City Council - Regular Meeting

And that means it is time to begin our special session. So we will start with something or other. We'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance. All right, I'm glad everyone's happy Can we start off with a happy roll call? Councilmember Vanna Councilmember Jimenez present a councilmember Wilson I

Here.

Council member Robinson?

Here.

Council member Zepeda?

Here.

And that was vice mayor Robinson, sorry. Mayor Martinez?

Here.

And council member Brown is absent. Our next item is statement of conflict of interest. Are there any?

I have a conflict of interest with a portion of the item today, and I need guidance on how to deal with it. It's the portion dealing with number five, which is the Bike Lending Library. As most people know by now, my partner is Rich City Rides. He's the executive director of Rich City. My partner is the executive director of Rich City Rides. They have a project, which is the e-bike lending library. It's part of the TCC project. And in item number five, addresses that. And so I would like to recuse myself completely from being involved in that discussion and being in the room when it happens and all those things except for it's part of the same single agenda item. So please advise.

So I think you just outlined it well, which is that you just announced your conflict and that when this specific subject is discussed among the council that you should leave the room for the discussion.

It comes back up at other parts of the discussion because we're talking about the budget as a whole. Is there some way that we can take it separately and consider it separately so I can be involved in the other budget conversations that do not address this issue?

I think that that seems reasonable. Mayor, do you agree that it seems reasonable that if it comes up in other parts of the budget that it can be treated separately, voted on separately?

It will have to be, but it will be difficult to know when that happens.

Well, I'll be paying attention during the course of this conversation and make sure Vice Mayor Robinson will as well to make sure that she will leave the room during the discussion.

Can I make a proposal around that? Can I propose that we either take that separately first so that I can just leave the room now and everybody discusses it, ADDRESSES IT, MAKES A PLAN ON HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, AND THEN I CAN COME BACK IN THE ROOM AFTER THAT PLAN HAS BEEN MADE?

I DON'T THINK IT'S POSSIBLE TO TALK ABOUT PART OF THE BUDGET SEPARATE FROM THE REST OF THE BUDGET. AND SO HOW WE DISCUSS THE BUDGET MAY AFFECT HOW WE LOOK AT THAT. SO IT WILL JUST HAVE TO HAPPEN WHEN IT HAPPENS.

Mayor, if I may, I also, I don't know if to what extent the materials were reviewed, but is this also applicable for the Richmond Wellness Trail?

Is the Richmond Wellness Trail funded by TCC?

Yes.

And is it a part of the budget why?

Yes.

Why is it a part of the budget?

Because there's a shortfall.

Oh, yeah, then it's applicable then, I would say, because it's the same issue.

All right, so we're done with statements of conflict of interest. Agenda review?

Okay, for the record, Council Member Brown is present. Our next item is agenda review. Are there any changes to the agenda?

Okay, we're going to move it up.

Ahead of agenda review? Yes. I GUESS THAT WAS A POOR JOKE.

TRYING TO KEEP IT FUNNY.

MAYOR, PAGE 7 OF THE POWERPOINT.

YES.

I'M TRYING TO SEE WHERE THERE'S A CLEAR PAGE 16. JUST WANTED TO NOTE IN PARTICULAR AS WELL AS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26. I'M SORRY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE NUMBERS REFER TO. WHERE ITEMS SO THAT IF VICE DEPART DURING THE DISCUSSIONS. THAT'S WHEN IT'S CLEARLY NOTED ON THE POWERPOINT THAT YOU ALL HAVE AT THE DIUS IN YOUR BINDERS FOR THE JUNE 9TH. FINANCE STAFF, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THERE WAS A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, SO I WANT TO THANK THE FINANCE STAFF FOR PROVIDING THE COMPLETE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FOR REFERENCE.

And it's the Moving Richmond Forward PowerPoint, right?

Yes, all of the PowerPoints commence with, yes. But it says June 9th, which corresponds with the day. Perfect. And the previous dates correspond with your previous discussions around the budget, the last previous three city council meetings. And then there was three community meetings. So this is our seventh conversation.

THROUGH THE CHAIR, JUST THE ONE THAT'S ONLINE IS DATED YESTERDAY. CORRECT. JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE IF WE CAN GET IT UPDATED AS WELL.

IT ALWAYS GOES UP. WE TRY TO, WE'RE ALWAYS ON A PATH OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT. SO WE CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THE MATERIALS AND REFINE THEM FOR CLARIFICATION.

All right, then we are ready to.

Ready for the next item?

Yes.

Our next item is under budget sessions. Our only item, item F1, is to receive an overview of the balance draft fiscal year 2026-27 annual operating budget and fiscal year 2026 through 31 five-year capital improvement plan budget. provide direction to staff prior to final budget adoption, and receive input on city council key initiatives and demands for built environment improvements as well as opportunities to improve organizational efficiency. We have a request from seven public speakers. If there's anyone joining us online, please raise your hand at this time if you'd like to make comments on this item.

All right. We'll do staff presentation, then we'll take public comment after.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR MARTINEZ, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE ON THIS SPECIAL SCHEDULED BUDGET STUDY SESSION. WE ARE CONVENED THIS EVENING AT THE COUNCIL'S REQUEST TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR DEEPER DISCUSSION AND CLARITY BEFORE THE FINAL BUDGET IS ADOPTED LATER THIS MONTH ON JUNE 23. WE ARE WALKING THROUGH THE BALANCED DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 26-27 OPERATING BUDGET AND THE FISCAL YEAR 26-31 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. THESE MATERIALS REMAIN IN DRAFT FORM WITH THE INTENTION OF SUPPORTING A THOUGHTFUL OPEN DIALOGUE ABOUT THE CHOICES BEFORE YOU. YOUR DIRECTION THIS EVENING WILL HELP ENSURE THAT THE FINAL BUDGET REFLECTS THE PRIORITIES, COMMITMENTS AND OUTCOMES YOU WANT TO SEE FOR THE COMMUNITY. THIS MEETING IS DESIGNED TO GIVE US SPACE, TO GIVE US THE SPACE WE NEED TO WORK THROUGH TRADE-OFFS, IDENTIFY WHERE ADJUSTMENTS MAY BE NECESSARY AND CONFIRM ALIGNMENT HEADING INTO THE JUNE 16TH CHECKLIST MEETING AND THE JUNE 23rd BUDGET ADOPTION HEARING. NEXT SLIDE. This evening, we are going to again reflect on the fiscal conditions and discuss resources and prioritization. Thus far, our fiscal resiliency has enabled us to support and sustain a growing workforce and deliver reliable services. Financial stewardship and stability are essentials in our dynamic environment, especially with all the changes that are happening at the federal and state level. This perspective anchors today's discussion and is intended to expand our previous presentations. As we begin this study session, we want to ground us in the principles that have guided us through this entire budget process. Fiscal resiliency, this special meeting gives us an opportunity to step back and talk openly about how we maintain the resilience while meeting community needs and delivering on council priority. Fiscal resiliency is what enables us to attract, retain, and support the workforce that delivers services across Richmond every day. It ensures we can provide stable, reliable services even in the face of rising costs, regulatory pressures, and evolving needs within your districts. Strong fiscal stewardship also reinforces public trust. By maintaining resources responsibly, avoiding structural deficits, and honoring our reserve policy, we create a foundation that supports long-term stability. This framing is especially important tonight because the decisions we discuss, whether maintaining current service levels or reprioritizing discretionary funding, have implication for both short-term operations and long-term fiscal health. This meeting is about ensuring we make THOSE DECISIONS WITH FULL CLARITY AND SHARED UNDERSTANDING.

ALSO, THIS IS MY FAVORITE SLIDE. THIS IS AT SHIELDS READ.

I'M ON THE ZIP LINE AND THEN CHIEF SIMMONS GOES AFTER ME. SO IF YOU HAVEN'T WRITTEN THE ZIP LINE YET AT SHIELDS READ, IT'S A FUN TIME. NEXT SLIDE. AS WE MOVE INTO THIS PRESENTATION, THIS SLIDE PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW AND ESSENTIALLY A ROAD MAP FOR HOW OUR TIME WILL BE STRUCTURED. WE BEGIN BY REVIEWING THE TWO BUDGET OPTIONS THAT WERE DEVELOPED FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION, THEN WALK THROUGH THE MAJOR IDEAS WHERE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS MAY BE NEEDED AND WILL ALSO HIGHLIGHT KEY INITIATIVES SUCH AS REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY, THE CIP BUDGET, AND AN OVERVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL REQUESTS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT BUDGET BUT OVER 29 MILLION IN REQUESTS HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY SHARED THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS. THOSE ITEMS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT AVAILABLE RESOURCES TO FUND THEM. We are also going to focus on several topics such as Mr. Gabino Arredondo will walk through the citywide electrical bike share program and suggest an alternative strategy to move forward increasing bicycle access in our community in a more financially sound manner and how forthcoming we are will have hopefully have an opportunity to discuss how ARPA interest can be used Finally, we'll provide a draft framework for the City Council to discuss regarding future initiatives to have consistency and shared understanding of how, when the City Council does put forward policy initiatives, It's clear on how they'll be evaluated. At this juncture we have 37 council initiatives and it's not clear when even if some items were introduced prior to previous items that have deadlines, it's not clear how those things should be prioritized. SO WE HAVE THREE MAIN ACTIONS FOR THE CITY THIS EVENING. FIRST, WE'RE ASKING YOU TO RECEIVE THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 26-27 OPERATING BUDGET IN CIP, FISCAL YEAR 26-31. SECOND, WE'RE SEEKING YOUR GUIDANCE ON AREAS WHERE THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, PARTICULARLY AROUND DISCRETIONARY FUNDING AND PROJECT PRIORITIES. THIS WOULD REQUIRE TRADE-OFFS. SO WHEN WE SAY TRADE-OFFS, THAT MEANS LIKE FOR EVERY DOLLAR IN, ONE DOLLAR OUT. And finally, we'd like to receive your thoughts on key initiatives, the city's built environment and opportunities to improve operational efficiency across departments. These actions are critical because the direction you provide tonight will shape the presentation that will develop in the next 36 hours that you will then review on June 16th. One thing that I, a couple of things I also wanted to share with the council is when I've had the privilege, for example, last night of attending the Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council meeting or at groundbreakings like this afternoon, I was at the groundbreaking for the new accessible garden. One of the things that has come up consistently is how pleased the community members have been with all of the great work that is happening in Richmond. I'VE CONSISTENTLY RECEIVED POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL OF OUR CITY DEPARTMENTS AND HOW WELL THEY'RE DOING, THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS SEE INCREASED RESPONSIVENESS, THEY SEE STAFF THAT ARE COMMUNICATING WELL, THAT THINGS ARE CHANGING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION. THEY'RE SEEING STREET SWEEPING, THEY'RE SEEING NEW LIGHTS, THEY'RE SEEING PAVING, AND TODAY MARKED THE FOURTH SORT OF PARK PROJECT THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. SO WHEN I TALKED TO RESIDENTS, THEY'VE NEVER INDICATED THAT THEY'VE NEVER SEEN THIS LEVEL OF POSITIVE ACTIVITY HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY WHERE THE LIBRARY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AS WELL AS THREE PARKS, THAT COMPLETE STREETS ARE MOVING FORWARD, THAT WE'RE FINANCIALLY STABLE. WE'VE HIRED 92 NEW STAFF PEOPLE. We have nearly, there's 147 active grants, over $328 million. There's four new grants in the pipeline, over $31 million. And all around the city is looking much better, and our homicide rate continues to trend downward, and we are continuing to invest in Kids First over $9 million for this fiscal year. SO I I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT AS WE EMBARK UPON THIS DISCUSSION TONIGHT THAT WE DO SO IN A POSITIVE PROPOSITIONAL FRAMEWORK UM VERSUS A DEFICIT FRAMEWORK BECAUSE IT REALLY IS A TESTAMENT TO THE GREAT PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION AND STEWARDSHIP THAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH ALL OF THESE THINGS And we want to continue with this positive momentum. Soon in September, the home key project will be coming online. So that's 49 units of new transitional housing. And so all around us, you're seeing, you know, Hacienda's finished. Nevin has four more units to get finished. THAT THERE'S REALLY REMARKABLE ACTIVITY HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY AND I KNOW NO OTHER CITY OF OUR SIZE THAT IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS SORT OF POSITIVE MOMENTUM AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK THE CITY COUNCIL AND ESPECIALLY THANK STAFF AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND FUNDERS FOR BEING IN PARTNERSHIP DURING THIS EFFORT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN AN EXTRAORDINARY LIFT. AND PEOPLE ARE SACRIFICING TIME WITH THEIR FAMILIES, WITH THEIR LOVED ONES, TO SHOW UP AND DO THEIR VERY BEST EVERY DAY IN RICHMOND, AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK AND ACKNOWLEDGE MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR COMMITMENT AND THANK THE COUNCIL FOR BEING SUPPORTIVE. AND WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MS. EMILY COMBS, THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND CITY GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. COUNCIL MEMBERS. BEFORE WE GET INTO THE MEET OF BEFORE WE GET INTO THE MEET OF THE PRESENTATION, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD THE PRESENTATION, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO SPEND TIME TALKING BE HELPFUL TO SPEND TIME TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE REFER TO ABOUT WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE REFER TO THE BASELINE BUDGET IN THE CONTEXT So the baseline budget reflects the minimum level of resources required to keep the city operating reliably today. It includes all our core services, all our currently authorized filled positions, which would be adjusted for the vacancy rate we use to balance the budget of 12%, and all known MOU-related personnel costs. It also includes anything we've already legally or contractually obligated to fund, so like our debt service, our pension obligation, our OPEB obligation, along with all ongoing programs that are already part of our existing service model, which include our general fund subsidies to programs like our housing authority or employment and training. So what this means on a practical level, BACKING UP TO WHEN WE START THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE REACH OUT TO DEPARTMENTS AND WHAT WE'RE DESCRIBING WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BASELINE BUDGET IS WE'RE REQUESTING THAT THEY ROLL OVER THEIR CURRENT BUDGET WITHOUT ANY NEW ADS. THAT WOULD INCLUDE, AS I MENTIONED, THE MOU COSTS, IF THEY'RE BUILT IN. And then any one-time items that maybe were carried over from the prior year, they'd back those out. It might include increases in costs related to CPIs and then costs that are outside the department's control. So like insurance costs or utility costs, things that you don't have control over. So that's what we consider the baseline budget. So equally important is what the baseline budget does not include. So it doesn't include any new programs, service expansions, any new positions beyond what is already authorized or unfunded departmental requests or council new requests. IT ALSO DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY LIMITED TERM REVENUE. CITY COUNCIL HAS ALREADY DIRECTED US TO MANAGE THE LIMITED TERM REVENUE SEPARATELY THROUGH THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THAT COMMUNITY INPUT WILL BE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE FOLLOWING THAT PROCESS. SO IN SHORT THE BASELINE BUDGET IS EVERYTHING WE HAVE ALREADY COMMITTED TO DOING AND NOTHING NEW. ON THIS SIDE WE'RE FOCUSING ON THE TWO PATHWAYS AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AS WE WORK TOWARDS FINAL ADOPTION OF THE 2627 BUDGET. SO OPTION ONE REPRESENTS THAT STATUS QUO, THAT'S WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE BASELINE BUDGET. SO UNDER THIS OPTION, THE CITY PROCEEDS WITH THE BALANCED BUDGET EXACTLY AS IT WAS PRESENTED IN MAY. It maintains all current service levels, all existing initiatives, and relies on that 12% vacancy rate, which generates about $16.4 million, which is how we balance the budget. This option does not require any use of reserves, and it allows us to continue moving forward without reducing or adjusting existing programs. Option two provides more flexibility, but it also requires some difficult choices. It preserves balanced budget, but only if the city council identifies offsets for any new priorities it wishes to fund. This means reprioritizing existing discretionary initiatives, reducing, deferring, or even discontinuing select programs to make room for emerging needs. SO OPTION TWO ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT SINCE THE INITIAL DRAFT BUDGET WAS RELEASED, WE'VE IDENTIFIED SOME SIGNIFICANT PROJECT SHORTFALLS, AND THESE INCLUDE SHORTFALLS IN THE RICHMOND WELLNESS TRAIL PHASE TWO, SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL AT POINT MOLOTY, AND IMPROVEMENTS AT SHILDS REIT AND WENDELL PARKS PROJECTS. IF COUNCIL WISHES TO ADVANCE THESE PROJECTS IN 26-27, OPTION TWO IS THE MECHANISM TO DO THAT. BUT IT ALSO REQUIRES IDENTIFYING WHERE THOSE RESOURCES WOULD COME FROM. SO IN SHORT, OPTION ONE MAINTAINS EVERYTHING WE ARE DOING. IT'S WHAT WE PRESENTED IN MAY. OPTION TWO GIVES THE COUNCIL THE ABILITY TO ADJUST AND RELY ON PRIORITIES KNOWING THAT EVERY ADDITION REQUIRES A CORRESPONDING REDUCTION TO MAINTAIN OUR BALANCED BUDGET. So this is the decision point for today's study session, determining whether to preserve the current structure or to rebalance the budget to reflect new council priorities. Next slide. WITH THAT, I'LL PASS IT OVER TO LESHONDA. THANK YOU, EMILY.

LESHONDA WHITE, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND THINK ABOUT OPTIONS ONE AND TWO AND THINKING ABOUT NEW INITIATIVES, EXISTING INITIATIVES, AND HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS BUDGET, WE WANT TO JUST GROUND COUNCIL COMMUNITY, REMIND FOLKS OF THE ADOPTED CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES. THEY ARE LISTED HERE. WE HAVE SIX OF THEM. They were developed in collaboration with community, and these are the six things that our city council, our city said are really important. So the council's adopted goals and priorities guide all budget recommendations and serve as a city's strategic framework for guiding policy decisions, resource allocation, and departmental work plans. While these six goals provide a high-level direction, each goal, once you dig down into it, is supported by a series of specific priorities and implementation tasks that further define the work and outcomes Council expects to achieve. These goals continue to be the lens through which we evaluate budget decisions, service enhancements, capital investments, and policy commitments. They help ensure that our limited resources are supporting the areas this council has identified as essential to improving quality of life, strengthening community well-being, supporting housing and economic development, and investing in public safety and infrastructure. So tonight as we walk through our budget options that Emily just presented and discretionary programs, we will reference these goals because they anchor both our recommendations and the trade-offs that come with reprioritization.

Next slide.

Here is the next two slides summarize council directive requests that have been received since January 1st of 2025 that are currently being advanced by amazing city staff. While these requests vary in scope and complexity, each can be connected back to one or more of the council's adopted strategic goal areas, which we have outlined here. The ones highlighted in green represent the items that have been completed. Next slide. So as you can see, there are 37 items that we have identified that have been presented by city council since January of 2025 that are in addition to our core services that city staff outlined during the month of May during the budget presentations. I mean, one of management's responsibilities is to ensure that council directed initiatives are implemented while also maintaining core services and advancing long-term priorities. So from a community services perspective, members of the community services department or myself have been involved in probably almost 40% of the council-directed items listed in this presentation on these two slides. That is not a flex, but it's also not a complaint. It is simply a reality. The initiatives, these initiatives would make Richmond amazing. The city manager mentioned that we do more than a lot of other jurisdictions, and I really believe we do. We have core services that a lot of cities provide, but we do a lot of other things that make us really amazing place for people to live, work, and play. SO I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. ALL OF THESE ADDITIONAL REQUESTS AND ACTIVITIES AND INITIATIVES THAT COME WITH THEM ARE PART OF OUR ROLE AND REFLECT THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS WORK. AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE MULTIPLE THINGS CAN BE TRUE AT THE SAME TIME, STAFF CAPACITY IS FINITE. AS NEW ASSIGNMENTS ARE ADDED, WE MUST SEQUENCE THE WORK THOUGHTFULLY. IN SOME CASES THAT MAY MEAN INJUSTING THE TIMING OF OTHER PLANNED EFFORTS IN COMMUNITY SERVICES THAT CAN MEAN FOR ME IMPROVING DELAYING THE TIMING FOR IMPROVING THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT PROCESS OR UPDATING OUR DEPARTMENT WEBSITE TO MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY OR IMPLEMENTING AN ONLINE RESERVATION SYSTEM OR COORDINATING WITH PUBLIC WORKS ON COMMUNITY CENTER IMPROVEMENTS. THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING. THEY JUST MAY NOT BE HAPPENING AS FAST AS WE WANT THEM TO BECAUSE AS STAFF WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE BALANCING WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO PROVIDE CORE SERVICES WHILE ALSO MAKE SURE WE'RE IMPLEMENTING THE DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL. So all of these projects remain important and will continue to move forward. The key point is that pace, timing, and level of progress may be affected as staff balances, council directed initiatives, core service, and longer term strategic work. This conversation helps. or we hope it helps create shared expectations. Staff understands that new ideas will continue to come forward and that new assignments will be given. Our goal is to provide transparency about how work is prioritized so council, city staff, and the community have a clear understanding of what can be delivered when and within the resources available. We will return to this topic at the end of the presentation when staff presents a proposed framework for evaluating and sequencing new initiatives. With that, I will turn it over to Mr. Seals.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez, Vice Mayor Robinson, City Council, staff, and residents. My name is Patrick Seals, and I'm the Administrative Chief. In our first presentation in May, we shared some priorities or recommendations that we would love to have guide us for the next fiscal year, and they are listed here before you. The first is related to wastewater reliability. Some handful of weeks ago, you received a presentation from the Public Works Department and the Wild Earth team regarding the need for standing up a wastewater reliability and to address the Veolia contract transition. This is one of the city's largest long-term infrastructure needs, and it's close to a billion dollars over the next decade. So preparing for the 2027 contract expiration and securing a reliable operator is critical. Second is parks renovation and maintenance. We've all been celebrating the onboarding of our Shields Repark. as well as anticipating the coming parks. We're continuing to make major improvements at Foreman as well as Wendell, along with upgrades focused on safety, accessibility, and long-term upkeep. The third is innovation and systems modernization. This really is about strengthening our internal systems and improving processes so we can deliver services, MORE EFFICIENTLY AND CONSISTENTLY CITYWIDE. TOGETHER THESE PRIORITIES HELP US FOCUS LIMITED RESOURCES ON THE AREAS WITH THE MOST SIGNIFICANT LONG-TERM IMPACT. AND THERE FINALLY IS THE PRIORITY NUMBER FOUR WHICH IS ADVANCING THE ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM STRUCTURE ALS PROGRAM. THE FOCUS THERE IS HOW DO WE STAND UP FIRST RESPONDER SERVICES AS WELL AS SUPPORTING EVALUATING SUSTAINABLE FUNDING STRATEGIES while also setting up systems to provide improvements to our fire stations. As the City Council considers new priorities and initiatives or service expansion, it is going to face some critical decisions and need to address trade-offs that may seem unavoidable within a constrained general fund budget. TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL DELIBERATION UNDER OPTION 2, STAFF HAVE CONSOLIDATED ALL THE EXISTING PROGRAMS, INITIATIVES, SUBSIDIES AND OPERATIONAL COMMITMENTS SUPPORTED BY THE GENERAL FUND. THE ALLOCATIONS LISTED HERE REPRESENT 6.4 MILLION THAT MAY BE DIRECTED IF THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES THAT NEW PRIORITIES OUTWEIGH SOME EXISTING COMMITMENTS. And for the purposes of this discussion, initiatives are listed as discretionary, doesn't speak to their value, their utility, or their impact. It really is very much a technical decision or a technical term that we're using. And so it's built on a few pillars. And those include, does the dollars that are currently allocated, are they tied to some city obligation that has contractual or agreement links? DO THE DOLLARS THAT ARE LINKED HAVE SOME RELATIONSHIP TO IMMINENT LIFE AND SAFETY? DO THE DOLLARS THAT ARE TIED HAVE SOME LINK TO PERMANENT FULL-TIME STAFFING POSITIONS OR ARE THEY LINKED TO RESOURCES NECESSARY TO PERFORM CORE SERVICES? SO IF THE DOLLARS WERE TIED TO CITY OBLIGATIONS RELATED TO CONTRACTS, IF THEY WERE TIED TO IMMINENT SUPPORT FOR LIFE OR SAFETY, IF THEY'RE TIED TO PERMANENT FULL-TIME STAFF OR RESOURCES NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN CORE SERVICES, THEY ARE NOT LISTED AS DISCRETIONARY. SO IF THEY MET THOSE BIDS MARKS, WE DON'T CONSIDER THOSE DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS BECAUSE THOSE DOLLARS ARE NECESSARY. AS WE THINK ABOUT THIS OPTION, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THIS OPTION ALLOWS FOR US TO MAINTAIN A BALANCED BUDGET. what we're presenting or what is being shown to you these discretionary dollars using those four pillars these dollars here the approximately 6.4 million dollars allows for reprioritization or consideration of trade-offs while maintaining a balanced budget and it also allows the city council in the city to maintain its fiscal policy with regards to reserves so it doesn't force any dipping into reserves and so As you can see here, we have some key initiatives totaling approximately 3.08 million. And with regards to our reimagining public safety, approximately 3.3 for a total of about 6.3 or approximately 6.4 million. So approximately $3.8 million has been set here, shown here with regards to discretionary funding. Again, in consideration of the criteria that I described prior, we have represents the primary pool available for option two with relationship to reprioritization. And that includes funding related to the arts corridor, the Black Resiliency Project, community engagement, gender-based violence, immigration, MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT AND THE POINT MALADI MAINTENANCE REMAINS REQUIRED AS WELL AS THE ALS REVENUE ANALYSIS IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR REALLOCATION. In fiscal year 21-24, the city allocated about $6.4 million to support reimagining public safety initiatives, and that was either an expansion on current programming or the establishment of new programming. For fiscal year 26-27, the budgeted amount is approximately $8.9 million, which is an increase of $2.5 million, or nearly 40% from what was originally allocated back in fiscal year 21, 22, excuse me. So many of these programs, the discretionary items, excuse me, the reimagining public safety investment total is about 8.8 million with 3.9 again meeting that standard of discretionary across the four pillars as I described. There's 3.3 there available. And that includes support currently allocated to Youth Works at 1.9, unhoused interventions at 1.3, and the non-discretionary amounts for our relationship to ONS again, because those dollars support one of the pillars, which is staffing. So those would be considered non-discretionary because the monies allocated to the ONS support current staffing levels and as well as the ROC with relationship to the 2.9. Many of these programs again represent enhanced service levels beyond our core municipal functions. This slide focuses on the reimagining public safety investment and these programs collectively represent again $8.8 million. As a council considers potential reprioritization, this slide is meant to illustrate both the opportunities as well as the limitations. While reductions in these discretionary areas could create capacity for high priority investment, such decisions would require balancing the community expectations and service impacts. And I will pass it on to my colleague.

So this slide you've seen before, it highlights the ongoing general fund subsidies or support we have throughout the city across several programs. And they total about $8.4 million, and they include the required support for the housing authority, employment and training, the rent program, and others. WE ARE ALSO AS YOU CAN SEE IN ENGINEERING SERVICES AND CODE ENFORCEMENT, WE ARE COVERING SOME SIGNIFICANT SERVICE GAPS WHERE THE REVENUES DON'T COVER THE COST OF THE BUSINESS THAT WE DO THAT IS SO CRITICAL. SO THE KEY TAKEAWAY FOR THIS SLIDE IS THAT THESE SUBSIDIES OR SUPPORT ARE BASELINE OBLIGATIONS. We don't consider these discretionary items, which limits how much flexibility we have when considering new initiatives or reallocations. Next slide. THIS TABLE SUMMARIZES THE PROJECT SHORTFALLS THAT I DISCUSSED EARLIER THAT HAVE EMERGED DURING BUDGET DEVELOPMENT. SO SINCE MAY, THESE WERE NOT KNOWN SHORTFALLS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. SO THE TOTAL NEED THAT WE'RE AWARE OF IS 2.676 MILLION FOR THESE FOUR HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS, THE RICHMOND WELLNESS TRAIL PHASE TWO, THE BAY AND SOME ANTICIPATED CHANGE ORDERS. THESE ARE IMPORTANT COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS BUT THEY CANNOT MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT IDENTIFYING FUNDING AND UNDER OPTION TWO COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE TO REDirect DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS TO CLOSE THESE GAPS AND KEEP THOSE PROJECTS ON SCHEDULE. SO THE DISCRETIONARY FUNDING IDENTIFIED IN THIS TABLE OR IN THE PREVIOUS TABLE which didn't include, so I guess what we're suggesting here is that this, we're not suggesting the 3.3 from, and I'm not sure if you had said this, from the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative, we're really speaking about the discretionary funds that you saw that were totaling the 3 million. So I just wanted to clarify that. All right, next slide. Oh, through the cheek.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I WAS GOING TO SPEAK FOR A MOMENT ON THE ALS FUNDING STRATEGIES AND THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. IN JANUARY 27th, PRESENTED AN UPDATE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. IT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR AT THAT MEETING THAT TRANSITIONING TO AN ALS OR PARAMEDIC PROGRAM WOULD CREATE ONGOING OPERATIONAL COSTS. THESE COSTS WOULD BE FOR THINGS SUCH AS STAFFING, EQUIPMENT, TRAINING AND OVERSIGHT. AND THAT WE NEEDED A RELIABLE LONG-TERM FUNDING STRATEGY TO SUPPORT THOSE COSTS. IN A SUBSEQUENT MEETING, BASED ON COUNCIL DIRECTION, WE WERE DIRECTED TO GO AND ENGAGE IN PUBLIC POLLING AND BRING BACK REVENUE OPTIONS TO THE COUNCIL. We will be bringing back those revenue options in the polling results in July. If the polling shows stronger support for a general obligation bond rather than a parcel tax, it's important to note that the general obligation bond is a community approved loan that requires a two-thirds vote and can only be used for capital projects. This is things such as the fire station upgrades or replacements. Because the general obligation bond revenues cannot be used for ongoing expenses, the city would still need to identify a stable general fund source to support ongoing paramedic operational costs. Once again, this is for the staffing, equipment, and the training.

Thank you, Chief, and my apologies for not introducing you. So looking at this pie chart, this provides an overview of our proposed $215.6 million capital improvement plan. The funding comes from a mix of grants, some dedicated funds, equipment services funds, and our general capital, which is basically general fund. But we also have, as you can see here, about $13.5 million in shortfalls and nearly $60 million in unfunded needs within our capital improvement PROGRAM. SO THE KEY TAKEAWAY HERE IS THAT WHILE WE'RE ADVANCING A SUBSTANTIAL CIP PROGRAM, MANY CRITICAL PROJECTS STILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES WHICH LIMITS OUR FLEXIBILITY AND REINFORCES THE VALUE OF TARGETED REPRIORITIZATION UNDER OPTION TWO. You've seen this before. These are the 29.3 million in department requests that were not included in the draft budget. The requests span all departments. With Public Works, requests alone totaling 21.3 million, primarily for pavement, sidewalks, lighting, HVAC, signals, and stormwater. So these requests reflect real operational and maintenance gaps. BUT WITHOUT OFFSETS, THEY CANNOT BE ADDED WHILE KEEPING OUR GENERAL FUNDS STILL BALANCED. NEXT SLIDE. SO ON THIS SLIDE, WE'RE JUST HIGHLIGHTING ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT LONG-TERM COST PRESSURES FACING OUR CITY AND MANY CITIES, OUR CALPERS AND FUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY OR UAL. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, BOTH OUR MISCELLANEOUS AND SAFETY PLAN, RETIREMENT PLANS SHOW STEADY UPWARD CLIMB OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. So in 2021-22, our combined UAL payment was about $26.9 million. And for 2030-31, we're currently projecting $44.3 million. Of course, that depends on a variety of factors, including how well CalPERS performs. And also, we'll still need to roll in the next round or this round of MOU negotiation costs which will increase that UAL as well. So basically what we're looking at right now, absent those things, is a 64% increase, and it represents an ongoing structural pressure on the general fund, which is a major reason why we're so adamant about maintaining that structurally balanced budget and avoiding any new ongoing commitments without a clear funding source. Next slide. SO CITY STAFF HAVE IDENTIFIED SEVERAL ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT MAY HELP INFORM THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE POLICY DECISIONS. SO THESE ITEMS INCLUDE, WHICH WE'LL GO INTO MORE DETAIL A LITTLE BIT LATER, INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDED APPROACH FOR THE CITYWIDE ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE PROGRAM, THE TREATMENT AND FUTURE ALLOCATION OF INTEREST EARNINGS ON THE LIMITED TERM Settlement funds and potential use of American rescue plan act or arpa interest earnings So together these topics present additional opportunities and for the City Council consideration as it evaluates available resources Next slide and next step we have Gabino I

Good afternoon. Buenas tardes. My name is Gavino Redondo, project manager in the public works department. And today I'll be talking about the citywide electric bike share program as an additional budget consideration. There's also a follow up from our recommended action a few weeks ago where we increased the allocation to the program to the end of June 30th. OF THIS YEAR, OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION, THE CITY RECEIVED AN INITIAL FUNDING FROM THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, MTC, TO FUND THIS PILOT ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE PROGRAM. The program started in August 2022, and the original vendor basically disappeared on the city, and so the program stopped. And then the staff that was currently in the transportation division at that time worked together with another vendor right today, which we have representatives from that company here today, to restart the program. SO THIS PROGRAM HAS COST THE CITY CLOSE TO $3 MILLION BY THE END OF JUNE 30TH OF THIS FISCAL YEAR IN OPERATIONS AND THIS INCLUDES THE RECENT APPROVAL TO CONTINUE TO JUNE OF 2026. THIS PROGRAM LIKE WE MENTIONED BEFORE IS NOT FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE WITHOUT ANY ONGOING GRANTS OR FUNDING FROM A CITY SUBSIDY. THE CITY COUNCIL MAY CHOOSE TO CONCLUDE THIS PROGRAM AND FOCUS FUNDING ON THE E-BIKE LANDING LIBRARY TO EXPAND E-BIKE USAGES IN THE CITY. NEXT SLIDE. WE HAD SOME INITIAL DATA PROVIDED BY THE VENDOR AND WE INCLUDED IT IN THE STAFF REPORT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE HAS BEEN POSITIVE EXPERIENCE BY THE USERS RELATED TO THE E-BIKE SHARE PROGRAM. HOWEVER, THE USAGE AND REPEAT USAGE HAS NOT BEEN AS STRONG. NEXT SLIDE. LIKE WE MENTIONED, THE COST FOR THIS PROGRAM ALMOST COST THE CITY $67 A MONTH AND THERE HAS BEEN SOME POSITIVE REDUCTIONS IN CO2 EMISSIONS. NEXT SLIDE. SO WE PROVIDED THREE OPTIONS IN OUR LAST PRESENTATION TO THE CITY AND CURRENTLY CITY STAFF RECOMMEND OPTION ONE WHICH WOULD BE TO CONCLUDE THE EBIKE SHARE PROGRAM AND REMOVE THE ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE DURING THE NEXT QUARTER OF 26-27 AND ANY OTHER ECI FUNDING COULD BE ALLOCATED TO EBIKE LANDING LIBRARY SHORTFALLS AND CONTINUE EBIKE ACCESS. EVEN TO CONCLUDE THE PROGRAM WILL COST THE CITY ALSO. IF WE CHOOSE TO CONCLUDE IT IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY. So city staff recommendation is based on the following. Low utilization may reflect low residential commercial density. Also, the vendor has talked about that there was a need to have additional hubs all over the city when the program originally started. But that, of course, there needed to be additional funding. Also, city bike link infrastructure may still be lacking for most riders to feel comfortable to use the e-bike program. The e-bike lending library will be, its goal is to provide community training and workshops for the maintenance and repair of future e-bikes. It may be better to explore other programs in the region. I know there's, MTC currently has a bay wheels program that is in Alameda County. FUNDING THE CONSTRUCTION GAP OF THE E-BIKE LENDING LIBRARY WILL UNLOCK AN ADDITIONAL $2.5 MILLION FROM THE TRANSPORTATION CLIMATE COMMUNITY GRANT, WHICH WOULD BE $1.2 MILLION IN CONSTRUCTION FUNDS THAT WOULD OPEN UP AND $1.3 MILLION IN OPERATING FUNDING FOR THAT PROGRAM. SO THERE WOULD EVENTUALLY BE A REQUEST FROM ECIA TO FUND THAT GAP. AND THAT'S MY PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU. SO I WANT TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON INTEREST EARNINGS FROM THE CITY'S LIMITED TERM SETTLEMENT REVENUES. AS THE STAFF REPORT NOTES, THE FIRST INSTALLMENT WAS RECEIVED AND WAS INVESTED, AND THOSE INVESTED DOLLARS HAVE GENERATED APPROXIMATELY 1.8 MILLION IN INTERESTS SO FAR. SO THESE EARNINGS INCREASE THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS, BUT THEY ARE NOT A STABLE ONGOING REVENUE SOURCE JUST DUE TO THE VOLATILITY. And so for that reason, we are recommending treating these dollars as one-time resources, suitable for one-time community investments. And just for the public's benefit, the council has already directed a community engagement process to guide how the settlement or limited-term revenues are spent. However, in terms of the interest earnings related to these funds, staff will return to the city council upon completion of MOU negotiations with updated interest projections and refined assumptions. Next slide. SO ALSO ON MAY 26 THE COUNCIL RECEIVED A PRESENTATION FROM RICHMOND PROMISE OUTLINING THEIR SERVICES AND THEIR SCHOLARSHIP NEEDS AND AT THAT TIME COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO EXPLORE FUNDING OPTIONS FOR RICHMOND STUDENTS. WE ARE CURRENTLY EVALUATING WHETHER ARPA INTEREST EARNINGS CAN THIS ELIGIBILITY REVIEW IS UNDER WAY WITH OUR ARPA CONSULTANTS AND ONCE THAT ELIGIBILITY IS CONFIRMED AND YEAR END CLOSE VERIFIES THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST RATINGS AVAILABLE, WE'LL BRING BACK A COMPREHENSIVE RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THAT. And we think this is especially important for us to look into this funding option as we're currently not anticipating much in terms of unspent funds at the year end since we've incorporated at this point in time most of the MOU costs, which were not originally included in the budget. So we're not expecting to have as much year-end savings. Next slide. I'll turn it back over to Patrick.

Thank you again. Patrick Sills, Administrative Chief. In consideration of some of the information that has already been shared regarding the desire for new initiatives, new programs, and new ideas, it is best practice with regards not only to public policy analysis, but also public policy development and recommendation and design to establish criteria for review. So what we've proposed is a way of evaluating through a set of criteria, new initiatives that might come forward via the city council. And they are listed here. This sequence also is representative of the sequence that we would choose to evaluate new initiatives and new programs. They're listed as strategic alignment, which is evaluating the consistency with adopted strategic objectives, policy direction, established council priorities, fiscal policy, et cetera. The next category of thing is fiscal and work plan impact. So what are the financial implications and potential trade-offs for initiating this new thing? Simple question is, do we have the dollars? The next is service delivery and resource stewardship. And the criteria that bundles up to service delivery is, are there impacts on our core services for this new initiative? Does the new initiative overlap with existing city investments? Are they a duplication of work that either we are already doing or that either partner agencies, i.e., the county might be already providing services for? And is it a governmental role, right? Is it something that the law would require that we as government provide? The next category for Building out a framework for evaluation and criteria is organizational capacity. Does staff have the capacity to take on this new initiative? Will it require an interdepartmental or external coordination? And finally, community benefits and public impact. Understanding and assessing the anticipated benefits and outcomes for residents and businesses. You can see here that we've also structured scores. THESE SCORES ARE NOT SET IN STONE. AGAIN, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION. AND WHAT IN ESSENCE STAFF WOULD DO IS GIVEN THAT THERE WERE NEW INITIATIVES THAT WERE SET FORWARD, STAFF WOULD RECEIVE THOSE INITIATIVES, HOPEFULLY AN OPEN SESSION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THEN WOULD WALK THROUGH THIS FRAMEWORK, BASICALLY BUILDING OUT A SCORE CARD TO DETERMINE Are these new initiatives things that we should take on? And given their score and their weight, what sequence should these new initiatives then be balanced against core services and prior initiatives? And so looking at that scale and scope. So this is a framework for entering into that conversation. So immediate next steps include finalizing this current 26-27 operating budget, as well as the fiscal year 26-31 CIP-based budget on the study session. We're going to try to turn this around in about three days. Update our revenue and expenditure assumptions and incorporate council guidance, which we're here for today. Make adjustments to maintain a balanced general fund budget. And for the June 16th meeting, we'll be presenting an updated draft budget checklist based on any comments or questions that come out of this discussion, provide additional information from prior discussions, and support the City Council in finalizing priorities adjustments before adoption. So our requested direction is, number one, should the city council, questions that we're looking for direction from, should the city council proceed with option one, which is our status quo, or option two, reprioritization of existing discretionary funding, and that is a discussion for you all to hold. We're also looking to receive direction on if option two is preferred which existing discretionary initiatives or programs or Commitments should be reduced or deferred or continue to maintain the balanced budget again around the framework Subject to trade-offs. We're also looking for direction around should discretionary funded be directed to address identified project project shortfalls including the Richmond Wellness Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail, Point Miladi, and park improvements. We're also looking for some support around Are there additional council priorities or built environment investments that should be reflected in the final budget? And should the council continue or conclude the e-bike? Finally, does the city council support further development of proposed initiatives evaluation framework to assist with evaluating new initiatives, referrals, or expansions? And the status quo is challenging, and adopting a clear framework would provide increased transparency not only for residents, but also council members and staff. And that concludes our presentation. Again, the recommended action is displayed and we thank you for your time and your attention.

Thank you for the presentation. We will now move on to public comment.

Okay. We have a total of 10 speakers. We have seven in person and three online. As I call your name to the in-person speakers, please come forward and line up behind the speaker's podium. Closest to the wall. Call it Claudia Citroen, Bruce Bayer, Andrew Melendez, Sonya Decker, Salma Burman, Burman, Sean flood and David plasma. You'll have two minutes to address the council.

Okay. So public safety is a core municipal service, and the city should put it as high priorities. Zaglobia don't demonstrate improvements in neighborhoods' walkability and will not reduce neighborhood cut-through traffic. School districts and unions are legally responsible for providing adequate educational workforce program, and the city should not replace school district responsibilities in times of strike. Council liaison functions should not be consolidated in one or two people, but need to be a greater accountability and separation and overview. Funding priorities are traffic signal programs, street paving, road rehabilitation to ensure stormwater and bay runoff compliance, and tied to measurable traffic and safety outcomes. Adding traffic management, congestion mitigation, emergency response capabilities, Fire protection services, police services, and public safety infrastructure is essential. Art corridor funding is inessential against these unmet infrastructure needs. Fire station rebuild projects should remain priority and delivered efficiently. Tiny home village expenditures at 200k for one year per year needs a forensic audit to cost occupancy and outcomes. Greater gender-based violence programs, immigration service funding should be supported by measurable performance grants and based on direct majority impact on community benefits. ONS received $2 million and served 69 people last year. Bike share program is not essential. Budget documents should disclose number of part-time positions which are not covered in full-time position. These people miss out on pension, health care, and benefits. Taxpayer funding should be prioritized towards programs and measurable results demonstrated. Community benefits and essential service infrastructure and public safety should be funded before discretionary programs.

Thank you. Your time has expired. Bruce Beyer.

Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Bruce Beyer. I'm the Chair of TRAC, Betrayals for Richmond Action Committee. You've received about 50 emails the last few days asking to provide the additional $1 million in funding required to complete the Port Malady project, Betrayal Project, which is under construction, scheduled for opening late this year. These emails were from residents citywide, Pogo Parks, Assistance for East Shore Parks, Save the Bay, the Bay Conservation Development Commission, and many others. The Point Malady Trail will provide long-awaited public access to one of the Bay Area's most scenic and historically significant shorelines. Completion of the trail will expand opportunities for walking, biking, wildlife viewing, environmental education, outdoor recreation for residents and visitors alike. By opening access to a previously inaccessible stretch of shoreline, the trail will advance City Council strategic goal areas 3 and 6, improving the quality of life and community health and addressing shoreline and ecological issues. The 2.5-mile Point Malady Trail from the RSR Bridge to the northern border of Point Malady is a cost-effective investment for the city. East Bay Regional Park District paid the entire cost for design, permitting CEQA compliance and bidding the 2.5-mile trail. If you approve covering this $1 million shortfall tonight or in the future, the city will be paying for only one-third of the construction cost. Construction already is underway, so providing funding now is a cost-effective investment to complete the project and open shoreline to the public this year. This will maximize the value of prior public investments avoid the risks and costs associated with project delays, and demonstrate the city's commitment to equitable access to parks, open space, and the shoreline. Please provide the funding needed to complete the Point Malady Trail. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Andrew Melendez. He'll be followed by Sonya Decker.

Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Andrew Melendez. I'm a lifelong Richmond resident and I'm speaking today as well as a member of the Community Crisis Response Program Advisory Board. As a member of the CAB, we've spent a significant amount of time over the last half year now discussing the needs that we're seeing from the ground with our ROC responders and what they're needing to ensure that this program is as taken care of and supports the needs in our community as much as possible. One of the key recommendations that our board approved earlier this year but wasn't included in tonight's proposed budget was the inclusion of two care navigator positions. Our board voted unanimously in support of this recommendation because we believe these positions are really vital right now, especially as we're seeing right now the growing demand for support and services past the period where the responders are present in that moment of crisis. These care navigators are widely used positions in similar crisis programs across the United States, and they do a lot of work to connect folks with services, build that long-term trust, and improve coordination between responders, and just ultimately making sure that no one falls through the cracks after they've accepted services and are on that pathway towards recovery. You know, this is something that we have been really talking about over the last few months. And again, our goal is to ensure that we are protecting this program, that we are doing everything we can so that it can be as successful as possible. Of course, at the same time, the investments in our community have to coincide with larger investments that happen through the form of community care and other types of services, one of them including the YouthWorks program that has also done incredible work alongside ROC to ensure that our young community members are provided with pathways towards stability and towards support as well. So ultimately, I urge this council to hopefully reaffirm your support for the ROC program, invest in care navigators in our city, and reaffirm your support for the many different programs, including Youth Works, who are in our city that are providing proactive and holistic care to our community. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Sonya Decker, followed by Selma Burriman.

Hello, council. My name is Sonya Decker. I live in Richmond. I grew up in Richmond, and I'm also speaking tonight as A CCRP ROC COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER. AND I AM HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE IMPORTANCE OF CARE NAVIGATORS RIGHT NOW IN THE BUDGET FOR THE ROC PROGRAM. AS YOU JUST HEARD FROM BOARD MEMBER MELENDEZ, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RECOMMENDING THESE POSITIONS TO COUNCIL AND THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS NOT INCLUDED. SO WE'RE LIVING INTO OUR BYLAWS BY SHARING DIRECTLY WITH YOU WHAT WE REALLY BELIEVE IS NECESSARY FOR THE ROC PROGRAM RIGHT NOW. to live into its vision and goals. This was a part of how the ROC program was envisioned by the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, by the Urban Strategies Council, what community advocated for. It's always been in the vision of the ROC program to have care navigators. They're a crucial part of the team. The community intervention specialists respond in the moment of crisis. Care navigators follow up and connect to needed resources. THAT WILL PREVENT CRISIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN. AND THAT'S A KEY PART OF THE ROCK PROGRAM AND IS ULTIMATELY A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE CHOICE AS IT CAN SAVE THE CITY MONEY IN THE LONG RUN TO PREVENT CRISIS FROM CONTINUING TO HAPPEN. AND I APPRECIATED THAT THE City Manager Curl said let's not operate from like a fear and a deficit perspective. Let's continue to invest in what has been working and I really appreciate your support of the ROC program so far. It's in its critical first year. Let's make sure that we're continuing to reimagine public safety in Richmond and give the ROC program what it needs to thrive in its initial year. This is a critical time and we really need two care navigators now. And I also want to share that really staff and on-the-ground team have voiced a strong need for this. They have too many follow-ups right now than what they can do. I also want to voice concern for taking money away from youth works and unhoused interventions as part of discretionary funding. I really believe that these funds are vital. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, Salma Burman, followed by Sean Flood.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM THE COMMUNITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF RICHMOND'S ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE PROGRAM. WHEN I TALK ABOUT BIKE SHARE, IT'S EASY TO FOCUS ON SPREADSHEETS, RIDERSHIP, NUMBERS, COST CALCULATIONS, BUT WHAT I SEE EVERY DAY ARE THE PEOPLE BEHIND THOSE NUMBERS. I meet residents at community events, transit stations, neighborhood gatherings, and outreach activities. I help people download the app, learn how the system works, and take their first ride. For many of the riders, that first trip becomes their connection to transit, work, school, healthcare, and other destinations throughout Richmond. The strongest ridership period occurs when we are actively out in the community. When we reduce barriers and help people try the system out, they used it. Many of those riders continued riding even after their vouchers were exhausted. That tells us that there's still an opportunity to grow ridership. I encourage council to remember that this program was never intended to be a short-term project. It was designed around a long-term vision creating a transportation network that would grow over time. The foundation is already in place. Community partnerships have been established. Years of outreach, education, and rider development have already occurred. We are much closer to realizing the city's original version than we are to starting over again. I understand the city's budget challenges. My request today is simply that council consider the value in continuing to build upon an investment that has been already made rather than walking away from an asset before all opportunities to strengthen it have been fully evaluated. Thank you so much.

Our next speaker is Sean Flood.

Hello, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council Members. My name is Sean Flood. I'm the CEO of Today. As you probably know, we are the operator for your bike share system. First, I want to point out that my team is here all week long and available not only tonight, but for the next few days to answer any questions that you may have. and work with city staff. Second, I think it's important that when council decided to launch a bike share system, that was a long-term plan. The first phase was stabilize the vendor who had left in the middle of the night, which we did. Second was to repurpose and acquire new bikes and racks, which we did. Those are your e-bikes, your racks. And then the third was hiring an operator to manage that system, which we've now done over the past few years. This system is designed to grow. There are some short-term things that we can do. One, you acquired enough racks where we could deploy in 10 other areas. We have that list of areas that have been approved. Those encroachment permits have been sitting with the city for about a year, not approved, but those are racks sitting in a warehouse ready to be deployed tomorrow. That means that 10 new stations in your community could be available where members of the city could access those bikes. That would drive utilization. Second, this is your system. If tomorrow you want this to be free to all members of your community, it can be. Further driving up utilization of bikes that you've already invested in, in racks you've already invested in, in a local team that you've invested in, the technology that's been built over the years to engage with the community. Again, this is not a short-term plan. The longer you have these assets, the easier it will be for people to access them and ridership will be driven up. Lastly, there are grants available that we have access to. Our team's currently drafting the language to share with city staff for an MTC grant that is perfect to fund the expansion of this program. That's due June 22nd. We are available the rest of today and the next three days and would love to answer any questions about your bike share system. Thank you all.

Our last in-person speaker is David Tausma.

Thank you, thank you Mayor and Council Members. I also want to thank city staff for working with us to put together the data today and I don't disagree with the challenges they've brought forward. I do believe there's some additional information and several opportunities we could explore before the Council makes a permanent decision. One thing I'll note is that Bike share is not the same as bike lending, and we support both. We manufacture electric bikes that go into bike libraries. Bike libraries provide access, one-to-one access for people. Sharing is a transportation infrastructure. They are complementary. The cost per ride story. So the headline costs per trip included a million dollars or so of acquisition of assets, the planning, the infrastructure, the setup, the racks. And if you reduce that or remove that from the calculation, it shows material improvement. More importantly, with use of vouchers, tabling, outreach, and things that Salma and her team have done, It nearly drops the per ride cost to $150 per ride. I think what's important about that is it's headed in the right direction when you do things like that and you remove barriers. Voucher users went from 2.25 rides on average to over seven rides per user. We've issued over 2,000 vouchers throughout the time we've been working with this system, and the system works. It removes barriers. There is a missing piece. The staff noted that hub density affects utilization, and we fully agree. Sean mentioned that we were able to deploy 10 stations fairly immediately, and we're waiting on encroachment permits to do that, and it could be done quickly, which would expand the system and increase ridership. So I'm asking the council to evaluate additional hubs, expanding vouchers, and helping us pursue dollars with grants, and also sponsorships. So before you make a decision.

Your time has expired. Thank you. Okay, that was our last in-person speaker. Now we'll move to the three online speakers.

Okay, and the three speakers are Erin Pang, Amaya Williams Segovia, and Isabella. When your name is called, please be prepared to unmute yourself. Erin Pang, you'll have two minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start.

Hello, good afternoon City Council members. My name is Erin Pang and I'm making a comment on behalf of Save the Bay. I urge you to adopt the budget option number two and provide the $1 million in funding needed to complete the Point Milani Bay Trail project. which is currently under construction and can be finished this year with the right funding. Save the Bay advocates for public access to the bay for all to enjoy. And as part of this, we envision a complete and accessible bay trail connecting the communities to the San Francisco Bay, which is one of the natural assets that makes our region so special. So this Point Malady Bay Trail project would close a really critical gap in the Bay Trail network and provide long awaited public access to one of the Bay Area's most scenic and historically significant shorelines. It will also expand opportunities for walking, biking, wildlife viewing, environmental education, and outdoor recreation for visitors and residents alike. Construction on this project has already begun, so providing funding to the project now will maximize the value of prior public investments, avoid project delays, and demonstrate the city's commitment to equitable access to parks, open space, and waterfront. So for these reasons, I urge you to support funding for the Point Milani Bay Trail project.

Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Amaya Williams Segovia. You'll have two minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Amai William Segovia. I'm the deputy manager at Citizens for East Shore Parks. Please adopt staff's option two and provide the $1 million in funding needed for the Point Melani Bay Trail that is now under construction. Citizens for East Shore Parks believes that this is an important project to complete to provide enhanced public access to the significant and historical part of the Richmond shoreline. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And the last speaker is Isabella. You'll have two minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start.

Good evening, mayor and council members. I'm speaking on the e-bike lending library. When the TCC grant was submitted in June of 2022, construction for this building was budgeted within a $1.16 million implementation task. Staff is now saying the current estimate is $3.4 million, roughly triple the original figure for a building with no land acquisition cost. For perspective, large, fully upgraded spec homes are built in the Bay Area for significantly less. and for far less here in Richmond. And this comes after the city's own e-bike program was revealed to cost taxpayers $665 per trip with an average trip of only 2.3 miles. Staff cites labor costs and other things, but cost drivers are not cost justifications. A $2.2 million overrun is an irresponsible ask of taxpayers when the city has far more pressing needs, including numerous park projects, helping homeowners in high fire severity zones, and countless other pressing needs. Before any additional funds are released, this council owes taxpayers a full line item public accounting of this project. But the problem extends well beyond this single structure. The $665 per trip e-bike program demonstrates that the city has not operated these programs at anything approaching a reasonable cost. And no plan has been presented showing how this program will be sustainably financed going forward. This council has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers and that responsibility demands more than approving just cost overruns as they accumulate. That honest answer here is not a redesign. It is whether this project should be canceled entirely. No responsible person would spend their own money this way on a glorified shed. Do not spend Richmond taxpayers money this way either. Thank you. Thank you.

And that was the last speaker.

Good. Thank you. We will now go into discussion. Discussion will be among council members. We will ask staff for information. There will not be debate, only suggestions and we will after discussion, decide whether option one, option two, if we decide option two, we will have to decide what we need to cut back on in order to provide finances for what we want to add. So Claudia, then Vice Mayor, anyone on this side? Okay.

Thank you so much for the presentation and for the work of the city manager around the great things that we are doing in the city. As I always said, the budget represents our values, and I feel like putting money into what we value, it will be the things that will improve in the communities we want to do. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BETWEEN AUCTION ONE AND AUCTION TWO. SO MY QUESTIONS ARE, ONE IS, IN AUCTION ONE, YOU, THE BASELINE IS TO HAVE A VACANCY RATE THAT IS 12%. Last year, we approved a vacancy rate of 7%, I believe, or 9%? 9.7. 9.7%. And then you said that by doing that, we will have $16.5 million. What is the vacancy rate that you are proposing an auction to?

12 right now and then it'll increase once the mous that you have with public safety are effectuated so that means that in option one any of the council directions are considered right no that's not what it says we can go back to that slide please

So yeah, because if it's the same vacancy rate and you are saying that we will have discretionary funds to allocate to other things, What does it look like?

Right, if we don't, if there isn't money in the budget for staff to effectuate programs, to buy supplies, then staff can't do their jobs. So there has to be some funding, for example, right, if you have staff in let's say parks, right, FOR PARK STAFF TO DO THEIR JOBS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE MULCH, THEY HAVE TO HAVE SEEDS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE PLANTS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE PAINT, RIGHT? THEY HAVE TO HAVE ALL THE SUPPLIES THAT IT TAKES TO RUN A CITY IS WHAT WE HAVE TO PURCHASE. SO WHAT KCRT, CAN YOU PUT UP THE TWO COMPARISON SLIDES THAT EMILY WENT OVER FOR OPTION 1 AND 2? WHAT ARE THEY? THANK YOU SO MUCH. OPTION 7. I MEAN, PAGE 7, RATHER.

So what I am trying to understand here is that, um, you are saying that we will need an additional money to finish these, um, bless you things like the, these shortfalls in auction too. So in auction one, we, we won't do that. Right.

Not, not as currently designed.

AND WHAT ABOUT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIONS ABOUT THE 37 KEY INITIATIVES? ARE THEY INCLUDED IN AUCTION 1? NO.

THE ONES THAT HAVE A KNOWN FISCAL IMPACT, YES, THAT WAS ALSO COVERED ON A SLIDE. AND IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT'S ON IN YOUR BINDER UNDER TAB 1. So the green items And this unfortunately didn't get so the green and then go to slide 10 please KCRT. So all of these items, some of them have known quantitative budget impacts and others don't. So part of what we were trying to ascertain from the council this evening are how does the council want to prioritize these 37 items, or now it's really more like 33. So for example, immigration, right, is funded under option one. Black resiliency is funded under option one to name two. But if somebody put an item on the agenda and its number, A DIFFERENT NUMBER, RIGHT? LET'S SAY 33, 34, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, RIGHT? WHAT IS THE METHODOLOGY AND WHAT IS THE PRIORITIZATION? LIKE IF SOMETHING SAYS RETURN TO THE COUNCIL IN 90 DAYS, RETURN TO THE COUNCIL IN 120 DAYS BUT THEN THERE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, 30 PLUS THINGS THAT CAME PRIOR TO, WHAT GOES FIRST? And there isn't consensus on the council on how that takes place. And so I think it inadvertently creates a lot of tension and conflict because there aren't, people have different expectations around what should be happening. So we want the council to agree upon what is the methodology for PRIORITIZING YOUR COUNCIL DIRECTION, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE ISN'T CONSENSUS. SO SOME PEOPLE FEEL LIKE, OH, I PUT MY ITEM ON, IT SHOULD BE HEARD, BUT SOMEBODY ELSE JUST PUT SOMETHING ON AND IT SAYS 90 DAYS. WELL, WHAT GOES FIRST? So that was the framework Patrick went over to just provide some initial guidance on what the city council might want to consider to then help inform how do these things get effectuated? Because right now there's no criteria in terms of what what the order is.

AND IF I MAY ADD, THERE ARE SOME ITEMS WITHIN THESE 37 REQUESTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, WHICH WERE MENTIONED. FOR EXAMPLE, NUMBER 25, THAT IS FUNDING THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, THAT WAS ON SLIDE 13 UNDER GENERAL FUND COMMITMENTS. AND RICHMOND PROMISES ON HERE AS WELL, ALTHOUGH NOT FUNDED, WE DID MENTION THAT.

So you're saying like black resilience in option one is funded, immigration is funded. Okay. One thing that I have, so these all are funded in option one.

No, not all of them, because some of them don't have a known fiscal impact. So like, say, Ciclovia, right? We don't know how much that's going to cost. So that isn't, but if you look at page eight of the staff report, table two, IT SAYS KEY INITIATIVES INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. THIS IS IN THE WE DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE THE POWERPOINT TOO LONG SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE YOUR BINDERS. IT'S PAGE 8 OF THE STAFF REPORT AND IT INDICATES THAT THE ART CORRIDOR PHASE 2 185,000 IS INCLUDED. BLOCK RESILIENCY 1.5 MILLION IS INCLUDED. $300,000 FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND LIMITED TERM REVENUE IS INCLUDED, $100,000 FOR GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE, $700,000 FOR IMMIGRATION SERVICES, $150,000 FOR MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT, $146,675 FOR REPARATIONS EQUITY AND INCLUSION, $250,000 FOR POINT MELATI AND $150,000 FOR REVENUE ENHANCEMENT ALS DEVELOPMENT AS AN EXAMPLE. SO THAT TOTALS. THREE, IN EXCESS OF $3 MILLION.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT IN AUCTION ONE ALL OF THESE WERE NOT THERE AND WE WERE TRYING TO FIND IT IN AUCTION TWO. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO THEN THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THIS COUNCIL, IF WE APPROVE AUCTION ONE WITH A HIGHER VACANCY RATE, WHAT ARE THE LEFT STUFFING THAT WE CAN HIRE? BECAUSE I THINK AS WE MENTION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT THE TWO CARE NAVIGATORS FOR ROCK CAN BE HIRED. YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING THERE ABOUT ARTS AND CULTURE MANAGER, BUT WHY IS THIS IN THESE LEADS WHEN THAT COULD BE IN THE HIRING or the position list, right? We used to have a manager before.

That's there because you brought, that key initiatives means you brought, the city council brought an item to the city council agenda and gave us policy direction. So that's specifically listed there because that was an item that you brought to the city council.

Yeah, but it is not part of, like, IT'S NOT PART OF THE POSITION LISTING. IT'S NOT LIKE ADDING A NEW POSITION BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE THE MANAGER WAS THERE.

JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING, SO THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 811 POSITIONS IN POSITION CONTROL. THE CITY CANNOT AFFORD 811 POSITIONS.

I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT BUT WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT THE That position was filled before. Unfortunately, we don't have it anymore because the person who was there is really sad past. So that means that because that happened, then we just cut it out and it's no longer there. Like, I just want to make sure what is the logic of... THAT POSITION AND THEN MY FIRST QUESTION I WANT TO ANSWER AND DON'T GET DERAILED IS IF WE APPROVE THIS VACANCY RATE THAT IS 12%, HOW MANY POSITIONS WE HAVE TO FILL?

So based on the list that you're referring to of 37 key initiatives, if we can go to the list there. So public art is number the 23 art and cultural manager and grant process reform. That was a specific agenda item that the city council brought forward. That's why it's listed here. So that's one thing. And so we're following through on the policy direction that was provided related to item 23 here. There was specific direction that was provided. So that's one piece. Then the second piece is as the costs associated with hiring 92 staff people over the last four plus years and the subsequent round of MOU negotiations and increases, and CalPERS increases and healthcare increases, the city is at a point now where we essentially, in absence of retirements, we are at a point that new personnel cannot be added. because of the cost, the labor costs. The labor costs have continued to increase. We've discussed this many times. And based on the information that I'm receiving from finance staff, AND THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH OUR BUDGET AND THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH OUR COSTS, THAT IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO HIRE UNLESS THERE ARE RETIREMENTS. THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR PERSONNEL COSTS HAS INCREASED IN EXCESS OF $54 MILLION, AND AS YOU SAW FROM I THINK IF WE CAN GO TO SLIDE 34, IT'S THE VERY LAST ONE, AT THE END OF THE DECK, THERE'S ONE THAT Well, no, not that one. Let's see, the one with the UAL. There we go. So you can see here that the UAL when we started 21, 22, when we had 92 less staff people, it was at about 27 million, right? And you can see Even with the returns doing really well that it's increasing astronomically. So what that means is that the city's costs for our personnel are increasing exponentially so we can no longer continue to hire unless there's a retirement. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNCIL KNEW ALL OF THE GREAT WORK THAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THE WORK THAT'S HAPPENING IS AMAZING. I DON'T HAVE RESIDENTS EMAILING ME COMPLAINING. THEY JUST SAY, OH, CAN YOU FIX MY POTHOLE ON THIS STREET OR CAN YOU CHANGE MY SIGN? BY AND LARGE I WOULD SAY OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS THE TYPES OF Information I'm getting has substantially changed in terms of residents So I really what we're trying to get the council to provide direction on Which is a series of six key questions is around based on the resources. We currently have how does the City Council want to prioritize? The work that we're doing WITH THE EXISTING RESOURCES BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ASSUME THAT YOUR COSTS ARE CONTINUING TO INCREASE EXPONENTIALLY EVEN IF YOU AREN'T ADDING MORE PEOPLE. IT'S KIND OF LIKE GAS, RIGHT? LIKE WE ALL GO BUY GAS AND GAS USED TO BE FOUR SOMETHING. THEN IT WAS FIVE SOMETHING. NOW IT'S SIX SOMETHING. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH OUR CITY BUDGET. SO IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WELL, MAYBE YOU TAKE LESS TRIPS OR YOU CARPOOL. BUT YOU CAN'T JUST KEEP DOING THE SAME THING BECAUSE THE COSTS ARE INCREASING ASTRONOMICALLY.

THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. I THINK FOR ME, I KNOW THAT IN THIS MOMENT, WE MIGHT HAVE TO HAVE THIS HIGH VACANCY RATE, BUT WITHOUT AN ANALYSIS OF LIKE MAYBE BY BRINGING SOME MORE PEOPLE THAT WILL ALLOW US TO GET MORE REVENUE OR INCREASE THE SERVICE AND THE SERVICE WILL HELP US WITH REVENUE, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO to think about no, like no advocating for the hiring that we need when there is programs that is core of us to serve the community and just kind of like leave it half and no really a FULFILL SO WE HAVE THE RESULT THAT WE WANT. THE OTHER THING IS THAT I SAYING THAT YOUTH WORKS AROUND HOUSE, ESPECIALLY YOUTH WORK IS DISCRETIONARY, BECAUSE PART OF THAT MONEY ALSO PAYS STAFF, RIGHT? SO I DON'T KNOW, LIKE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT ALL THAT MONEY GOES TO YOUTH FOR PAYING THEIR SALARIES?

DEPUTY MANAGER WHITE, CAN YOU COME ELABORATE ON THE SLIDES YOU PRESENTED, PLEASE?

So the question around youth works and I can go to that slide. You are accurate. So the, all of the funding that is listed as discretionary, some of it does go to support staff and some goes to support stipends. So it needed to be split.

And then, so you are making an argument that for ROC, ONS, this is not discretionary because some of that mostly goes to staff. But in youth work, you are presenting the whole thing as discretionary when some of that goes to staff. But anyway, so... It should have been split. Okay, thank you so much. But I think it's also that... I particularly feel like we had been putting this money over and over for unhoused intervention for youth work and it had been really giving us results in terms of getting more young folks in our city to work. So I don't agree that we need to use that as a slash fund and we had a commitment TO REIMAGINE PUBLIC SAFETY AND THIS IS PART OF THAT. SO I JUST HOPE THAT THIS COUNCIL DON'T THINK THAT THESE ARE DISCRETIONARY FUNDS BUT ARE FUNDS THAT ARE HELPING OUR COMMUNITY ESPECIALLY NAVIGATING THINGS LIKE PROVIDING SERVICES FOR YOUTH AND THE UNHOUSE INTERVENTION THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE AND RESIDENTS COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT. SO WE ARE MAKING SOME GOOD WAYS INTO SUPPORTING RESIDENTS AND WITH THESE TWO PROGRAMS. I THINK I WILL HAVE MORE, BUT I WILL STOP HERE FOR MY COLLEAGUES TO TALK.

AND FOR THE REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY DOLLARS, THE FINANCE DIRECTOR ALSO MENTIONED THAT THERE'S A SLIDE THAT SHOWS some recommendations from staff about how the funding could be used, the 2.6 for some of the shortfalls, and she mentioned that it was more connected to the key initiatives, what we label still as discretionary that aren't attached to staffing costs, that total a little bit over $3 million, and that the 3.3 that was mentioned under reimagining public safety THERE HAS NOT BEEN A RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY STAFF ABOUT WHERE TO SPEND THAT MONEY ON.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND JUST ONE MORE QUESTION. SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE FROM THE SETTLEMENT BROUGHT $1.8 MILLION.

IN THE STAFF REPORT IT NOTES THAT IT'S IN CAL TRUST.

SO WE HAVEN'T EXPENDED?

THE INTEREST, NO.

THE INTEREST IS NOT EXPENDED.

THAT WAS ALSO NOTED AS SOMETHING THAT ONCE WE FINANCE STAFF, HISTORICALLY AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE FISCAL YEAR, THERE IS A LARGE UNSPENT AMOUNT. BECAUSE THE MOU INCREASES WERE NOT BUDGETED IN THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR AND CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, THAT MEANS THAT, AND WE'VE HIRED 92 PEOPLE, THAT MEANS THAT IS SHRINKING. SO THE REASON WHY STAFF ARE BRINGING THESE PROJECT SHORTFALLS TO YOU NOW IS BECAUSE CURRENTLY, RIGHT, AND THE BUDGET IS AN ENVELOPE. THINGS CAN ALWAYS CHANGE. FINANCE STAFF IS PROJECTING THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNSPENT DOLLARS. IN FACT, WE MAY NOT HAVE UNSPENT DOLLARS BECAUSE WE HAVE TO THEN, REMEMBER, AS OUR GENERAL FUND INCREASES, WE HAVE TO INCREASE OUR RESERVE TO 21%. SO WE'RE NOW GETTING AT THE we have to be very thoughtful about the expenditures. So Councilmember Jimenez, we agree with everything that you said. I think the question that we're trying to get to as staff are, are there some things that the City Council wants us to focus on and do really well? Right. While we're seeing how our numbers continue to come together. And there are some things that are key council initiatives that we actually don't need the money for right now. Right. So it doesn't mean that they're not important. Right. But we're not going to spend the money like in the next six months, probably. or we certainly won't spend all of it. So since we know we have these four projects that have a shortfall, should we go ahead and fund those, get those complete, and then the Council can work through how do you want to prioritize your 37 key initiatives and the fiscal allocations associated with that.

I think like also I am just trying to figure out there is $1.8 million that we haven't allocated. That is like you are saying one-time money. So that might be a good thing to think about how we allocate that money to fill the gap for this project. I agree. If we start projects, we should... FINISH THEN, BUT I AM JUST TRYING TO SEE WHERE THE MONEY IS INSTEAD OF JUST TAKING MONEY FROM THINGS THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY.

WE MIGHT NOT KNOW THAT UNTIL SEPTEMBER, RIGHT? AND WE NEED TO FINISH AND HAVE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THAT BEFORE The current, we need the city council, right, to provide an opportunity to fund the four project shortfalls in advance of year-end close.

BUT LET ME JUST FINISH WITH THIS. SO YOU ARE PROJECTING THAT WE WILL HAVE $1.8 MILLION OR YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT WE HAVE $1.8 MILLION AND WE CAN HAVE MORE MONEY?

THE 1.8 MILLION IS THE INTEREST EARNINGS TO DATE.

IT'S ALREADY THERE. TO DATE. SO WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, LIKE, HOW MUCH ARE YOU PROJECTING THAT WE CAN GET AN INTEREST RATE FOR THAT MONEY THAT WE GOT THIS YEAR?

That is the 1.8, but the thing is, right?

No, no, no. One moment. I just want to, so we have $1.8 million right now because we earned that money, right? Correct. It's yes or no? Correct. So we have $1.8 million. We got another $15 million this year. How much interest rate are we projecting to win, like to get for that extra money, like the $15 million that we got?

THE INTEREST RATE CHANGES.

I KNOW, BUT YOU HAVE PROJECTIONS.

MAYOR, IF I MAY, WHAT DID WE DISCUSS EARLIER, THAT IF THE MEETING WAS THERE WAS DISCORD, WE WERE GOING TO ASK TO TAKE A RECESS, RIGHT, MAYOR? So mayor if I may the way that the the funding works right is The interest is accrued depending on market conditions. It's not an absolute right it depends on market conditions It is not an absolute So right now, there has been interest income accrued, but we haven't closed out the books for the current fiscal year. Therefore, it is not prudent to appropriate the interest because we might need the interest for the reserves or something else if the revenue projections are not accurate. That's why you don't appropriate. This has happened before when I was not city manager. You do not mix fiscal years with appropriations and take future revenues and make an appropriation for an existing fiscal year. You have to make sure your balance and closure books with the appropriate revenue. If Mubeen and Jerry and Antonio, who spend all of their time thinking about these things, tell me that things are going to be close, things are going to be tight, that I listen to them because this is all they do is think about these things. I try to think about it as much as I can, but I defer to staff. So if staff are telling me they think this current fiscal year is going to be tight, then that's what I convey to you. Anytime anything changes, if all of a sudden there is a big documentary transfer tax, right, we email you and we tell you, oh, there's been a windfall, here it is, right, a building sold that we weren't thinking about. So we are telling you it's a snapshot in time, today at 5-11, what we know now, and as it continues to change, the budget envelope can be adjusted. That's all. There's no, it's not a right or wrong, it's just today, here is the snapshot of where we are.

Point of clarification. When we're talking about the general fund, we're talking about the entire general fund?

Yes, Mayor.

So that includes the $50 million from our settlement?

I AM HAPPY TO FOLLOW THE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY DIRECTION. YES, MAYOR. SO THEN, OKAY.

VICE MAYOR?

HI. I JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. FIRST QUESTION IS HOW OPTION 1 DEAL WITH THE CIP PROJECT SHORE FALLS?

CURRENTLY THEY'RE UNFUNDED. AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT MEANS THAT ON ATTACHMENT ONE, THERE IS A LIST OF ALL THE CIP PROJECTS UTILIZING THE METHODOLOGY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I MEAN THE SHORT FALL PROJECTS. No, there's a lot. It's not just these four.

I'm talking about the four that are suggested in option two.

We want you all to have a discussion and tell us.

I'm trying to ask and make it clear. I'm trying to understand if option one includes those shortfalls for those four projects. No. They do not.

And the plan is just to let them be what they are and that's it. No, we're saying that the city council can decide to do option two or you can decide to do a modification of option two. We can also decide on option one. Yes.

And just let them be what they are.

Potentially, or we'll come back to you and try to move money around. It depends on, like every change order is different, right? So if there's a change order for concrete, AT SHIELDS REED, RIGHT? WE NEEDED $400,000 TO DO CONCRETE AT SHIELDS REED. SO STAFF WERE VERY CREATIVE AND SO INSTEAD OF HAVING ANOTHER CHANGE ORDER FOR $400,000, THEY'RE LIKE, OH, WE CAN DO THE CONCRETE OURSELVES. THAT WILL SAVE $400,000. SO WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN IS WE WOULD GO BACK AND SHARPEN OUR PENCILS AND SAY, OKAY, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT HASN'T BEEN AUTHORIZED AND CAN WE REMOVE IT? if it has already been authorized and then we would go back and say okay where in the city council's uh cip approved budget could we cut something and then we would come back to you and see if we should cut something but thank you um the next question i have is uh what is the city's plan to increase revenue and how does option one support that plan We are continuing to implement Measure U and the City Council has adopted several economic development plans that are being implemented by staff. A large part of what helps economic development is also how we engage with the business community. And so I think the Chamber of Commerce has been doing a great job of working collaboratively with staff and working on a regional basis through the Economic Development Commission. So I think that things are Moving forward in a much more positive direction hence open AI choosing to come to Richmond So you believe that option one actually has a path for increased revenue?

Yes Do we know what the estimate of what that increase in revenue would be? We can come up with one it would that be another initiative that would go on to the list of 33 or is that just normal business I

THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. IT DEPENDS ON HOW LONG IT TAKES. IF IT TAKES UNDER AN HOUR, WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO RESPOND TO INQUIRIES.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE PLANNING AND HOW WE ARE RESOURCING THE CITY'S REVENUE AND REVENUE STREAMS. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT MAY BE THE POTENTIAL OF INCREASES IN REVENUE AND WHAT PRACTICES WE ARE DOING AND WHAT PROGRAMS, WHAT STAFF ARE NEEDED IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THAT. COULD WE PLEASE GET THAT INFORMATION SO WE UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER? SURE.

SOME OF THE THINGS ARE SIMPLE, LIKE IMPROVING THE CITY'S BUSINESS LICENSE PROCESSES, WHICH STAFF ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON. IF YOU GO ONLINE RIGHT NOW TO GET A BUSINESS LICENSE, IT'S PRETTY CUMBERSOME IN TERMS OF THE DIRECTIONS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON NOW IS STREAMLINING THAT PROCESS AND MAKING IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW DO YOU OBTAIN A BUSINESS LICENSE. AS DEPUTY CITY MANAGER WHITE MENTIONED, WHEN WE HAVE THE 37 INITIATIVES, IT MAKES IT HARD TO THEN DO THE THINGS THAT WE KNOW WE NEED TO FIX TO MAKE THINGS MORE EFFICIENT. SAME THING WITH SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS.

SO KIND OF LEADING FROM THERE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD PRETTY CLEARLY FROM ALL THE DEPARTMENTS, EVERY DEPARTMENT THAT CAME AND SPOKE, was that they quite clearly said that they were understaffed under immense amounts of pressure and their stress load was very, very high because of it. How does option one address what seems to be a pressing staffing need?

It still requires that the city council come up with criteria around your key initiatives. I mean, part of the opportunity.

In option one, I don't think that includes any of those unfunded initiatives, right? So it's just the core operations, if I understood what Emily said correctly. She said that option one only funds the basic operations.

No, that's not what, please go to page eight of the staff report. Table two. So the heading under this item in the staff report, it notes key initiatives included in the budget.

So I'm seeing in the presentation on slide seven option one. It says maintains all current services, has a vacancy of 12%, preserves operational community equity, no use of reserves, supports long-term feasibility. So when we were going over this, I thought it was made clear that it does not have, it was only the basic Operations, I don't know which side that was when you were testing.

No, that's what we deputy city manager white and finance director combs explained that that wasn't the case and

IT'S BASICALLY THE STATUS QUO. BUT I THINK THAT KIND OF NOT TO SEGUE BUT IS WHY WE BROUGHT UP THE DRAFT FRAMEWORK AND ARE ASKING FOR CITY COUNCIL INPUT ON CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERING NEW INITIATIVES TO SORT OF HELP WITH THAT STAFF CAPACITY WITHIN DEPARTMENTS.

you know the core what we described the core it just it keeps at the baseline so in community development what lena has is what lena has going forward um without any new positions the only plan to address the the stress that staff is experiencing and the understaffing even in the business license department i talked to them and they had more more people allocated that were supposed to be working with them but they were understaffed I DON'T THINK COUNCIL INITIATIVES WERE A FACTOR IN THEIR STRESS OR WORKLOAD. I THINK THEY NEEDED MORE PEOPLE TO HELP THEM PROCESS BUSINESS LICENSE. BUT WE'RE SAYING THAT IN THIS OPTION, IN THIS BUDGET, WE HAVE NO FUNDS FOR THAT.

THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS AS WE'VE DISCUSSED DURING right as we've had three consecutive rounds of of increases that as staff make more money you can afford less staff and so the only thing that is then viable is to become more efficient and to make processes streamlined. So we have the software by and large. We have the systems. We have to implement the systems and technology that allow people to work more efficiently. And it's difficult to do that if we're responding and sort of managing projects through email, We're, you know, if people aren't using IMS as the way to report things. And so the function of having less staff is a function of the cost of staff and the increases that have been received. It is not something that I'm recommending. We've hired 92 people. That's amazing. Right? It's, that's great.

But the only way, I guess what I'm hearing is the only way to change this is to, have increases from Measure U, the revenue increase, efforts to increase revenue, Measure U being the primary way, or to become more efficient.

Those are the two short-term things that are within your control. You can have a great economic development strategy, but we're in a free market economy, so nobody has to open a business here. So the things that we focus on as the first and second things are things that have high fiscal impact and can have definitive results because we can't make anyone locate here. But what we can do is we can make it easy for them to locate here. We can be friendly. We can be open for business. We've hired more economic development staff than we've ever had in the city of Richmond, as long as I can remember. So I think the opportunity is, what are we going to focus on? And doing really exceptional at that, that's the opportunity.

I guess my question is the question that I would like you to take back as a staff is, are there PARTICULAR STAFFING POSITIONS THAT ARE STRATEGIC THAT IF WE DO STAFF THEM WOULD HELP US INCREASE REVENUE.

WE CAN CERTAINLY THINK ABOUT THAT.

I JUST WANT TO FINISH MY THOUGHT REALLY QUICK. FOR INSTANCE, IF WE WERE TO ADD SOMEONE IN BUSINESS LICENSING, WOULD THAT INCREASE OUR REVENUE IN A WAY THAT WE COULD REALLY MAKE AN IMPACT? IF WE WERE TO INCREASE STAFFING IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT DEALS WITH PERMITS? Would that increase how quickly permits were able to be processed so that we can get projects happening and then, again, increase revenue? I don't know the answers to those questions, but I think that they're key questions for the budget, especially for long-term building of revenue. And I do believe that we need to think strategically about, I understand that we won't be able to hire under this scenario, but if somebody does retire, we have a question of where do we then put that staffing money? And if there's a strategic place to put that staffing money that would actually make more money so that we could look at some places that maybe didn't make money to staff in the future, that would be strategic. And I don't know that from all the information that I'm provided now, and I'm asking if we could get that question answered.

We're happy to provide information. I think the thing that's important for the council to understand is operationalizing Measure U in an automated manner is so that the notices are just going out and nobody is, like, manually collating things is where the magic is, right? And so we actually just need to effectuate the system we have better and utilize innovation. So I actually wouldn't say, oh, we need another business license person, probably. I would say, oh, we need another person on the innovation team, right? And so, but I think it's not... But I think that's the question that I'm asking. Right, but I would say if...

I'M NOT PRESCRIBING THE BUSINESS LICENSED PERSONS, BUT RATHER SAYING IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, STRATEGICALLY PLACED STAFFING WHEREVER IT MAY BE YOUR NEED TO BE IN ORDER TO INCREASE REVENUE? YES.

I THINK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CAN CERTAINLY, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING AND WHAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO, BUT IT'S ALSO I THINK FROM A being empathetic to the staff that we have now and that they're at capacity, I think is important in terms of our values, right? And so if they're saying they're at capacity, then as city manager, my role is to convey that to the council and to say that we need to have conversations around trade-offs, even though it's hard.

I have two more quick questions. And one is the Point Malade project. I DON'T REMEMBER THE FULL TIMELINE, BUT I SEEM TO REMEMBER THAT WE ALLOCATED MONEY FOR A FUNDING GAP PREVIOUSLY. IS THAT CORRECT?

YES, THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATIONS. AND SO WE CAN GET THE FULL ACCOUNTING FOR THAT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE IT RIGHT NOW.

I SEEM TO REMEMBER THE SECOND OR THIRD FUNDING GAP THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING IN THIS PROJECT.

ASK STAFF TO WORK ON.

IF WE COULD GET A REPORT JUST ON THE FULL COST AND HOW WE GOT TO THIS FULL COST AND HOW MUCH WE'VE PUT IN SO FAR FROM VARIOUS FUNDING STREAMS, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR ME. OKAY. AND THEN FINALLY, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE PULLMAN PARK INVESTIGATION IS IN ALL THIS ANALYSIS. I COULD NOT FIND IT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE WAY THAT I PUT FORWARD THAT ITEM IS THAT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY ACQUISITION. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYTHING LIKE THAT. a pathway and understanding of how we would go about moving such a project and not asking for allocated resources. I saw it somewhere in here that it had $150,000 allocated to it. I don't understand how it got that. And I also understand that it's unfunded. So I don't know where it exists in all these things, even though it was a past item. I don't know.

Can we call Director Chavarria to answer that question, maybe with support from Darcy?

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MARTINEZ, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, FOR THE RECORD, VICE MAYOR ROBINSON, WOULD YOU MIND REPEATING THE QUESTION, PLEASE?

I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THIS GREAT VOLUME OF INFORMATION AND I REMEMBER SEEING THAT THE PULLMAN PARK INVESTIGATING CREATING A PARK IN PULLMAN AT THE SITE MENTIONED. It was allocated $150,000, and I was wondering why, because all I was asking for is what is the pathway, what are the things that we need to actually investigate in order to be able to move it in that direction. It shouldn't cost money. We're not actually acquiring anything or doing anything or doing any studies. I just wanted a list of what it is that we needed in order to make such a park. And so I'm trying to understand, one, where that cost came from, and two, where is it in the realm of all these things? We approved it, but I don't really know where anything stands because of the way things are being framed.

Yeah, currently we are not using any funds for that project. What we're doing is what we have for the 90 days to come up with what will be the steps to acquire and what will be the implications, right, to acquire that. That's where we are right now. That's it. Yeah.

So do you, I can't remember where I saw that $150,000, but I was like what is that $150,000 for and why does it even cost any money at all outside of staff time?

I'm looking at because he's the number guy. I mean, I know. No, so we're confirming there's no money for Pullman. I don't know if they're 150. If you have the page or the location, we can check it out.

There's hundreds of pages everywhere. I don't remember where I saw it. I will try to see if I can't do searches to find it again. So I guess what I'm asking is, where does it live in all of these things?

On the slide of the 37 items, it lives there.

So it would be one of the things that needs to be prioritized so that we know what order to work in on those things?

Yes.

Okay, thank you. That's all I have.

Councilmember Spada?

All right, sorry. I was totally doing some chocolate. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE MY TURN YET.

YOU'RE NOT SHARING, COUNCILMEMBER ZAPATA.

I TRY TO PASS IT AROUND. IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS SOME. I JUST WANT TO START OFF WITH PAGE TWO.

OF THE POWERPOINT, COUNCILMEMBER ZAPATA?

OR THE STAFF REPORT? OF THE PDF, I DON'T KNOW.

THE ATTACHMENT ONE? THE COLORED DOCUMENT WITH THE, THAT'S THE EIGHT AND A HALF BY

NO, MOVING RICHMOND FORWARD.

OKAY. THAT'S THE POWERPOINT.

POWERPOINT, YES. OKAY.

KCRT, CAN YOU PLEASE GO TO SLIDE TWO?

I KNOW YOU BROUGHT IT UP, BUT THIS IS JUST SUCH A FUN PICTURE. AND I MADE A NOTE ON HERE AS I'M LISTENING. This is a great new park that you all have helped build for our community. Thank you. And one of the communities that have needed the most help. And I bring this up because I've lived in Richmond my whole life pretty much. We have a lot of new staff members. So I just want you to know that all your time and effort doesn't go unseen by both council and by our community. Right here, you see the police chief going, all right, Ms. Curl, get back to work. And she's saying, no, he's getting on next.

He got on next. All right.

But it's just a quick little glance at if we can have fun as staff, we can have, we're sharing this great thing with our community as well. So I just want to acknowledge that as well. And then I did a quick Google search to show how other cities are doing. Cause the thing is always important to kind of compare. four-ish years ago, three and a half years ago, I remember sitting here and going, oh, we're doing a really great job, which we have been year over year over year. But then you see other cities, they're in millions and millions of dollars in deficits. I just want to put that out there. I hope we don't ever go to that again. I remember sitting in this council chamber on that side when previous city managers had to cut. And that's, did we cut here? Did we cut there? Which staffing? Which this? I think there's always room for improvement, as Ms. Curl says, but I just want to acknowledge that for all the staff members that are here. It's great to see you all. Thank you for coming out here and enjoying your Tuesday night with us. I know you had nothing better to do today. So thank you. But I just want to put that out there as well. Okay, I'll start with my questions. On slide 13 of the presentation, I want to make sure that the general fund commitments available for reallocation key initiatives. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS. YOU'RE SAYING IF WE WANTED TO ADOPT OPTION ONE, SOME OF THESE HERE WE CAN REALLOCATE WITHIN OPTION ONE? THAT'S ONLY FOR OPTION TWO. OKAY. SO CAN I UNDERSTAND, HOW WOULD SOME OF THESE PUT INTO THIS LIST? I DON'T REMEMBER VOTING ON SOME OF THESE.

THESE ARE ITEMS THAT SHOULD CONNECT BACK TO THE KEY INITIATIVES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ALS ITEM AND THE POINT MELANI MAINTENANCE AND YOU'LL SEE THERE THAT THOSE ARE TWO THAT WERE YOU KNOW, NOT RECOMMENDING, BUT WE FELT LIKE IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT THE COUNCIL UNDERSTAND. SO FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE REACHED OUT TO EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT AND WITH THE SUPPORT FROM THE MAYOR TO TRY TO EFFECTUATE OUR QUARTERLY MEETINGS AGAIN. WE USED TO HAVE QUARTERLY BROWN ACT MEETINGS. And so we want to try to get those conversations moving again, because if to the degree to which that we can partner with East Bay Regional Park District, there might be an opportunity to start reducing the city's expenditures in the outer years, which we anticipate are going to significantly increase sooner.

So going on that there, for the Point Malady annual maintenance, 250, this is separate than the 400 that we gave them as a one-time, the agreement was a one-time. In the 40 million? YEAH, THAT WAS A MUCH BIGGER ONE. BUT ALSO, RIGHT, ABOVE THE 40 MILLION, WE ALSO SAID WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU 400,000 AS A ONE-TIME MAINTENANCE SECURITY AS WE'RE MOVING THE PROPERTIES AROUND. SO JUST WONDERING WHERE THIS 250 IS COMING FROM.

SO THIS IS BECAUSE THE MOST OF THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT PROPERTY IS STILL Excuse me. Most of Point Malati is still legally owned by the city, even though a small portion of it was transferred to East Bay Regional Park District. So this is why there's an annual maintenance cost is because the city still maintains most of the is still responsible and legally owns most of the property.

So this 250 is above and beyond whatever we do with public works. So this. We've never incorporated this into the Public Works regular budget.

WE NORMALLY DO, BUT THE COSTS HAVE BEEN IN EXCESS OF NORMAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE, LIKE THERE'S ALWAYS THINGS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN, LIKE WE HAVE TO PUT NEW TARPS ON OR THERE'S SOMETHING HAPPENING WITH THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE, AND SO WE THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS PRIVY TO THESE COSTS AND IS CLEAR THAT WE ANTICIPATE IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR OR TWO THESE COSTS ARE GOING TO INCREASE ASTRONOMICALLY. So it would behoove us to start having conversations again to figure out how do we move forward collaboratively.

Thank you. And I do like your note to have staff consider, so I would love to direct staff, if my colleagues allow, to pursue cost-sharing discussions with East Bay Parks. We want to start minimizing this and just going back to just whatever our base cost is for the area, especially if they've taken over a big chunk of it or a small, whatever chunk that was. So thank you for that. IN THE LIST OF ALL THE ITEMS, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH SLIDE IT IS NOW, 30-SOMETHING, 40-SOMETHING ITEMS THAT WE GIVE YOU, THERE'S ONE MISSING OR AT LEAST ONE MISSING.

IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN FROM 2024.

I KNOW I BROUGHT A COUPLE. OR 2023. THE TRAINS. PLANES AND AUTOMOBILES. TRAINS, PLANES AND AUTOMOBILES AND E-BIKES. BUT THAT WAS LATER. BUT FOR NOW IT'S THE TRAINS. SO I KNOW THAT I BROUGHT A COUPLE ITEMS TO HAVE STAFF LOOK INTO PUTTING IN AN UNDERPASS AT PARK CHESTER BECAUSE OF THE TRAINS. LOOKING AT FUNDING FOR OTHER CROSSINGS FOR THE TRAINS. SO THAT'S A REALLY BIG ISSUE. THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD A COUPLE OF TIMES. WE'VE LOOKED INTO GETTING GRANTS. And I know there was some conversation about that, so it didn't make the list. I just want to make sure that we don't drop it.

IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO DIRECT US TO GO BACK TO 2024 FOR THIS DISCUSSION, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO SO. WE JUST DIDN'T WANT THE LIST TO BE TOO LONG FOR DISCUSSION. BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO GO BACK.

THAT WAS MY OTHER QUESTION AS WELL. WHY ARE WE STARTING IN 25 TO PRESENT? IS THIS A SNAPSHOT OF ALL THE PROGRAMS THAT WE'RE DOING OR FUNDING?

THESE ARE JUST THINGS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PUT ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA THAT ARE THAT ARE NOT INITIATED BY STAFF THAT WERE INITIATED BY ONE OF THE SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS DURING THE LAST AT THE TIME IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 16 MONTHS WHEN WE STARTED PUTTING THIS TOGETHER BECAUSE THEN INDIVIDUALLY YOU ALL HAVE BEEN ASKING STAFF FOR STATUS UPDATES OR WHERE IS MY ITEM AND SO IT BECAME APPARENT THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A CRITERIA SO THEN EVERYONE CAN HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN TO EXPECT THINGS BASED ON the capacity of staff that you have.

Okay. Thank you for that. So I just want to make sure, again, going back to the train, it doesn't matter if it goes on this or not, I just want to make sure. I wasn't sure if this was an ongoing list or if this was just a snapshot.

THIS IS A SNAPSHOT AND THEN THERE'S BEEN OPPORTUNITIES WHERE IF ANOTHER GRANT COMES UP THAT'S MORE VIABLE. WE PARTNERED WITH PARK CHESTER AND RECENTLY SUBMITTED A GRANT FOR GIANT ROAD. SOMETIMES WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO GET EXACTLY WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL POLICY DIRECTION IS BUT WE TRY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS IN A WAY WITH POTENTIAL GRANT FUNDING RIGHT THAT HELPS MOVE THINGS FORWARD IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION SO IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE ARE THAT WE DON'T WE'RE NOT TRYING TO IMPLEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY DIRECTION BUT SOMETIMES THERE ISN'T A GRANT OR A FUNDING SOURCE SO WE TRY TO LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE COMPARABLE OR AT LEAST HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION THANK YOU AND THEN WHAT KIND OF MAKES I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS LIST BECAUSE IT'S SO

There's so much range in here. So what makes it? Is it a number of hours that we ask for? Is it the number, a dollar amount?

It was just anything that the city council asked for. And Patrick Seals, administrative chief, can speak to this. He's the keeper of this list if he would like to join us.

Because at this night here, you see the council liaison appointment cycle change. That happens every year.

No, this time it was requested that it goes to a two-year, right?

I know, but so that saving is one year, right?

But I'm just using that as an example of something where it has to, even though the city council may direct something, it still takes staff time to effectuate it. It doesn't just happen.

Okay.

And Patrick, I don't know if you have anything to add around this list.

If there's a specific question around any of this, I can...

Yeah, so I was just trying to just figure out how the list was put together, and then how do we say it's complete? So using that council liaison appointment, for example, number 24, As far as I know, it's completed because we voted for it back earlier this year.

So how the list is compiled. I'm tracking every item that comes before city council. I'm building out an automation system as well as some other kind of stuff to support the city manager. in tracking this. This is an endeavor. It's taken me almost a year. I have an intern who's supporting me, a graduate student, and we've gone back multiple years. And so we're trying to support innovation and efficiency to manage and maintain these things. So these items are initiated from January 2025 to present. I believe that the overpass item was before that. I remember it, but it was prior to this. And as the manager said, if the manager directs me, I can go back to 24, et cetera.

I WAS JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT ONE DIDN'T GET LOST. NOW I'M UNDERSTANDING HOW THE LIST IS MADE AND HOW THEY ARE COMPLETED. I'M ASSUMING NUMBER 24 IS ALREADY COMPLETED BECAUSE WE VOTED FOR IT

For this particular list, I have something that is much more robust. A lot of columns, this is a very simplified version of what I'm actually working with. I reached out to staff responsible for supporting these things. AND ASK THEM, HEY, IS THIS THING COMPLETE? BECAUSE THE ARTS AND CULTURE MANAGER WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS THE PROCESS FOR BRINGING ON A NEW ARTS AND CULTURE MANAGER WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS INITIATED BY STAFF OUTSIDE OF WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN OUR STANDARD CITY ONBOARDING PROCESS THROUGH THE HUMAN RESOURCES SYSTEM. and we haven't actually hired an arts and culture manager, staff doesn't see this as complete because we don't have an arts and culture manager at this point. But the solicitation has been released. I think they're in the process of receiving applications. The application is open. And so staff that are responsible for managing these are the ones that I spoke to just for this 37 just to provide, again, a quick snapshot.

Thank you, thank you. Okay, I won't ask anymore of this. I think I'm understanding it, so thank you, because I want to make sure that our list gets shorter as fast as possible. Yes, sir. For ALS, which is very important, I believe, to all of us, Chief? Is there a way to potentially, it's more a question for finance, so is there a way to look at funding it and then getting for both ALS and the stations and then get paid back should the measure pass, right? We're looking at potentially putting a ballot measure in November. Right now we saw that the majority of ballot measures in June around the Bay Area did not pass. So I'm just, the need is still going to be there. So I'm just trying to just figure out as we're creating the budget now, is there a way to put a little bit of chunk to the side to say, okay, we can start fixing a couple little pieces here or there into the stations or putting into ALS, should that not pass? Because I don't want to get to November and then figuring out plan B and the budget's already halfway through. So you're saying, can we do something retrospective? So if we, what I'm saying is, if we say let's allocate in the budget, and I'm just losing numbers here, a million dollars, right? We're going to put it in a bucket where we need 100 million, but that's a million for now. If the ballot measure passes, we can take that million back and then reallocate it back to somewhere else. If it doesn't pass, then we continue putting in incremental money in there throughout the budgets so that we could fund ALS and that we could fund the stations that we need repaired.

COUNCIL MEMBER ZAPATA, IF WE CAN LOOK AT ONE PARTICULAR EXAMPLE WOULD BE STATION 63. THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE FIRST ONE ON THE LIST BUT IT'S THE FIRST ONE THAT CAUGHT MY EYE, WHICH IS IN ATTACHMENT ONE, LINE ITEM 37. IT SAYS FIRE STATION 63 FIRE DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENTS STATION 63. AND SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN ITEM WHERE IT'S AN ACTIVE PROJECT, SO IT'S BLUE. IT IS NON-GRAP FUNDED, SO IT'S ALSO BLUE. AND IT HAS A FOOTNOTE THERE FOR ONE, WHICH MEANS SHORTFALL EXISTS BUT IN THE OUTER YEARS. SO CURRENTLY THIS PROJECT IS IN THE PLANNING PHASE, RIGHT? AND THERE'S $177,996 IN GENERAL CAPITAL FUND THAT'S BEEN APPROPRIATED TO IT. BUT IT'S INDICATING THAT THERE'S A SHORTFALL OF 4.33 MILLION. SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHY WE ARE MOVING ON PARALLEL PATHS. LIKE WE'RE NOT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT MEANS THAT WE'RE PUBLIC WORK STAFF KEEPS GOING AND THEN CONCURRENTLY WHY THEY KEEP GOING WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON. We are working with the consultant, and so we'll have presentations. Actually, we're going to try to do it in June, although it may not be until July, where the City Council can give policy direction based on the data that's been obtained from the polling regarding how to move forward with ALS. And so this is an example of something where it's nuanced. It doesn't fit definitively sort of in one stream. It overlaps in different areas. And so this is an example of where things are nuanced and we're trying to work on things on parallel paths.

So again, my question is the $4 million for Fire Station 63, or $4.5 million, is if the ballot measure passes, which will be great, then we can use the ballot measure to fund the $4.5. And what I'm saying is if we start eating away at that $4.5 now, can we get reimbursed and say, okay, hey, we used $4.5 to do Section 63, but since we got the ballot measure, we can now move this money to...

WE CAN ASK THE CONSULTANT TO EXPLAIN THAT WHEN THEY PRESENT LATER THIS MONTH.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE MYSELF AROUND. THANK YOU.

ANYTHING ELSE FOR CHIEF BEFORE HE?

NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHIEF. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WANT TO LOOK AT THE E-BIKE PROGRAM AND THANK YOU FOR THE E-BIKE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE HERE.

And I think this grant was submitted a while ago. Gabino, when was the original grant submitted? Okay. Can someone look in the administrative record and find out when that grant was originally submitted? Thank you.

And I want to just make some clarification. So I know that the presentation, I don't remember which slide it says, but it says citywide program. But it's not a citywide program. And I want to be able to see, if we decide to move forward with the project again, that it really becomes a citywide program. Because right now, there's only 13 stations. And they're only from almost the middle of Richmond south. So to really know if people can and should and will be using the program, we should either go all out. Yes.

And so option three here in the slide, we also propose that. So talking to the vendor to expand citywide, 17 additional hubs, 250 new e-bikes, it would cost an additional $1,459,000 to do that. So if we want to have a citywide program with the additional hubs, In addition to the 10 they mentioned, this is the cost.

So then what I believe what I heard was that they can immediately start implementing 10 new hubs at no cost. All right, so this here I'm seeing 1.4, but they can do 10 for no cost. Can we do the 10 for no cost, right? Maybe that's option four. So 10 at no cost.

Everything has a cost. So I would say.

They're saying no cost.

Well, we don't negotiate contracts in open session, right, right, city attorney? So we can take that your point is well taken. We're happy to have a conversation with them. But what we're trying to get the city council to consider, right, is now that this program has been operational for a while and the city council has directed building another facility, is it prudent to pivot? AND SAY UNTIL THERE IS A GRANT THAT COULD FULLY SUPPORT THE E-BIKES, WHICH IS HOW WE STARTED THIS PROGRAM, IT WAS THROUGH A GRANT, THEN IS IT PRUDENT TO SUNSET? I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME. SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO SAY WE REALLY LIKE SOMETHING, BUT We don't have another, you know, $1.5 million right now. So we're going to turn this off. And if we find money in the future, we're happy to reconsider, right? It doesn't mean it's a bad program, but we're not seeing the return on investment we would have hoped for. So it looks like thank you for evaluating the pilot. It's time to move on. The pilot hasn't flown all the way yet, right? Well, sometimes the pilot says when you get a grant, this is where you have to operate, right? Kind of like Complete Streets, right? Like we might want to only do traffic safety, but that means 27 grant sources that currently fund Complete Streets would not be available to us because those grant guidelines have very specific criteria for us to be able to submit. So the bottom line is the grant funds have run out. We do not have general fund dollars for this program. I as city manager in good conscience can't recommend, like when I go see the kids at Shields Read and they tell me they want Peppa the Pig, I'm going to make Peppa the Pig happen because there's a whole group of kids there that love Peppa the Pig. So that's what we're doing. I have not had anyone call me and say, please give me more e-bikes or email me. Now I'm sure they will come out of the woodworks. But prior to now, they hadn't.

So what I also heard them say was they can look at getting some MTC funds. So they didn't email you, but they did email me.

So isn't that suspicious?

No, no, no.

But when the vendor goes to the vendor, who not the vendor?

So there's one of our large companies that's located at Hilltop. They lost the bus route. And when they lost their bus route, we were chatting and they said, can, what else can, can we get the bus?

They can get their employees e-bikes.

Yes, and I said you can use those easy bikes.

No, they can give their employees e-bikes and not get a city subsidy because they're a great employer.

There's also current rebates for e-bikes.

But that's what they can do to be a good employer.

Wouldn't it be better if they give us funding so then everybody can use the e-bikes?

No, you know why? Because it takes Gabino staff time. And you know what we need to do? Yes, but then that means there's e-bikes for the whole community. Well, but we don't have them right now.

It depends on priorities. So when I started with the transportation department, e-bikes was maybe fourth or fifth on the list because first we needed to do paratransit, right? Paratransit is our more successful program. It has $1.3 million and moves seniors. And we were in a program and improvement plan. So that was like my number one thing, right? And the e-bike program kept going. THEN AFTER THAT, OUR MICROMOBILITY, RICHMOND MOVES, RIGHT? THEN I WORKED ON THAT. THEN I HAD IMMIGRATION, SO I KIND OF HAD TO LIKE PIVOT AND DO IMMIGRATION LEGAL SERVICES. AND THEN I CAME BACK AND NOW WE HAVE CHARGING STATIONS, SO I ALSO GET ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM YOU AND OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT CHARGING STATIONS, SO NOW WE'RE FOCUSING ON CHARGING STATIONS. EBIKE LOCKER STATIONS THAT WE ALSO NEED TO UPDATE. SO WHEN THE OPPORTUNITY CAME FOR THIS, I'VE ALSO TALKED TO CCTA AND MTC RELATED TO FUTURE FUNDING RELATED TO EBIKE PROGRAMS AND THEY SAID IT'S SPARSE. WE'RE ALSO PART OF A STATEWIDE NETWORK OF EBIKE PROVIDERS. ACTUALLY IT'S A NATIONAL NETWORK. THEY MEET MONTHLY RELATED TO FUTURE FUNDING AND THE ONLY One that has been successful in this group, this working group, has been the ones that are funded directly by the city and run by the city, right? And they're limited hubs. So that's the ones that we have gotten, the ones from the best practices that I've seen so far. So that's why we have this current recommendation related to this future of this program.

I mean, I think that if we can continue the conversation with them, I would appreciate it just to see what we can do. And it would also be great to one day potentially having enough funding from some of these large employers that are willing to give us money. Let's take it. Maybe we do the program where it's free for the community. It's about getting people out on the bikes, out on the streets safely. If there's an opportunity, let's see if the money is there.

So we had a conversation with the provider and they've only been able to say that they would have a $6,000 discount. So it would still cost us $60,000 a month to keep the conversation going. And that is starting on June 30th. Okay.

Thank you.

Then the other, sorry, July 1. So respectfully, this is why we're recommending that we stop the program. Okay.

I think that we should have more conversations. But yeah, okay. The other is, so the ECIA, right, kind of going off of this here, the ECIA funding has had a lot of different types of other projects as well. And I know ECIA is tied to a whole different other revenue source. But are we looking to see what's going to happen with those projects that were attached to ECIA? And ECIA is going away. So how are we going to fund those other projects?

We're not.

So all of that is going to be going away. The Richmond Moves, that's ECIA.

No, unless there's another funding source. Some of the programs have really high rates of return, right? So when you have high utilization and high rates of return and low costs, right, Richmond Moves is an incredible benefit for our community because it has high utilization and low costs, right? And so those are the kind of programs that we're looking for. Gabino can speak more to that.

Yes, and also, this is, I also mentioned it to the current bike provider, like for example, Richmond Moves. Richmond Moves, we already applied for four grants. They're all, the provider's always asking me, let's apply to this grant, let's apply to this grant. So currently, we have funding until about April of next year, and that's half grants, half ECIA, so it's half funded, THROUGH THE GRANTS AND HAVE FUNDED THROUGH ECIA RIGHT NOW. BUT CURRENTLY WE HAVE NO GRANTS RELATED TO THE EBIKE PROGRAM. SO I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR A YEAR AND FOUR MONTHS AND I HAVE NOT GOT ONE GRANT APPLICATION from the provider.

Not to cut you off because I want to make sure that I move forward, but it's not just about the EVACs. I'm just talking about all the other programs, right, that right now are getting funding from ECIA because I haven't seen anything, and I no longer sit on that committee, but I haven't seen anything there about the programs because you're just saying it's going to die. So a very successful program is going to die when ECIA funding .

Well, in April, it has funding through April, and so between now and then, right, staff will continue to look for grants. I think what staff is trying to convey are that there are some entities that we have partnerships where the partner is very aggressive and takes the lead, and it's easier for staff to work with them, right?

So I guess here's my request, is a list of projects that are there that either we have to make a decision to sunset or not, small projects, big, whatever. Whatever ECIA is funding, we have to make a decision. either continuing, not continuing, e-bikes, whatever programs. But ECIA is currently giving money to programs, so we just need to know what those are so that we can figure out how we incorporate that into the budget because right now it's not in the budget.

So ECIA is currently whose Deputy City Manager White was originally providing support and then now Avanish, you're looking at it. Do you have a sense and are you able to speak to that now or do you need time to?

She said next meeting.

Okay.

I'm sorry, what was that?

We'll provide information at the next meeting.

Thank you, thank you.

And then lastly on the e-bikes, so why have we not approved the permit since July 25?

similar to what I mentioned about my capacity as staff leading. And I also didn't want to expand if we can't make sure that the, so it'll cost us more to expand and then we have to bring them back. Do you know what I mean? Like, so if we put 10 more, that's more hours for abatement or whoever we contract to be able to contract the program. So what's it called? We wanna know what the future was for the program before we expand.

I mean, I get it, but, IF WE WOULD HAVE HAD TEN MORE, WE COULD HAVE HAD MORE PEOPLE UTILIZING IT AND NO ADDITIONAL COST. THANK YOU. THE VACANCY RATE IN THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS, THANK YOU, GOVERNOR, NO OTHER QUESTIONS THERE. IS IT BEING TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THE POTENTIAL PUBLIC SAFETY BALLOT MEASURE?

NO, WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT ON THE 16th. WE'RE WORKING ON THE FINANCIAL MODELING. OKAY. THANK YOU.

THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE SHORTFALL FOR THE PARKS FOR BOTH SHIELD REEDS AND WENDELL, DO WE HAVE A LIST OF WHAT THE SHORTFALLS ARE? I KNOW YOU MENTIONED CONCRETE.

DARCY AND JOSEPH MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS IN DETAIL.

IT COULD BE AN E-MAIL IF YOU WANT.

I THINK IT'S GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW SINCE WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION NOW. IF WE KNOW THE ANSWER, WE'LL TRY TO ANSWER IT. IF WE NEED MORE TIME, WE'LL SEE IF WE NEED MORE TIME. THANK YOU, DARCY.

Hello to the Mayor and Council. My name is Darcy for the record and so just to clarify the question is What is the list of shortfalls at Wendell and Shields Reed Park? Yeah, okay The primary there's a lot of things so it's nuanced as as usual, but the primary shortfalls are that a restroom was not included in the scope of work before it was bid to the contractors and And the second item is changes by PG&E that were mandatory during construction. So it's amounting to a fair amount of money.

And that's for both parks?

Shields Reed is primarily related to the PG&E changes, and Wendell is the restroom.

Okay.

Yeah.

Those are kind of necessary. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. For the e-bike lending library... Do we have a how it's going to be?

Director Velasco. Sorry, I leave it towards the end. And Beatrice, if they're here, if she's here. Yes. Jerry, can you allow Beatrice? Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor, council members, Lena Velasco, director of community development. I'M HERE WITH OUR PROJECT COORDINATOR FOR TCC. SO THE EBIKE LENDING LIBRARY COMES WITH OPERATIONAL FUNDS FROM THE TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE COMMUNITIES IMPLEMENTATION GRANT, WHICH HAS BEEN NOTED THAT 2.2 MILLION IS NEEDED. HOWEVER, THERE'S ABOUT 2.5. HALF OF IT WILL GO TO CONSTRUCTION AND THE HALF WILL BE TOWARDS OPERATIONS.

AND THAT OPERATIONS, IS IT FOR HOW MANY YEARS?

THROUGH 2028, LIKE AUGUST 2028. AND IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE APPLYING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO EXPAND THAT BEYOND.

SO 2028, WHEN DO WE, IF IT MOVES FORWARD, WHEN DO WE THINK OPENING IS? SO IS FUNDING FOR TWO YEARS, I GUESS, I'M GUESSING, 27, 28? IS IT FOR ONE YEAR?

Yes. So our goal, if the capital funding can be committed, we can bid the project, which the city will bid the project. Once awarded, we can then start construction. We do anticipate it'll be a short construction period, about six to nine months. And then once completed, it will open up to the public.

And then the cost. I got a couple of emails and communication that the cost has gone up so dramatically. What are we building? I mean, I know I was here at the presentation before, but did it change? It seems to just, it's a building that's going to house the bikes. Why is it so much more expensive? Just in general, why is it so expensive?

Yeah, so costs have increased. So it is larger. It will have a restroom facility. It's built around a public plaza space. We will also, the fire requirements related to storage of bikes is expensive. Insurance has gone up. I THINK WE'VE ALSO HAD LEAD, THE CITY HAS A GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE SO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ARE REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE LEAD CERTIFICATION COMPLIANCE. SO THAT ADDED ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS THAT WE WEREN'T ANTICIPATING. When we developed the budget for the project, it was a conceptual plan. And as we've gone through permitting, looked at insurance and fire requirements, all of those things have added up. But it will be a significant investment into the Greenway as well as at Unity Park. So we anticipate that it will be a long-term asset for the city.

And we definitely need the bathroom, so thank you for including that in there. I'm still trying to wrap my head around just the cost of that building. And I know it's, is this going to be ours? Is this going to be ours forever? Are we doing 100% of the cost? Is there a nonprofit that's going to be coming in and they're going to take some of the costs for like the insurance, for example?

Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council members. for the record Beatriz Guerrero, TCC project manager, project coordinator. The e-bike landing library will be owned by the city. It's our space and it would be owned by the city until the end of when we decide to stop having it. It is on city property. Also, there would be an agreement with Rich City Rights to do operation of the e-bike lending library, as well as for them to bring the electric bikes that would be provided to communities. So there's two different programs that will be operating there. One would be the training program for residents who are interested in learning how to use an electric bike or just a regular bike. And additional to that, there will be another program for rich city rights to give away bikes, which is included under TCC grant. This program would be free bikes for community members who complete the six modules of training that they have created within the TCC program. This is specifically created for safety, but also to provide e-bikes for free for community members that are interested in getting that, and not just for people who want to use the library. ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, WE HAVE BIKES THAT WILL STAY PHYSICALLY THERE FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO USE THEM ON A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, WOULD BE UP TO A WEEK, SO THAT THEY CAN ADDRESS DIFFERENT COMMUTE PATTERNS THAT THEY REQUIRE. SO THOSE ARE THE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT WILL BE OPERATING WITHIN THE E-BIKE LANDING LIBRARY. AS OF RIGHT NOW, RICH CITY RIGHTS HAS BEEN APPLYING TO ADDITIONAL GRANTS TO KEEP OPERATIONS GOING AFTER THE TCC GRANT SUNSET. WE ARE ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS FUNDING THAT WE HAVE ON THE TCC WILL FUND US TILL 2028, BUT AFTER THAT OPERATIONS WILL REQUIRE THE NONPROFIT TO HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THAT.

HOW MUCH IS THE CITY MATCHING AND THEN HOW MUCH ARE WE MATCHING FOR THE LIFE OF THIS PROGRAM?

Would that be for operations or for construction?

For both, right? Is it all the grant is 100% or are we doing part of it?

Well, I think the request is we do have a shortfall of $2.2 million. HOWEVER, THAT WOULD UNLOCK 2.5 MILLION OF TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE COMMUNITIES AND THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THE E-BIKE LENDING LIBRARY, THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE OPERATIONS. WE HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WILL ALSO BENEFIT FROM THE LEVERAGE. WE HAVE A YOUTH FELLOWS PROGRAM AND THIS WILL CREATE ANOTHER for those youth fellows to work around e-bike lending, around Unity Park. This will also be co-located near the universally accessible garden, which we had the ribbon cutting today. But I think right now these are the, so it's almost like a dollar for dollar. If the city puts in $2.2 million, then we'll get $2.5 million.

Director Velasco, can you also and Beatrice explain how the TCC funding and the other additional grants that you've obtained and then how this all fits together because in order to maintain the compliance with the grant, I think it would be helpful for the Council to understand how it folds into the larger picture of what is in progress and what the deliverables are for the approximately $50 million?

I WOULD LIKE TO TALK RELATED TO WHAT SHASA IS MENTIONING. THE TCC GRANT SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION COUNTING THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD TO COMPETE WITH OTHER CITIES THAT WERE APPLYING FOR THIS GRANT. SO EMISSION REDUCTION IS, WELL, THIS PROJECT IS COUNTING FOR THE EMISSION REDUCTION THAT WE PROMISED THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL THAT WE WOULD ACCOMPLISH. SO IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW THAT IF THIS PROJECT DOESN'T GET COMPLETED, WE PUT AT RISK OUR FUNDING UNDER THE TCC GRANT BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND TELL THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL THAT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO BUILD IT, IN WHICH CASE WE WOULD HAVE TO ACCOUNT and figure out how do we make up for those greenhouse gas emission reduction. And I don't know, Lina, if you want to talk about the rest of the additional grants, but I wanted to highlight that because this is important for the whole list of projects that we have under that grant.

Yeah, and just to, so the Transformative Climate Communities Implementation Grant, it was 35 million over a five-year period. IN OUR APPLICATION WE ALSO HAD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE WAS 17 AND A HALF MILLION WORTH OF INVESTMENTS ALREADY PLANNED FOR THE PROJECT AREA SO WE WERE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THROUGH OTHER PROJECTS LIKE YELLOW BRICK ROAD, THE HARBOR EIGHTH COMMUNITY CENTER AND SO ALL THESE OTHER INVESTMENTS THAT THE CITY IS MAKING WITHIN OUR PROJECT AREA. SINCE THEN, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO, AS A TEAM, WORKING WITH OUR NONPROFIT PARTNERS, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, BRING IN ADDITIONAL 19.5 MILLION, SO 10 MILLION FROM RM3 AS WELL AS 9.5 MILLION FROM THE RECONNECTING COMMUNITIES PILOT PROGRAM. SO WE THINK THAT THE EXTRA EFFORT OF THE COORDINATION WITH THE COMMUNITY ALONG WITH OUR PARTNERS HAS BEEN ABLE TO LEVERAGE ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. SO RICHMOND WELLNESS TRAIL WENT FROM A SMALLER $3 MILLION PROJECT TO 10 AND A HALF MILLION. SO SAME WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLETE STREETS. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO EXPAND THAT TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUESTS BY THE COMMUNITY.

YOU MENTIONED RM3. I'M TRYING TO BRING UP MY NOTES. SO WHAT PORTION OF RM3 IS GOING TO THIS?

In our three is region measure three just for the right so ten million will go towards neighborhood complete streets as well as Richmond wellness trail phase two So we'll be making complete streets improvements along Harbor, Ohio And marina way so that's for the the street improvements not for this particular project of the evac lending library.

I

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO THE E-BIKE LANDING LABORATORY, HOWEVER, WE INCLUDED THE E-BIKE LANDING LABORATORY AS PART OF THE CORRIDOR'S IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE COMMITTED INTO THE PROJECT. SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE GOT ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THAT. GOT IT.

BECAUSE I'VE BEEN FIGHTING FOR MONEY, SO I JUST WANT TO BE LIKE, WHERE DID IT GO? THANK YOU.

SO THINK OF IT AS LIKE CONCENTRIC CIRCLES, RIGHT? SO THERE'S AN INDITIAL GRANT APPLICATION AND THEN THERE'S BEEN SUBSEQUENT GRANT APPLICATIONS THAT THEN LEVERAGE. So it's all tied together.

Do we have a projected use? Because we just got numbers for another lending bicycle program as well, and we're saying it's low utilization. That was also $2 million. And that is going to incorporate half of the city, not all the city yet, but half of the city. This is going to be located in just one part of the city. So if half of the city is low utilization, what is one part of the city going to bring?

Well, we do think, I mean, it will be operated differently because the fee, there will be a small fee, you know, it will be nominal for some residents. It may be free given the grant. However, it will be a bike that somebody could take home. They don't have to leave it at their destination. As well as, you know, we'll be providing classes where right now because of the way the hubs work is you have to drop it off if not you're continuously being charged. So we do think that that will hopefully enhance the utilization but it will be available and it's a bike so we will try to do connections along the routes but people will be able to check it out for long term and maybe even look for a rent to own options.

I understand how important these questions are in order to determine whether or not we want to keep a program but I think we need to stay focused on the budget. So thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. And then thank you for bringing me around. So thank you for that. That brought some good context as we make decisions there. And then a request is, are we able to put in a one, three, five, 10 year plan? This is not about this anymore. This is now about Ms. Curl and to finance director. Out of all the projects, all the programs here, I feel like every time we talk about budget, we get this whole list of all the stuff that we're putting in. But how do we eat an elephant, right? One bite at a time. Can we start figuring out and prioritizing? I think you were alluding to that earlier, out of all the different programs we bring in, one year, three year, five year, 10 year. So we know, like this is, I agendized it, we approved it, it's coming in five years, right? There's no need to hash about it every single time we come to budget.

Yes, we can certainly work towards that.

Perfect. Thank you. And then slide 13. I THINK I MIGHT BE, I MEAN, I'LL JUST PUT IT OUT THERE FOR REQUESTS. NOW THAT YOU TAKE ANY MORE REQUESTS FOR MONEY BUT IF YOU FIND ANY, WE'LL LOVE TO PUT MORE MOVIE NIGHTS ALL OVER THE CITY BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY FOCUSING ON SOME AREAS. FARMERS MARKET, HILL TOP, THE NORTHERN PART OF RICHMOND, WE'LL LOVE A FARMERS MARKET.

DO WE HAVE A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WANTS TO HOST A FARMERS MARKET? THEY DO.

I WONDER IF THEY WANT TO FUND IT.

OWN A REALLY DEAD PROPERTY. I WONDER IF THEY WANT TO FUND IT.

I'VE ASKED THEM. OKAY. LET ME KNOW HOW I CAN HELP ASK THEM AGAIN. TRAFFIC CIRCLES. I KNOW YOU'RE ALL WORKING ON IT. I'M JUST GOING TO PUT IT OUT THERE MORE. TRAFFIC CIRCLES IN ALL THE SIDE SHOW HOT SPOTS. AND I'LL END WITH THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BONNA.

Thank you. I'll try to be brief. You know, I usually don't beat around the bush. Not too many questions. I go to the core. So if I can find my questions. Yeah, I'm even surprised we had that e-bike. Grants are very nice, but if you have to pay money to. Anyway, I think you have good recommendation to stop the program. I appreciate it. Overall, I appreciate the presentations, the budget, baseline. And it's a little sad that we only have so much wiggle room. It's really depressing.

But... No, it's not. It's because we've been wiggling so much. We've just wiggled on up.

Yeah, I wish we had a little more. But quick questions. Could the arts and culture manager be part-time? Why does she have to be full-time?

That is a very comprehensive program. I would be happy to talk to you offline. I want to be thoughtful about time to make sure you guys have time for discussion around what that role encompasses, but it is a substantial amount of work.

Yeah, I would like to discuss it and I would like to push for a part-time position. That's very important. I didn't understand what earthquake preparedness initiative MENT IN THERE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN ASKED FOR ANY BUDGET.

IT DOESN'T MEAN JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR A BUDGET IT DOESN'T MEAN THERE ISN'T WORK. YEAH, THERE WILL BE WORK. SO ANY WORK THAT'S REQUEST FROM COUNCIL TAKES STAFF TIME AND SO THAT IS STILL AN APPROPRIATION OF RESOURCES.

YEAH, A MAJOR EARTHQUAKE OF 7.8 JUST HAPPENED IN THE COAST OF PHILIPPINES WITH MANY DEBTS SO WE NEED, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE INSURANCE. YOU MAY NOT NEED IT BUT YOU ALWAYS HAVE IT. SO THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT. ALSO GRANTS FOR WILDFIRE. I WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU PUT IT UNDER THE DISCRETIONARY. I MEAN, IT'S OUR FIRE CHIEF, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR PUT IT OUT THERE THAT THEY NEED THE MONEY AND YOU JUST WANT TO WAVE IT SO I'M ASKING YOU TO PLEASE DON'T PLAY WITH THE IMPORTANT ITEMS. DON'T CONSIDER THE WILDFIRE AD HOC SAFETY. IT WAS IN YOUR TABLE SOMEWHERE. ITEM NUMBER, I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER, BUT I SAW IT THERE.

OKAY. SO TWO, THAT ONE IS WE PUT REVENUE ENHANCEMENT ALS DEVELOPMENT, $150,000.

IT WAS NUMBER TWO, WILDFIRE PREPAREDNESS AD HOC COMMITTEE AND ASSESSMENT. THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO BE INCLUDED AND ACTUALLY I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR MORE BECAUSE Communities with HOAs are also asking for grants or matching grants to do vegetation management. Wildfire is a serious danger. So I'm asking you to please keep that in place. And if possible, let's add to it, not cut it. You talked about building permits. I just wanted to say there are many companies. You mentioned business permits. I just wanted to say building permits are also very tough for applicants. If you could make them streamlined and straightforward, that would be awesome. So what was the on-house intervention program that you're saying could be dismantled?

Well, if on page 10 of the staff report, it offers an unhoused intervention funding accounting. And so between what was developed, this is in the staff report, it's not in the PowerPoint. ON PAGE 10 OF YOUR STAFF REPORT UNDER TAB 1, THE CUMULATIVE TOTAL INVESTMENT FROM EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE, HOUSING FIRST, PROJECT HOME KEY, REIMAGINE PUBLIC SAFETY, UNHOUSED EMERGENCY SERVICES, ARPA, ECIA, ERF 1, ERF 2, ERF 3, KIDS FIRST, THAT TOTAL FROM FISCAL YEAR 21-22 TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY PROJECTED BETWEEN 26-27 IS NEARLY $60 MILLION. AND SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS. DIRECTOR VELASCO AND HER TEAM REALLY NEED TO FOCUS ON GETTING THE HOME KEY PROJECT UP AND OPERATIONAL BECAUSE IT HAS LIMITED REVENUE. THE CITY PUT IN 10.3 MILLION AND EVENTUALLY THE MATCHING FUNDS THAT SUPPORT THE PROGRAMS, RIGHT, SUBSIDE. So as it's coming on beginning in September, we need staff to really focus on understanding how to operationalize the home key project in a way that really works. We've never done this before. And so when you're asking staff to do lots of different things concurrently, it means they can't focus. And I'm extremely concerned, if I may, I'm extremely concerned that this is a significant lift for staff and so if we ask them go do home key exceptional and go do something else that's nearly two million dollars both will not be done effectively so we're suggesting that you focus on home key because you've already made that appropriation instead of continuing to allocate because we have so many other projects that have ERF 1, 2, 3 that we focus on leveraging those state dollars, expending those, get Homekey up and running and then assess where should we make another supplemental request for appropriations and potentially apply for ERF 5.

My question is if you say yes to what you're suggesting, what services would be slashed?

They haven't been appropriated yet.

Oh, okay. So it's just a budget on the paper. It's not SOS money or things like that?

It could be, but we don't have a guarantee. When the city council makes an appropriation, it is not from previous years. It is not when it doesn't involve staff. THERE SHOULDN'T BE AN ASSUMPTION THAT SOMETHING IS GOING TO CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY, RIGHT? IF THE CITY LAUNCHES A PROGRAM, THEY PROVIDE SUPPORT TO GET THEM A GRANT WRITER AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, THERE SHOULD BE A NOTION THAT EVENTUALLY THINGS, JUST LIKE WE'RE SUGGESTING WITH THE E-BIKES, EVENTUALLY THINGS MAY TAPER DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER PRIORITIES. BECAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE PRIORITIES ON TOP OF PRIORITIES. YOU HAVE TO, IF YOU PUT SOMETHING ON, YOU HAVE TO TAKE SOMETHING OFF.

So if there is an encampment, people complain about it. If you slash this, will there be services and resources to address?

There currently are services and resources outside of SOS. There's currently CORE. And we currently work with Contra Costa County. So what staff is saying is based on the request from the community around improvements to the built environment, we might need to make some trade-offs. And because there's been a nearly $60 million investment since 2021, bringing 49 new beds online should be our primary focus.

I understand and appreciate that. What I don't understand is what, What services this would affect?

Probably the discretionary unhoused services. Which are? So on Table 8.

Okay. Discretionary unhoused services. And I asked you specifically what they are and I don't hear an answer.

Because we can't say that someone is going to get a contract when they're, I mean, it's not appropriate to say like X or Y entity is going to get a contract.

Okay. All right. So this is what... IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE STAFF DO, CONTRACTS TO NONPROFITS?

RIGHT. IT'S FOR THE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF RICHMOND ABOVE WHAT THE COUNTY PROVIDES.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND, OKAY, I LOST SOME OF MY NOTES. I NEED TO COME BACK TO THEM. BUT ONE THING I HOPE WE CAN DO IS HAVING REVENUE GENERATE, I MEAN, INVESTING and resources that generates revenue for us. Like the sound system for auditorium, so hopefully it doesn't cost much, 50,000 I guess, and hopefully we can have more use of the auditorium for concerts and stuff, that's number one. Number two, which is way more important, is prop four, which is $10 billion for the state of California, 40% of it going to disadvantaged communities, and Richmond well qualifies. $2 billion this year, up to $30 million per city. I understand that PROPOR is not forever, so you don't have to hire staff for that, But can we outsource grant writing and allocate budget for that, like 200,000? And I'm sure we're going to get more than that.

I would defer to Director Velasco and Chief Osorio, which I previously sent them a request to please confer.

Okay. I think it's an absolute need. Also, CAL FIRE has grant opportunities up to $950,000. I hope the fire department applies for that, but I know how busy our fire chief is and the fire department. By the way, if I could ask our fire chief if they have enough staffing, because I know you said you don't hear complaints from residents about many things, but the only thing we hear complaints is RESOURCES FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WITH REGARDS TO FIRE PREVENTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE WELL STAFFED. EVERYONE ALWAYS WANTS MORE STAFF. I KNOW OUR CITY MANAGER IS VERY CONSERVATIVE.

No, I'm not. We actually, when Chief Osorio took over, there were like, the Prevention Bureau was almost non-existent, and we were on mandatory overtime.

I know the chief is doing an excellent job. We have fire inspectors. We have a wee fire inspector we never had before. Our fire marshal has a deputy. So you're doing a great job. But in terms of fire prevention, do you need more staff, for example, to be involved? More to have more resources available to residents who want to become fire wise, you know all the issues I've been sharing with you and some of them I know your staff have been too busy to respond to Do you need more staffing?

we currently have a vacancy in fire prevention i can't feel yet so no i don't i need to fill the staff positions i have right now i have one vacancy still we also you could looking at utilizing our americorps volunteers to assist with some of those duties that cross over between oes and fire prevention and so that's one of the items the other item is that we are We are getting back to people. And sometimes we're just playing phone tag. I think people need to be give us some grace and allow the communication to happen the way it is. And I know you're referring to a community and they've been playing phone tag with my inspectors. And so it's not a lack of effort. It's just miscommunicating. So as it stands right now, I need to fill the positions I have right now. And we're looking at better utilizing some of our current staff into helping and crossing over into two disciplines.

If I may ask, which positions in fire prevention, how many, and do you think...

I have a fire inspector position currently vacant.

Okay.

So that would, if currently I have five inspectors, a deputy fire marshal, and a fire marshal. So that would bring me to my full staffing for fire inspectors. I still have one embedded inspector in Chevron who also doubles as the WUI wildland inspector. So that's... VERY BUSY POSITION.

EXCELLENT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE GOOD WITH THE STAFFING AND THE SALARY YOU'RE OFFERING DOESN'T CREATE A PROBLEM WITH THE STAFFING.

I DON'T DETERMINE SALARIES.

FOR THESE THINGS REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS, WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IS FOR THE COUNCIL TO FOCUS ON THE POLICY DIRECTION, NOT THE HEAD COUNT. SO IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC TASK OR POLICY THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE ACHIEVED, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD DISCUSS DURING OPEN SESSION, BUT WE WOULDN'T, IT IS NOT, AT THIS JUNCTURE, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT IT IS NOT AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY TO TALK ABOUT HEAD COUNT BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT WANTS MORE PEOPLE. I UNDERSTAND.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. SO WILDFIRE PREVENTION I THINK NEEDS SOME SUPPORT. SO BACK TO PROP 4, OUTLINE OF WHAT APPLIES TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND I HOPE THAT WE'LL HAVE, YOU KNOW, some budget item for hiring grant writers in terms of consultants to help us with that. Wildfire prevention and vegetation management, shoreline and sea level rise, parks and open air space improvements, community resiliency centers and extreme heat mitigation, and habitat restoration projects. So most of it applies to the fire department. Fire Chief, do you have a grant writer or do you have budget for hiring grant writers on a temporary basis?

Currently we are partnering with CONFIRE and Measure X to apply for the CAL FIRE and Prop 4 grants joint application. Right now the criteria for the type of grants they are offering do not cover some of the aspects that you have asked for. In fact, we went out and looked for one that was specific to home hardening. Those grants this cycle are not looking to fund home hardening programs. They're looking to fund educational programs. There's a few other different types of programs. So we are currently partnering with CONFIRE and Measure X staff to do a joint grant to work on some One of the aspects the state wants us to focus on is education. And so that's one of the aspects we're looking at how we can fit something in and we're going to be putting in a grant request for that.

So my specific question basically is do you need resources with regards to grant writing or grant application?

Well, sure. Patrick Sills, I'm in chief. TO THE POINT WITH REGARDS TO GRANT WRITERS, WE HAVE A CADRE OF GRANT WRITERS ON CALL. I RELEASED AN RFQ ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. IT'S A FIVE-YEAR RFQ FOR GRANT WRITERS. I THINK WE HAVE A LIST OF AT LEAST 16 ACROSS VARIOUS AREAS. WE CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS, RECORDED THOSE INTERVIEWS. THEY COMPLETED SHORT ANSWER FORMS. EXCEL DATABASE WITH LINKS TO VIDEOS THAT WE SHARE WITH STAFF SO THAT THEY CAN ACCESS GRANT WRITERS WHEN THEY NEED THEM. NOW, WITH REGARDS TO THE CHIEF SPECIFICALLY AND HIS NEED, THERE MAY BE SOME REFINEMENT AND PARTNERING WITH AGENCIES WHO MAY HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE. BUT TO THE POINT OF GRANT WRITERS, BECAUSE IT HAS COME UP BEFORE FROM OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, OUR STAFF, THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION HAS ACCESS TO ON-CALL GRANT WRITERS.

Awesome. I'm glad to hear that. Thank you. So in terms of Prop 4, have you applied for like parks and open space improvement? Patrick left. Too fast.

I apologize. I thought that question was for the chief.

No, it's about parks and open space. AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCY CENTERS.

JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, I THINK IT WAS IN MARCH, WE HAD A FEW DEPARTMENTS THAT APPLIED FOR GRANTS, INCLUDING THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, FOR CONGRESSMAN GUERRA-MENDI, AS WELL AS.

I'M TALKING ABOUT PROP 4. $10 BILLION UP TO $30 MILLION PER GRANT.

VERNESIA AND FINANCE AND DIRECTOR VELASCO, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SHARE OR SHOULD WE RESPOND VIA E-MAIL? OUR BUDGET COLLEAGUE RECEIVES ALL THE INQUIRIES I BELIEVE FOR THE GRANTS THAT ARE APPLIED FOR CITYWIDE. WE HAVE A CENTRAL REPOSITORY WHERE THEY GO.

WHAT I CAN SHARE, WE ARE LOOKING AT PROP 4 UNDER VARIOUS SCENARIOS. ONE OF THEM BEING VEGETATION MANAGEMENT OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY OR PUBLIC PROPERTY AND HIGH FIRE SEVERITY AREAS AS WELL AS DOING WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. You know, Jason and Parks and I have had conversations as well as working with nonprofit organizations. So we have not submitted an application yet, but we are looking at developing a concept. We haven't looked at the community resiliency centers because part of that is we're figuring out a citywide strategy. Where are they needed first? But for vegetation management, we do have a concept in development right now.

Yeah, the Earthquake Ad Hoc Committee will help you with community resiliency centers. But last year, California spent $4 billion on these items. And this year, $2 billion. It's a total of $10 billion over years. And again, 40% goes to disadvantaged communities like the city of Richmond. I emailed you last year and...

We did complete one, the work that we've done with Pogo Park. That is an example, right, on Harbor 8 of a completed project. So we need to, you know, keep effectuating that work and then we'll be in a position to reapply. Hopefully for the MLK Center is the one that we were queuing up next.

Thank you. I appreciate that. That's good to know. Let me see if I have any more questions for you. No, that's it, basically. So just keep wildfire ad hoc recommendations presented by Chief Osorio intact. One suggestion I have. So all the discretionary items, you count it. If they go on a rack, but we can pick them up. in the same order when the money becomes available. I'm personally flexible, but if you let them go and then, you know, they're gone, no way. Because each one of them are important projects to us that we have been fighting for them to achieve them. So let's come up with a scheme that prioritize things that may work.

Thank you. That's very helpful feedback.

Thank you. Council Member Wilson?

Thank you. So just as a sort of housekeeping thing, one of the things that I think Vice Mayor Robinson asked for was an update about the Point Malade, like how many times, the Point Malade Trail, the various expenditures for that. And if we could wrap into that report, and I know, I believe Public Works is working on this right now and I saw some activity this week. One of the issues that I raised about the trail is that I'm not willing to spend money on a trail that involves a shoreline stabilization solution that puts riprap over 300 feet of the beach. And so it would be helpful for me to get an update, you know, sort of some reassurance that that is not currently the design plan of that. We don't have to do it today, but as a part of that report back, I would appreciate getting more info. Thank you.

Does Daniel, do you all have that now or do you want to wait until the 16th? Joseph, whoever else is working on it. We want to wait. Look, I think Darcy's ready to go. Avanish is ready to go.

So we're done. We're done.

Wait, hold on. Let them huddle. Let them huddle. Can you give them 10 seconds to huddle?

Can we get one more person up there?

YES. WHO WANTS TO JOIN THE TEAM? HERE COMES JOSEPH.

OKAY. I'LL GO FIRST. JUST TO EXPLAIN ON THE FUNDING SIDE, THE BAY TRAIL, BY THE WAY, GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. SORRY TO INTRODUCE MYSELF. I'M THE FINANCE MANAGER IN THE BUDGET DIVISION. The Point Malade Bay Trail had originally received $3 million in 2009 from the UUT settlement funds. And since then, it has spent a significant chunk of that in community outreach and in various preliminary engineering activities. 1.2 million remain from there, about 1.2 million. ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT CAME FROM CITY COUNCIL WAS ONLY 750,000 FOR THE PROJECT. CURRENTLY IT HAS 2.2 MILLION DOLLARS OF TOTAL FUNDING ALLOCATION IN THE BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR AND THERE'S 2 MILLION DOLLARS OF GRANT FUNDING. THE STABILIZATION HAS 2 MILLION DOLLARS OF FUNDING ALLOCATION FROM GENERAL CAPITAL FUND.

Thank you for that, Avinash. Also just wanted to quickly clarify that there are two Point Malade projects. And so this one is just trail specific, not related to any beach stabilization that the million dollar shortfall is associated with.

Sorry to interrupt, but I was under the impression that the amount of beach stabilization that's necessary varies depending on the position of the trail. So I thought they were intertwined, these two projects. AND IN ORDER TO HAVE A MINIMAL STABILIZATION WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE TRAIL IS INLAND.

THAT'S TRUE. IT'S NUANCED. BUT THERE'S A GAP OF SO THE MILLION DOLLAR SHORTFALL AND THE PROJECT THAT IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH HAS A GAP IN IT WHICH IS WHERE THE STABILIZATION NEEDS TO OCCUR. AND SO THAT PORTION OF THE TRAIL WILL BE ADDRESSED WITHIN THAT STABILIZATION PROJECT. At this time, the alignment still has options to evolve. And so the stabilization is not driving the alignment of the trail, if that makes sense. Does that answer the question?

No, but maybe we can just talk offline before next week. Okay.

Okay. Okay. So just to clarify this, the million dollar shortfall is for the trail portion only. And the reason is that back in 2021, when we had a cooperative agreement established with our partner, East Bay regional, the cost estimate was 3.35 million. And at this, when the bids came in last year, they were, it was 4.12. So that's about $900,000 difference. So.

Yeah, and just to state, and then we can talk this out later, is that IF THE CITY IS GOING TO BE CONTRIBUTING MONEY TOWARDS THIS PROJECT, I WANT TO LEVERAGE THAT IN ORDER TO SAY WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE POSITION OF THE TRAIL BE SUCH THAT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE COVERING THE WHOLE BEACH WITH RIPRAP IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE TRAILS.

COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, SINCE THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT IS REALLY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL I THINK TO THE DEGREE TO WHICH IF THE COUNCIL HAS MORE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE A CONVERSATION IN OPEN SESSION SO EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND THE DYNAMICS OF THE PROJECT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS PRETTY NUANCED. SO IF YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, THAT'S ACTUALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE IS WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS MILLION DOLLARS.

OKAY. WELL, LET'S HOLD THAT FOR THE END BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE WHOLE TIME TALKING. I HAVE OTHER POINTS I WANT TO MAKE ABOUT THE BUDGET. SO THANK YOU. I'LL YELL IF I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE POINT MELODY TRAIL. BECAUSE I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT STAFFING. So am I correct in understanding that under option one, you're proposing a 12% vacancy rate to balance the budget, and under option two, it's also a 12% vacancy rate to balance the budget?

Yes, and the vacancy rate will need to increase when the MOUs are finalized with public safety.

So it's a minimum of 12% vacancy rate?

Right. And it will increase when your MOUs are finalized with public safety.

And that's under both option one and option two. And what's, and last year, what we had approved was a 9.7 vacancy rate, but what is the current vacancy rate?

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU USE AS THE BASELINE. THE ISSUE IS 811 POSITIONS. WE ADDED ADDITIONAL POSITIONS OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND DIDN'T DELETE ANY POSITIONS. SO WE ADDED NEW POSITIONS, 100 AND SOME ODD. I FEEL LIKE MAYBE IT WAS I CAN GET YOU THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT THE PRIMARY DRIVER, RIGHT, WE'RE ACTUALLY UP A NET FOUR OF WHERE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN 2021. SO THE DRIVER OF THE VACANCY RATE IS BECAUSE WE ADDED NEW POSITIONS AND DID NOT DELETE ANY EXISTING POSITIONS. SO THAT'S THE PROBLEM. AND IF COSTS ARE GOING UP, THEN YOU CAN'T KEEP ADDING PEOPLE. THE MATH JUST DOESN'T WORK.

Okay, so, but the two, I guess my larger point here is that we've been offered two options to pick from tonight, both of which have the same plan in terms of staffing. Like, there's no option about, like, what would we have to do in order to... BE ABLE TO BE IN A POSITION TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE. THAT'S NOT A THING THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED?

THAT'S NOT PRUDENT BECAUSE IF YOU HAVEN'T CONCLUDED YOUR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THREE BARGAINING UNITS, THEN WE'RE NOT IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN SUGGEST ADDING MORE PEOPLE.

SO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS WE HAVE AN OPTION WHICH IS A STATUS QUO BUDGET. AND THEN WE HAVE AN OPTION WHERE THE STAFF HAS DISCOVERED THAT THERE'S FOUR PROJECTS, RICHMOND IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL AT POINT MALADY AND THERE'S SHORTFALLS TOTALING $2.6 MILLION. AND YOU'RE SAYING IN OPTION TWO WE TAKE SOME MONEY FROM THE BASICALLY FROM WE UNFUND INITIATIVES PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR AND MOVE IT TO FUND THE $2.6 MILLION SHORTFALL IN THESE FOUR PROJECTS. THAT'S OPTION TWO?

you appropriate money that is needed now and you determine how you're going to prioritize your key initiatives such that there's clarity on what the priorities are and what order they should be funded. Because you have a pressing problem that needs to be addressed now. And then you have a list of 37 key initiatives that don't include if people meet with me or email me or work with the board or commission or other things. You have 37 things that have come at the dais, right, in the last 16 months that you've asked staff to work on that staff don't have the capacity to work on 37 things. And if I may, this process around the 37 new key initiatives is not normally how this volume is not the tenor of most EFFECTIVE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS.

I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SEEM TO INDICATE, AND YOU CAN TELL ME IF I CAUGHT THIS CORRECTLY, IF WE AS A COUNCIL SAY WE'RE NOT WILLING TO MOVE THE MONEY FROM THESE COUNCIL INITIATIVES, LIKE WE'RE NOT WILLING TO CANCEL THE BLACK RESILIENCY FUND AND GIVE THE MONEY TO THE... THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING CANCELING.

WE'RE SAYING THAT... POST FUNDING? NO, CONSIDER MULTI-YEAR FUNDING STRATEGY IS WHAT IT SAYS ON YOUR SCREEN UNDER COLUMN THREE. OKAY.

DEFERRING THE FUNDING, IS THAT A FAIR WAY TO SAY IT?

WE'RE SAYING CONSIDER A MULTI-YEAR FUNDING STRATEGY BECAUSE WE DON'T YET HAVE A PROGRAM THAT'S READY TO EFFECTUATE.

OK, so what I heard you say also is if we said, no, we'd just like to leave the funding in the buckets that we have, that there's other places that I think you made reference to sharpening, going back and sharpening your pencils. Yes, we will.

We will go find other things to take the money from. So maybe it's ADA sidewalks. Maybe it's paving, like the work that you see happening right now, right? THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY, THE STRIPING, THAT KIND OF WORK THAT PEOPLE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT, THAT WOULD SUBSIDE IN ORDER TO KEEP THESE THINGS WHICH ARE KIND OF BIKE RACKISH, LIKE THEY'RE NOT MOVING RIGHT NOW REALLY FAST. THEY'RE MOVING INCREMENTALLY BUT THEY'RE MOVING VERY SLOW.

MY CONCERN WOULD BE IS THAT IF WE TAKE THE MONEY AWAY FROM THEM, THEY'LL MOVE EVEN MORE SLOWLY. I HAVE NOTICED SORT OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US FUNDING THINGS AND THAT SORT OF THE SCIDS TOWARDS COMPLETION. OTHER PEOPLE HAVE A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON THAT. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SCALE OF THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS CRITICAL OF IN PAST MID-YEAR REVIEW, I'M A RELATIVELY NEW CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, HAVEN'T DONE THIS VERY OFTEN, BUT THERE'S BEEN A PATTERN OF we have an extra six million, we have an extra eight million because, and I don't think this is a bad thing. I think that, you know, the city kind of has fair, you sort of don't like the word conservative, but fairly conservative assumptions about REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES, AND THAT MEANS WE HAVE A PATTERN OF HAVING A SURPLUS THAT WE USUALLY DEAL WITH AT THE MID-YEAR REVIEW. AND I WAS CRITICAL OF THAT. I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, WHEN THERE'S A $6 MILLION MID-YEAR SURPLUS, THAT WAS $6 MILLION WE COULD HAVE PUT TO STAFFING, AND SO WE SHOULD HAVE INVESTED MORE IN STAFFING. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MUBIER SAID THAT ACTUALLY WAS VERY INTERESTING FOR ME IS THAT In a budget the size of a city's, if you budget and you end up with a $5 million surplus, I think he used the word budget dust, which is actually a concept that is amazing to me. Yeah, it's less than 1%. Yeah, it's budget dust. That means you did a great job, basically.

Unless there's no more dust.

I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT. WE'VE JUST SPENT THREE HOURS TALKING ABOUT BUDGET DUST. FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE.

I'M THE STAFF PERSON THAT DECIDES IF SOMETHING IS SIGNIFICANT AND WHAT I REALLY THINK IS IMPORTANT IS THAT AS YOUR CITY MANAGER, I'M SAYING THAT YOU'VE REACHED A CRITICAL TRAJECTORY WHERE BASED ON THE NUMBERS I'M GETTING FROM FINANCE AND BASED ON THE MOUs THAT YOU'VE APPROVED, WE NEED TO RATCHET IT BACK. BECAUSE WE CAN'T KEEP SPENDING MONEY AT OUR CURRENT PACE. AND I KNOW THAT'S A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING IT TONIGHT AND WE DIDN'T HAVE IT IN MAY.

Well, see, I'm not sure. So two things. One is that I would like to have a larger conversation about the staffing levels, which I'm disappointed that we're focused so much on whether we need, you know, how do we fill this $2.6 million gap, which in the context of the whole budget is a very, very, very small gap. And I would like to have spent less time on that and more time on exploring what would be the trade-offs if we wanted to hire two extra people here, two extra people there. And maybe we'll get to that next week, I don't know. But I just wanted to focus that. I am not willing to mess with the funding of previously approved initiatives that already have funding. But I really do encourage the finance team to go back and find other ways to close that $2.6 million. I GUESS THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO WOULD BE IN SIX MONTHS OR WHAT IS THE MID-YEAR REVIEW? IS IT SIX MONTHS FROM JUNE?

WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD Q3 YET BECAUSE THE NUMBERS HAVE NOT BEEN STABLE ENOUGH WHERE WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE REALLY TIGHT PROJECTIONS. SO WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE CITY COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS IS WE LIKE IT WHEN WE HAVE excess revenue, right? We'd like to be able to say we can fund all of these things. That makes our lives much easier. It's actually really difficult to have this kind of conversation around trade-offs because no one's happy, right? So it's not our desired outcome isn't to have a lot of consternation. That doesn't make our jobs easier, right? What we want to do is get things done. What we're suggesting is that you have a finite amount of staff And the current pace is not sustainable. So we need to understand what your priorities are so we can budget and make recommendations appropriately.

And again, I've said that I believe leaving the $3 million that you've identified as discretionary that are tied to council initiatives in place is my preference. I'm just one vote. AND THAT I WOULD HOPE THAT FINANCE CAN FIND OTHER SOURCES. SUCH AS? I REMEMBER WHEN WE DID POGO PARK, WAS THAT $3 MILLION?

THAT WAS ANOTHER UNSPENT FUND.

WHERE DID YOU GET THAT MONEY FROM?

Mubeen, can you come forward and tell me that you've, you've tell the council what you've told me around us, the status of our budget. So every year at this time, no, no, no. I think this is really important. Every year at this time, I say, Mubeen, how much money are we going to have left? Right. And I get super excited and I called Joseph to my office and we try to figure out what short call falls can we fund.

Right.

This year Mubeen put the brakes on me. And I think, so then I have to tell you, which is a very difficult conversation because, MUBEAN TOLD ME THAT WE MIGHT NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. SO MY JOB IS TO CONVEY THAT TO YOU.

AND YOU HAVE. OKAY. SO AGAIN, I AM ENCOURAGING STAFF TO SHARPEN THE PENCILS. IN WHAT AREAS? I THINK IT WAS THE HVAC FUND WHERE THE POGO PARK FUND CAME FROM.

SO GET RID OF RESILIENCY TYPE CENTERS.

NO, NO, JUST IS THERE AN HVAC FUND? SO I'M CLEARLY AT A DEFICIT HERE.

No, no, but we have to have real solutions.

An information deficit.

Is it all Mubeen's fault then?

No. Mubeen's great.

So council member, so there is no such HVAC fund. There were three HVAC projects that were basically defunded to reallocate funding to the hub.

Yeah. So, so I, if there's nothing like that, maybe it's something we can revisit in the mid year, you know, like we can make this our top priority to fully fund these, these, these four projects in the mid year.

They can't, it can't wait until the mid year or we wouldn't put it on for discussion tonight.

so that's not a viable solution councilmember brown thank you lord um i've been listening and across all departments and across all the budget session conversations that have gone forth that the consensus is staffing that we are low on staffing despite the 92 positions yet we don't have room to hire. So my brain goes to like, what do we do? What could we do? And so I just wanted to know, do we know the total annual cost of staffing supporting city council meetings, like including the additional staff time, the management, the legal review, the administrative support, and most devastatingly, like all of the overtime that staff contributes to these meetings?

if I may say something, only a sliver of that. Remember like in my last presentation, in our last presentation on May 26th, there were like bar charts in the forecast and I wanted to really stay on those bar charts because those were really expensive. Those were worth a couple of trips to Disneyland.

Yeah.

TO SUPPORT THE COUNCIL WORK AND COUNCIL MEETINGS AND ALL THAT. THERE'S HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS. WE COULD DO TIME STUDY BUT THEN AGAIN YOU NEED RESOURCES TO DO THE TIME STUDY OR YOU NEED TO EVOLVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT.

So based on your... It does... Most cities only have two meetings. No, I was going to mention that. Because it's so extensive of a lift to even have a meeting, right? Especially when we have three in a row, then that means, like, now, Shannon is... REVIEWING ITEMS, RIGHT? AND I REVIEW ITEMS DURING THIS MEETING FOR OUR SUBSEQUENT MEETING.

YEAH. SO THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING TOWARDS, THAT WE HAVE STAFF WHO ARE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME PREPARING FOR THESE MEETINGS AND DURING THESE MEETINGS WE CONTINUE TO give council directions to do more things that we can't even do because we didn't do the last 50 things that was directed. So it's like we're playing catch up and it's like we're never catching up. So I'm just wondering, and then of course we are one of what, three cities in the state of California that still have three meetings. Everybody else in the state of California has two. It's been argued that we have more city business to do, but if we are just passing city business but not materializing or implementing city business, then we're just busy. So I'm wondering if regular council meetings were reduced from the three per month to two, how could resources such as the staff hours, the overtime, the time for agenda preparation workload, the departmental capacity be redirected to improve service delivery and the project implementations?

That's a really great question. We can get back with a reply back on the 16th with a definitive answer. But I would say in short order, a lot of the things around technology and innovation, whether it's improving the permitting process, improving the business license process, things that take interdepartmental collaboration to effectuate. WE COULD WORK ON BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T BE WORKING ON PREPARING FOR THIS MEETING. IT WOULD ENABLE THOSE THINGS TO GO FASTER, RIGHT? WHETHER IT'S THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT, ALL OF THOSE THINGS TAKE BUSINESS LICENSE, THEY ALL TAKE INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION, SO WE COULD DEFINITELY FOCUS.

I JUST WANT US TO EXPLORE THAT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE, AGAIN, THAT WE ARE... THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL. OK, and I'm just again, I'm expressing that because it seems that we're compiling new directions, you know, from the council for good reason, of course, because there's so much to do in the city. But it seems like staff may need to catch up. So my question is, if. no new council directed initiatives were added, how long would it take us to complete the existing backlog of council directed work? That's a really good question.

We can work on coming up with what that would look like.

I know we're a city, so we're going to have to continue to bring things that are urgent to the council, but I'm saying like, all of the things that i mean i know we're innovative and and and dream really big but if we could kind of brace ourselves and allow the staff to actually do the work that we've you know um that we've gotten past i think we'll absolutely i think we won't stay here so long of like trying to figure out what's most important when all the things on the list are important Also, are there, so thank you, I would appreciate that information. Next, I want to ask, are there services currently funded by the city that are also provided by Contra Costa County, other regional agencies, nonprofit partners that we can utilize instead of duplicating efforts or spending? If there are any... Can we find out what would be the estimated the estimated? cost savings In service impacts for that yes, no there certainly are and yes, we can try to quantify that okay Thank you because I know we are Richmond and we want to be everything to everyone, but nothing to ourselves So I just want to make sure that we are not Duplicating the efforts because again duplicating efforts is busy work if we have someone else that could do it Why not? pass that over or accept the help, I would say. Let's see. Next so on page 23, so my conclusion would be like I'm not sold on either on either like the continuation of the e-bikes or the lending library both are grant funded but seems to take away from the limited staffing that we were just talking about the limited staffing that we have so yes it's grant funded like we all praise the fact that we can get grants so it seems like we're not taking away from the city budget because it's grant funded. However, we have our limited staff that we depend on for all of the dream things that we've added to our list of priorities. And I'm just wondering, how do we refocus the priorities of that program? So again, if we are getting grant funding for both programs, regardless of the direction that we go in, is staff still being taken away from other priorities to focus on these programs?

I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION NOW. THE DIFFERENCE HERE IS BEATRICE'S POSITION AND ANOTHER POSITION ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE TCC GRANT. SO VERSUS WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE THE E-BIKE LENDING LIBRARY. THE BIKE SHARE PROGRAM, THAT'S NEW.

THAT'S SOMETHING NEW THAT'S COMING ONLINE.

THAT'S GRANT. THE STAFF TIME TO HELP SET THAT UP AND GET THAT EFFECTUATED IS PRIMARILY THROUGH THE TCC GRANT. THE OTHER ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE PROGRAM IS WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS UNDER THE AUSPICES OF TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSPORTATION HAS A SLEW OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT GABINO WAS ARTICULATING THAT ARE UNDER HIS PURVIEW. AND SO PART OF THE OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, WHEN I THOUGHT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO HIRE PEOPLE, BECAUSE I WANT TO CONTINUE TO HIRE PEOPLE, MY PLAN WAS GABINO COMES BACK TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, WORKS ON CITY, SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL PROJECTS SUCH AS IMMIGRATION, BUT THEN FINANCE, YOU KNOW, AS WE'RE STARTING TO GET OUR NEW PROJECTIONS, OUR CALPERS NUMBERS, OUR KAISER NUMBERS, THEY'RE TELLING ME WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN.

SO THAT'S ONE WHERE IT'S NUANCED. DOES THAT MEAN WE WON'T HAVE STAFF PARTICULARLY FOR IT'S THE OPPOSITE.

THE BIKE SHARE PROGRAM IS UNDER THE BIKE SHARE PROGRAM IS UNDER TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS. TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS.

THOSE ARE WITHIN TRANSPORTATION, THOSE ARE WITHIN TRANSPORTATION, WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS.

WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS. the e-bike lending library is part of the tcc grant which sits in both community development and public works but those staff that are part of that grant are within community development under lena so it's just it's different departments different resources so there are full resources appropriated for the lending library versus electric but the bike share program there isn't gabino what are all the programs under transportation

Currently the ones that are active. So we have the paratransit program. Then we have the micromobility program, which is the Richmond Moves. Then we have FOR ALSO THOSE TWO, THERE'S A BOARD AND COMMISSIONS THAT WE NEED TO ATTEND, WHICH ARE LIKE FIVE MEETINGS DURING THE MONTH, WHICH IS CCTA, WIC TECH. AND THEN AFTER THAT WE HAVE THE CHARGING STATIONS PROGRAM. THEN WE HAVE THE E-BIKE LOCKERS PROGRAM. And then there's other programs that, like we mentioned before, that hasn't been active, like the permitting program for neighborhood permitting program. That's not existing right now. And any other transportation services that come. And then we have a new one that we added to paratransit, which is the Lyft and Uber option program.

Okay. I was asking because I'm looking at the programs, both programs, and the program has not demonstrated, you know, it hasn't demonstrated that we're just like being fiscally responsible when it comes to what the, you know, per rides, per user, repeat users, like all of those things that were listed. And even like not being like this, huge um even though i don't have like this uh huge knowledge around like all of the climate um projections that this that that was said to be reducing it seems like the climate benefits were like very minimal but it was like really stressed to like keep the program uh afloat also um the staff recommendations uh it continues to share throughout the document that that this isn't financially sustainable without funding or city subsidies. So I'm just wondering why. I'm hoping that we, or at least I thought that our last few meetings ago, we were talking about just using that funding to settle out any debt and sunset the program. But then we're being asked to fund this e-bike lending library that just includes like just... OUTRAGEOUS NUMBERS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND COST AND I SAW THE PICTURE IN ONE OF THE SLIDES OF WHAT IT IS AND I WAS JUST LIKE WHAT JUSTIFIES THAT PARTICULAR STRUCTURE TO COST MORE THAN LIKE HOMES IN RICHMOND?

DIRECTOR VELASCO CAN SPEAK TO THAT. I BELIEVE SLIDE 23 IF WE GO BACK, THIS IS THE CURRENT

IT'S BECAUSE IT'S TWO DIFFERENT PROGRAMS.

THIS IS THE CURRENT ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE PROGRAM.

THE PROGRAM RELATED TO THE TCC, I KNOW THAT WAS AN ORIGINAL PROGRAM THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION.

I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOME OF THE FRAMING. So to me, it's important that if we're saying that something's going to go away and if there's something similar that we're adding, right, we make sure that the community is clear, like we think this should get sunset, right? That's what the council approved to kind of transition it out and have it go away. AND BY THE WAY, STAFF IS ALREADY WORKING ON ANOTHER GRANT. WE WERE WAITING FOR THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL TO SAY WHERE THE SOURCE OF THE MATCHING FUNDS BECAUSE IT SPECIFICALLY SUPPORTS DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, RIGHT? SO SB 535 IDENTIFIED COMMUNITIES. AND SO THAT APPROVAL HAS RECENTLY COME. AND SO WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE'RE REAPPROPRIATING FUNDING THAT WAS ONCE DIRECTED ONE PLACE TO THEN BECOME MATCHING FUNDS FOR A LARGER GRANT THAT'S ESSENTIALLY $50 MILLION.

I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND AND THANK YOU FOR BREAKING IT DOWN ANOTHER LAYER. I'M JUST SPEAKING TO AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S BOTH PROGRAMS SO I'M SAYING GIVING LIKE THE POOR UTILIZATION OF ONE PROGRAM THE HIGH SUBSIDY LEVELS THE TAXPAYER COST PER RIDE, IT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE EXISTING PROGRAM MODEL DOESN'T WORK. SO I'M JUST SAYING WHAT EVIDENCE DO WE HAVE THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE LENDING LIBRARY WOULD PERFORM MATERIALLY BETTER THAN THE CURRENT BIKE SHARE PROGRAM WITH THE STRUGGLING UTILIZATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS.

THANK YOU. GOOD QUESTION.

Director Velasco Council Member Brown was asking what data is there to support that the e-bike lending library will perform better than If I'm summarizing here than the bike share program like yeah, I mean we've already gotten all the data regarding what the eshare program electric bike share program Performed that the performance metrics for that so we're asking to to for us to move over to the e-bike lending library. So I'm asking what evidence do we have to support that this program would do better if we are not, and I think it speaks to what council members have paid us in. If we were talking about deploying 10 more spots throughout the city for a city-wide situation to being this one hub, why are we convinced that the utilization will not remain low?

I THINK EARLIER I STARTED TO ALLUDE IT WOULD OPERATE DIFFERENT. YOU WOULD CHECK OUT A BIKE SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO RETURN IT THE SAME DAY, SIMILAR TO A BOOK. IT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO TAKE IT HOME SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE have to be hub to hub drop off and there are other programs similar to there's an e-bike lending library in Oakland and so we've been looking at those models and really working with community members to understand how it works but I think for the next council meeting we'd be happy to sort of detail that a little bit further of how we think the programs will function differently. I agree with the comment that was made earlier a lot of the times these Programs can be complementary. They're not but you know when you have to look at Where we can put our limited resources. This is one area that I think we can expand it will be the CITY ASSET FOR THE FUTURE AS WELL. AND IT COULD TRANSITION OVER TIME. I MEAN, I THINK IF E-BIKE IS THE THING RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD BE A BUILDING THAT COULD SERVE MULTIPLE PURPOSES OVER TIME.

OKAY. LASTLY TO THE E-BIKE OR TO THE LENDING LIBRARY, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN BIKES ARE NOT, LIKE, RETURNED, THEY'RE STOLEN OR DAMAGED? ARE RESIDENTS CHARGED OR ARE THE CITIES CHARGED?

Yeah, so those are components that we are looking into. There is, you know, and it may look different slightly for the project area residents because there is a greater subsidy being provided by the transformative climate communities like maybe limited usage free uses so those are things while it will serve citywide uh... there may be additional benefits for residents within the project area given the grant sources uh... but we do anticipate that there will be some level of uh... Contribution or deposit that will get okay.

I'm just asking because it's like with the Some of the e-bikes I was seeing them like on the side of folks house and they were stripped and things like that So I'm like are we gonna how are we gonna protect our assets? Are we gonna provide or include trackers on these bikes or you know because if someone's If someone has this bike and they park it in front of their apartment complex or near their units or something like that, I don't want to assume that everyone that will borrow these bikes have proper storage. So how are we going to potentially mitigate that?

Yeah, we can come back with more details on how we anticipate to do that. Okay.

Okay. And my last thing, because I know the mayor's looking at me, the last thing I would, thank you. The last thing I wanted to add, also I was looking at the, I forget which one it is. It's a slide where it has all of the council initiatives. I was looking at number 12, which is the community-led bus stop bench program. And it said that the goal, it was goal six, shoreline and ecological issues. And honestly, I think that, I don't know why it was categorized that way. Maybe you can provide more insight to that. But I think it's more like quality of life, transit, accessibility initiatives, so to speak, because we're You know, Richmond, we don't have bus stops, a lot of bus stops. And so just having seating for seniors and disabled residents would be essential. So I just didn't understand, like, the category. And I don't know if that category... DEEMED IT LIKE LESS IMPORTANT THAN OTHER CATEGORIES OR THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE AROUND IT.

THE QUESTION WAS REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 12 HERE, COMMUNITY LED BUS STOP BENCH PROGRAM. WHY WAS THIS CATEGORIZED AS GOAL AREA 6 ON SLIDE 8? SO IF WE CAN GO BACK TO SLIDE 8 WHILE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT IT. KCRT, CAN YOU PLEASE GO TO SLIDE 8?

And while we're looking at that, I just wanted to know, because we were like full steam ahead with this project and then staff got swamped. And this isn't like an emergency initiative. However, it is relatively very inexpensive and like almost no costs associated with this at all. um and you know no no cost really almost to uh to actually roll this out um but yet it would have immediate benefit for the public so little to no cost but yet immediate benefit for the public I think is really important and so I'm just I just was kind of wanting to know like where the like the communication drop off with the implementation process because we were like right there with this one.

So maybe Patrick can take the first part and then maybe Darren and Daniel or an engineer with Daniel can take the second one. YOU LOVE BENCHES. I KNOW THAT, DANIEL. BUT I JUST WANT THE COUNCIL TO KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF STAFF THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THESE THINGS. THE DIRECTORS ARE DOING AN AMAZING JOB, BUT SOME OF THEIR DEPUTIES OR ASSISTANTS ARE HERE, SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COUNCIL GETS TO HEAR FROM THEM AS WELL, EVEN THOUGH OUR DIRECTORS ARE AMAZING.

YOU CAN'T SAY THAT AGAIN.

THANK YOU.

Well, so let me address the second part of the question. So we're currently developing the policy and there is initial cost. There is initial cost because the bench itself has a cost, the installation itself has a cost, but also when you put in a bus stop, you have to make sure that it's ADA compliant. So you have to regrade the sidewalk and most likely PER LOCATION WHERE WE'RE GOING TO INSTALL THIS OR THE COMMUNITY WILL INSTALL THESE BENCHES, WE'RE GOING TO END UP DOING CONCRETE WORK. AND THEN PART OF THE POLICY IS ALL THE DIMENSIONS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THEY COMPLY WITH ADA REQUIREMENTS AS I SAID. NOW THERE'S THE OTHER PART IS THE MAINTENANCE AND THAT'S PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE POLICY. WE'LL PRESENT THE POLICY TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN WHICH WHO'S GOING TO BE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO PROPOSE WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE BENCHES BECAUSE THAT'S A COST. SO IT COULD GO TO THE COMMUNITY THAT INSTALLED THEM. IT COULD GO TO THE CITY. IT WOULD BE THEN PART OF THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR. SO WHATEVER YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY WILL GO UP. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BRING TO THE CITY COUNCIL. I DON'T HAVE THE DATE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'RE IN THE FINAL DATE.

I WAS JUST ASKING BECAUSE THE ORGANIZATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE INSTALLING, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN FUNDING. THEY HAVE FUNDING SOURCES THAT THEY ALREADY CAME TO THE TABLE WITH.

CORRECT. BUT THE MOMENT YOU INSTALL A BENCH AND THEN SOMEBODY TRIPS AND FALL, THEY'RE NOT GOING AFTER THEM, RIGHT? SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT OPENING THE CITY UP A LIABILITY UNNECESSARILY.

OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU.

COUNCILMAN BROWN.

DID YOU HAVE A PRELIMINARY DATE?

NOT DATE, BUT IT'S IN THE FALL, THIS YEAR.

THANK YOU. PATRICK?

YES, COUNCILMAN BROWN. THAT WAS A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR ON MY PART.

OKAY.

IT IS GOAL AREA THREE.

OKAY. OKAY, COOL.

AND I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER PORTION OF YOUR QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER OF THE GOAL AREAS.

No, I just was wondering why that was categorized. Oh, that was a typographical. It's goal three. Thank you so much. I do have one last question. So just shout out to Public Works and everyone that's involved. I love seeing all of the work that's undergoing throughout the the city in particular, District 1, with all of the striping and just all of the improvements, like it just gave like the community such a facelift. But with respect to the items presented tonight, when will we have the opportunity to highlight things that we don't see on here? Because I don't want to get, you know, quote pulled about mentioning something that's not particularly on this slide deck or anything like such as like stop sign that's needed that you know that multiple residents have put in requests for when can you know we inquire about that and then of course like the last thing is the Humphrey play lot about the flooding there and the community members so just wanting to know that if staff could evaluate like the cost of addressing the reoccurring flooding problem to determine if we should

IF IT SHOULD BE LIKE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. WHOMEVER HE MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO JOIN HIM.

OR LAKE HUMPHREY.

So that specific project we have calculated a rough order of magnitude. We know what the issue is. Okay. We are trying to, it's actually in the, TENTATIVE PLAN THAT STAFF DEVELOPED IS ONE OF THE ONES THAT WOULD BE MORE ADVANCED, BUT WE NEED THE FUNDING. JUST TRYING TO SEE.

IN ATTACHMENT ONE, IT'S CURRENTLY 128 IN THE LIST, BUT THE PRIORITY BASED ON THE CIP SCORING IS 58.

I KNOW. I SAW THAT.

SO I WAS WONDERING. SO, DANIEL, CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE MORE AND COLLEAGUES AROUND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? And then?

Well, the entire site is lower than the rest of the surrounding properties. So we need to basically lift it all up. And it will require removal of the entire plate structures or everything they have there, removal of the existing soil, installation of drainage, backfilling higher than the other properties. And the reason why we would put drainage is not to that then create another problem that will flow to the other properties, will just flow into the storm drain system and then bring basically new place structures, new facilities into the park.

Okay. So how can we go about getting that put on the list to be in the queue or because it's on there? You know what I'm saying? Because it's on there, it's considered in the queue just not as a priority.

Joseph, do you want to go over the methodology?

That's just one project that I really want to advocate for because it seems to be, it's been a recurring issue for quite some time.

GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL. NO, GOOD EVENING, CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JOSEPH MUNOZ. I'M GOING TO TRY NOT TO GO IN TOO MUCH DETAIL. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, I AM IN THE WEED. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YOU ACTUALLY MENTIONED A VARIETY OF PROGRAMS, RIGHT? SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STOP SIGNS OR WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SAFETY, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THANKS TO OUR NEW TEAM THAT WE HAVE HERE THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS HELPED US PUT TOGETHER, Our planners have put together the neighborhood safety access program as well as the complete streets program. So you're saying, well, how does the request come in? How are you guys evaluating? That's the programmatic approach we've been mentioning, trying to clearly establish with council and the residents so they understand it. And they're working to develop that. As city manager has indicated, there's a CIP score. That CIP score, thanks to your guys' assistance last year, I think we started back in February, March, and then April, then finally adopted. That was a great exercise. I have a six pack now because of that. But we have a score. And that score is not indicative of, I would say, our recommendations as program leads. What that does, it tells you how it aligns with your city council goals and priorities. But there's the sequencing. There's the ideas of their nearby projects. Or if we're paving, like we're saying, we want to do the other elements of complete streets there. So when you now mention parks and open space program, that's the humble play lot or all these other parts that you guys are indicating. So currently right now, if I was to put my Darcy hat on and speak on her behalf, and you can come and correct me as well, I would imagine the saying would be, let's continue to complete the existing projects that are on there, which is on attachment one, and it's highlighted there, I think in blue. OR COULD ACTUALLY BE THE FIRST ONE IF THEY'RE A GRANT PROJECT AS WELL. GET THROUGH THOSE AND THEN THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR WE WANT TO UPDATE THE PARKS MASTER PLAN. THAT'S GOING TO HELP US DEVELOP THE FUTURE SEQUENCING, THE FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS. HOWEVER, JUST BECAUSE THE CIP SCORE IS LOW, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S NOT WHAT THE STAFF MEMBER MAY RECOMMEND. However, it's up to city council. It's your desires. If you guys want to say, hey, 58, 40, that's the one we want to move forward with, and there's funding allocated, that's the direction. That's the policy you guys are giving us. That's the order that we'll have to go with. But we're still going to come up with a recommendation, just like option one and two today. But in the end, it's up to city council to decide what projects, what programs at that level. But we're here to assist you how it aligns with the policy that you guys have adopted.

Okay. Thank you so much. That's all.

Thank you. Excuse me. This Council has done piecemeal budgeting throughout our sessions. And because we've done that, we've made it difficult for staff to do what they need to do. They're all great ideas. They all need to be done. But they kind of put some things in the front that really shouldn't be in the front and That pushes things back and so and so we had asked the staff to come up with with a Master plan and even as they come up with the master plan we continue to do this piecemeal budgeting so Looking at the City Council requests, I see that some of them are in green because they've been completed. They were one-time things, but if you look at them, you can see that a lot of them will be requested again by the communities who received the benefits. So even though they're one-time, they will be coming back. When I supported the Latino graduation and the Mother's Day event, I wanted that to show what the city is capable of doing. But I also know that with the way we budget things, we can't continue doing it that way. So seeing what's possible, I'm hoping that the recipients of our generosity will begin looking at how they can fundraise to make it happen again, because they were excellent things. I also know that in our planning, we need to look to the future. Right now, we're just looking at the budget right now. Two things that are important, and when we budget we need to consider them. One of them is retention. We need to make sure that the people we have, we keep. And we're doing that by raising salaries. But we also need to work on succession. We need to be able to impart the information from one generation of workers to the next generation of workers to the next generation of workers, and we need to codify everything. And this staff, our city manager, has done a fantastic job of codifying a lot of things that were just word of mouth. That takes a lot of time. And I appreciate the time that's been put into doing that.

Thank you, Mayor.

We also are moving from one mode of business to another. Things are becoming more computerized, more AI. AI is a wonderful thing, but it's also a problematic thing. Our requests for information has exponentially increased, but our staff hasn't. So I believe we need more people in our legal department to handle the increase of the request for information because that's something that can't be done with a computer at this point with the program. Today, I called in to have senior services come by for the pickup. And I got on the phone and I listened to that beautiful music that they have on the phone line forever. And then they had me... leave a message after all that listening to. They asked me to leave a message. I left the message, but I have no idea whether or not that message was received. I asked for a call back to confirm. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. AND THE REASON THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN IS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE HANDLING THAT SORT OF WORK. I KNOW THAT IN, I GUESS IT'S BUILDING, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE COST RECOVERY, WE BEGAN WITH A COST RECOVERY, YOU KNOW, PUTTING OUT PERMITS, THEY GET MONEY FOR DOING THE PERMITS, AND THEN THE NEXT THING THEY END UP DOING CODE ENFORCEMENT. And then they end up doing code enforcement for rental units, which is a new thing. So their work has increased, but their budget hasn't. And in order to do the work increase, they need to have more people. So it's essential that we have more hires for the departments that are getting more work. Computers are wonderful things, programs are wonderful things, but they don't have that human touch. They don't get back to you in a way that makes you feel that you've heard, that you've been heard. And so I'm advocating for positions in building and positions in our legal department. Because I would like to see those departments be seen the way our maintenance and operation departments have been. Because we hired people in operation and maintenance, the city is able to see the work that they're doing. It is a positive thing for our city. And I want that positive vision of what our city can do to spread to all departments. So I know that we need to figure out how to balance this budget. And I know that positions take up a lot of money, but I also believe that positions are essential for service. And if the city is here for anything, it is to serve its constituents to the best of our ability. And, um, that's, that's, that's my ask that, that we, um, and I think it's a modest ask. just to provide personnel to the departments that need that. I had asked if the entire General Fund had been spent. And I understand that it has. Is that correct?

MAYOR, THE POINT THAT YOU MADE EARLIER REGARDING THE LIMITED TERM REVENUE NOT BEING INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT DRAFT BUDGET IS CORRECT, THAT THE COUNCIL, THE CITY STAFF AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL, THOSE FUNDS HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE FOR A COMMUNITY PROCESS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE COUNCIL VOTED TO DO, BUT IT IS A PORTION OF THE GENERAL FUND.

Okay, so then the general fund hasn't all been spent. It's just been earmarked for consideration.

Yes. um okay i uh but i thought i heard someone suggesting that we spend the interest of that um that um again is is a policy uh discussion for the city council um we're not suggesting that you um have to to make that decision tonight we just trying to be transparent around what is to come in the future okay well uh

I believe that the general fund needs to be considered as a general fund. We have no special funds and if we set money aside as a special fund then we are not honoring the ballot measure that was going to be placed and the decision THAT WE MADE OR THE AGREEMENT WE MADE IN THE FINAL AGREEMENT WITH CHEVRON, WHICH WAS THAT IT WAS GENERAL FUND, NOT SPECIAL FUNDS.

SO MAYOR, YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN. WE DEFER TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING POLICY DIRECTION PERTAINING TO THIS MATTER. THUS FAR BASED ON THE LAST CITY COUNCIL VOTE, THAT IS THE DIRECTION WE'RE IMPLEMENTING. UNLESS THE COUNCIL DIRECTED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

Council member Jimenez.

Thank you. This is just one comment to make some more information in the next time. The budget is a projection of how much revenue we expect and receive. And if it's a projection, I don't understand why And I'm glad that you say that is going to be a policy direction that we try to see if we can allocate also the interest earned by the settlement, like the money from the settlement. AND ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IF WE ARE DOING PROJECTIONS, WE ARE NOT PROJECTING THE POTENTIAL EARINGS THAT WE CAN HAVE FROM THAT MONEY ON. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NOT IN THE PROJECTION. SO I WOULD LIKE YOU COME UP WITH SOME OF THAT. There is a negotiation, and I know that I cannot talk a lot about that, but make sure you change the way business can pay, and children will have to pay more. And I know that you cannot project that, but I think that is also things that we have in the budget. TO LOOK FOR IT IN THE PROJECTIONS BECAUSE AS I SAID BEFORE, WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING HERE IS THE PROJECTION OF LIKE PROJECTING HOW MUCH REVENUE WE ARE GOING TO GET AND HOW MUCH WE ARE GOING TO SPEND. AND IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO PUT EVERYTHING, THEN WE ARE LEAVING OUR MONEY ON THE TABLE OR WE ARE DOING A BUDGET THAT POTENTIALLY WE ARE NOT SEEING ALL THE MONEY, REAL. SO IN THAT SENSE, YOU ARE ASKING WHAT WE THINK IS THE BUDGET. AT THIS MOMENT IT SEEMS THAT Q1 IS KIND OF LIKE THE AUCTION AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE CITY MANAGER TO CHARPEN THE PENCILS and look for the HVAC budget for the other things that we are needed. One thing that I would like also to see is Joseph talk about the master plan, the park master plan. That might take two years, so I would like to see a timeline for that because then we can start talking about when things are going to happen. in real time. And I think we have an opportunity with the process of the settlement. If we roll it into the general fund, then we will spend it. And then in the 10 years, we have spent it all and not really create the kind of economy that we want. And that is, I think, is a dangerous situation. So I am not advocating for hoarding that money, but I am advocating for us to have a time where we can really think about how that money is going to be invested. And I feel like there are three things that we need to do is a robust community process, and a smart strategy about financing and how we can expand this money and make more money, and to make sure that some of this money goes to these unfunded projects because we haven't had the money to put it, and this is why we are here discussing whether we want a park, we want to fund a park, or we want more staffing. SO THIS IS FRUSTRATING AND THIS IS THE TOUGH SITUATION WE ARE IN, BUT I HOPE THAT WITH THIS ROBUST CONVERSATION, THE STAFF COMES BACK NEXT CITY COUNCIL AND WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT WE CAN APPROVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THE WORK.

Mayor, if I may, I would like to respond. As I noted, the budget is a snapshot in time. It's what we know today at the moment that you're receiving the information. Measure U and potential revenues associated with Measure U are not an appropriate open session conversation. It's very important that we follow all laws regarding disclosures. DO NOT CALL OUT SPECIFIC RICHMOND BUSINESSES DURING OPEN SESSION, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THIS INFORMATION IS CONFIDENTIAL. AS YOUR CITY MANAGER, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE CONFIDENTIALITY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT THAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY. COUNTING ON REVENUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVED IS LIKE SOMEONE BELIEVING THEY'RE GOING TO RECEIVE AN INCOME TAX RETURN REFUND AND, IN FACT, THEY GO TO THE CHECK CASHING PLACE AND THEY GET AN ADVANCE AND THEN THERE ISN'T A REFUND. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID. WHEN I STARTED THIS JOB AS CITY MANAGER, UNFORTUNATELY I DID USE THE EXAMPLE THAT IT WAS LIKE WE WERE AT THE CHECK CASHING PLACE ON CUTTING. THEN MY GOAL WAS TO GET US TO MECHANICS BANK, THEN MY GOAL WAS TO GET US TO WHERE WE HAVE REVENUE INTEREST EARNINGS BEING ACCUMULATED WHERE WE COULD support the city's programming because that's what organizations that are really high capacity do they don't they're not dollar for dollar they have money invested they use their earned interest money to pay things forward so you always have a large principle that you can rely on in case of emergency so that was my goal so i feel like i've accomplished my goal as your city manager and of getting us in a financially stable position. And I am suggesting that based on the current information available today, unfortunately we do not have resources to continue at our current pace. AND THAT THE PROJECTIONS AS WE'VE DISCUSSED INDICATE THAT BASED ON THE RAISES YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED, IF MARKET CONDITIONS DO NOT CONTINUE AT THEIR CURRENT PACE LIKE THIS SIGNIFICANT RETURNS IN THE STOCK MARKET, IF THAT CHANGES, YOU WILL BE USING YOUR LIMITED TERM ONE TIME CHEVRON DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THE MOU INCREASES YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED. I HAVE STATED THAT REPEATEDLY. FOR FULL TRANSPARENCY, I'M SAYING IT PUBLICLY. AND, YES, THERE SHOULD ALWAYS BE A STRATEGY AROUND MAKING SURE THAT EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR THAT WE SPEND, WE DO SO STRATEGICALLY AND SMARTLY.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN URBANO.

Quick question. I just wanted to make sure that the budget we approved for Hilltop Green is in place and is not forgotten or touched. And I brought up the issue of auditorium sound system to make more money for the city. And moving.

Can you please come speak to those two items? Or indicate if you need additional time.

The question is about the auditorium sound system, right? So we can have, like, more information to you about the next council meeting.

Okay, because it was approved but was not spent because there were some legal issues. But I believe the city attorney is working on the legal issues with the confire to get resolved. So...

I BELIEVE YOU HAD TWO QUESTIONS. ONE WAS ABOUT HILLTOP GREEN AND THE SECOND WAS REGARDING AUDITORIUM SOUND SYSTEM. IF THERE IS AN APPROPRIATION FOR SOMETHING AND THEN IT COMES TO CITY COUNCIL AND THERE ISN'T CONSENSUS TO MOVE IT FORWARD, THEN USUALLY THE MONEY WOULDN'T BE REAPPROPRIATED. so okay we need to go back and look at the administrative record on that one maybe chief osario can speak to that now um and then the other one around hilltop green who would who is the staff person that could speak to that okay thank you chief the council we went back and look at it this is 2023 i believe it was an allocation of like 120 000

WITH THE CONDITION THAT MEASURE X WOULD MATCH, AND IT WAS FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR. THAT MONEY DOES NOT GET CARRIED OVER. SO IF THE CITY WANTS MONEY TO GO TO A PROJECT THAT'S JOINT WITH CALM FIRE, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE AN ACTION THAT THE MAKES. IT WASN'T A CIP PROJECT. SO THAT MONEY IS NOT BEING CARRIED OVER FROM FISCAL YEAR TO FISCAL YEAR. WE DIDN'T USE IT. AT SOME POINT IT SHOWED UP AS UNSPENT FUNDS LATER IN THAT YEAR AND WAS USED FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THAT YEAR, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE. UNDER THE STIPULATION THAT COMFIRE WAS GOING TO, MEASURE X WAS GOING TO PAY FOR IT. AT THAT TIME MEASURE X NEVER COMMITTED.

BUT THEY DID AND THEY STILL HAVE THE BUDGET. They committed 80,000 or something.

They committed when and if the property owners agreed to it.

That's why they're still working on it.

The property owners did not agree to that arrangement during the 23 fiscal year.

Right, but they kept the money and they kept working on the agreement and they just received the agreement.

Measure X funding can be carried over in different cycles. The money that was set aside for this project was not CIP money. It was from the general fund that year.

But the city manager just said it would carry over.

RESPECTFULLY, I ASKED THE CHIEF TO COME SPEAK TO THIS BECAUSE ON THEIR SPECIFIC LINE ITEMS, I DEFER TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS BECAUSE THEY MAKE THEIR RESPECTIVE BUDGETS, RIGHT?