City Council - Regular Meeting

. . . Thank you. Thank you. . . . Thank you. It is now five.

IT IS NOW 5 O'CLOCK, TIME TO START THE SPECIAL OPEN SESSION TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS BEFORE CLOSED SESSION. MAY WE HAVE ROLL CALL?

COUNCILMEMBER BANA? POSITIVE. COUNCILMEMBER BROWN?

HERE.

COUNCILMEMBER JIMENEZ?

PRESENTE.

COUNCILMEMBER WILSON?

HERE.

VICE MAYOR ROBINSON?

HERE.

AND MAYOR MARTINEZ?

HERE.

FOR THE RECORD, COUNCIL MEMBER ZAPATA IS ABSENT FOR ROLL CALL. DURING CLOSED SESSION, COUNCIL WILL DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEM C1, CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION, CARL V. CITY OF RICHMOND, CONTRACASTA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NUMBER C24-03531. ITEM C2, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR. PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT MIRROR FLOOR, SOUTH 45th STREET. AGENCY NEGOTIATORS, LENA VELASCO AND NANETTE BEACHAM. NEGOTIATING PARTIES, ACQUIRE HOLDING LLC UNDER NEGOTIATION PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. ITEM C3, CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. agency representatives Sharon Taylor, Jack Hughes, and Lisa Charbonnet, employee organizations, SEIU Local 1021 Full-Time and Part-Time Unit, IFPTE Local 21 Mid-Level Management, and executive management units. Richmond Police Officers Association, Richmond Police Management Association, IAFF Local 188, and Richmond Fire Management Association. For the record, Council Members Zepeda is present. We have one request to address the Council. Cordell Hendler, you'll have two minutes.

So, good evening, Mayor Martinez, Council. For the record, Cordell Hendler and I'm speaking to you all about the unions. Once again, this is the time for the unions and the city to come together and figure out ways of more payment because they have worked tirelessly to make Richmond a place to work and play. So when you go back in there, think about what I was saying. That's it.

Thank you. There are no requests. Are there any requests to address the council from attendees online? Okay. No other speakers?

If there are no other speakers, then public comment before closed session is closed and we will adjourn to closed session.

Thank you. Thank you. so so . . Thank you. We'll be right back. you Thank you. . . you Thank you. Thank you. So, . . . . . Thank you. ... ... Thank you. Thank you. Bye. So, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you. Oh, my God. We'll be right back. It is now 6.13.

It is now 16, 13, 13 minutes after the starting time, and we will begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll call, please.

Councilmember Bonner. I'm here councilmember Brown here Councilmember Jimenez present a council members of Peter Here councilmember Wilson here Vice mayor Robinson here and mayor Martinez here Our next item is statement of conflict of interest are there any I? Hearing none, our next item is agenda review. I have a few announcements. Item 07A, that's a contract with Contra Costa County's Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement for Homeless Outreach Services has been withdrawn by request of staff. Item M2, That item is a proclamation honoring Richmond's sole founder, volunteer coaches, student athletes, and families. That's been continued to September 28th. Item P1, that's the first public hearing. And that item has been continued to July 21st. And that's the ordinance modifying chapter 12.19 of the Richmond Municipal Code entitled On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems. THAT'S ALL THE ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT I HAVE.

MR. MAYOR, MAY I ASK ITEM Q7 TO BE MOVED INTO CONSENT CALENDAR? IT WAS IN THE CONSENT CALENDAR BEFORE, BUT THE DIRECTION TO THE STAFF WAS NOT SPELLED OUT BECAUSE THE DIRECTION IS CLEAR NOW AND THE ATTORNEY, DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING?

I MEAN, I THINK AS LONG AS, I MEAN, I MET WITH COUNCILMEMBER BONNA TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE ITEM. I'M CLEAR ON THE DIRECTION, AT LEAST FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND I THINK I DEFER TO THE CITY MANAGER ON WHETHER HER TEAM IS CLEAR ON THE DIRECTION, BUT I'M FINE IF IT GOES ON TO CONSENT. I mean, meaning I understand the direction from at least our office.

Right. But I think there's issues that need to be discussed. And if it were put on consent, it would be pulled.

Okay.

Interesting.

So I'm requesting that item Q8 is moved up due to time sensitivity. Tonight it would allow the city attorney to know whether or not they would be able to prepare the ordinance and ballot materials for the council's consideration. And so this would need to happen, the council's consideration would need to happen before our last meeting before the recess and the City Attorney's Office would need time to prepare those items for Council's consideration.

I'm not going to allow that. It will have to go to vote.

I'll make a motion to move that up.

I'll second. Q8.

So a motion and a second to move Q8, Richmond Government Accountability Transparency and Ethics Act, Richmond Gate Act, placing a ballot initiative on the November 2026 ballot to adopt an ordinance that establishes an independent ethics commission. Can we have a roll call?

Council Member Brown? Yes. Council Member Vanna?

I'm sorry? Oh, yes.

Council Member Jimenez? No. Council Member Wilson? No. Vice Mayor Robinson?

No.

Council Member Zepeda?

Yes.

And Mayor Martinez?

No.

The motion fills with Council Member Brown and Bonner and Zepeda voting yes. All right. Are there any other items under agenda review?

Could you repeat which ones were taken out of consent calendar, please?

Okay, item 07A, that's a contract with Contra Costa County Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement for Homeless Outreach Services that's been withdrawn from the agenda. And that's the only one from consent. The other items that were moved around item M two, that is one of the proclamations. It's been continued to September 28th. Then we have one of the public hearings item P one continue to July 21st. Next item. So we have this emergency item. No, no.

I'm sorry.

M two.

M2 was moved.

Thank you.

Move to September 28th. Okay. Our next item is a report from the city attorney of final decisions made during closed session.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. During closed session, no final decisions were made during closed session.

Our next item is a report from the city manager. This includes a new employee report.

KCRT, can you please put up the PowerPoint presentation? Good evening, Mayor Martinez and members of the Richmond City Council, Shassa Krill, Richmond City Manager. As a reminder, all of these items can be found in the weekly report or by calling the City Manager's Office at 510-620-6512. Next slide. Well, everyone in the Bay Area knows that 3rd of July in Richmond is the best fireworks show. So hopefully many of you came out to Marina Bay Park for the annual 3rd of July fireworks showcase. There was live music, delicious food, and family-friendly activities. I would like to thank all of the city staff that were involved. There were staff from many departments, volunteers, vendors, performance, and in addition would like to thank our public safety staff. That was extremely busy over the weekend with a variety of matters. I didn't put them in for the weekly report, but they were quite busy to say the least. We look forward to celebrating again next year and hope everyone had a wonderful time. Next slide. This afternoon, Port staff, in addition to the Mayor and many Council members, hosted a convening and received acknowledgment related to a recently awarded $11.2 million Federal Port Infrastructure Development Program grant. This award will support critical improvements to Burst 7 as the City has already applied for additional funding to continue this momentum. City staff remain committed to expanding Richmond's economic potential and strengthening safety and operations around our port to continue to create jobs and opportunities for the Richmond community and broader Bay Area. I would also like to extend my personal GRATITUDE TO CONGRESSMAN GARRETT MINDY AND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONTINUED ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT OF THE PORT OF RICHMOND AND IN PARTICULAR I WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE OUR PORT DIRECTOR CHARLES GERRARD AND OUR DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NANETTE BEACHAM AND SENIOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Lizette and management analyst Kyle they all have been doing a really amazing job Working with the port over the last couple years, and I think today really felt like we have reached a key milestone want to acknowledge Mayor Martinez as well when we worked with Bloomberg through through the Harvard connection that was an opportunity for us to really get organized around the port and And the good work is starting to pay off and come to fruition by receiving these federal dollars. So thank you to everyone involved and we'll continue revitalizing our port. Next slide. On Saturday, please come out to Shields Reed. You may be able to see me with my fractured foot on the zip line. I don't know. I'll see what the doctor says. Along with Chief Simmons because we had a good time before I was injured taking a test run. This Saturday from 11 a.m. to noon, Shields Reed Park is going to be opening. I, IN PARTICULAR, WANT TO THANK EVERYONE THAT'S BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT. JANAE WAS ONE OF THE EARLY STAFF THAT WORKED ON THIS AND THEN MOST RECENTLY DARCY AND OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN GEARING UP AND TAKING CARE OF CLOSING OUT THE PARK. And I'd also like to acknowledge Darren and all of the operations and maintenance staff that have joined the Shasta Curl Richmond City Manager Edition of HGTV by fixing up and sprucing up the community center inside. So when you come to the grand opening, you're going to see a great new Shields Reed Park, but you're also going to see a refreshed community center. with beautiful public art and on the exterior so thanks to economic development arts and culture staff for that you're going to see a new weight room you're going to see painting and it's really going to look extremely beautiful so we appreciate all of the staff that have worked to bring this project forward there was a little activity in the area for fourth of july but I'm hearing that overall it wasn't too bad, so I think the soccer fields are still in good shape. If you have any questions regarding this event on Saturday, please call 510-620-6793. And this park is absolutely beautiful. I'm not supposed to have favorite parks, but right now this one is definitely taking the lead. Next slide. And from 12 to 5 at Shields Reed, it'll be the North and Greater Richmond Blues Foundation North Richmond Music Festival. And so you can see the new stage that's at Shields Reed that will serve as where the artists can perform. There's going to be a lineup of live performances from local and regional artists featuring Sounds of Blues, R&B, and soul along with special cultural performances. There will also be free lunch while supplies last. I would like to thank the North and Greater Richmond Blues Foundation for all of their work organizing this community tradition. Next slide. I just passed out the fire infrastructure and facilities community survey. This is what it looks like. It was distributed and it's available in both English and Spanish. So council members, you should have one. Hopefully it's made its way down to you at the dais. The survey is currently available and it closes on July 17th. We are looking to provide and receive input on emergency response services because these are essential to the safety and wellbeing of Richmond residents. And we'd like community feedback as part of our planning effort for the future. Some of the city's fire stations equipment and emergency response infrastructure are aging and in need of repair, renovation, or replacement. In fact, some fire stations were built approximately 80 years ago and are beyond their useful life. The City Council is currently exploring options to address these needs, including a potential bond measure to support fire stations and emergency response infrastructure improvements. No final decisions have been made and the city is seeking input from residents before moving forward. Please take a few minutes to complete the emergency response services community survey by scanning the QR code on the screen. Again, the survey closes on Friday, July 17th at 8 p.m. For additional questions, please email richmondlistens at richmondca.gov. We want to hear from you. Thank you very much. And with that, I'll turn it over to Director Taylor to provide our new employee report.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council Members. Sharon Taylor, Human Resources Director. I'm pleased to share with you May's hires. KCRT, please bring up the slides. Excuse me, June hires. Next slide. Karen Ruff, Communications Dispatcher 1. Allison Gonzalez, tree trimmer, public works. Manoa Muniz, police officer trainee. Amitesh Kumar, police officer trainee. Jonathan Garcia, recreation program aide. Diego Alejandre, recreation program aide. Mercedes Sanchez, recreation program leader. Micah Beard, maintenance aide two. Yalisa Cintron, Senior Lifeguard, Community Services. John Huey, Lifeguard. Kashika McDowell, Recreation Program Specialist. Augustine Monroy, Recreation Program Leader. Martin Cortez, Lifeguard. Dayanara Gomez-Alvarado, Recreation Program Aid. Jasmine Perkins, Recreation Program Aide. Lucero Quiroz Tovar, Maintenance Aide II. Salma Reyes, Recreation Program Aide. Mahogany Lee, Recreation Program Leader. Rocio Hernandez de Roman, Maintenance Aide II. Reed Rakowski, Recreation Program Aide. Leonardo Ramirez, Recreation Program Leader. Enzo Vargas, Recreation Program Aid. Brian Garcia, Maintenance Aid II. Natalia Alvarado, Recreation Program Leader. Eli Beisser, Administrative Student Intern, Community Development. Kelly Towers, Recreation Program Aid, Community Services. Zaniyah Warfield, Recreation Program Aid. And thank you. We welcome all of our new employees and happy to see that we're staffing up our recreation department for the summer. Thank you. Thank you, Sharon. Great job.

Our next item is under commendations, presentations, and proclamations. Item M1 is a proclamation honoring the Richmond Emergency Communications Volunteers for their leadership and service celebrating the installation of the City Hall emergency antenna and declaring April 30th, 2026 as Richmond Emergency Communications Volunteer Day. If there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time.

You've been out for so long, you should have seen it.

Hello, everyone. Welcome, MCOM team. Thank you so much. Before we get it started on the proclamation, I just wanted to show, okay, let's take a group picture first. Get it out of the way. Come on.

Hi. Hi, everyone.

I said the story. It's not going to happen.

I was going to be hiding it.

Oh, okay. Yes. Yes. Sideways, not all the way sideways, so we can get closer to each other.

Yes, thank you. Hold on, hold on. Hold on, let me get this other hand. Sorry, so they're ruining the picture.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it. So I just wanted to show my ham radio. I took the class, and the team actually helped me. Do you want to show it?

I cannot hold both.

The ham radio, and gave me the instruction manual on how to operate it. So they make it very easy for you if you want to become a ham operator. I just wanted to introduce the team and tell you what they do before we read the proclamation. So in case of a public emergency, if there is an earthquake, your cell phones are not going to work. If you need 911, what are you going to do? You're going to find the neighbor in your area that has one of these. Tell them you need help from emergency responders. These people have set up an antenna on top of the other building, 450 Civic Center Plaza. They can communicate with other ham operators there, and they have presence. in the room where the 911 dispatchers are. That's how they tell fire and police that you need help. So they are not only skilled, not only committed, but proactively dedicated. to you and the community without you even knowing that you may need their help. They're here for you. So I really appreciate the work. Ever since I came to the council for the past four years, they've been saying, we need an antenna. And guess what? Finally, after four years, that antenna has been installed. And maybe David can tell you later about it. But let's go to the proclamation first. Do you want to start? Sure.

The City of Richmond proclamation honoring the leadership service and the installation of the City Hall emergency antenna for Richmond emergency communication volunteers. Whereas the City of Richmond sits atop the Hayward Fault and facing significant risk from a major earthquake with potential for consequential damage, injury, and heightened wildfire threats and... Want to read more? Whereas the Office of Emergency Services recognizes that professional first responders will be overwhelmed in a large-scale disaster and requires trained volunteer resources to augment response and recovery. And whereas reliable rapid communication is essential during and after a major disaster to report incidents, coordinate response, and protect lives and property.

And whereas Collectively, a team of citizen radio operators led by Davis Swanson advocated for an antenna at City Hall to enable rapid emergency communications between Richmond neighborhoods and the Richmond Emergency Operations Center. And whereas the recent installation of the antenna atop City Hall and the placement of a portable radio station at City Hall basement is a culmination of the sustained advocacy training and coordination efforts. And whereas, after a major earthquake, the antenna and EOC radio station will enable rapid reporting of neighborhood emergencies such as fires, freeway and road blockages, downed buildings, life-threatening injuries, and other incidents requiring first responders' support.

Whereas for many years, these citizen radio operators have built a network of organized auxiliary communicators leading radio communication practice sessions, exercises, and drills in Richmond and with other jurisdictions in Contra Costa County, as well as statewide to maintain readiness and interoperability. And whereas they have practices every week and every month and then annual practices. They can't tell you about it. Whereas these community leaders are active in clubs and organizations, including the Contra Costa County Communications Club, 4Cs, Coroaco, Kensington, El Cerrito, the East Bay Amateur Radio Club, EBARC, and others providing training, mentorship, and leadership to neighbors, CERT participants, and local jurisdictions, and whereas the city acknowledges and celebrates the operational testing of the city hall antenna and EOC radio station during the Beacon Coastal Exercise Building Emergency Radio sorry, Building Emergency Area Communications Operations and Networks, held on Saturday, April 30, 2026, and it was a major operation along the West Coast. Yeah. Whereas the city council wishes to recognize the extraordinary voluntary service, leadership, and public-spirited dedication of individual Richmond radio operators who have contributed in unique and sustained ways. And when we go through names, if you're here, please raise your hand. David Swanson from East Richmond. Thank you, David. For the past 20 years, David has focused on establishing a communications structure between neighborhood incident command posts and the Richmond EOC. Since 2018, he has hosted monthly tests of emergency radios at the Richmond Police Department Communications Center, teaches radio classes for the CERT Academy, and led the advocacy for the City Hall antenna. He helped me with my ham radio. Sia Horowitz from Carriage Hills, following wildfire relief. Thank you. Following wildfire-related PSPS outages in 2020, Sia became a vital radio operator and leader. She hosts six to 10 radio nets each month, facilitates the first Thursday tests from the temporary OC, organized biweekly neighborhood radio drills in Carriage Hills and Castro Heights, and mentors neighbors in GMRS systems. Rob Johnson from El Sobrante. He's not here. Recognizing communication challenges across Wildcat Ridge, Rob started the first Saturday 9-4-8-0-3 emergency preparedness GMRS net. He actively participates in simulated emergency tests and provides critical training to neighbors on GMRS message protocols to strengthen the El Sobrante Valley network. Chris Hardwood, who is my neighbor in El Sobrante Hills, not here. Chris assists Contra Costa County income nets as periodic HF and VHF net control. He has been instrumental in improving the Richmond EOC community radio station, implementing Windlink, and ensuring El Sobrante remains connected with the stations west of the Berkeley Hills. Dave Roth from Point Richmond. Couldn't be here. An original member of the Antenna Advocacy Group, David's a vetted Richmond Police Department operator for the EOC Auxiliary Radios. He co-led radio emergency training classes at Richmond Senior Center and focuses on the vital task of differentiating what neighborhood incidents require EOC reporting. David Neisuller, am I saying it right? Hey, from North and East, thank you. An original advocate for the City Hall antenna and a vetted EOC operator, David has participated in Richmond's CERT since 2015. As logistics officer, he manages the security of the neighborhood equipment cache in the Burke Park container, which serves as the CERT ICP for the North and East neighborhood. Alvin Todd from North and East, not here. A vetted operator for the UOC emergency radios, Alvin is highly skilled in digital radio communications. He has successfully run the Bay Shores Emergency First Saturday Search Radio Net for many years, bridging communications for radio operators throughout the 94803 area. Kevin Mullally from East Richmond Heights. A vetted EOC radio operator, Kevin serves as a scribe during EOC radio tests and drills. He volunteers for traffic control during local evacuation drills and supports CERT fire training at the Richmond Fire Training Center, bringing vital wildfire danger awareness to his efforts. Diane Ertwine from East Richmond.

Hey!

An original antenna advocacy group member, Diane has authored instructional materials and serves as net control operator for various radio nets. She creates and leads exercises for the East Richmond Ready to React group and successfully integrates search graduates with their local neighborhood teams.

So now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Mayor Eduardo Martinez, hereby formally recognize and commend these Richmond Emergency Communications volunteers for their leadership, skill, and sustained commitment to public safety and disaster resilience. And hereby declare April 30, 2026, as Richmond Emergency Communications Volunteer Day in the city of Richmond. Thank you for all the work you've done.

Thank you, everyone. I hope you can hear me here now. I want to ask more people to think about volunteering to help out with this Richmond City. That's what we all do. It's all volunteer work. We've been doing this for years on our own and at our own expense. But we're trying to get more people involved, especially in neighborhoods. When Sohaila mentioned the incident command post, your neighborhood should have a meeting place called a command post so you can get a ham radio in your neighborhood and you can communicate with the emergency services after the earthquake. We've been doing this for a long time, and we organized that well. Thank you. And also our thanks to Mayor Martinez for helping us get the antenna on City Hall so that we can have communications at the Emergency Operations Center, finally. From now on, the more people that get involved, and if you have any interest in becoming a ham radio operator, let me know, because there are classes that you can do. You don't have to take a test, but you can do it all in one day. And it's a lifetime license. So let me know if anyone needs any more help with anything. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you, everyone. Really appreciate it. Thank you so much for coming tonight.

No speakers. THERE ARE NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.

MAYOR, IF I MAY THROUGH YOU AS THE CHAIR, RESPECTFULLY I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE OUR I.T. DIRECTOR SUE HARTMAN AND FIRE CHIEF OSARIO FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT AND THEIR RESPECTIVE COLLEAGUES ON THEIR TEAM. THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT ITEM IS OPEN FORUM. The open forum is an opportunity to address the council on items that remain on the consent calendar or items that are not on the agenda. Tonight we have one item that was withdrawn from the consent calendar and that was item 07A, contract with Contra Costa County, coordinated outreach referral and engagement for homeless outreach services. That item was withdrawn from the agenda. If there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council, Under open forum, please raise your hand at this time so that we may get a full count of all the speakers. During open forum, dialogue between the council and the speaker is prohibited. When your name is called and you are an online speaker, please be ready to unmute yourself and begin speaking. For speakers in the chambers, when your name is called, please come forward and line up behind the speaker podium closest to the wall. And for safety reasons, all the aisles including the area behind the speaker's podium and staff presentation area must remain clear. All speakers should state their name and your city of residence is optional. Please terminate your address to the council when your time expires. Okay, I see a total of two hands on line and we have 22 speakers in person. So each speaker will be allowed up to a minute and a half to address the council. The city of Richmond welcomes your comments and requests that you present your remarks in a respectful and appropriate manner within established time limit. First 10 speakers, Cordell Hendler. Mike Villa-Giante, Gabriel Solomon, Frank Gaskin, Kimberly Graves, Don Gosney, Josh Enejar, Ed Henderson, Travis Keaton, Joaquin Antonio. Please come forward. Cordell Henley.

Yeah. So good evening, Mayor Martinez, council. For the record, I am Cordell Henley, and I have two things to say. So coming up, I'm putting that as a future agenda request, is to invite Caitlin Sly to come and present to us on food insecurities. Because if you notice that there are that prices of food is getting higher by the minute. And so I'm thinking to myself, we need to have Caitlin Sly to come and present to us on how we can encourage, you know, food insecurities. Because when I was at the Mayor's Conference in February, her presentation was very helpful, so I was thinking that we can have her come in September to give us more detail. That's one. Number two is you passed the budget, so now we need to fill these positions. Why? These positions have been vacant for quite some time, especially in finance. There has not been a contract compliance admin in three years. And so I'm thinking to myself, we need these positions filled as soon as possible because we know we have money somewhere, but we need to fill the positions, especially And finance. And then the other thing is one of the things that I have noticed in the women in the workplace report, they get less support because they need more staffing. So I'm trying to, I'm advocating to add more positions. I'm not giving up without a fight. So we need positions and we need positions N-O-W right now.

Mike Villagiante.

I have two people yielding their time to me, Mr. Chairman and Council. Frank Gaskin and Gina Villagiani are going to yield their time to me. You don't do that?

I'm sorry, we do not yield time.

Okay, then I'll speak quicker. All right. I am the president, Mike Villagiani, of Local 10, the ILWU in the Bay Area. We have very much a concern on what's taking place. CNH Sugar is on strike. They're warehouse men, and we are honoring their pickets, so they shifted their ship over here to Richmond at Levine. Levine is unloading raw sugar to the dock, to the ground, and it is... They are... messing around with collective bargaining. They are interfering with collective bargaining. The ability to bargain with our employer and The C&H sugar factory people are not honoring it, but the warehouse men are just asking to keep what they have. They're doing some things that are violating the California EPA. It is putting the sugar on the ground, raw sugar. It's a violation of peanut code 3743. And it is explosive material if you don't know that. A sugar will explode. It's a raw material and it's dust being mixed with coal, being mixed with petroleum fluids that are on the ground. It is a violation and we're asking the council to stop that behavior. It is not acceptable to interfere with collective bargaining in the unions that are trying to just make ends meet. And that's all the warehouse men are doing right now. And Local 10 is enforcing and endorsing them. And we will raise some havoc to this operation all the way until that sugar tries to get to C&H. So thank you very much, council persons.

Gabriel Solomon.

What's that?

Hello, council members. Make this real quick. This is going to get right to the point. My president said what's going on. Gave us something, 9319, business agent for Local 10. Now, we would like to discuss the penalties that be levied against them. And I looked at it. EPA can come out and levy $74,000 a day for hazardous waste. This has turned to hazardous waste, as my president said. regarding the storage of sugar, because storing the raw sugar on the ground near coal transporting causes severe problems. Coal dust settles on the exposed sugar, rendering it inedible and unsellable. They can't sell the sugar, but they're going to sell it anyway, unless you guys get the EPA out there today or tomorrow to take raw samples of that sugar that's in there right now. Also, raw sugar is rich in energy and will rapidly draw a horde of insects and rodents. That means that when they sell it again, they're going to be for store use. They got rodents and they got the little feces that rodents do inside the sugar. You can't weed that out. So you need the EPA out there. soon as possible. And he also said about both raw sugar and coal exist as combustible dust. That means it goes to the air in this environment. Richmond already is fighting that coal system because America came out there and he talked about you guys fighting to get coal out of Richmond. Now when you got coal and sugar mixed in together and in the atmosphere in this environment, the community right here, then people are going to get sick. So we have to stop it right now by getting EPA out there and finding them daily. That's the only way they can listen. I see my time. Thank you.

Frank Gaskin.

Yes. Hello. My name is Frank Gaskin. My president brother, Michael Villajanes, speaks for Local 10. So I want him to speak for my behalf and the union of Local 10. Thank you.

So if you don't also know, the Filipino community is protesting.

I'm sorry, this is the same.

Out of order? Yes, it's the same as seating time. All right, that's no problem. I was just trying to speak for brother. He doesn't speak well in public. I understand.

Well, have him come up.

Come on.

You know, sometimes, I want to say sometimes... This is the first time I've ever been at a city council meeting that I couldn't give my time to someone else. That's bullshit. I don't care. That's bullshit. We were out there yesterday, a bunch of members from the Filipino community were out there speaking about Negroes in the Philippines, how people are dying over the sugar, it's blood sugar. murdered, it's wrong. And we're bringing it out here in the city of Richmond is allowing this shit to happen. Food product on a contaminated terminal. And they call the cops on us for just making our signs, walking them down and saying we're doing something wrong. All we're doing is making people know what's going on. Information will pick it out there, and they want to call the police on us. But we're here now to speak so everyone can hear what's going on. And it's getting old. It's bullshit. I wish you guys do something for us for the food that you eat. It's bad and we need your help. Thank you.

I wanted to say that sometimes the weakest voice is the strongest voice. So thank you for taking the time.

Our next speaker is Kimberly Graves, followed by Don Gosling.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I intend to continue advocating for the City of Richmond to equip all patrol vehicles with dash cams. This is a matter of transparency, accountability, and public trust. Objective video evidence protects the public, protects officers, and helps ensure that disputed encounters are resolved based on facts rather than conflicting testimony. That concern became personal for me after my alleged speeding citation before my June 26th hearing. I requested through the city attorney the training records for the officer who alleged I was speeding, specifically regarding the officer's pacing training. At the hearing before the Commissioner, I was not permitted to decline to stipulate before the proceedings continued, and I was not afforded the opportunity to fully present my position. Following that meeting, I sent a letter dated June 24th to the City Council City Manager and City Attorney requesting a response regarding the administration of public comment. During that meeting, I requested that my speaking time be stopped because the mayor and Zepeda engaged in an extended conversation in Spanish with another speaker. That speaker, after their allotted time had expired. My concern was never the language spoken. My concern is that the rules governing public comment should be applied equally to everyone. As of July 7th, I have not heard a response to that letter. I am also concerned that the city resources... No problem. Thank you.

Don Gosney.

Good evening. You know, if I've said it once, I've said it a gazillion times. That's a whole lot. And I'm going to repeat it here because it's just as true now as it has always been. As a community leader, how can you claim to speak for the people when you rarely speak with the people? At recent meetings, our clerk has been following the directive of this council to implement your policy that severely limits the right and ability of the public to speak with those that were elected to represent us. And whether you believe this or not, just because you were elected by the good people of a particular district, you were actually elected to represent each and every one of us. You've been silencing the very public you're supposed to be listening to, and we, the public, are not happy with how you are representing us. You're limiting our ability to speak at these council meetings. We've expressed our displeasure with you, but every single one of you has refused to speak with us about this. Why? You have policies put forth on the agenda packet that do not match your established policies in your policy handbook. You have the ability to work with the people you represent to establish a workable policy that will meet your needs as well as ours. So why do you stonewall us? We refuse to be silenced by autocratic despots. Since we're talking about policies, I thought you had a policy that public proclamations would come at the end of the month, the fourth meeting of the month, and that they would be limited to five minutes. What is that? Policies apply to us, but they don't apply to you people? You're insulting us here because you're going to defer more items off the agenda because we ran out of time tonight.

Josh Aniger, followed by Ed Henderson.

Mayor, council members, hello. My name is Josh Aniger. I'm the executive director of the Contra Costa Labor Council, a federation of 92 unions in Contra Costa County. Right now, in Crockett, I know I'm in Richmond, but in Crockett, ILWU is on strike. They're on strike because the company decided that they don't want to pay for retiree health care and medical, that they want to get rid of seniority and continue to take take-backs from collective bargaining. They're not bargaining in good faith, and so the union went out to demand justice for themselves. Why am I here in Richmond talking about Crockett? Because the CNA Sugar has decided to move the sugar from their port to your port. And as the brother talked about, we have open sugar sitting next to coal, sitting next to petroleum. This is insane. And I feel that justice needs to be done for these workers. We need to make sure that this doesn't ever happen again, where this system, I understand it's a private terminal, but this is on land that is union busting something in Crockett. This is unacceptable. And the Labor Council stands in full solidarity with the IOWU to make sure that the workers there get justice and get everything they want in collective bargaining. And also, we hear the stories from the Filipinos community about what is happening there, murdering people, trying to bring any form of justice, any form of economic sustainability for people there, and have faced murder and violence. It's beyond me. We have better ethics here. We have better morals here. We need to stand with workers and make sure that every worker is kept whole, that they have health care, that they have benefits. Thank you.

Ed Henderson, followed by Travis Keaton.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Ed Henderson, Secretary-Treasurer for IOWU Local 10 in San Francisco, California. I'm here on the subject of regards to the CNA Sugar and the Port of Richmond at Levine terminals. I want to put on record that our president, Donald Trump, we already know that he's a bum, but he has created such a wide... disarray on unions, the tariffs, raising cargo. But the problem is we had in the country of the Philippines, we had Individuals killed, murdered in the field. The vessel that bringing the cargo over here to Point Richmond that should have been in CNH has blood on it. It's a lot of contamination. As you already heard from petroleum, from leaking equipment, tires rubbing through the sugar that's on the ground. They're pushing it through with the payloader. and push it up in a hopper. It should never touch the ground. It should go directly from the vessel into a hopper, into the warehouse. Also like to include in this that Not only does this attack our jurisdiction, 26 years of the longshoremen, I've done maybe tons of man hours over at Crockett driving the whirly cranes on the ship or payloaders. And this is a disgrace. And you guys need to cease and desist this operation out at Port Richmond because all they do is follow the conglomerates of Trump. Thank you.

Travis Keaton. You may be wrong, too.

Hello. My name is Travis Keaton. I come from Richmond. Specifically, I come from down on Potrero. And I just want to say two things, but I might not get to the second one. We are very, very in the full of summer and we came through spring. And I don't know if you know, but the way that birds work, usually where you find a big finch population, you find other species of birds. So the whole, you know, birds and the bees concept. So I just wanted to say that I think that it's very nice that we are a very nature eco-friendly kind of city, but I think we should... give a little more care to the fact that we do get birds in the spring, and we do get birds in the summer, and they do leave roughly for the fall, and they come back. So that was the first thing. And then the second thing, I had came before, and I was talking real mad about the streets, because I do skateboard and whatnot. Not as bad as I thought they were. Turns out I needed softer wheels. Turns out I'm rolling around on skate park wheels, and that's real hard, which would explain why I was real chattery every time I went down the street, so it's not as bad as I thought.

I still say McDonald's is garbage though.

I did like Nevin. Barrett is not that bad. Carlson, eh, it gets good when you get to El Cerrito. I haven't tried 23rd yet, so I'll come back on that one. Thank you.

The next speaker is Joaquin Antonio. Followed by the next 10 speakers, Callie LaMora, Latonya Morris, JR Singson, Claudia Citron, Garland Ellis, David Ward, Samantha Torres, Stan Scott, Dean Song, and Mark Wasberg.

Joaquin. Hello, my name is Joaquin Antonio. I'm a member of the Filipino community and the Defend Negros NorCal Coalition. We stand in solidarity with the ILWU Local 6 and Local 10 workers who are picketing for better benefits in Crockett and the CNA refinery and for the rights for collective bargaining down at the Levin's Terminal. On April 19th and 20th, 19 people were killed by the armed forces of the Philippines in Negros, the same locations where the sugar that is on the Thai Herald that is unloading in Levin's Terminal, where that sugar was cultivated from. This sugar has blood in it. And one of those 19 people that was murdered was Lyle Priholis, a Bay Area beloved activist that fought for Filipinos back here in the Bay Area and back home in the Philippines for over 20 years. We know that this city has a history of fighting for environmental and worker justice, and we want you to please halt the unloading of this sugar and stand with the ILWU and for our Cababayan, our Filipino community here in the Bay Area and back in the Philippines. We know that this sugar is actually an issue not only just for us, but for this whole nation. The CNH Refinery produces 15% of all cane sugar throughout the country and is in products that you can't even imagine that is in every single grocery store and even in the hospital system.

Your time has expired.

Thank you.

Callie L'Amour.

Hi, City Council. My name is Kaylee, and I'm also here with the Filipino community today. We're from across the Bay Area, and we're standing in solidarity with the striking C&H workers, specifically ILWU Local 6 and Local 10. I'm also here on behalf of the Defend Negros NorCal Coalition, which is a coalition of Filipino organizations, individuals, and solidarity organizations that formed because of the incident that Joaquin just mentioned where our friend Lyle Perjolas was murdered because he went back to the Philippines to learn about the conditions of peasant farm workers on the island of Negros. So for a little context, Negros is called the sugar bowl of the Philippines because it produces 90% of all sugar exported from the Philippines. And as Joaquin said, there's a shipment of sugar from Negros on the Thai Herald right now, which is docked in the Port of Richmond. In Negros, farmers and peasants face land grabbing by corporations that garner super profits off their exploitation. Peasants only make $3 to $5 a day for backbreaking labor. And here in the US, C&H, which supplies 15% of the US sugar supply, similarly extracts from workers in Crockett, who are on strike right now for a fair contract. So we see these issues of workers in Negros and Crockett as interlinked. So many of our members have been picketing with ILWU at six at CNH. And we really want to bring this to city council's attention because CNH is circumventing. Oh, well, thank you. Someone else will discuss.

J.R. Singson.

Good evening, City Council of Richmond. My name is JR Singston, and I'm a public health scientist, proud unionized scientist, and Filipino community organizer residing here in the East Bay, but also work here in Richmond. Today I'm here, as I've learned, as many of you have heard from the situation, with the striking warehouse workers of ILW Local 6, who work at the CNA Sugar at Crockett, bringing attention of their struggle with a situation happening right now at Levin Terminal. CNH, rather than coming back to the bargaining table, have decided to offload sugar at the terminal that is not designed to handle sugar at all. It handles coal, it handles petroleum, it handles hazardous goods. They have subverted ILW 10's honoring of ILW Local 6 strike and using non-unionized labor for this operation. CNH was also recently levied with fines last year as their plant violated the Bay Area Air Quality Management District standards, as well as Clean Water Act standards, totaling with fines over a million dollars. So these damages that are happening that have been relayed They're crucial for this city council to act, to be in solidarity with ILWB workers, to release a statement of support for these workers and honor the picket line. From Negros to Crockett, no blood in our sugar, justice for Lyle and justice for Negros 19.

Claudia Citroen, followed by Garland Ellis.

Wouldn't it be nice if this council would spend as much time on issues in the city like the fire department and EMS services than it does on unions from Crockett? Nothing against the unions. So I noticed this whole survey going on and I can see people are in support of EMS and fire, but they oppose new taxes. Now you guys have another tax out there for above and beyond park care in the marina and you had no problems with that one. There is a huge issue with transparency and accountability. There's another huge issue with your spending priorities. There's an even bigger issue with your infrastructure priorities. Nothing is being said about, I mean the fire department came so many times out and did phenomenal presentations None of your people dared or bothered to tell your Richmond site or your news outlets to actually do a report on it so that the audience, residents know about it. They don't understand that we have complete EMS services. They don't understand that if you have a stroke you don't get any care unless you are in urgent care and maybe someone takes care of you. But that is not your priority. You spend like an hour and a half on discussing whether there is an e-lending library, but you don't discuss whether you actually need safety issues for bike helmets and all of that. So I yield my time. Garland Ellis.

I'm Ames Garland-Nellis, mayor and council members. It seems unusual that we just finished the budget and there was no recommendations to give a lot of money to the fire department. You wait till the budget's passed, then you now come to the people and want to give them a survey saying, oh, we need money for infrastructure. Most cities will recognize that police and fire sewer, water, maybe roads are the most important infrastructure for any city, any place in the United States. But yet you keep giving money to other items and then after the budget's passed you go, oh well we need a bunch of money for the fire department. Surveys are good if you're wanting to get good information. But most politicians will admit a survey is for one reason only. They either want a donation They want more taxes. They don't really care about what you say because they already know what they want to do. They just want the money. Unfortunately, the city of Richmond has already taken a whole lot of money from everybody in this city. We have one of the highest tax rates in the state, and yet now you want to put off the most expensive items, infrastructure that are really important, and now figure out a way to tax us for more. or pass bonds. Bonds cost us extra money too, there's interest on them. This should have been handled all along. Time has expired. As the years have gone by.

David Ward followed by Samantha Torres. Samantha Torres.

David Ward not here.

Samantha Torres. She's coming. Followed by Stan Scott.

Oh, 90 seconds.

Good evening, mayor, council members, and staff. I hope you're enjoying the FIFA World Cup. It's inspiring a new generation to fall in love with the beautiful game. Youth sports should be accessible to every child regardless of gender, regardless of income. Yet the pay-to-play model continues to create barriers for Richmond families. Projects like the McDonald mini field project would help, but these temporary projects won't solve Richmond's biggest challenges, which is we don't have enough safe quality spaces for kids to play soccer. Richmond's 2010 parks master plan identified a need for one soccer field for every 3,000 residents. That means we're short more than 22 soccer fields. While most other sports are at or near equity standards, soccer remains drastically unserved. I am grateful for the progress we've made since the community came before you in 2023. Investments in Borman Park, Wendell Park, Shields Reed Park are meaningful steps forward, but they are stepping stones, not a destination. Richmond needs a long-term vision, a regional sports complex. Now, not one agency has to build it alone, but someone has to lead. And someone should unite the city, West Contra Costa Unified School District, Contra Costa County, the East Bay Regional Park District, nonprofits and private partners. For over 25 years, Richmond taxpayers have helped fund the Tom Bates Regional Sports Complex in Berkeley, while our own children struggle to find fields at home. Richmond's kids deserve facilities they can be proud of here in our city. Let's use the momentum of the World Cup to begin building that future.

Thank you. Thank you. Stan Scott.

Good evening mayor and city council members Stan Scott local 10 Iow Stewart council co-chair I'm going to read something from our Pacific Coast longshore contract document 2022 to 28 section 1.1 Within the state of California, Oregon, and Washington, all movement of cargo on vessels or loading and to discharging from vessels in any type and on dock to or from and from rail cars and barges and decks is covered in this contract document. All labor involved therein is assigned to longshoremen as set forth in Section 1. With them trying to move cargo from Crockett to Richmond is undermining wages, it's undermining pensions, and also safe working conditions. The reason we handle that in Crockett is because we do it in a safe manner, and it's been done for decades. So we need to stop what's going on right now that's taking place in Richmond. And at the end of the day, it's still our jurisdiction as well. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Dean Son, followed by Mark Wasberg.

Hello, my name is Dean, and I'm a member of the Solidarity Collective called the Defend Negros Coalition. I won't harp too much on the same points that some of my other members have shared, but I will say this. This violence overseas is inseparable from the exploitation of the workers that we're seeing here. We obviously know the Thai Herald, which is currently docked at the Port of Richmond, is carrying sugar cane from Negros. But I do want to highlight some of the responses from the workers on the picket line. One of these striking Local 6 workers, after learning of the conditions of farm workers in Negros, said, quote, The workers in the Philippines are the beginning of the exploitation. We at the processing plant are the end. Yesterday, a Local 10 worker on the picket line said, quote, But the sugar was already dirty before it came here to the dock because it came from blood spilled in the Philippines. The justice we want is an end to the long, bloody supply chain. The Defend Negros Coalition implores the city council to please stop unloading the sugar, support striking workers in ILWU Local 6 and 10. Thank you.

Mark Walsberg will be followed by Gina Villagiante.

In New York City, she praised 9-11, and she praised the attack on Israel two years ago. Then she wins the... primary to run for office. This is a democratic, socialist, communist, Muslim party that's sweeping America. Now it's going down to Los Angeles. Now it's going to Chicago. Then it's going to all the other democratic states, even in Richmond. Fox News did a story about you people being a democratic, socialist, communist party. Two documentaries was done by Fox News. Another reporter did a story on you. I told my friend, you need to go out and buy all the ammunition and weapons you can because we're going to be in a full-out revolution next year. And you wait until these people start running for office. It's going to start rioting. And we are going to win because we're going to get rid of you commies. out of office because you do not belong into our government. You do not belong when you're going to preach hate and violence against our country. And we know for a fact that Aguado, he went to, he went to, what was it, Detroit to preach hate and violence. He stood up for Hamas. And the city council goes, oh, just give him a chance. That's why you lost the election.

Gina Villagianti.

Good evening. My name is Gina Villagianti. I'm a longshore woman with ILWU Local 10. Local 10 are the Bay Area longshore workers. Local 6 are the warehouse workers. Those are some of the best union jobs in your community for the people that live here and the whole Bay Area. This council, I know, and Local 10 also knows, is not shy to doing the right thing. We are aware that you guys passed one of the first ceasefires for Palestine. We need you to do the right thing here again. Number one, there's been a murder in the Philippines. 19 people just for wanting better working conditions. That is the beginning of the exploitation. Then they are union busting both Local 10 and Local 6 here in your community. They're also possibly contaminating all the people that end up eating this sugar. So there are multiple reasons to stop this operation. So please don't be complacent on this issue and halt this operation immediately. Thank you.

Our last in-person speaker is Cesar Zepeda, and then we'll move to the two online speakers.

All right, good evening, council. I'm gonna stand up here in solidarity with our brothers and sisters that are here, letting us know of all the issues that's happening down at CNH. So thank you for coming out and letting us know. I was trying to bring an agenda item earlier as an emergency item, but we still need some more tweaking on it, which is why I didn't bring it forward all the way. So hopefully we can work together on something. And with Don Gosney, I want to agree with him. This council voted on rules that we don't always follow to the T. Today we did not have a real closed session. If anybody paid attention to the agenda, it was a special open session to hear public comment before closed session. That was going around the city council rules to start at 3.30. Instead, we started at 5. We're going around our own rules. It's our rules. If we don't like them, let's change them. But let's not go around each other just because we're able to. So let's work on the council rules and let's figure out a good time that we can start, that we should be starting. Let's make sure that we're working on all the other rules that are also on there. I know nobody likes the timing of the speakers and I have six seconds left, but that's also part of the council rules. We can change that. Let's change it if we need to. Thank you.

Let's call the online speakers.

And that speaker is Julie Freestone. Please unmute yourself and you may begin. Julie. Julie, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Thank you. I'm Julie Freestone. I'm a Richmond resident for 36 years. You may have seen me around July 4th on ABC News talking about illegal fireworks or read about me in Richmond side. I don't have to tell you what July 4th was like. You're here. It was loud, seemingly endless, frightening bangs, explosions. Some people say the lead up to July 4th was better, and I agree. Some people say that July 4th wasn't as bad as it has been. Maybe that's true. I wasn't in my backyard this year screaming, but I was in my bedroom cowering. And until that isn't my solution, we need to keep working on this problem. Meanwhile, I'm here to thank a number of people. First, to anyone who called the non-emergency police number to report the problem in their neighborhoods, you might think it was useless, but it does help pinpoint the worst problem and target the response. Thanks to the dozens of you who posted signs saying that fireworks are illegal in Richmond. Your lawn signs, window signs, and signs on poles help get the community know that we have zero tolerance for illegal fireworks. A huge thanks to Michelle Milam from the police department who has so many assignments that I don't know when she sleeps. She kept everyone's eye on the issue, ordered signs, put them out and did so much more. And if I had the rest of the two minutes, I would thank other people. But let's keep working on this issue together. There's a lot more work to be done and you can see it's dangerous. So that's it. Thank you.

Thank you. And that was our last speaker. Our second speaker, Hope Dixon, no longer has her hand raised.

We do have a Laura Navarro. Can you call Laura Navarro, please?

Good evening, everyone. I'm calling to urge you to respect the C and H workers who are currently striking for justice for exploitive conditions. Let's reject the shipment to Richmond. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next item is approval of the consent calendar. And for the record, item 07A, the contract with Contra Costa County's coordinated outreach, referral, and engagement for homeless outreach services will not be included in this vote. So we need a motion to approve the consent calendar.

I move to approve the consent calendar. I second it.

Councilmember Brown? Yes. Councilmember Bonner? Yes. Councilmember Jimenez? Yes. Councilmember Wilson? Yes. Councilmember Zepeda? Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson? Yes. Mayor Martinez?

Yes.

The vote is unanimous. Okay, our next item is under Public hearing pursuant to public notice this time to hold a public hearing to adopt a resolution, approving a report of sewer service charges for fiscal year 2026 27 alive for the sanitary and stormwater fees to be collected on the annual 2627 tax row. We have one speaker in person. There's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item. Please raise your hand at this time.

The,

Speakers will be allowed up to three minutes.

Mayor, if I may, through the chair. Mayor, through the chair. Pardon me, Madam Clerk. So in response to the comments that were made this evening, I've scheduled a call tomorrow morning at 830 with one of the participants, and I'll report back to the city council regarding next steps in coordination with community development staff.

Thank you.

You're welcome. Thank you.

Good evening Honorable Mayor Martinez and esteemed members of the City Council. My name is Tawfiq Halabi and before you this evening we have the annual public hearing for collection of sanitary and storm fees. The city has an enterprise fund for the wastewater treatment plant and sanitary sewer collection system and the storm collection system. And we collect the funds through taxes, through parcel taxes. So each year we prepare the tax rates for the Contra Costa County and we submit them to the county to be included on the tax rules. This year there are no changes. The last time we made changes to the tax rates was a couple of years ago for the fiscal year 24-25. So the current year, the rates will stay the same for single family homes, for multi-unit residential, and for commercial and industrial facilities. That concludes my statement. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Do we have any public speakers?

Yes, we have three public speakers, in-person speakers. And if there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time.

Yes. Open the public hearing. Okay. I'm opening the public hearing.

Okay, the speakers are Garland Ellis, Claudia Citrone, and Janet Flint. Please come forward. Garland?

I didn't actually sign up to speak on this issue. Q, this is Q2.

Hold on.

No, this is P. This is P.

We have one speaker Claudia Citroen All right this day needs to be marked in the calendar one of the staff members managed to Handle a budget without having to increase the budget. That is remarkable. Thank you Tafiq second thing I understand council is not supposed to have private conversations on the days and it's been happening all the time today. I expect that, I asked Shannon Moore to please monitor the council if they have private conversations since the council doesn't seem to be able to regulate itself. collection with the sanitary and storm fees, I have so many questions like how, do we also receive money really from the run-offs from San Pablo and from El Cerrito which goes into Richmond stone waters? How are the fees going with the civil grand jury reports you received regarding the storm water? run-offs into the bay. There has been no discussion on this either. I know this is not Tafik's issue, but this is related to it. The third thing is also Keller Beach and Point Richmond, there is so much, and when there's heavy storms, there's so much water just running off somewhere, not necessarily going to the sewers. What is the city actually doing about all that runoff that doesn't go into sewers. We have in our neighborhood a lot of businesses which are not listed. It's a residential neighborhood. Those trucks leak oil. There is nothing in place for that either. that runs off somewhere, it's not being measured, and I expect you to focus on this as well. Now again, this is traffic enforcement because they are the ones who hear loud trucks. There is a noise noise ordinance. If it's louder than 60 or 70 from a vehicle, It could get a ticket. There's a lot of trucks out there which have damaged engines, and it goes into stormwater drainage because those trucks leak oil. So this needs to be a part of the discussion. I'm so happy that all of this can be respected, and I know I bitch a lot and I complain a lot. It is remarkable that for one change, you do not raise the taxes, so I yield my time on the compliment.

That was our only speaker.

All right. If that was the last speaker, then I close the public hearing, and I'm open for clarification questions to staff. Are there any questions? Any comments? If not, Tafiq, I want to thank you for the work that you do, and I was looking over it, and just thank you. So with that, we'll move on to the next item. Since the... We need to... Oh, wait, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, we have to...

ADOPT RESOLUTION. YES.

OKAY. SO WE NEED A MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION.

I MAKE A MOTION.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON. And second by Mayor Martinez to adopt a resolution approving a report of sewer service charges for fiscal year 26-27, allowing for the sanitary and stormwater fees to be collected on the annual 26-27 tax row. Council Member Brown?

Yes.

Council Member Bonner? Yes. Council Member Jimenez? Yes. Council Member Wilson? Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson? Yes. Council Member Zepeda?

Yes.

And Mayor Martinez?

Yes.

The vote is unanimous. Okay. Moving on to new business. Item Q1 is to adopt a resolution in support of the community cleanup plan for the United Hackathon Superfund site developed by the Richmond Shoreline Alliance, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Sierra Club San Francisco Bay Chapter. And we do have... three speakers for this item. Anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time.

Yes, please.

So I'm going to invite the presenters up to the front while I introduce the item. As everyone here knows, Richmond is an environmental frontline community. So the effects of pollution are felt by the residents here first and worst. But we benefit from a strong ecosystem of organizations and individuals who are focused on reversing the damage that has been done by corporate polluters for many decades. In some cases, these grassroots organizations are the first and best source of information about what locations in Richmond are contaminated, the sources of that contamination, and previous attempts to clean those sites. So the final decision in the case we're going to be hearing about today, the United Heckathorn area, is the final decision about the cleanup rests with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA. But we do know that these environmental regulatory agencies do pay attention to what the community thinks and that we as elected leaders can influence them as well. So I hope my colleagues will listen carefully to this presentation and offer their support for the plan that's going to be presented. I also want to thank the members of the Richmond Shoreline Alliance and other allied organizations for bringing attention to this problem at United Hackathorn site and for working with community members to come up with what I think is the best plan for the site, which is a full cleanup. So I'll hand it over to Janet Johnson.

Thank you so much, Council Member Wilson. Good evening, Mayor, city council members, and staff. My name is Janet Johnson. I am coordinator of the Richmond Shoreline Alliance. Our mission is to connect Richmond residents, organizations, and allies dedicated to environmental justice in seeking an accessible, safe, and healthy Richmond shoreline now and for future generations. We've partnered with San Francisco Baykeeper and Sierra Club Bay Chapter to advocate for a complete cleanup of the United Heckathorn Superfund site. For some reason, I thought there was a slide presentation with us.

It's up now. Can you see that?

Oh, cool. I see. Yeah, thank you. No, right in front of me. Okay, may I see the next slide, please? So we're here to urge the city council to support the community cleanup plan. As we will show, Richmond has waited decades for a complete cleanup of dangerous pesticide pollution at the United Hackathorn site. Your support will send the unmistakable message that Richmond will not settle for anything less than a complete protective cleanup plan. This proposed community cleanup plan was essentially written by a number of experienced technical people from Sierra Club, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Richmond Shoreline Alliance, and finalized with considerable input from the community. Next slide, please. The United Heckathorn Superfund site sits on 20 acres along the Luritzen Channel off Richmond's Inner Harbor. 15 acres are underwater, five are above mean high tide line. It is located at 4th Street and Wright Avenue across Cutting Boulevard from the Santa Fe neighborhood, coincidentally the site of the Levin Richmond Terminal. Land use restrictions require that this area is limited to commercial use. Next slide, please. From the 1940s through the 1960s, the site was home to a group of companies collectively known as United Hecathorne, which formulated and packaged pesticides, most notably DDT and dieldrin. Their negligent operations severely contaminated the site. Next slide, please. The U.S. EPA classifies DDT and dieldrin, which were widely used in agriculture and malaria control, as probable human carcinogens. Both chemicals have been banned in the U.S. for decades, yet their legacy persists. When I refer to DDT, I include its breakdown product DDE. DDT and DDE are fat-soluble and not excreted from the body, so concentrations tend to increase throughout life. Exposure has been linked to liver cancer, premature birth, respiratory illness, and type 2 diabetes. In fish, birds, and other wildlife, these chemicals damage the nervous system, liver, and reproductive health. People are exposed by eating fish that having absorbed these contaminants migrate to nearby fishing sites. This puts Richmond residents who depend on local fishing for food at the greatest direct risk, making it a public health threat that demands urgent action. Next slide, please. Because the contamination was so severe, The United Hackathorn site was designated a federal superfund site in 1990, with the EPA taking the lead on regulation. In 1994, the EPA approved a cleanup plan that included capping contaminated soil on land and dredging some, but not all, of the contaminated sediment. However, this initial cleanup was inadequate. Sediment samples collected in 2013 and 2016 found DDT and dieldrin at concentrations up to 3,800 times higher than acceptable levels. The initial cleanup effort fell short for three key reasons. A flawed remediation plan, insufficient oversight and quality control, and minimal community involvement. Because of these failures, DDT and dieldrin have leached into the marine environment for three more decades. The first cleanup also failed to account for sea level and groundwater rise, a critical emission the new plan must correct. Climate change is expected to accelerate erosion of contaminated land areas, potentially spreading DDT and dieldrin further into San Francisco Bay. Any plan that leaves contaminated materials in place risks being undermined by rising seas and increased storm activity, raising the danger of yet another failed cleanup. Next slide, please. The US EPA is planning to formally propose another cleanup plan in late August this year. We want the EPA to approve a remedy that corresponds with what we think a complete cleanup should look like. This means, one, it has to aim for a complete, permanent cleanup, not a partial fix. Two, it has to account for climate change and sea level rise. Three, it has to recognize the environmental justice issue here. This community has carried a heavy environmental burden for generations. Next slide, please. The core strategy of our cleanup plan is to work in relatively dry conditions. This will be accomplished by building a temporary waterproof barrier across the mouth of the Lauritzen channel. This barrier, or caisson as shown here, will separate the Lauritzen channel from the Santa Fe channel. Water will be pumped out so crews won't have to work underwater. Equally important, this step avoids underwater dredging, which would disturb and spread contamination.

Next slide, please.

Next, all materials need to go, including all pile-supported structures and wharves, as well as stand-alone pilings. You can see an example here of this ancient infrastructure. Rock, debris, and riprap and underlying contaminated soil must also be excavated. Our plan recommends all structures and contaminated materials next to the channel's edge be removed, including contaminated buildings and capped soil and taken off site. Our plan also recommends excavating the sides of the channel until clean material is reached. The plan should also include locating and removing any pipes that could contain contamination and sampling cavities to ensure no contamination is left behind. Next slide, please. So here's a summary of what we recommend for a complete cleanup. Isolate and drain the channel, completely remove all materials, address seeps and groundwater, dispose of contaminated materials offsite, conduct rigorous post-cleanup monitoring, and protect workers. Our goal is a cleanup that attains contamination levels low enough to pose negligible risk.

Next slide, please.

It's important to note that federal law requires that responsible parties pay for the cleanup and that workers be compensated for any work stoppages resulting from the cleanup. Next slide, please. So what is the city's role here? City officials carry real weight and a powerful voice with regulatory agencies, and endorsing this cleanup plan sends an unmistakable message. A strong City Council resolution demonstrates to EPA that the full weight of local government stands with the community's demand for a cleanup that is complete, equitable, and built to last. Plus, the timing is critical. The EPA needs to hear from the city before it releases its proposed cleanup plan in late August. Next slide, please. Modernizing this part of the port is squarely in the city's interest. A thorough environmental cleanup lays the groundwork for modernizing the Lauritsen Channel. By clearing away all the outdated infrastructure, a complete cleanup paves the way for full modernization, which can translate into more commerce, more revenue, and more jobs. By the same token, leaving residual contamination will create a problem for future modernization. A complete cleanup, removing all contamination, will facilitate reuse. It will optimize opportunities for site restoration and turn this area into a valuable resource for the city, creating a more healthy, productive and efficient environment for business and commerce. This plan is more about, excuse me, this plan is about more than removing contamination. It's about protecting public health, advancing environmental justice, and building a resilient future for Richmond.

Is there one more slide? One more slide?

Yay, thank you. Okay, now I will turn the meeting over to council for questions. For technical questions, sitting with me tonight is Chip Kribble. Chip's academic background is in geology, civil, geotechnical engineering, and nuclear engineering, and health physics. For over 40 years, he's worked as a contractor, consultant, and as a state regulator in the environmental remediation and restoration field. Thank you.

Thank you. Before we ask questions, I would like to know if we have public speakers?

Yes, we do. We have several. We have nine online speakers and we have about 12 in person.

Okay. We would like to hear the speakers first.

Great.

In-person speakers are Don Gosney, Garland Ellis, Quanon Parker-Brightman, Mark Wasburg, John Lindsey Poland, Jeannie Stowers, Andrew Melendez, Crescent Diamond, Zoe Panopoulos, Dabjanae Tillis, Pedro Ruiz, Chris Taft, Carlos, Fox Kazin, John Malve, and Adam Adian. Don Gosney.

Which ones?

This is Q1. Okay, we do not have that many speakers.

I think there's somebody who wanted to speak on the second floor.

Girl. Let's see, we have two speakers.

Yeah. In Q1, we have Garland Ellis, Claudia Citrone, and Janet Flint. Garland Ellis.

Hi, my name is Garland Ellis. I'm a resident of Richmond Annex. We've had issues with contamination along our shoreline and it extends down into the Marina Bay. The Heckathorn Project has been an area that has been addressed before. Unfortunately, it was done in a cheap manner, you might state. All they did is they came in and dredged what they could get to easily. And unfortunately, there was contamination in areas that wasn't so easily to get to, and it spread. We now still have the same issue there. And it needs to be cleaned up properly. When the water is removed, it needs to be filtered. The casement needs to be put in so that more water won't come in so that the contamination won't spread out further. All the mud and silt needs to be removed down to a level that's more stable base. All the wharfs, the piers that have contamination underneath them need to be removed so that they can go in and dredge those areas as well. You also have an area that's capped Part of that area that's capped has cracks in it. They say that, oh, well, it contains the contamination. Well, what's it gonna be like in 10 years, 20 years from now? It's still gonna come back up through the cracks, and if the cracks are worse, it's gonna be even worse contaminating the area again. They need to do a complete and thorough job so that the area will be usable for commerce. It also gives an opportunity for the port to clean up and expand and to be a more viable port. As we look at this example, we need to also look at all the other examples in the Marina Bay and along the shorefront, all the way down to Point of Seville. They all need to be cleaned up just as well. Thank you.

Claudia Citroen. So I looked at the the agenda, and I tried to find the budget for that. What is the city's thinking it needs to pay on this, or what will it pay on this? Will it prioritize this cleanup over fire department or over other things? There are also no maps in the city available. When I purchased my house many, many years ago, my realtor, and I had to ask her thoroughly for this, gave me finally a map saying that there's a five mile radius around Chevron Refinery, which has cesium, which is a radioactive substance, and doesn't break down. So it's always good to start somewhere, but it seems that you want an ordinance without discussing finances again, which is very typical for this council. Let's just go with what is good for voters and deal with finances later. That is not how you guys should make decisions, and I waive my time. I have too much to complain about this issue.

Our last in-person speaker is Janet Flint.

Press the button. Push the button.

Is that better? Yes. Thank you. Okay, thank you for having me. My name is Janet Flint. I live in the May Valley neighborhood and I'm speaking in support of item Q1. I volunteer with several environmental groups including Sierra Club, California Native Plant Society, Golden Gate Bird Alliance, and I'm a volunteer member of the Richmond Urban Forest Advisory Committee, although I don't speak on behalf of any of these groups today. I URGE RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE COMMUNITY CLEANUP PLAN FOR THE UNITED HECKATHORN SUPERFUND SITE. A STRONG RESOLUTION LIKE THIS TELLS EPA THAT RICHMOND EXPECTS A COMPLETE CLEANUP. EPA SHOULD REMOVE THE CONTAMINATION ADDED SOURCE AND PROVE THROUGH MONITORING THAT THE CLEANUP IS WORKING. EPA should engage the community for input before the formal comment period begins. Residents shouldn't be asked to respond only after the cleanup plan is already shaped. The chemicals that were left behind by these companies should be cleaned up, not covered up. People shouldn't have to be told don't fish here or don't eat what you catch. Kids shouldn't have to be told they can't play in the dirt here. Richmond residents shouldn't have to fear higher incidence of cancer because they live near the Zeneca or United Heckathorn sites. We should make choices today that protect wildlife and leave a healthy shoreline for future generations because what is good for wildlife is good for people. Thank you very much.

That was our last in-person speaker. Now we move to the online speakers.

And those nine speakers are Kathy Bleer, followed by Michaela Marquez, Skylar Sokolos, Cheryl Patel, Nick Pilch, Lisa France, Sally Tobin, device ending with 4562. And the last speaker will be John Calloway. Kathleen, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, thank you. My name is Kathy Blyer. I'm a board member of the Golden Gate Bird Alliance and chair of its Richmond Initiative Committee. I support the proposed resolution to clean up the United Hackathon Superfund site. Our organization has 5,000 members around the Bay, and we are committed to and have been working with local groups in Richmond and local agencies to protect its watersheds, clean up Wildcat Creek and the Bay Trail, and to support other efforts to restore Richmond habitats. We've also been working with council members Sue Wilson and city staff Tawfa Kalabi to remove the large trash from Meeker Slough. So we're committed and we're very interested, and we've been working on this for a couple of years. The United Heckathorn Superfund site should have been done right and completed years ago to avoid the risks proposed by DDT and Dieldrin to human health and to aquatic and other wildlife. With respect to birds, the shell thinning impacts are well documented and resulted in precipitous declines of eagles, peregrine falcons, and brown pelicans in the past, which is one of the main reasons these chemicals were banned. Richmond has the longest shoreline of any city on the Bay, and it has invaluable coastal habitat that should be cherished and cared for. The contamination of Richmond's harbors and coastlines in general is among the most egregious examples of continuing environmental injustice. in my opinion. And I think every effort should be made to fix this now. I fully support the Richmond Shoreline Alliance's proposal for cleaning up the United Hecathorne Superfund site.

Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Michaela Marquez. Michaela, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi there. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Hi, good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Michaela Marquez, and I'm a field investigator and community outreach coordinator at San Francisco Baykeeper. Today, I'm speaking on behalf of Baykeeper in support of the community cleanup plan for the United Hecathorne Superfund site. This is item Q1 on the agenda. For decades, toxic DDT and DL drink contamination have threatened the Lauritsen Channel, Richmond shoreline and community. And although the EPA has conducted a cleanup that was held in the 1990s, the remedy failed and contamination still remains. Richmond deserves a remedy that addresses the problem, not one that leaves pollution behind again. Fish caught in the Lordson Channel continue to contain DDT at levels hundreds of times higher than fish from other parts of the Bay. There are posted warning signs, and these alone cannot protect public health, and they do not protect public health or the environment. The most effective solution removes contamination at its source and also addresses the groundwater pathway that continues to carry pollution into the channel. This resolution sends an important message to the EPA that the City of Richmond stands with its residents in advocating for the strongest possible cleanup. Richmond's shoreline is an invaluable community and ecological resource, and decisions made today will affect its health for generations to come. We urge the Richmond City Council to adopt this resolution in support of the community cleanup plan. Adopting this will send a clear message to the EPA that Richmond expects a comprehensive cleanup to protect the health of its shoreline as well as the health of Richmond community members. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you.

The next speaker is Skylar Sokolos. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, thank you. My name is Skylar Sekulis and I am an environmental justice organizer with Green Action and part of my work focuses on how shoreline contamination poses a unique and dangerous threat to community and environmental health because flooding, groundwater rise and sea level rise all have the potential to mobilize and spread existing contamination. And as we know, DDT and de Yeldren have remained in the Lauritsen Channel and nearby areas for decades. And because of this, I am also here to support the community cleanup plan for the United Hackathorne Superfund site, because the community deserves a complete cleanup that will protect their health and the environment now and into the future. The community cleanup plan is essential for properly remediating legacy contamination, strengthening EPA's plans, and ensuring that the cleanup protects the people most impacted by the contamination. We need our cities to support robust and community-led action that will truly defend our shoreline communities from contamination and the impacts of climate change. It is critical that the Richmond City Council stands up for those most impacted by the United Hecathorne contamination and supports the resolution endorsing the community cleanup plan. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Cheryl Patel. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi. Good evening, Mayor Martinez and city council members. My name is Cheryl Patel. I am giving this comment on behalf of the local nonprofit San Francisco Baykeeper and our nearly 5,000 members and supporters who live and recreate in and around San Francisco Bay. For decades, the United Hecatombs site has been contaminated with DDT and dialtrin, chemicals linked to serious health issues like cancer and other serious diseases. The US EPA's first attempt to clean up the United Hackathorn site failed, and it left contaminated soil and sediment in place. These contaminants have been leaching into our San Francisco Bay and into the fish that live in the bay, exposing subsistence fishers to these harmful chemicals. As impacts from human-caused climate change continue to amplify, the buried contaminants in the upland area of this site are at risk of being moved further into areas where people live, work, and recreate due to current and impending sea level rise and groundwater rise. These and a myriad of other reasons are why I urge you all to support this resolution. Support the community cleanup plan that prioritizes fully removing all contaminants from the United Hackathorn Superfund site so that our shoreline, neighbors, and bay can be safe for everyone. Thank you for your time and support.

Thank you. The next speaker is Nick Pilch. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members. Thank you for your time. My name is Nick Pilch. I live in Albany. I'm a Sierra Club volunteer leader, former elected official, and I'm here to support the community cleanup plan for United Hecaton site, Superfund site, and the Sierra Clubs and everyone's work on this. I care about this issue because Richmond shoreline should be safe for the people who live and fish there. And I live just down the shoreline and I use the Richmond shoreline for recreation. And because of course everyone deserves a planet free of toxic waste. When the US government over many years only increases its military budget, yet slow rolls toxic cleanup, which is tragic and inequitable. It's vital that we raise our voices loudly and strongly and do not let the US government forget that they still have a lot of work to do. I support the community cleanup plan because it calls for a complete cleanup. EPA should remove the contamination at its source and prove through monitoring, really important, monitoring that the cleanup is working. EPA should also include community input before the formal comment period begins. Residents shouldn't be asked to respond only after the cleanup is already shaped. I urge the Richmond City Council to support this resolution endorsing the community cleanup plan. Richmond needs a cleanup that protects residents and holds responsible parties to the full cost of fixing the harm. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker is Lisa France. Lisa, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, good evening. My name is Lisa France and I am, and while I live in Berkeley, I work for the Richmond Shoreline Alliance. I'm here to support the community cleanup plan for the United Hackathorn Superfund site. As Discussed, EPA already led one cleanup in the mid-1990s, but it failed. Richmond shouldn't have to contend with another plan that leaves pollution behind. This is why our plan calls for the channel to be sectioned off and the soil to be dry to completely remove any threat of DDT spreading. Fish from the Lauritsen Channel have shown DDT levels hundreds of times higher than fish caught elsewhere in the San Francisco Bay. Warning signs just aren't enough. A real cleanup removes the contamination at its source and addresses the groundwater pathway that keeps pollution moving. The companies responsible for the pollution are... responsible to pay for the full cost. I urge the Richmond City Council to support the resolution backing the community cleanup plan. A strong resolution tells EPA that Richmond expects a complete cleanup plan with community input before the plan is already shaped. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Sally Tobin. Sally, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

My name is Sally Tobin. I'm a Richmond resident. And I would like also to urge your support of this particular resolution. As the other speakers have indicated, this is a very important part of the living beings that occupy the city of Richmond, from fish to humans. And I'd like to just call your attention to a couple of things that haven't been mentioned yet. One is that DDT loves sediment. So it attaches itself to sediment. And so what that means is that every time a ship passes by the mouth of the Lauritsen Channel and sediment is stirred up in its wake, DDT is being spread. And I think that we absolutely need a complete cleanup of this area. And I would particularly like to advocate for cleaning up the capped part of the contaminated area. There is part of the area that is not protected on the bottom and sides from from liquid suspending the DDT and dieldrin. And so with sea level rise, which will cause ground level rise, those contaminants can be washed into neighborhoods that are even a couple of miles away from their original contaminated site. So I would really like to advocate for inclusion of that capped area, as well as the extensive contamination that is found in the Lauritsen Channel. And I would also like...

Your time has expired. Thank you. The next speaker is device ending in 4562. Please unmute yourself and you may begin. Please state your first and last name for the record, please.

Yes, you can hear me, correct?

Yes.

Okay, thank you so much. Good evening, city council members and staff. My name is Carolyn Graves, and I'm a long-term resident of the Richmond Annex, and I am here to support the community cleanup plan for the United Heckathorn Fund site. This matters to me because while Richmond is the city of industry, that industry has resulted in high amounts of industrial pollution impacting our residents' decades. The first cleanup failed, resulting in contaminant levels higher than before the cleanup. We need the next cleanup to protect public health for the long term. I support the community plan because it calls for a complete cleanup, removing the contamination at its source and requiring monitoring to prove the cleanup is working. While the EPA scheduled public meetings for each step in developing the plan, They then canceled the meeting where all the proposed cleanup options were supposed to be discussed and public feedback gathered. This cut the public out of a key planning step where the public feedback might have resulted in a better cleanup than the one the EPA now proposes. Please approve the resolution for a full cleanup rather than the flawed plan proposed by the EPA. Thank you.

Thank you. And our last speaker is John Calloway. John, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Thank you. My name is John Callaway, and I strongly urge you to support the proposed cleanup of DDT at the United Heckathorn site, as all of the other speakers have. I'm a Berkeley resident and a regular user of the Bay Trail in Richmond. I serve as co-chair of the East Bay Conservation Committee for the Golden Gate Bird Alliance, formerly Golden Gate Audubon. And I also have been involved with wetland restoration around the Bay for over three decades as a wetland restoration ecologist. As you've heard from the other speakers, DDT is a dangerous contaminant that accumulates in the food web. In addition to human health impacts, DDT has caused substantial impacts to many bird populations and other wildlife, from pelicans to osprey and peregrine falcons. This cleanup plan is necessary because it's a plan for complete cleanup that will address potential future impacts of the pollutant associated with climate change. As you've heard, past cleanup efforts have failed to clean up this serious problem. Without removing existing contaminated soil and pilings, DDT will continue to impact San Francisco Bay, impacting the ecosystem as well as the community of Richmond. So I'm in strong support of the proposed plan for cleanup, and I urge you to endorse this plan so that EPA will see that the city of Richmond demands full cleanup of this highly problematic pollutant. Thank you for considering this critical issue.

Thank you. And that was our last speaker.

Thank you. With that, the public comment is closed and we are now open for questions and comments from the Council. First Council Member Jimenez, then Brown, then Bana.

Thank you so much and Janet, it's great to see you here again. Your work has been amazing too. support the environment in Richmond. I wanted to ask you about the EPA and the timeline for them to come to Richmond and start doing some of this work. I am in full support of this resolution, but I wanted to know more about the strategies that you are thinking about to make sure that our voice and what the community wants is actually what EPA does because as we heard from you, there is a cleanup that had been done but hasn't been successful. So thank you.

I've been told that it's my turn to answer that question. THE TIMELINE IS AN ESTIMATE THAT THE EPA WILL COME OUT SOMETIME IN LATE AUGUST WITH THEIR PROPOSED PLAN AND THAT WOULD START A FORMAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD UNDER CEQA WHICH I THINK THEY'VE BEEN INDICATING 60 DAYS. POSSIBLY 90. AND THAT'S OUR WINDOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT AS YOU'VE ALREADY GOTTEN THE PICTURE, I THINK, FROM THE PRESENTATION AND THE COMMENTERS, EPA HAS NOT ENGAGED THE COMMUNITY IN DEVELOPING OR CONSIDERING THE INPUTS FROM THE COMMUNITY. SO THEIR DRAFT PLAN IS SAN'S COMMUNITY INPUT. IT'S WRITTEN WITHOUT COMMUNITY'S INPUT. THROUGH THAT DIALOGUE, YOU COME OUT WITH A MUCH BETTER RESULT. IT INFORMS THE REGULATORS, IT INFORMS THE COMMUNITY PEOPLE, SO ALTOGETHER, IDEALLY, THAT'S HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK. THAT IS PART OF THEIR POLICY. I'M NOT SURE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

Thank you for the presentation. I just wanted to ask the question. So I know you said the proposal will come out in late August. But I just want to know, is there any enforcement strategy if the EPA chooses a different cleanup alternative? Do we have any legal options as a city? What are the plans if this doesn't work out for a full cleanup like we anticipate?

That's a difficult question. We could appeal to DTSC, the state of California, who also has the same authority, by the way, over this site, but because it's already been designated as a Superfund site and the agencies have agreed that either way with that designation or without, the EPA is the regulatory lead agency. And in the course of that public comment period, if the city or the community feels that this is not gonna turn out in our favor, we could appeal to the DTSC and request that they intervene. That is their role to protect the interests of the state of California. And part of the definition or who says what is the interest of the state of California, a good part of that is the community.

Okay. Thank you so much. I just want to make sure that we have a plan to move forward if this doesn't work. Thank you.

Councilmember Bonner?

Thank you for the presentation and thank you very much for your work on this. I really appreciate it. Just some quick questions out of curiosity, not that, you know, they're a factor in my decision, but how deep would the cleaning go? and under the water and on the land.

The question is how deep would the excavation go? I don't know the answer to that. I am not totally familiar with the data. I don't know if there is enough data that bounds the extent of the contamination. So part of that would be either more sampling a priori to the process or in the course of the cleanup, they just keep digging until they get to clean material through and they can confirm that as sampling.

So we know the materials there. We don't know how much. And there was a talk of disposing the material. How do we plan to dispose them? Where do they go?

We don't know what the EPA is proposing, but what the community cleanup plan calls for is for offsite disposal. That means having it disposed of in a legally authorized facility that is prepared and approved to receive this kind of material or hazardous waste profile.

So are there designated sites or we just like send it to Nevada, for example?

THEY WOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE WHATEVER SITE THEY WANT TO SEND IT TO. DTSC WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT THEY COULD WEIGH IN ON THAT. BUT IT'S REALLY THE CONSULTANT OR THE CONTRACTOR DOING THE WORK THAT WOULD MAKE THE ARRANGEMENTS FOR WHERE THEY WOULD DISPOSURE IT. OKAY.

SO WE'RE JUST ASKING TO BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHERE AND HOW. AND DOES BCDC HAVE ANY SAY IN IT OR ANY GRANTS OR MONEY OR SUPPORT?

OF THIS, THEY'RE NOT INVOLVED IN THIS AT THIS POINT.

OKAY. AND SO WE'RE SAYING THE OWNER PAYS FOR THE CLEANUP? THE OWNER DOESN'T MEAN THE CITY, I ASSUME, RIGHT? PRIVATE OWNERS.

WE UNDERSTAND, YEAH, IT'S NOT THE CITY. Our understanding is that this area is private property. It's not city property. And the entity that's responsible for the bill is the responsible party, also known as RP. And that's either a single entity. It could be multiple entities. In this case, there are a few. We have never seen the agency's determination as to who is and who is not a responsible party. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE ONE SINCE THEY OWN THE PROPERTY ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE EARLY YEARS. BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND I COULD BE WRONG, THEY ARE NOT LISTED AS A RESPONSIBLE PARTY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

COUNCILMEMBER ROBINSON? VICE MAYOR ROBINSON. MY APOLOGIES.

No offense taken.

So a couple of questions came up in the course of public comment and I wanted to just clarify a few things or get your clarification. A couple of things. One, does this resolution call for the use of City of Richmond funds to complete the cleanup?

I believe not I don't see unless the city has some has some Connection to that property through either through prior ownership or prior operation of the state of that area and as far as I know that's not the case, but I Couldn't say that definitively We have not seen from the what we know from from the federal epa The city has not been listed as a responsible party. I don't know how definitive that is I

Council member Wilson.

If I can just speak to that. I'll pull up the email. We did run this question by the port director, Charles Gerard, and he confirmed that it's private property. It's not city property. And so I'll find that and read to you for that in a minute.

I just wanted to clarify that it was under my MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THIS WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO COST THE CITY MONEY, THAT WE WERE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE EPA TO DO A THOROUGH CLEANUP AND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT WEIGHT BEHIND THAT RECOMMENDATION BY HAVING THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL HOPEFULLY VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT. IS THAT CORRECT?

THAT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING.

GREAT. AND THEN I DID WONDER ABOUT THE CAPT AREA. You know, we've had a number of different presentations about sea level rise and about how that will affect these caps. That was assuming that you could put something on top and that nothing would move underneath. But with sea level rise we're anticipating of brackish water moving up channel and mobilizing contaminants underneath caps. And so my question is does your plan address the capped area of the site? I just wanted to get clarity on that as well.

It does. The plan requests or calls for removal of that upland stored contaminated soil with a cap over it. There are a lot of reasons why that's dubious To be polite about it if you look at the history the time when this facility this area was built out It probably was not The fill was placed not as engineered fill but as just dumped fill dredge material as best we can tell from historical photographs And that means that there probably is a considerable amount of space or void space that contamination could move through and water could move through, which also includes the considerable likelihood of settlement, especially when an earthquake hits. So whatever you place that material on is likely to consolidate or sink, maybe make room for migration or pathways for that contaminated stockpile material to move.

Thank you. And then the last question that I have for you is, you know, this seems like a very, kind of thorough, well-grounded recommendation. I wonder if there are other examples of sites who have used this kind of approach to cleaning up a site. Are there other sites that use these strategies of kind of draining the water from an area and kind of cleaning up everything that's in that area, is this unique or is this kind of an accepted practice that has been used other places?

This has been done a number of times elsewhere. There's no newness here. This is all stuff off the shelf that practitioners would use or be familiar with.

Thank you. And thank you both for all of your volunteer hours doing this work for so many years, for decades even, for the community. Thank you.

Council Member Cepeda.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you so much for the presentation. Great to see it. And finally getting it up here and getting it done. A misconception, a lot of people think the Superfund means super contaminated, which in this case it is. The Superfund means we're going to get access to the Superfund, so money, money, money, from the EPA from a law that Congress established many, many, many years ago. So if they're not able to find the responsible party, in this case will be whoever contaminated. So if they went under bankruptcy or they just left or whatever, then the EPA then looks to find funding. And then they'll go and dip into the super fund and get that money to help pay for this. So just kind of want to clarify that there, because that was one of the questions that was asked a lot by our community, is Richmond paying for it? And no. But right now we are, because we're not able to utilize this property. We're not able to really fish in this area or really take advantage of our environment. So right now we're paying for it by not having this be cleaned up. So thank you again for being here.

Thank you. I was looking through the letters that we received. We received one from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. And in the letter from them, they said, they said, we are happy to discuss how to best engage with members of the Richmond City Council regarding this matter and look forward to speaking with interested council members soon. As part of our public involvement process, we also plan to hold one or more in-person public meetings near the site so that community can learn more about the Hecatoran Superfund site and EPA's proposed cleanup. They said EPA wanted to let you know that our agency is working on a proposed cleanup plan for a portion of the site and will share that proposal with the public this summer fall. The City Council may opt to wait to hear about EPA's proposed cleanup plan prior to taking up the community cleanup plan. Well, I say to them that if we pass this plan, resolution for this plan, we will consider their plan to augment the one that we have chosen to follow. So with that, I need... I move the item. I'll second. Okay.

We have a motion by Councilmember Jimenez, seconded by Councilmember Cepeda to adopt a resolution in support of the community cleanup plan for United Heckathorn Superfund site. developed by the Richmond Shoreline Alliance, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Sierra Club, San Francisco Bay Chapter. Council Member Brown? Yes. Council Member Bonner? Yes. Council Member Jimenez? Yes. Council Member Wilson? Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson? Yes. Council Member Zepeda? Yes. Mayor Martinez? Yes. The vote is unanimous. Our next item is item Q2. Okay. And that is to adopt a resolution approving the Richmond Police Department's 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and authorizing the continued use of approved military equipment consistent with government code section 7070 through 7075, policy manual section 707, and the findings required by government code section 7071D. If there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time. AND THIS IS THE ITEM WITH SEVERAL SPEAKERS.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE MAYOR MARTINEZ, VICE MAYOR ROBINSON AND RICHMOND CITY COUNCIL, POLICE CHIEF TIMOTHY SIMMONS AND I HAVE WITH ME OUR PATROL CAPTAIN, CAPTAIN JOHN LOPEZ AND OUR TRAFFIC LIEUTENANT, LIEUTENANT PATCHEN AND WE ALSO HAVE A COUPLE OTHERS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT SHOULD SOME QUESTIONS COME, I'LL BE HAVING THEM COME TO HELP ME OUT WITH THAT. So before presenting the Richmond Police Department 2026, actually 2025 AB 481 Annual Report, I believe it would be helpful to briefly explain why this law exists and how the Richmond Police Department has worked to meet both the letter and the spirit of this legislation. Assembly Bill 481, known as the military equipment bill was enacted by the California legislature in 2021, following a period of significant national discussion regarding policing practices. Much of that discussion stemmed from the death of George Floyd, or I should say the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota in May of 2020, and then the demonstrations that followed throughout the country. The legislature also expressed concern over historical transfers of surplus military equipment from the United States Department of Defense to local law enforcement agencies through what is commonly known as the 1033 Foundation program. These concerns center on ensuring that communities have greater transparency, public input, and local oversight over specialized law enforcement equipment. It is important to note that the Richmond Police Department does not have any military equipment that was acquired through the Department of Defense 1033 program. None of the equipment that is included in our report or that will be part of this presentation tonight originated from that federal surplus program, zero. In the case of the Richmond Police Department, the equipment covered under AB 481 is instead standard municipal law enforcement equipment that has been recognized, regulated, and utilized by California law enforcement agencies for decades. Much of this equipment has been part of accepted policing practices and is supported by training standards established by the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, otherwise known as POST, meaning there are certifications and classes and training that are state-certified for the particular pieces of equipment we have. While AB 41 classifies certain items as, quote, military equipment for purposes of transparency and oversight, these tools are commonly issued to municipal police departments throughout California, and they're intended to enhance officer and public safety during high-risk incidents and ever-rapid changing dynamic circumstances. In fact, some of the equipment that is classified as, quote, military, unquote, can actually be purchased by the general public at your local electronics store. You can go to Best Buy and buy a drone, which are the same drones that we have for the most part. You can go to the flea market and buy the same drone. Or you can go to an authorized firearm dealer and purchase the exact same firearms that the Richmond Police Department has as well. Ironically, while AB 41 focuses on equipment possessed by law enforcement, our officers increasingly encounter actual military style weapons in the hands of violent offenders. Over the past year, Richmond police officers have recovered fully automatic machine guns, firearms equipped with large capacity magazines, including 100 round drum magazines and other highly dangerous weapons from individuals who have committed crimes in our community. Many of these incidents have been publicly documented on the Richmond Police Department's social media platform or in local news articles. You can just go to our social media sites and you will see just a couple weeks ago we took multiple fully automatic machine guns off the streets here in our community. These cases serve as an important reminder that our officers routinely confront heavily armed suspects while using equipment designed to protect both the public and our personnel during these dangerous encounters. AB 481 also emphasizes transparency and accountability. Those are two very important principles. We appreciate the guidance provided by the city council during last year's review when we went through our 2024 report. And we've worked diligently to address each of these council's recommendation. And this is a really important point for me. Specifically, we implemented an electronic patrol rifle deployment reporting process that allows officers and supervisors and watch commanders to consistently document deployments. The resulting data is included in this year's report. That was a request directly from the mayor. We amended Department Policy 707.6 to address the use of armored vehicles borrowed from neighboring agencies, which clearly identifies their authorized purpose, operational control, and reporting requirements. THAT WAS A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE. WE PROVIDED ADVANCED NOTICE OF THIS YEAR'S COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETING TO THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE CITY COUNCIL NO LESS THAN TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE MEETINGS OCCURRED. WE EXPANDED OUR REPORTING TO INCLUDE ESTIMATED DEPLOYMENT LOCATIONS AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION INCLUDING RACE AND ETHNICITY WHENEVER THAT INFORMATION WAS EITHER KNOWN OR REASONABLY AVAILABLE. We've added military equipment use statistics on our department's website and listed them by category, month, and number used. So in real time, anybody member of the public or this council can go to the department's website and our transparency portal and you can track in real time over the course of even this year how military equipment is being deployed and used in our community. So they don't have to wait. Nobody has to wait until the report you can see as we're moving forward. These enhancements reflect our commitment to continuous improvement and our willingness to work collaboratively with the City Council and our community to strengthen transparency. Ultimately, AB41 is not simply about equipment. It is about public trust, accountability, and ensuring the community understands how specialized equipment is acquired, governed, and used. The Richmond Police Department shares those values. We remain committed to using these tools responsibly, only when necessary, and always in the interest of public safety. Before I conclude and we begin our presentation, I would like to make one final observation. In response to the Council's direction following last year's AB-481 report, the Richmond Police Department has invested hundreds of additional hours into developing new reporting processes, tracking mechanisms, policy revisions, data collection procedures, community outreach and administrative meetings to ensure we fully comply with the Council's direction to do our best. We did so because we respect the Council's oversight role and we are committed to transparency and accountability and we respect the voices of our community. With that in mind, I would like to respectfully ask the Council to consider the workload associated with these annual reporting requirements as you review this year's report. We are currently operating with limited staffing and the additional administrative responsibilities associated with AB41 are absorbed by existing personnel who also have many other critical operational responsibilities. If the reporting requirements continue to expand year over year there will come a point where additional personnel will be necessary for the department to continue meeting the expectations without affecting other essential services. I would also like to offer some perspective as we get into this report. Richmond's AB41 report is approximately 60 pages in length. By comparison, the Oakland Police Department, an agency roughly four times the size of Richmond, submitted a report of approximately 57 pages. Berkeley's report is approximately 20 pages. San Francisco Police Department's report was approximately 13 pages. Many other Bay Area agencies with significantly larger staffing levels produce reports that are substantially shorter than ours and less transparent. And I understand and respect the desire to lead the way regarding police transparency. I am on board with that. I only ask that we also be realistic in that pursuit. I believe this demonstrates that the Richmond Police Department has gone well beyond the minimum reporting requirements established by law in AB 41. As Chief of Police, I am proud of the work that our department has done to comply with council direction in the interest of public safety, in the interest of transparency. I'm proud of the work that's gone into producing this comprehensive and transparent report, and we remain committed to that level of transparency. So I'm asking the council to please consider that workload as you hear our report this evening and establish a stable set of expectations that will allow us to continue producing a thorough, meaningful report each year while ensuring that limited staffing resources remain focused on our primary mission of serving and protecting the Richmond community. We are happy to continue meeting the high standards that are established. We simply ask that the goalposts remain consistent from year to year and so that we can continue delivering quality product in a sustainable manner. Thank you for listening to me. We're now going to get into the report. I appreciate it. And I'm gonna hand it off to Captain Lopez, who is my executive manager that's been responsible for the program.

Good evening, everybody. Mayor, council members, members of the public, thank you for being here. KCRT, if you can bring up the PowerPoint presentation, please. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to present this year's 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report. As the Chief explained, this presentation concerns the Department's accountability under Assembly Bill 481. My role this evening is to walk through the report in detail. What the law requires, how the Department responded to Council's direction from last year, what equipment we maintain, how it was used during the 2025 reporting period, what it costs, and what transparency safeguards are in place. The reporting period that we will be discussing is from January 1 through December 31 of 2025. Next slide, please. I will begin with the AB41 framework and the annual obligations imposed by the state law. I will then address the direction council gave at the April 22nd, 2025 annual review and show how those directions were implemented. From there, I will summarize the statutory categories that apply to Richmond, the department's written policy and oversight process, the inventory as of December 31st, and the purpose, restrictions, training, and fiscal impact associated with each equipment category. The second half of the presentation covers use, data, location and demographic information requested by council, patrol rifle tracking, drone as a first responder, proposed 2026 acquisitions and policy revisions, public complaints, cost and incident logs. Next slide, please.

Just by way of a quick insert here, when we talk about proposed 2026 acquisitions, there is no request for the council to approve the purchase of anything tonight. This is simply giving you TRANSPARENT INSIGHT INTO WHAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD MAYBE LIKE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH IN THE FUTURE FOR PURCHASES. NOT ACTUALLY ASKING TO BUY SOMETHING THIS EVENING. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.

THE STARTING POINT IS THE AB41 FRAMEWORK. THE STATUTE DOES NOT AUTHORIZE EQUIPMENT SIMPLY BECAUSE AN AGENCY OWNS IT. IT REQUIRES PUBLIC DISCLOSURE, A WRITTEN POLICY, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND ANNUAL GOVERNING BODY REVIEW BEFORE AN AGENCY MAY CONTINUE TO USE COVERED EQUIPMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AB 41 is codified in California Government Code Section 770 through 7075. It became effective January 1 of 2022. The term military equipment is defined by state law. It is a statutory reporting term. It does not mean every listed item came from the military or is used for military purposes. In fact, the Richmond Police Department does not own any equipment that was previously owned by any branches of our military. For Richmond, the governing body identified by statute is the Richmond City Council. Covered categories for our agency include UAS, the tactical robot, the mobile command center, specialized breaching tools, patrol rifles, diversionary devices, chemical agents, 40 millimeter launchers, less lethal shotguns, and associated munitions. Next slide, please. The law creates an annual cycle of accountability. First, the department must maintain a public military equipment use policy. Second, the policy must identify the equipment, authorized uses, training, fiscal impact, legal and procedural controls, compliance mechanisms, and how the public may submit questions or concerns. Third, the department must publish an annual report describing inventory, deployments, complaints, audits, costs, funding, quantity sought, and plan acquisitions. Fourth, after public release, the department must hold a well-publicized community engagement meeting within 30 days. Finally, the governing body must annually review whether to continue, amend, or revoke authorization. This council presentation is part of that yearly review. Next slide, please. The report is deliberately broader than a list of equipment. It identifies what we have and the quantity sought for the next year. It explains how the equipment was used and the operational purpose for each category. It also documents the public engagement process and the department's response to council direction. This year's report covers pages three through 60 and includes additional location and demographic information council requested in 2025. Next slide. This timeline is important because AB 41 sets a deadline for public engagement. The 2025 annual military equipment use report was publicly released on May 14th of 2026. On May 15th, notifications were sent to the community police review commission, the mayor's office, and each council member. That notice also provided three weeks advance notice of the community engagement meeting. The Richmond Police Department presented an overview to the Community Police Review Commission on June 3rd. I received feedback from the CPRC and suggestions before the community engagement meeting was held. On June 5th, the department hosted a community engagement meeting in the city council chambers. The meeting was publicized in advance and attended by 15 community members. Following the presentation, the department provided an opportunity for questions and comments, and every attendee who wished to speak was given an opportunity to do so. This meeting was within the statutory 30-day window following release of the annual report. Tonight, council conducts the annual review. The report policy and monthly statistics stats are publicly available through our transparency website. Next slide. This slide depicts the department's response to last year's city council direction. On April 22nd, 2025, after presentation of the 2024 report, council directed the police department to develop a process to track patrol rifle deployment or displays. In response, the department created an electronic reporting form and a process for officers, supervisors, and watch commanders. That process was implemented in February of 2025, and the resulting deployment data is included in this year's report. Council also directed an amendment to Policy Section 707.6, addressing armored rescue vehicles borrowed from other agencies. That proposed new section, which is now 707.6.1, is included later in the presentation. It identifies purpose, operational controls, and who may operate the vehicle and the reporting requirements. Council further directed advance notice to CPRC, the mayor's office, and council at least two weeks before the 2026 community engagement meeting. The department provided that notice three weeks in advance, as mentioned. Finally, council requested location and demographic information, including race and ethnicity data, to the extent available. The department added an incident log and supplemental demographic reporting while explaining the limitations of data when no suspect or victim is identified. Next slide. The next slide to identify the AB41 statutory categories that are relevant to Richmond. This is necessary because the statute includes categories that do not apply to our inventory. The report does not claim that Richmond owns every type of equipment listed in the law. Rather, it clearly distinguishes what the department does have, what it may need operationally, and what it is not applicable. Next slide. For Richmond, Category 1 applies to unmanned aerial systems and the SWAT robot. Categories 2 through 4, MRAPs or armored personnel carriers, Humvees or wheeled breaching vehicles, and tracked armored vehicles do not apply to our inventory. Category 5 applies to mobile command center. That distinction matters because it prevents confusion between the department's actual inventory and our broader statutory categories. Next slide, please. Categories six through 11 cover weaponized aircraft or vehicles, explosive breaching tools, firearms, and ammunition of .50 caliber or greater, specialized firearms below .50 caliber, and firearm accessories designed to launch explosive projectiles. Very important note, Richmond does not maintain weaponized aircraft, .50 caliber firearms, .50 caliber ammunition, or firearms designed to launch explosive projectiles. Category 7 applies only to the specialized breaching rounds and tools included in the report. Category 10 applies to the department patrol rifles, which are specialized firearms below .50 caliber for purposes of the statute. Next slide. Category 12 applies to diversionary devices, explosive breaching tools, tear gas, and pepper ball systems. Category 14 applies to projectile launch platforms such as 40 millimeter launchers, bean bag shotguns, and specialty impact munitions. Another note, our department does not maintain the taser shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, or long range acoustic devices described in category 13. The annual report identifies only the statutory categories relevant to Richmond's actual inventory or operational need. Next slide. AB 41 became effective January 1 of 2022. Richmond City Council approved the department's military equipment use policy through ordinance 12.22 NS on October 19th of 2022. That approval allowed continued use of qualifying equipment subject to annual reporting and council review. On April 22nd of 2025, council adopted resolution number 48-25, approving the department's 2024 AB41 annual item by unanimous vote. The additional unanimous direction from that meeting is reflected in this year's report through advance notice, rifle deployment tracking, and armor rescue vehicle policy amendments, and the inclusion of available location and demographic data. Next slide. Policy Manual Section 707 is the department's public AB41 policy. It requires a written description of each item, the quantity, capabilities, expected lifespan, purposes, authorized uses, fiscal impact, and legal and procedural rules, required training, compliance mechanisms, and public complaints procedures. Next slide. Policy 707 establishes the ongoing oversight structure. The department designates an AB41 coordinator, which is me, conducts annual inventory review, prepares the annual report, publicly posts the report, holds the community engagement meetings, and presents the matter to city council for annual review. The policy also directs complaints to the Community Police Review Commission as the independent oversight body. Next slide. We will now move into the inventory. The report identifies equipment maintained as of December 31st. The next several slides show the equipment by type and model before we address the more detailed purpose control training and operational use for each category. Next slide, please. There are two points to keep in mind while reviewing the inventory. First, listed quantities are the ending inventory for the 2025 reporting period. Second, quantities sought for next year reflect anticipated acquisitions or replacement needs. Consumable items such as ammunition, breaching rounds, diversionary devices, chemical agents, and impact munitions naturally change during the year due to training, deployment, exploration, damage, and manufacturer replacement schedules. It identifies anticipated replacements of already approved equipment subject to funding and continued compliance. Next slide, please. UAS inventory. The department maintained 15 unmanned aerial systems as of December 31st, 2025. These systems support patrol, SWAT, crime scene documentation, disaster response, search and rescue, and the authorized drone as a first responder program. The number reflects different platforms with different operational capabilities. Next slide. robot command center and breaching tool inventory. This slide covers specialized equipment used during high-risk operations. The department has one recon robotics tactical robot and seeks one additional robot. The department has one EVI Spartan mobile command center. It has four breaching shotguns and 300 breaching rounds. The quantities sought for breaching rounds reflect consumable replacement needs. These tools are used to create safer options, remote assessments before personnel enter a dangerous location, on-scene command during complex events, and controlled tactical entry when a high-risk incident requires it. Next slide. Rifles and rifle ammunition and inventory. Richmond maintained 82 rifles across patrol, SWAT, investigations, and traffic assignments. The police department anticipates seeking authorization to acquire 10 additional Colt M4 carbines. These are intended to ensure that trained officers who currently do not have access to a patrol rifle can be properly equipped when circumstances require it. A patrol rifle is a critical incident tool. It may be needed when an officer is responding to an armed suspect, an act of threat, a violent felony, or another situation where a handgun may not provide the necessary distance, accuracy, capability to protect the public and officers. Our objective is to ensure that trained and qualified officers have access to the appropriate equipment when faced with those circumstances. The need for additional rifles is also connected to staffing. As the police department hires and trains additional officers, we must ensure that the equipment inventory keeps pace with the personnel needs. It is not enough to hire officers. We must also provide the training, protective equipment, firearms, and operational tools necessary for them to perform their duties safely and effectively. The police department also has a responsibility to maintain its existing firearms in good operational condition. Some rifles in the inventory are older legacy platforms. As firearms age, they require increased maintenance, replacement parts may become more difficult to obtain, and the department must evaluate whether continued repair remains practical and reliable. Replacing aging rifles and firearms allows us to maintain a dependable inventory and avoid relying on equipment that may no longer meet operational needs. The ammunition quantities listed in the report are directly connected to training, qualifications, duty readiness, and replacement needs. Ammunition is not simply a supply item. It is necessary for officers to develop and maintain proficiency with the firearms they are authorized to carry. Every officer must complete required firearms qualifications and ongoing training. That training includes basic marksmanship, judgment under stress, safe weapons handling, decision making, and scenario-based exercises. Officers cannot remain proficient with a firearm without regular, realistic training. The police department has a fundamental responsibility to ensure that officers are prepared before they are placed in situations where they may have to use a firearm to protect themselves or to protect others. The annual ammunition amount can also change for several different reasons. First, it is tied to staffing. As the department hires additional officers, promotes personnel into specialized assignments, or expands training opportunities, the total training demand increases. More trained personnel means more required qualifications and practice ammunition. The ammunition market itself can fluctuate. Availability, manufacturing capacity, demand, and pricing can all affect what is available to law enforcement agencies at any given time. Ultimately, the requested ammunition supports a simple but important principle. Officers must be properly trained and proficient with the equipment they carry. The department's responsibility is to maintain that readiness, ensure our equipment remains reliable, and make certain our staffing, training, and equipment needs remain aligned. Next slide. Diversionary devices and chemical agents. The department's inventory included 120 diversionary devices and 700 chemical agent smoke or pepper ball units. This is a mixed inventory because different delivery methods are designed for different tactical environments. The report identifies canister, non-pyrotechnic agents, 40 millimeter chemical rounds, direct impact OC rounds, and pepper ball projectiles. These items are consumable and must be replenished based on training, operational use, expiration, wear, and replacement schedules. Next slide. The police department maintained 10 active 40mm launchers and 150 active 40mm munitions. Two legacy 37mm launchers have been decommissioned and are no longer active in an inventory. The department also maintained 17 less lethal shotguns with 500 beanbag rounds, two chemical shotguns, and four FN-303 less lethal launchers. These are distinct tools with different capabilities and limitations. Their purpose is to provide trained officers with a lawful, less lethal option, greater distance, and tactical flexibility when such options can safely reduce the risk of serious injury. Next slide. This next section moves beyond inventory. For each category, the report explains four things. Why the equipment exists, when it may be used, what legal and policy controls apply, and what training is required. Next slide. The police department currently owns 15 UAS platforms with an expected lifespan of approximately three to five years. They are used when an aerial perspective can improve safety or decision-making, including search and rescue, barricaded suspects, high-risk tactical operations, disaster response, crime scene documentation, and authorized DFR operations. Only trained and authorized operators may fly, and all operations must comply with department policy, applicable laws, FAA rules, and civil rights protections. UAS expenditures during 2025 was roughly $46,128.05. Next slide. UAS authorized missions and safeguards. This slide identifies the specific mission categories. The department may use UAS for post incident documentation, explosive ordnance disposal support, hazardous material incidents, search and rescue, life preservation missions, disaster response, training, fire authority requests, lawful operations supported by probable cause, and search warrant operations. The safeguards are equally clear. Before deployment, operators and observers must consider civil rights, civil liberties, and reasonable expectation of privacy. Flights are documented through digital tracking with a mission dispatch form available when digital tracking is unavailable or impractical. UAS use must remain consistent with local, state, and federal law and FAA regulations. Next slide. The tactical robot is a remotely operated battery-powered device that provides visual and audio information in dangerous environments. It may be used in confined spaces, barricaded subject incidents, high-risk warrant services, hostage situations, and tactically compromised structures. The core purpose is to obtain information without immediately placing officers, victims, or other occupants at unnecessary risk. It can help determine where a suspect is located, whether a subject may be armed, or whether other people are inside need assistance. The initial cost was $7,500 with no annual maintenance costs associated. Next slide. The Mobile Command Center. The Mobile Command Center is a 40-foot non-armored command and control platform. It provides the incident commander with a field-based location to manage personnel, communications, equipment, and decision-making during major emergencies, high-risk incidents, and special events and disasters. The vehicle has an estimated 20-year lifespan, although technology systems require periodic upgrades. The initial cost was $402,152.52, with an estimated annual cost of $3,000. Next slide. Armored rescue vehicle, mutual aid support. As mentioned, Richmond does not own an armored rescue carrier. When an incident presents an unusual threat requiring ballistic protection, the Richmond Police Department may request assistance from other agencies that own and operate its own armored rescue vehicle. The use of outside armored support may arise during high-risk SWAT operations, barricaded suspect incidents, hostage situations, rescue operations, or other critical incidents where protected movement is necessary. The assisting agency's trained personnel operate its vehicle under that agency's AB 481 policy. Richmond has no ownership or maintenance cost for those mutual aid vehicles. Later in the presentation, I will address council's direction to formalize this process through a policy amendment and the department's continued evaluation of dedicated rescue capabilities. Next slide. Breaching shotguns and specialized breaching rounds are limited to trained SWAT personnel. They are used to defeat locks, hinges, and other door hardware when safe entry is necessary during a barricaded suspect incident, hostage situation, high-risk warrant service, or another operation where the SWAT commander determines the tool necessary. Authorized operators must complete an approved SWAT breaching course or an in-house instructor training and live fire proficiency training. The report lists four breaching shotguns and 325 rounds, with an annual maintenance estimated at $100 for shotguns and $500 for rounds. Next slide. Patrol and SWAT rifles are precision tools for the situation where a handgun may not provide sufficient accuracy, distance, or capabilities. The report identifies 82 rifles and the associated .223 and .308 ammunition inventory. The department removed 17 legacy MP5 firearms from the inventory after they were decommissioned. They will not be included in future reporting. Rifles may be used only for official law enforcement purposes and within state and federal use of force law. Only department approved and department issued ammunition may be used. Officers must complete the initial 40-hour patrol rifle course, qualify with a certified instructor, and complete ongoing training and qualifications. Next slide. This slide describes the limited circumstances in which a rifle may be deployed. Those include an objectively reasonable anticipation of an armed encounter, a need for accurate fire at extended distances, a need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower, a barricaded or hostage situation, potential body armor, supervisory authorization, or a humane euthanization of an animal. Next slide. Diversion of devices. Commonly described as flashbangs are designed to create a temporary sensory distraction through sound and light. They may be used during high-risk war and service, barricaded or hostage incidents, potentially violent animal incidents, or when a SWAT commander determines a distraction device is needed to reduce risk. They are used only for distraction purposes. Their use is limited to trained personnel. Diversionary device trainers complete an approved course and must attend related training at least every three years to maintain and update skills. This report lists 120 devices and initial cost of $6,800 per 120 devices and no annual maintenance costs. Next slide. Chemical agents include canisters and projectile rounds containing CS, OC, or other authorized agents. They may be used in high-risk tactical incidents, barricaded situations, and only when legally justified, crowd control or control or crowd dispersal situations. The authorization level is specific. Only the patrol sergeant incident commander or crisis response unit commander may authorize tear gas after evaluating the totality of the circumstances and determining the force is justified and necessary. For crowd control, post-training and penal code section 13652 does apply. The report lists 700 units at $5,000 initial cost and 3,000 in annual maintenance. Next slide. The 40-millimeter platform provides trained officers with an extended range, less lethal option. It can deliver approved impact rounds and, where authorized, chemical agent munitions. The purpose is to reduce the potential for violent confrontations by creating more distance, accuracy, and tactical flexibility than some closer range force options. Only department-approved munitions may be carried and deployed, and only officers who have completed department-approved training may use the platform. Next slide. Policy limits 40 millimeter deployment to specific circumstances, when a suspect is armed and safe application is possible, when there are credible threats of harm, when a suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or throwing dangerous projectiles, or when there is probable cause for a crime of violence and the person refuses lawful orders. For crowd control responses or purposes, kinetic energy projectiles may be deployed only by officers with post-crowd control training and only when objectively reasonable under Pinnacle Section 13652. Next slide. Less lethal shotguns deploy beanbag rounds intended to temporarily incapacitate or gain compliance while reducing the likelihood of death or serious bodily injury compared with conventional firearms. They may be used when a person is armed with a weapon other than a firearm, poses an immediate threat, is violently resisting or assaultive, or presents a danger to the public or officers, provided the tactical circumstances allow safe deployment. Only trained officers may deploy them. The report lists 17 shotguns and 500 beanbag rounds with $500 in annual maintenance. Next slide. The chemical shotgun and FN-303 are additional specialized platforms. The chemical shotgun delivers authorized chemical munitions at a distance during barricaded or other high-risk incidents when chemical agents have been properly authorized. Only personnel trained in both chemical agents and the delivery platform may use it. The FN-303 is a compressed air less lethal launcher used when a less lethal response can reasonably help gain compliance, stop dangerous behavior, or reduce risk to officers, the public, or the subject. Both tools are limited to official law enforcement purposes and applicable law, department policy, and trained users. Next slide. During the 2025 reporting period, the department recorded 166 reportable operational uses across the listed AB41 equipment categories, excluding the separate DFR program total. Next slide. The total includes 104 UAS deployments, 26 diversionary device deployments, 13 less lethal impact deployments, nine instances of mutual aid armored support, eight breaching deployments, five chemical agent deployments, and one reportable patrol rifle and ammunition use. Next slide. This monthly table provides the underlying data for the annual total of 166. It also shows the equipment use is not constant or routine. The highest monthly total was 35 in May, followed by 27 in April. UAS accounted for the largest number of reported non-DFR operational uses with 104. Next slide. This graph is a visual representation of the prior table. The takeaway is that the reporting equipment use varies with the number and nature of high-risk incidents. The graph should not be interpreted as a measure of force. It shows operational deployment of different tools, many of which are used to gain information, create distance, coordinate resources, or reduce risk before force becomes necessary. Next slide. This graph shows the distribution of the 166 reportable operational uses by equipment type. UAS represented the largest category of non-DFR use. Diversionary devices, less lethal tools, chemical agents, breaching tools, and mutual aid armored support are separately reported because they have different authorized uses and different safeguards. The report also separates DFR from the broader UAS missions because DFR is a distinct program with its own deployment count and public transparency platform. Next slide. At Council's direction, the report includes available demographic information for known suspects or involved persons, together with the general incident location in the report's incident log. This data was added to provide greater transparency, but it must be read carefully. Not every deployment involves an identified suspect. Some are area searches, suspicious vehicle calls, missing person cases, traffic control impounds, or other calls where a suspect is not identified. In other incidents, a person is known but complete demographic information is not available. Therefore, these figures reflect known and available data only. They are not a demographic accounting of all community contacts or calls for service. Next slide. known suspect demographics. For reportable equipment deployments, the known suspect demographic data shows 99 male arrests or entries, seven female entries, 29 unknown entries, and six entries where no suspect was applicable. By age, the largest known category was ages 18 through 29 with 38 entries. There were 41 unknown ages entries and six not applicable entries. These categories are reported for transparency, not to support conclusions beyond the data. Unknown means the information was not known or available. Not applicable generally means no suspect was involved in the incident. Next slide. Pause for a second. That's the patrol rifle deployments table. My apologies, one second. Can you go to the next slide, please? It's a different slide. It's a different slide. So let me just go over this. So if we go back one slide. So the patrol rifle deployments table. So this shows, this is a bar graph of when the patrol rifles were deployed. This was based off of the city council provided direction to us regarding trying to tally all the patrol rifles and when we used them. When I say use, I say that's to say deployed or when the rifle was taken out of the vehicles. So we had to come up with a reporting mechanism in order to count or tally when the officers were using or taking the rifles out of the vehicles. Next slide. So there were 333 deployments. Officers reported making a rifle available based on the circumstances of the call or operation. One reportable rifle use. A rifle discharge or reportable use is rare and separately reported under the equipment summary. So most of the deployments were tied to planned operations for dangerous suspects wanted for homicides, shootings, and robberies. So 86% of the rifle data that we collected were for search warrants. Next slide. Get back on track here. My apologies. Drone as a First Responder Overview. Drone as a First Responder, or DFR, is a public safety program in which trained personnel deploy a UAS ahead of or in coordination with responding officers. It provides real-time aerial information to officers, supervisors, and dispatch so that decisions can be made with the better information before officers arrive. DFR is designed to improve safety and response EFFICIENCY. IT MAY SHOW WHETHER A SUSPECT IS PRESENT, WHETHER A PERSON IS ARMED, WHETHER A PERIMETER IS NEEDED OR WHETHER A CALL CAN BE RESOLVED WITH A MORE APPROPRIATE LEVEL RESPONSE. IT IS NOT RANDOM SURVEILLANCE. IT IS GOVERNED BY UAS POLICY, FAA REQUIREMENTS, PRIVACY LIMITATIONS, OPERATIONAL TRACKING AND PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY MECHANISMS. NEXT SLIDE. DFR may be used for crimes in progress or just occurred. Suspicious persons or vehicles, reports of individuals with weapons, perimeter searches, missing person cases, illegal fireworks calls, injury traffic collisions, roadway hazards, human trafficking operations, and other volatile or rapidly evolving calls where aerial information can improve safety.

Is this video working?

Yeah. Next slide. Let's see if we can click on it. There you go. Council approved the relevant Flock Group Contract Amendment on January 21, 2025. Let me pause right here. So this shows an example of a call for service that we had where there was a potential firearm involved and the individual that is, their face and identity is blocked out, displayed a long rifle that he was hiding in his pants. So this information was then relayed to our officers who then responded accordingly.

It ended up being an assault rifle, and we were able to coordinate tactically to be able to get in safely without there being any use of force situation by knowing what it looked like before we got there.

Next slide, please. The DFR program recorded 766 deployments from May through December 2025. The highest monthly totals occurred during the early operational months, 213 in June, 240 in July, and 153 in August. The program began with 25 deployments in May and then scaled as the system and staffing became operational. These 766 deployments are reported separately from the 104 non-DFR UAS deployments in the AB-481 equipment use summary. Next slide. The next section addresses anticipated 2026 acquisitions and policy updates. It describes anticipated replenishment of consumable equipment and the continued evaluation of a potential armored rescue capability, all subject to operational need funding city review, department policy and AB 41 compliance. Next slide. The Department expects consumable acquisitions to remain generally consistent with training, operational use, expiration, wear, and replacement cycles. This includes ammunition as discussed earlier, chemical agents, impact munitions, less lethal rounds, breaching munitions, and diversionary devices. The important distinction is that replenishment maintains previously authorized capability. Unplanned replacement may also be necessary when existing equipment is damaged beyond repair, reaches the end of service life, or is no longer operationally reliable. Each replacement must still be evaluated on a case by case basis. Next slide. Armored Rescue Vehicle Evaluation. For 2026, the department will continue evaluating the need for reliable access to an armored rescue vehicle. The department currently relies on mutual aid, but mutual aid access is not guaranteed. Another agency's vehicle may be committed elsewhere, its train operators may be unavailable, or the response may not occur in the timeframe required by a critical incident in Richmond. In August of 2025, the department received a quote for an armored rescue vehicle for $483,667. The report identifies this as a life safety capability. The protective platform can support rescue, evacuation, protective movement, medical access, crisis negotiation, and de-escalation during active shooter, barricaded suspect, hostage situations, disaster, or hazardous condition incidents. Next slide. Policy updates, armored rescue vehicle amendment. This is the policy amendment requested by council last year. Current policy 707.6 states that the equipment used by outside agencies providing mutual aid and remains subject to that agency's military equipment policy. Proposed policy 707.6.1 adds explicit standards for armored rescue vehicles from other jurisdictions. It states that Richmond does not own such a vehicle. It limits a request to circumstances where the vehicle is reasonably necessary to preserve life, protect the public, protect officers, or safely resolve a critical incident. It identifies examples, high-risk foreign services, barricaded suspects, hostage incidents, active shooters, rescues, and evacuations. The assisting agency's trained personnel operate the vehicle under their policy and applicable laws. Richmond personnel may not operate it unless separately trained, authorized, and approved. When feasible, the decision to request it is made by the SWAT commander, incident commander, or designee. Each use will be documented and included in the annual AB 41 report to the extent information is available. Next slide. UAS Policy Revision PM607, Policy Manual 607. The Police Department is also proposing updates to Policy Manual Section 607 so the UAS policy accurately reflects the current program, including council-approved EFR operations, AB 41 tracking, and strengthened privacy language. The revision makes clear that UAS may be used to protect life and property when other means are unavailable or less effective. It requires constitutional and privacy protections and FAA compliance. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators may not intentionally record or transmit images where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and must take reasonable steps to avoid inadvertent recording. The policy prohibits random surveillance, harassment, intimidation, discrimination, personal use, and weaponization. It limits vision enhancement technology to situations without a protectable privacy interests are where exigency, a warrant, or a court order authorizes the use. Evidential video is retained under the established records retention schedule. Next slide. Complaints, fiscal impacts, and projected costs. The remaining report section addresses accountability after deployment. Complaints and any identified policy violations. Notable incidents, actual 2025 equipment related expenditures, and the projected cost of the training needed to use specialized equipment responsibly. Next slide. During the 2025 reporting period, the Richmond Police Department received zero formal complaints related to military equipment and identified zero policy violations involving deployment or use of military equipment. That result does not eliminate the public's ability to raise concerns. The report identifies three ways to submit questions or complaints or concerns, by email, by phone, or by mail to the Richmond Police Department. Under Policy Section 707, complaints may also be referred to the CPRC, the Community Police Review Commission, as the independent oversight body. Next slide. Notable incidents. The report identifies one notable incident because it involved the reportable discharge of a patrol rifle, which is AB 41 equipment. On August 4th of 2025 at 5 p.m., the Richmond Police Department Communications Center received a 911 call regarding an armed subject who was inside a residence in the 400 block of First Street, threatening to kill people. The reporting party indicated the subject was armed with at least one knife at that time. Officers responded and they could hear a disturbance coming from inside the residence. They were also simultaneously updated by RPD dispatch that the suspect had armed himself with a second-edge weapon. Officers approached the front door of the residence and announced their presence. Officers were immediately confronted by a subject who was armed with at least one knife, directly outside the residence. At that time, two officers discharged their firearms, and an officer-involved shooting occurred. The subject, unfortunately, succumbed to his injuries at the scene. The Contra Costa law enforcement involved fatal protocol as a set of guidelines and procedures followed in cases of officer-involved fatalities was invoked, and the Contra Costa District Attorney's Office responded to investigate the incident. Next slide. Fiscal impact. The fiscal impact table reflects military equipment related expenditures from January 1 through December 31st of 2025. The department is budgeted for 147 sworn personnel and 71 professional staff members. The grand total was $405,425. These costs include acquisitions of new equipment and replenishments of replacement or consumable equipment. WHERE IT APPLIES, THE TABLE ALSO IDENTIFIES MAINTENANCE OR REPLACEABLE COSTS. SEVERAL APPROVED CATEGORIES HAD NO EQUIPMENT RELATED EXPENDITURES DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD. The largest 2025 expenditure was DFR at $299,454. That amount reflects the launch of a new operational program approved through the council contract amendment. Equipment cost is only part of the accountability investment. The department also incurred substantial training, qualification, supervision, and readiness costs to ensure specialized tools are used lawfully and safely. Next slide. The report projects staffing costs associated with specialized training using 2026 top step salary rates. The largest estimate is SWAT training, approximately 26 members training 240 hours per year for an estimated 546,000. The patrol rifle program is estimated at $53,498, including a 40-hour course for approximately 10 officers and annual in-service qualification for qualified personnel. Sniper team training estimated at $96,837. DFR startup and implementation staffing from May 25 through November 7, 2025 cost was $81,685. One officer attended a less lethal impact munitions instructor course at an estimated cost of $3,418. Training, scenario-based practice, qualifications, supervision, and policy compliance are necessary to protect the public and the officers using the tools.

I just would like to make one special note on this slide that this estimated cost does not include benefits for these employees. Those are standing expenses. whether they're training or not training. This is salary and overtime expenses that would be associated with them training. So that's just a special notation there.

Next slide, please. At Council's direction, the report includes an incident log on pages 49 through 58. The log identifies offense or incident type, general location, and available demographic information for certain reportable requirement deployments. It is inclusive of equipment use incidents other than DFR. Locations are intentionally reported as general blocks or intersections rather than exact addresses. That approach provides transparency while protecting victims, witnesses, juveniles, investigative integrity, tactical details, and other sensitive information. The incident log is therefore a public accountability tool, not a complete record of every person or every contact associated with an incident. Next slide. Patrol rifle deployment by incident type. This supplemental slide gives context to the 333 rifle deployments. Of those deployments, 285, or as mentioned, 86% were connected to planned search warrants. 41 or 12% were community-generated calls for service, and seven or 2% were officer-initiated calls. Search warrants and community-generated calls for service together account for 98% of rifle deployments. Again, a deployment means a rifle was made available based on risk and circumstances. It does not mean the rifle was fired, pointed, displayed, or used as force. Next slide. This slide provides context for the 166 reportable equipment uses. 53% were associated with community generated calls for service, 39% were search warrants, and 8% were officer initiated calls. This shows that more than half of the reported equipment uses arose from calls initiated by community members. The equipment category responds to different safety needs. UAS for information and search, diversionary tools and breaching equipment for high-risk operations and less lethal tools where trained officers determine an alternative force option is reasonable. Next slide. The report also includes available victim demographic information and supplemental context. The same limitations apply. Not every incident has an identified victim and equipment uses do not always correspond one-to-one with victims. Some incidents are missing person cases, impounds, traffic control, or outside assist. Unknown means information was not known or available. Next slide. Victim demographic summary. This slide presents the known and available victim demographic summary. The data should be read with the stated limitations. 52 entries are not applicable and 13 are unknown for sex, 52 are not applicable and 25 are unknown for age, and 52 are not applicable and 17 are unknown for race. The purpose is to provide counsel and the public additional context about the reportable incidents while avoiding claims that the data cannot support. Next slide. The report also places AB41 readiness in the context of Richmond's public safety environment. In 2025, Richmond experienced 110 shooting incidents with 31 victims struck by gunfire. These figures do not justify indiscriminate equipment use. They explain why the department must maintain trained, accountable readiness tools for armed, dangerous, and rapidly evolving incidents. Next slide. Public safety reality. This slide provides an example from a 2023 firearms investigation. A search warrant led to the recovery of 53 firearms, including 20 rifles, 23 handguns, eight revolvers, two shotguns, explosive grenade, more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition, and firearms manufacturing equipment. This does not suggest every call presents that level of danger. It is to explain why the department cannot plan only for routine circumstances. When credible information indicates firearms, barricaded suspects, hostage risk, or similar threats, trained officers need lawful equipment and policies to create that for public safety. Next slide. In 2025, Richmond officers recovered 231 firearms from the community. These recoveries occurred during shootings, firearm investigations, search warrants, arrests, domestic violence calls, vehicle stops, and community-generated calls. Officers frequently respond with limited and changing information. The department's responsibility is to protect victims, witnesses, community members, and officers while using the least intrusive, safe, and lawful option available. Next slide.

Next slide.

Next slide. Next slide again. Yeah. And one more time. There we go. The June 5th community engagement meeting generated important questions and concerns. Topics included the community impact of equipment deployment and the August 2025 officer-involved shooting, potential crowd control and hostage uses, the 333 rifle deployment number, drone privacy, DFR, and impacts on our community, equipment and training costs, and the relationship between public safety resources and community priorities. The Department's response was grounded in the report. We explained that no AB41 equipment was used for crowd control in 2025, and that any crowd control use is restricted by law and post-training requirements. We explained that the rifle deployment is not the same as force. We described UAS and DFR safeguards, including policy, FAA compliance, privacy restrictions, tracking, and public transparency. We also acknowledge the public's questions as are part of the purpose of AB41. Transparent reporting, clear answers, correction of the record when necessary, and continuing council oversight. Next slide. The department's responsibility is twofold. Use these tools lawfully, carefully, and when the circumstances justify them, and remain prepared for the difficult moments when lives are at risk. We respectfully submit the 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report for Council's annual review and consideration and for continued authorization. Thank you.

Deep breath. That was a lot. I'm so sorry for that. If I had water, I'd pass it out to everybody in this room.

We're almost done. People are falling asleep over here. Yes.

Our goal was not to bore you. It was to try to give you as much of the information as we possibly can in accordance to what has been asked of us. So that concludes our report and presentation.

Thank you very much. That was a lot of information, and I was trying to follow along with the report, but a lot of information. Do we have public speakers?

We have 27 speakers.

All right. Let's hear them.

Okay, the first 10 speakers, Don Gosney, Garland Ellis, QUANON PARKER-BRIGHTMAN, MARK WASPER, JOHN LINDSEY-POLLIN, JEANNIE STOWERS, ANDREW MELENDEZ, CRESCENT DIAMOND, ZOE PANIGOPOULOS. AND NUMBER 10 IS DAVE JANAE TILAS.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE PROPER AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS. TWO MINUTES.

If I may, Mayor, through you as the chair, are there any of the agenda items, Mayor, through you as the chair, since we have several staff here for other items, are there any, pardon me for interrupting, are there any items that you think we may not get to this evening so we can release staff to go home?

Well, we only have, if we extend, we have an hour and a half with that number of speakers. This will be the only item.

I hope we can get to Q7.

FOR EXAMPLE, MAYOR, LAST WEEK, DIRECTOR VELASCO STAYED ALMOST UNTIL THE END AND UNFORTUNATELY Q3 WASN'T HEARD. SO I INDICATE THAT SHE SHOULD REMAIN AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO AIM TO GET THROUGH HER ITEM AS WELL AS Q4 FOR THE PORT. MR. CHARLES IS HERE FROM THE PORT DIRECTOR. SO IF WE COULD POTENTIALLY GET THROUGH THOSE TWO, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

OR NOT.

OK, so. Mayor, would you like me to release them to go home or where shall they remain?

Oh.

Total total of 27.

27 online speakers, 40 total.

It's going to be an hour. So one item that wouldn't take long. Mr. Mayor is number Q7, so I suggest we let the staff go. except for Q7. That's a quick item.

Can we cut the time down to a minute and a half?

Oh, whoa, whoa, whoa.

You want a riot here? Well, we have enough police to protect us. Where's your sense of humor? We're not laughing on this side. Okay, yeah, let's move on and we'll see what we can do.

Thank you.

We're paying for overtime.

Yeah, you can ask some of the staff to go home.

Sorry, they're still talking. Okay, I've been through these before, so that's what's going to flavor my comments here. How many times have we heard members of the council and their acolytes refer to the tools our police officers need as military? This abuse of the word is an abomination of a politicized use of the word. How many of you can recall the biblical story of the young shepherd boy, David, I believe it was, who was tasked to take on the giant Goliath, the champion of the opposing army and, from all accounts, a very bad guy? David took a small stone, placed it in his sling, and took down Goliath with a well-placed stone in Goliath's forehead. When he put that stone in his sling, didn't he militarize the small stone? Really? Do you think anyone then or now saw that as a military weapon? Now let's head back to February 28, 1997. when two very bad guys armed to the teeth with fully automatic weapons and had head-to-toe body armor robbed a bank in Hollywood. When the police arrived, they were limited by the weapons they were provided with that were severely inferior to what the bad guys had and were freely using. Because of the limitations placed on them by elected officials and community members who were looking after the well-being of the bad people, 12 police officers and 8 civilians were injured. And that was before even more horrific weapons were readily available to the many bad guys and gals that we see today. It was only when the officers sworn to protect and to serve went to sporting goods stores and seconded the weapons they needed that they were able to stop these two bad guys from injuring officers and civilians willy-nilly. Is this council going to continue to send our police officers out to face these bad people with a very real possibility they may not return alive? I know that there are some members of this council and even the Police Community Review Commission who would not lose a minute's sleep if this were to happen. We've heard too many of our elected officials publicly and privately proclaim how much they hate the police and surround themselves with like-minded supporters and even appoint them to committees where they can implement that hatred to place our police and the public in jeopardy. When you spread your hatred of the police and put their lives at risk, do you really think you're best serving the people of Richmond?

Garland Ellis.

Hello, my name is Garland Ellis. There's neighboring cities to Richmond where the police will not respond because they're afraid they're going to be outgunned or because they're afraid that they'll be outnumbered. Richmond has been very, very lucky. The type of response, the type of incidents in Richmond has been very low compared to, say, Vallejo, Oakland. And yet, you're hoping against hope that the police can do their job with nothing. Right now you have about 122 officers that are out on the street and that barely covers their shifts. The civil grand jury recommends for this city 185. There's traffic concerns, there's lots of other concerns that the city can't get to. You have open prostitution down off of 23rd Street that the citizens have been complaining about for years and years and years. There's many other issues in this city that the police can't get to. What you're defining is a quality of life. Do you want people to leave the city because they think it's not safe? The police don't have time to go down to the gun store to borrow something, if they could even find one open. They don't have time to wait for another officer to bring a rifle because it's needed. They have to be prepared to handle it by themself each time they respond because they may not have any backup because we're limited in Richmond. A bullet goes right through a police car. A bullet can go right through a vest. The bad guys have the stuff that they want that can defeat them if they want it.

Your time has expired. Quinan Parker-Brighton.

Good evening. My name is Quinan Parker-Brighton. I'm executive director of United Native Americans. We as UNA, United Native Americans, demanded no, no on item Q.2 AB481, mobilization. Vote no on approving or authorizing the continued use of military equipment in local police departments. American citizens should not be subject to military grade equipment. We should also ban assault weapons in Richmond. Our First Amendment right to peacefully protest must be protected. Decreasing violence will only be achieved by training officers In de-escalation techniques, thank you very much. I hope you vote no on supplying Barney Fife and his crew with more money and more assault weapons. Thank you.

Mark Wasberg. Mark Wasberg will be followed by John Lindsey Poland. Please be ready to address the council.

First of all, Joyce Floyd was not murdered. It was own stupidity that caused him his death. I said, you haven't seen the weapons that these gangsters use. AK-47s, MAC-10s, MAC-9s, 9mms. The Richmond PD does not have automatic weapons. Only SWAT has automatic weapons. And I don't know where you get this stupid idea from that they have military items. You might think they have grenades, grenade launchers, M16s, 60, 50 cals. See, this is how stupid you people are. You haven't did your homework. You haven't researched it. This is about the fifth time that you put this item on just because you want to handpick law enforcement. It doesn't matter if they vote yes or no because the city government has no authority over law enforcement. They have no authority, the vote has no authority over law enforcement. The federal government issues these weapons Because by law, all right? Just like I said, the average cop on the beat cannot have an automatic weapon. And I don't know where you get this stupid idea, all this military crap. Look at these stupid signs up there. Now you're gonna tell me that the Richmond PD has a bunch of machine guns? When I was out there filming the violence, I was there when they arrested the guy with the AK-47. The Richmond PD about 15 years ago had a show and tell. They showed all the weapons that the gangsters was using during the heyday of the violence. And people were shocked to see this stuff. Like I say, Richmond, I said, the cop out on the street, he's always gonna be outgunned because the public, I said, they could easily make automatic weapons. So don't ask no stupid questions because you people are stupid.

John Lindsey Poland followed by Jeanne Stowers.

My name is John Lindsey Poland. I work for the American Friends Service Committee. We monitor AB41 military equipment reports statewide. I've studied this report. I appreciate that the department added some things. It did help us understand a little bit better the impacts of this equipment throughout Richmond. I want to point out some things in terms of acquisition requests for the coming year. because the department has said that there are expendables that need to be replaced. Okay, fine. However, there's 120 flashbang devices at the moment, which are fairly dangerous devices in the wrong circumstance, and they want to replace them with 200 of them. They only used 26 in the past year. Impact projectiles, they have 650. Their replacements, their acquisitions add up to 1,050. They have 33 less lethal launchers. They're going to decommission four of them. But even after the decommissioning, if you approved their acquisition requests, they would have 64. They have M4 carbine weapons. They have 50 of them. They say they want to acquire 10. It's not clear whether those are replacing 10 of the 50 in order to keep the same 50 or whether it will increase the amount to 60. This needs to be clarified. And also, you need to address the criteria under AB 481, which is this law, of acquisition and approval of military equipment policies. Because that requires that you certify that there is a, it's cost effective, that there is no alternative, to reach the same public safety objective, and that the policies protect civil liberties. That's the criteria that you need to meet in order to accept this report. And I would submit that increasing the number of these weapons, even though there are extreme circumstances that may require them some of the time, but increasing the number and the situation right now is not justified under those criteria. Thank you.

Jeanne Stowers, followed by Andrew Melendez.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JEANIE STOWERS. I'M A RESIDENT OF RICHMOND. I LIVE IN COUNCIL MEMBERS BANA'S DISTRICT. AND I HAVE, I FIRST WANT TO START OFF BY THANKING THE the city and the police department uh four years ago when the ordinance was being developed john lindsay poland and some other colleagues and friends we met with captain lopez and some of the city attorneys and were able to provide some input into what became the ordinance And at the time, I was very impressed by the city of Richmond's willingness to talk to us and accept advice from us, and that was much appreciated. I have a comment about the report and a comment about the policy. I find it confusing in the report to have a separate category for the drone first responders. We see the list of the other militarized equipment categories, and there are, I think, 104 or 106 instances of using drones. And then there's 766 under the drone first responder program. And I don't know why they're separated. I think I heard something about there was a platform difference. Under the state law, my understanding of it is that those would be grouped together. And I hope that they can be in the future already the use of drones is like 63% of the other of all the militarized equipment except for those drones for first responders and I also want to suggest that under the uses that should be not permitted that that would be Drones on at protests Because your time is expired.

Yes.

Thank you so much.

Andrew Melendez followed by crescent diamond. I

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Andrew Melendez, lifelong Richmond resident, organizer with Reimagine Richmond. Our group, alongside a coalition of 12 other community organizations, have written a letter that was sent over via email to all of you, and we'll be reading it out tonight as well. Dear Mayor and City Council, on July 7th, the Richmond Police Department's annual report, mandated by Section 7070-7075 of the Government Code, commonly known as AB 41, will come before this council for consideration. We, the undersigned community organizations, urge you to decline the department's request to spend precious city resources to acquire new unnecessary military equipment. After record lows in police recorded crimes like homicide, larceny, and vehicle theft, the department asked this council for funding to expand its military stockpile. The requested items include a $483,667 armored rescue vehicle. While the department claims the need is not theoretical, it only describes hypothetical situations that might call for an armored vehicle rather than occasions when such an item is needed. In addition, the estimated cost suggests that the department is asking for a military-looking barricade rather than an expensive, less conspicuous alternative. The annual report additionally requests 10 Colt M4 patrol rifles, 200 Model 8933 flashbangs, 515 various chemical agents, 20 Penn Arms launchers, two Remington shotguns, and over 3,000 cases of various munitions without disclosing the purchase and training costs for acquisitions. The department requests this blind expansion of its stockpile without sufficiently disclosing the fiscal impact of maintaining existing militarized weapons in 2025. The reported $405,000 cost of maintenance for 2025 omits all personal and training costs, which brings the total fiscal impact to at least $1,187,026. Time is expired. Preston Diamond, followed by Zoe. Panagopoulos.

Hi, can you hear me? My name is Crescent Diamond. I'm a Richmond resident and a member of Reimagine Richmond, and I am continuing the letter that Andrew just read. The department requests this blind expansion of its stockpiles without sufficiently disclosing the fiscal impact of maintaining existing militarized weapons in 2025. The reported 400... and $5,000 cost of maintenance for 2025. Okay, he already read this, but I'm going to continue. Maintenance for 2025 omits all personnel and training costs, which brings the total fiscal impact to at least $1,187,026. if approved the department's bold request to grow its stockpile may well bring the 2026 fiscal impact of police militarization in richmond to more than 1.6 million funds that could be spent on rock youth works libraries parks and the home key and metro walk affordable housing programs the department argues that these acquisitions will help it prepare for worst case scenarios but the reality is that military weapons do not help keep our communities safe Studies on the effects of increased militarization of police forces in other jurisdictions have found no benefits in terms of crime rates or officer safety. Instead, increased militarization has been shown to diminish the public's trust in police. Furthermore, the department's own report admits that military equipment is used disproportionately against our brown and black communities, with black residents being twice as likely to have militarized equipment deployed against them. Purchasing unnecessary and unused equipment will encourage the department to deploy militarized equipment rather than prioritizing de-escalation. Please decline the department's request to use even more city resources for its growing militarized stockpile. respectively submitted by Reimagine Richmond, Asian Pacific Environmental Network, Richmond Progressive Alliance, Safe Return Project, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Multicultural Institute, American Friends Service Committee, The CHAT Project, SEIU, local one. Time has expired. Thank you, and a few other organizations.

Zoe Panagopoulos, followed by Dabjanae Tillis.

Hi, my name is Zoe Panagopoulos, and I'm a resident of the Hilltop neighborhood in Richmond District 2. And I am here with Richmond Jews for Palestine and Richmond for Palestine. We stand against the militarization of our community. Military weapons do not make us feel more safe. They signal the anticipation of violence by the Richmond Police Department. Their report in this resolution cites the need for the police to defend themselves against people who are armed with guns, yet the only time a military-grade rifle was used last year, meaning when it was fired, was to kill a 27-year-old experiencing a mental health crisis who was not armed with a gun, but with a knife. 911 was called by that individual, his name was Angel, by his mother seeking help. I am also a mom and I can't imagine calling the Richmond Police Department seeking help for my child and for their response to be to kill him. Yet here, the Richmond Police Department are now asking for 10 more of that same weapon. I ask for what? Hopefully not for more of that. The increased presence of these weapons in our community and seeing things like an armored vehicle, like they are requesting in our neighborhoods, does not make me feel safer or more likely to call the police in a real emergency situation out of fear for the unintended consequences of those around me. It signals to me that the Richmond Police Department sees a need to protect themselves against us. I urge the council to vote no on this resolution. Thank you.

Dabjanae Tellis, will the following individuals please come forward? Pedro Ruiz, Chris Taft, Carlos, Fox Kazin, John Malve, Autumn Arion, Julie, and our last in-person speaker will be Alan Munguya.

Dabjanae? I can't start. She's right here in the way. Please.

OK. That's really rude.

OK. Hello, Mayor and city council members. Hello, RPD. I want to first say that my name is and I'm a concerned Richmond resident who is against RPD having and acquiring more militarized weapons, especially more chemical agents and armed rescued vehicles. AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO HAS BEEN AT THE AB 481 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETING IN THE LAST THREE TO FOUR YEARS, I DO APPRECIATE HOW MUCH MORE DETAILED THIS YEAR'S REPORT HAS BEEN THAN OTHER PREVIOUS YEARS. I APPRECIATE THAT THERE IS MONTHLY AB 481 REPORTING. THANK YOU FOR THAT WORK. OKAY. CAN MY TIME RESTART? THIS IS REALLY RUDE. REALLY RUDE. VERY RUDE. However, I feel like from a budget standpoint, it doesn't make sense for Richmond to have its own armed rescue vehicle, especially if an armed vehicle has never not been available when needed to borrow. If more weapons require more training and more personnel, how about we stop acquiring more? As a community, we need to invest into community safety that does not involve militarized weapons. We need to invest in more programs, services, and systems that value prevention, care, and not fearmongering about hypotheticals. It is highly concerning to think that an entity that has already has issues with de-escalation has access to militarized equipment, especially when it's primarily used against black and brown youth. According to the report, a large impacted group was 18 to 29, and 48% of the suspects was known were black. in a city whose population is only 17% black. That is concerning. How is 48% of them affected black when there's only 17% of us? I'm running out of time, but rest in peace to Angel. Rest in peace to George Floyd. How can we serve our black youth? How can we create systems of care, support, and prevention over criminalization with the same money they're trying to ask for more weapons? Thank you for all you do. Thank you. Good night. Pedro Ruiz.

All right. Good afternoon, Richmond City Council. My name is Pedro Ruiz. I am a lifelong Richmond resident, also a member of Reimagine Richmond as well. And I just want to speak out against this assembly bill. And just by saying, when I see military weapons being deployed in my community, I generally don't feel safe. And instead, when I see armored vehicles, assault rifles, drones, and other militarized equipment It only sends a message that our communities should be treated as active threats instead of people deserving care and investment. The RPD bill or Assembly Bill 481 report shares that black and brown residents have been disproportionately impacted by the deployment of militarized weapons. And it also shows that the age group most commonly impacted are young people between ages 18 and 21. And I myself fit into that same demographic. And it's impossible not to see myself, my friends, and my own peers reflected in these numbers. And these statistics are generally our friends, our neighbors, and our future. And in the case of those who we've lost to police violence, like Angel Montano, stories that have ended in the hands of military weapons. And we cannot bring those like Angel back. But what we can do tonight is to ensure that we do not continue expanding the tools that have caused so much harm to those like Angel and many others. And I urge you today to reject the proposed acquisitions and require full transparency about the true financial and human costs of any military weapon requests. Thank you.

Chris Taff.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Thank you. I'm Chris Taff. I'm a resident of District 2. I'm a supporter of Reimagined Richmond, also showing up for racial justice. I'm here like you to maximize public safety. But militarization, heavy arming of police, is what you do when going against a powerful enemy. Richmond citizens are not the enemy. Even those breaking the law are not our enemy. As noted, where militarization has proceeded, it has disproportionately targeted black and brown people. I personally have visited countries where there are riot-dressed cops with powerful weapons on every street corner, and I can tell you it scared the hell out of me. This is the direction we're heading. The elites in those countries were seeking to control and not to protect. Cops always want more, more power, more money, more weapons, and more freedom from restraint, however much they tip their hat to the requirements of AB 481. And arms manufacturers always want more inventory moved, so keep that in mind. But we want Richmond's resources spent on education, health, road repair, toxic cleanup, housing, job training, culture. Please stand against the militarization and surveillance society that we are trending toward here. Don't reinforce the federal project, the Trumpian project, of terrorizing and controlling the population. Don't be in the position, please, of having to look back and say, that moment, that moment, that's when we should have tightened the leash instead of letting go of it. We should have drawn the line. Thank you for your time.

Carlos?

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Carlos. I'm a Richmond resident, organizer with Reimagine Richmond as well. I'm here today to ask for a greater transparency and fiscal accountability before any new military equipment is approved under AB 481. The purpose of AB 481 is to give the public meaningful oversight of military equipment. That oversight only works if residents have enough information to evaluate how this equipment is being used and whether it's justified. Right now, this report leaves out important information. The incident log tells us when the military equipment was deployed, but it doesn't identify the specific equipment used in each incident or describes the injuries, if any, that resulted. Without that information, residents cannot meaningfully evaluate whether this deployment were necessary or whether they improved public safety. At the same time, the reported acquisition costs do not include personal training costs, making it difficult for residents to understand the full financial impact of these purchases. Before approving any new equipment, the public should receive a complete itemized breakdown of acquisitions and training costs. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the Council to require future AB 481 reports to include the specific equipment used in each incident, any resulting injuries, descriptions of the emergencies that justify each deployment, and a complete itemized cost information. Until those reporting gaps are addressed, I urge the Council to postpone approving any new military equipment. Thank you.

Fox Carlson.

Hi there, council. Hi there, JLO. Nice to see you again. And then hi there to all the rest of my Richmond community members out tonight. So I want to speak as somebody who's lived in Richmond for about a year now. I came here as an AmeriCorps VISTA. And for those who don't know what AmeriCorps is, it's a federal program where people can serve their country fighting against poverty. And my assignment was here in Richmond at a local nonprofit called The Practice Space, where we serve predominantly black and brown students. And we teach advocacy skills, public speaking skills, And just to say that doing that work, I affirmed the same oath that our service members do and our politicians. But for my work, I was only funded less than the California state mandated minimum wage. I think at 40 hours, I was getting paid $15.50 an hour. And so I sit here and I look at this budget for military weapons that are often deployed and not used. And the one time that the rifle that was deployed was used was to kill somebody at close range in an unarmored target. And of course, the district attorney found that that was a justified use of force. But for those of us on the ground who know the reality of how police and the law works, the DA probably wasn't going to make the right call there. I see the need as somebody who works a lot with unhoused community members in my spare time. I've made 30 calls over the past year to CORE, ROC, A3. I've not once called 911. And so when we think about how we continue to invest money in this community and how we use our resources, there is a need out there in District 3 where I live. But it's not for weapons. It's for shelter, food, and the things that we need. We keep us safe.

John is our next speaker. He'll be followed by Malve. John. Malve. No one? Mel? Okay. Autumn? Adia?

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Autumn Medean. I'm a member of Contra Costa Young Democrats and Reimagine Richmond. I work closely alongside youth in Richmond to fight for equity and community safety for youth in our communities. I want to speak about AB 481 and highlight the impacts that these requested military weapons have on our community. The reality is that military weapons serve no place in our streets. What it really does is damage the trust between law enforcement and residents and reinforce the perception that our black communities in Richmond should be treated as occupied territories rather than spaces where communities of color can get the dignity and care that they deserve. As a black youth, I feel afraid knowing that black families, residents, and neighbors with the same skin color as me are treated as if our bodies are disposable. This is the unfortunate reality that we've had to contend with for decades as a nation. And the situation now is no different. The facts don't lie. AB 481 clearly shows that black people are disproportionately harmed by military weapons enrichment more than any other racial category. And it's our black youth who suffer the most from these weapons of war. If we as a city truly believe in providing every resident with the care that they deserve, then we need to stand up and say no to the military weapons, chemical agents, armored vehicles, drones, and patrol rifles that have kept us in a state of fear. I know that our council can make that change happen and I hope to see reflected in your vote tonight. Thank you.

Julie.

Good evening. My name is Julie Salomon. I've been a Richmond resident for about a decade. I want to thank Chief Simmons and Officer Lopez for their detailed report and for their words about the importance of transparency in the community, particularly when we're talking about these weapons, military weapons. It's not our definition of military, by the way. It's the state that defines them as military weapons. These are not everyday weapons, and they're not supposed to be. That's why there's so many rules around them. And what the reporting showed us tonight is that patrol rifles were deployed 330-something times last year. That's almost every day. And when military weapons are becoming everyday weapons in our community, that's a problem. We also heard that Patrol rifles were deployed 86% of the time, were used in search warrants. This is often happening in houses. And you know who's in houses? Children, elderly people, deaf people, whole vulnerable communities that may not be able to respond to an officer's command. And what we learned about patrol rifles, what we know about them is they're designed for accuracy at long range. If you get shot at close range, the chances of it being fatal are very, very high. So I also want to say briefly that I'm originally from Missouri. My dad was raised two blocks from where Mike Brown was shot. And one of the terrible things that arose from that incident when it happened was the police response to the community's grief was a militarized response. And I've seen firsthand how that can absolutely tear apart a community. We talked about a lot of costs here, but one of the things we didn't talk about is the cost to the community when military weapons are deployed upon them. And I want to really urge this council to keep that in mind when they are thinking about whether or not to authorize any new military weapons.

Time has expired.

We urge you to say no.

Our last in person speaker.

It's time to extend the meeting. So I need a motion and a second.

I extend the meeting until this item is heard. 11.

I second it.

Council Member Brown.

Mr. Mayor, I want to make a motion to suspend the rules so that we can finish all the items that we have left. We continue moving items forward and we're never going to be done.

Staff has gone home.

That's my motion.

I second. And could we sort of modify it to the items that do not require staff being present?

Yeah.

Second.

Can I make a comment before we vote on this? So one of the reasons why we created the rules around stopping at 11 o'clock is because after 11 o'clock we are not having a public meeting. Who is awake? Who can participate? It is a disservice actually to bring important issues when the public can't really participate. I just want to say that.

Councilmember Brown yes is on the substitute motion Yes, okay councilmember Bonner I'm saying Push your boat.

I abstain.

Oh, okay. Sorry Councilmember Jimenez no councilmember Wilson. No Mm-hmm vice mayor Robinson. No council members of Peter. Yes mayor Martinez.

No I

The motion fails. Council Members Brown and Zepeda voting yes and Council Member Bonner abstaining. Now we'll take a vote to extend the meeting to finish this item.

Board 211.

Okay. And that was a motion by Council Member Jimenez, second by Council Member Bonner. Council Member Brown.

Yes.

Council Member Havana? Yes. Council Member Jimenez? Yes. Council Member Wilson?

I'm sorry, we're voting to extend it.

Extend the meeting to finish this item or until 11 o'clock? Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson? Yes.

I just want to make sure that I'm voting to extend the meeting until 11, which is at the time when the rules ends in the meeting. And if we are able to do additional items, then that's great. Right? That's what I'm voting on?

Yes. Yes. We are voting them to these items or .

That's different.

Yeah. That's it, I think.

Okay, the motion was by Council Member Jimenez, second by Council Member Vanna.

Council Member Jimenez said this item, then corrected it until 11, but you read it as or. Actually, it's extended until 11.

It can't be either or. It has to be one or the other.

So it was extended until 11? Yeah. Okay.

Yes, on extending to 11.

Okay, Councilmember Zepeda?

No.

And Mayor Martinez?

No.

The motion passes with Councilmember Zepeda and Mayor Martinez voting no. Okay, our last in-person speaker was Alan Munguya.

I want to preface this with I'm speaking not on behalf of the Department of Defense. I'm not speaking on behalf of the United States Air Force. I'm speaking on behalf of the East Bay Coyotes and all working class citizens here in the Bay Area. For 10 years, I served as a security forces fire team member. I've done five deployments. I've flown over 20 missions as a Phoenix Raven flyway security team member. I'm familiar with this equipment. It should not be here. It just shouldn't. I love this flag. I love that flag. I love my home. I love the Constitution I swore to uphold. I do not love seeing the equipment I was trained with being used on my neighbors, on my community. To me, that's just egregious, unacceptable. the time people want to thank me for my service I said it's not necessary support is enough but if you really want to thank me for my service I asked my fellow citizens to use your rights as you are now to speak up for your communities organized and if this council wants to thank me for my service they will vote no I feel I incredibly blessed to come back home alive, not like my other fellow service members to be able to act on the Constitution we fight for. So please, I beg you, if you want to thank me for my service, and I know everybody always wants to, you will do exactly that. Thank you.

That was our last in-person speaker. Now we'll move to the online speakers.

The first online speaker is Sal Chiel, followed by Richmond resident Amber Hartfield, Hope Dixon, Rebecca Kay, Raymond Windale, Janice Haugen, and the last speaker is Philip Rosenthal. Sal Chiel, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, I'm Lorraine Ressa, a D6 Richmond resident. I have critical concerns about the use of military grade weapons used against us, your residents. I urge the entire council and Mayor Martinez to demand more transparency in RPD's report to deny RPD from acquiring any more military grade weapons and invest that money back into our neighborhoods. RPD wants us all convinced how necessary this equipment is to protect themselves against incredibly violent criminals, yet crime is down in Richmond. Richmond is not a war zone, nor should RPD be given license to act as it is, regardless of how easy they say it is for the public to purchase. And just because RPD confiscated weapons doesn't mean they need to use military-grade weapons. The fact that the report shows that any of these weapons have been deployed and used disproportionately against residents of color does not surprise me. What alarms me is that RPD is still allowed to use our tax dollars to acquire such weapons and there is little transparency about the purchase and training or lack thereof. In fact, RPD actually makes the situation more violent, such as in the notable incident they cited. Why don't you just say his name? The murder of Angel Montaño, who we know is in the throes of a mental health crisis when he was shot nine times at close range by RPD, was the only time a patrol rifle and ammunition were used, as stated in the report. As stated in their own slideshow, Angel was not wearing body armor, nor was he at a distance, and while armed, only had one knife on him. This was not a situation that necessitated greater accuracy or capability than a handgun. Yet RPD felt it was necessary to murder him with a military-grade weapon at close range. This report and RPD's presentation actually proves what we all know. Military-grade weapons are not necessary to protect the public. They actually harm the public fatally. I urge the entire council to protect us, Richmond residents, aka your neighbors.

Thank you. The next speaker is Richmond resident. Please state your name for the record. Please unmute yourself and state your first and last name for the record. You may begin. Richmond resident. Okay, we'll go back to that person. The next speaker is Amber Hatfield. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening.

My name is Amber. Please proceed.

Amber Hatfield, Good evening, my name is amber hatfield and i'm a district three resident and would like to urge the Council to deny any requests by our PD for additional purchases of military grade weapons for uses in our Community. Amber Hatfield, As the parent of a young neuro diverse and gender diverse child it breaks my heart to know that both of these identities, make it statistically more likely. that any future police encounters my child has will end in violent arrest or death. There are too many stories of US police using lethal force against young people going through mental health crises, including the story of Angel Montano. RPD shot Angel with a Colt M4. As I understand from the report, that was the only deployment of a Colt M4 last year. Every additional bullet we authorize for this type of automatic assault rifle is one that is likely to take the life of someone who needs help. Because I believe in the transformative power of human connection, I serve on the Community Advisory Board for ROC. We need funding for crisis response specialists, care navigators, and administrative staff. Instead of funding fear and death, let's fund life. Also, I want to draw a connection here to the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people still being carried out with US military weapons and funded by our tax dollars despite the so-called ceasefire. Israel uses military drones to kill children as young as 10, like the boy who was murdered while fetching water in Gaza just five days ago. The weapons technology being used there will eventually be used here. We already know that Flock has access to data footage from military drones used by RPD. As it stands, we have no control over how Flock will use that data. and which agencies they will choose to allow access. We don't know how RPD came to acquire an additional seven drones to the tune of $300,000 in 2025 without following notification protocols required by AB 481. Please rein in the spending. Each dollar we spend on militarization secures nothing but a fascist future.

Thank you. Next speaker is Hope Dixon. Hope, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, thank you. My name is Hope Dixon, and I am a Richmond resident in District 2 in Point Richmond. And first, I just want to thank the Richmond Police Department for this report. And I really, really want to thank the City Council tonight for making the request to have the additional information put in the report. I think that data is incredibly important because it helps us make data based decisions and that's what you're allowing to happen. And so I know that it can be a lift, but I really think that it's truly, truly helpful. So thank you for that. I don't see Any of this being very easy, we saw some images that were kind of terrifying. We saw a flock video that made me confused because I thought that we were only capturing license plates. But I digress. And so I just kind of want to give something that I've learned recently as kind of like some strategy as you think about, you know, kind of these decisions moving forward. Who benefits? Who pays? Who decides? Maybe the community will benefit, but we know police will. They'll feel better protected. They'll feel better armored. Who pays? We know it's our community. We know it's our tax dollars. And who decides? That's up to you. Because right now, you know, once additional weapons are placed in RPD's hands, then they get to decide always. And in our current circumstances in the world, it is absolutely terrifying. Mass surveillance. I just can't. The drones, and it really does, like, every time I see imaging of Israel and the war in Palestine, I just, like, that's all I think about with drones now is, you know, them calling them and saying, hey, go into this field and we're going to kill you. And if you don't do it, we're going to blow up your whole family who you're with right now. It's just absolutely dreadful. And so I just ask, how are we going to continue moving Richmond forward? How are we going to do just transition? Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go back to Richmond resident. Richmond resident, device name Richmond resident, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm a longtime Richmond resident. I just want to say that tonight there have been a lot of speakers from Reimagine Richmond. I'd like us to not forget that the Richmond Police Department was recognized by the Obama administration as an example of good community policing. The detractors tonight are making the possession of the equipment the issue. when the equipment is not used daily against our community. It is not. The issue is what does RPD need to respond to better protect the community and limit the loss of life during catastrophic events? Would you send a police officer with a handgun but no patrol rifle up against someone with an automatic weapon? Drones can provide officers with real-time information to assess developments of situations on the ground that can save lives and limit even high-risk pursuits by providing continuous visuals from the air. RPD needs to be able to respond effectively to dangerous situations and the people who should have the final say in what they need to do their job are the people trained to do the job, not people who don't have to face life and death decisions every single day. Thank you. Thank you.

The next speaker is Rebecca Kay. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, my name is Rebecca Kenny. I live in El Cerrito, half a block from the border with Richmond. When I was 19, I had a psychiatric incident and my roommates called 911 for me, hoping that I would get help. And the police showed up and I was transported to a psych facility in the back of the police car. And in the aftermath, when I was in a better headspace, when I hadn't even really processed the trauma of it all, the first thing that I thought was, thank God, all they did was hold me down. When my brother was 21, he had a psychiatric incident and a passerby on the street called 911, hoping that he would get help. And when I heard about it, the first thing I thought was, thank God he didn't get killed. Angel Montano's family called 911 hoping he would get help. And instead he was killed from close range by an assault rifle, by one of these patrol rifles that they say they need in case of, you know, a heavily armored suspect from a long range where they can't use a handgun. his family called hoping that he would get help and he was killed. And then to hear him spoken about as this notable incident where they just sort of brush it off as like, oh yes, I guess we suppose we'll mention this one notable incident and thank goodness we had this patrol rifle to kill this suspect who had a knife and don't mention the part where it was at close range and under none of the circumstances where they actually described needing a patrol rifle. or where they claim they might need a patrol rifle. And I wish I were there so that the police could tell me that this is how they would have talked about me or my brother.

Thank you. The next speaker is Raymond Wendell. Raymond, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening, City Council. My name is Raymond Wendell. I'm a current San Pablo resident with close ties to Richmond, and I'm calling to express my serious concern about the police department's acquisition and use of military equipment, as discussed in the report tonight. Studies have thoroughly demonstrated that the militarization of law enforcement does not lead to better outcomes. It does not improve officer safety. It doesn't improve community safety or crime rates. Instead, militarization sows distrust between law enforcement agencies and the communities they're supposed to be serving. I'm especially concerned about the police department's use of patrol rifles. A patrol rifle is very different from a standard handgun. It's a specialized firearm that is intended for extraordinary circumstances that require greater accuracy, like long distances and body armor. A patrol rifle is also far more lethal than a standard handgun. And I'm very, very troubled that this weapon was deployed 333 times by Richmond police officers in 2025. That is, in fact, every day, just about every day. That's treating a highly specialized weapon of war as a casual, everyday piece of equipment, and I don't think that's okay. And I'm especially disturbed by the fact that Richmond police officers used a patrol rifle to kill a beloved community member, Angel Montano. I don't understand why a patrol rifle was used in that situation when the officers were just feet away from Angel. He didn't have a firearm and he was not wearing body armor. I would like to see this council take patrol rifles out of officers' hands. And finally, California law dictates a very particular procedure for acquiring new military equipment. And it's very disappointing that the city sidestepped that process last year and allowed the department to acquire seven drones that were not requested as part of the AB 481 process. The council should not have signed off on those unlawful acquisitions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker is Janice Haugen. Janice, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Janice Haugen and I'm a Richmond resident. The Richmond Police Department was rarely able to catch and cite firework violators until they began using drones as first responders in July of 2025. Many California cities are using drone footage as firework violation evidence to curb danger to the community as well as to the user. Fireworks are not a victimless crime. Black market fireworks have become more powerful and therefore dangerous, not only causing injuries but deaths in California. They start fires, damage vehicles and structures, terrorize people with PTSD, autism, anxiety disorders and dementia, pets and wildlife. They put toxins in our air and water. They disturb sleep and peace of mind. And the used fireworks litter our streets. The firework violators block off streets, making passage not only inaccessible to cars, but also to emergency service vehicles, all the while increasing fire danger. It's a disaster waiting to happen. When I moved to Richmond 15 years ago, I was shocked that illegal firework Violators were allowed to act with impunity. Now that RPD has a method to document violations, please do not take it away, as the fireworks culture in Richmond will likely not stop if violators can't be caught. As a reminder, fireworks violations result in administrative, not criminal, penalties. They will neither go on a violator's criminal record, require jail time, nor tie up the criminal court system. Chief Simmons said that accepting this AB 41 report isn't about approving purchases, but a lot of the comments have been about that. So I'm confused. Anyway, thank you for listening. Good night.

Thank you. And the last speaker is Philip Rosenthal. Philip, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening, everybody. I just want to say that over the last few years, I have repeatedly seen the council and many council members and many members of the highly organized and sometimes highly funded groups that are constantly present with posters in these meetings dehumanize our police force and treat the criminals as if they are victims and the police force as if they are criminals. This is an imperfect world. I personally do not support all of the types of weapons that are being requested. But when we hear members of our community and council members suggesting that if there is crime happening in your neighborhood, particularly if it's violent or gun-related crime, which is absolutely going crazy these days in Richmond, that the police have to wander... The understaffed police force has to randomly wander your neighborhood looking for armed criminals when we could use drones to protect you without any weapons. So the police can't win with this current council because... If they ask for support that doesn't include weapons, they don't get that. And then if they use weapons, they do. So it's really very confusing to us to say, what do you want? In the meanwhile, where was ROC? during these mental crises that they are supposed to protect us against. So these social services, which we fund more than any other Bay Area community, are going to help in the future. We need the police to have the tools they need now.

Your time has expired. Thank you. And that was the last speaker.

Thank you. Thank you very much. SO NOW IT'S TIME FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? COUNCILMEMBER BANA.

THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. AND I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE WHO MADE A PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU EDUCATE US. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. ESPECIALLY THE GENTLEMEN FROM FRIENDS ORGANIZATION. SORRY, I DIDN'T GET THE WHOLE NAME. I THINK IT WAS AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE. I'd like your contact information, by the way, if you could leave it for me. So my questions. First of all, I'd like to say, as a public commentator said, public safety is our common goal, all of us. How do we implement it? I would like to start by saying that I'm proud of the city of Richmond, too. allocating budget to ONS, Office of Neighborhood Safety, and also ROC. And for our police department, my position is that we need to be able to recruit police officers. And some people mentioned they need to protect themselves. Of course they do. If they're going to have the job and they cannot protect themselves, how do you expect them to do their job? But my question is, and I also wanted to add that I sincerely wish for no rifles in Richmond, no rifles on Earth, but sadly, You know, arms industry provides more rifles than food in the world. My question is, number one question, which one of those items are optional? And I'd like to add to it the question that was brought up, why are we increasing the stockpile?

So I'll answer the second question first. In terms of the stockpile, which stockpile would you be referring to, Council Lombana? So I can be specific to the question. So you have to understand the dynamic is, number one, we're hiring new officers that require us to have new equipment to issue them. So we have to purchase more than what we have now in order to equip new ones when they come on. We have to replace existing ones. We have an obligation to have operational Equipment out in the field when we issue it to officers We train I'll just go with firearms training we train on a monthly basis Firearms, which is more training than I'm aware of any other agency in Contra Costa County. We want proficiency We want to know they're safe. We want to know that that they operationally can Handle the equipment that we're being issued to them that they know the policies that they know the procedures we incorporate scenarios into the training all kinds of scenarios so we can pick up on Deficiencies that a particular employee might have or an officer might have that we need to provide them extra training and that's a monthly basis. So stockpiles in terms of additional ammo goes towards training every single month as we're hiring new officers. We have to send them to the police academy. The city is, the police department is obligated to provide that new recruit with all of the training ammunition they're going to need for the six and a half months that they're going to be in the police academy. I think we have nine in the Police Academy right now. So we're required, I believe it's 2,500 rounds. Well, times that by nine, and that's just for this batch of trainees. And I think we've put close to 20 trainees through the Police Academy this month. So we're balancing organizational needs with training, with new hiring, with making sure that we have operational equipment, that we're trading things out as they age out. And so it's all of that to answer that question.

But, for example, chemical...

Same thing. So chemicals expire. We train on those on a regular basis.

So you actually...

Absolutely, yeah. Okay. Yes, yes. I didn't know. Part of being able to testify in court, we have to expose ourselves, actually. annually to the effects of the different chemicals so that in court when we testify as police officers, we're testifying to the extent in which we knew what force we were using because we had been exposed to that ourselves. That's an annual requirement. Chemical agents specifically have expiration dates that we have to move things out that will move them into training environments and then we have to replace them for in the field scenarios.

So what portion of these military, I don't consider drones actually military item. I think it's a misnomer. But the rest of them, what percentage of them are used by the SWAT teams and what percentage are used by the entire RPD?

So Captain Lopez, he's our commander of our SWAT team. I'll let him answer this question.

So pretty much every, so SWAT is Specialized Weapons and Tactics. So we utilize the tools and resources that we have, the training specifically. And all of our SWAT team members, they are our trainers for the departments. They go to specialized trainings. They are instructors. And so when you look at the list here of what we have, breaching shotguns, they utilize that on a routine basis. Chemical agents, not so much, only when the need arises for it. You might have a barricaded suspect. You might have a hostage.

I'm sorry. I know SWAT team uses everything. My question is non-SWAT. the rest of the police, the regular officers, patrol officers.

Sure.

Which items do they use besides drones from the military?

SWAT's everything. So the, for officers on patrol, you still have, remember, we have a collateral assignment, so our SWAT officers are also on patrol. They're also detectives. They also have collateral assignments. So when they're on patrol, it depends on what the case is. If you're looking for a specific number, I don't have that for you. But if there is a search warrant that they're conducting or if there is an incident where the crime that's going on dictates that they should produce a rifle on the scene, then they will use that.

But there are particular rifles that patrol officers that are not SWAT team members do not have access to. So I think that's what she's asking.

Correct, yes.

What of the military list is only SWAT capable or trained? The robots, right? SWAT team. Correct. So what items are those that are SWAT teams?

So I would just say the robots, and then there was also designated rifles that are specifically for SWAT, and that's it.

Thank you. And I remember there was talk about the de-escalation training after the incident regarding Angel, the very sad and unfortunate. Are there more de-escalation training for our police officers?

We train in de-escalation also on a monthly basis. It's incorporated into our firearms training. It's one of the things that's monthly when we're out at the range, we're going through. When I said scenarios, many of those are forcing the officer to enter de-escalation situations and then making a determination if they have to pivot. So de-escalation is part of everything that we do. Let me give you, there was some comments about real life examples. Just on the 4th of July, we had our officers encounter a particular group that was at least 500 strong that had barricaded the road and our officers negotiated with them for well over an hour. No force, no, we saw news articles of 4th of July of other jurisdictions having to put on helmets and batons to try to clear areas. We were able to address two of those types of situations on the 4th of July through negotiation, through de-escalation. It took a long time. And it's not always successful because the person you're de-escalating has to be willing to be de-escalated, right? Like de-escalation is a two-way street. It's not a magic wand that an officer can wave in a situation and expect that all of a sudden the situation changes. De-escalation requires both parties being willing to move from their position into an environment that doesn't result in any kind of force. We successfully did that on the Fourth of July in situations were very impressive to me as a police chief. I was very proud to see how our officers moved in an environment where I know for a fact other locals might not have gone that way, but it went that way for us. And I attribute that to training.

Thank you. So out of all the items you counted, which ones are optional? Like if you eliminate them, you still can do your recruitment and do your job.

They are all absolutely necessary because there are tools that we pivot to, Councilwoman Banna, in moments where you have to have the right tool available. You know, we learn from critical incidents all the time. We go to debriefs from like Uvalde and Columbine and these other locations, and you learn about what preparedness looks like. And if you could reflect back, we don't want a situation like that to unfold in Richmond. So we learn from where they unfold in other situations so that we can be the best prepared and understanding how we have to train, what resources we need to have available. Another real life example, February of 2024, Montalvan Manor, there was an individual in a neighborhood, residential neighborhood, firing rifle rounds at neighbors and people in front of his house. We were the first ones on scene. We had to wait almost three hours for a rescue vehicle to get there while bullets were going into neighbors' houses. We had no capacity at all to try to get to those neighbors, to try to get them out of their homes. We tried with patrol cars. Our patrol cars took rounds. And somebody mentioned about bullets going through cars. Those rifle rounds went through our cars like Swiss cheese. And you want to talk about being scared? You want to talk about being in a situation where you're wondering how are we going to get people out of these danger zones safely? The only way to do it was to wait for an armored rescue vehicle to get there. Real life situation, February 2024, East Bay Times, you can read about it yourself. That's one example. We used armored rescue vehicles nine times in 2025. It's on page nine in our report. So we're reporting on it, we're talking about it. Those are for high-risk situations where we're entering front doors of people's homes who have a history of committing violence against other people. Gun violence, homicide suspects, armed carjacking suspects, where we know they've got weapons in the house. We're not just randomly, you have to understand, We know what's going on in that house before we get there. And so we know what the risk is. We know what the association is. And we want to do it as safely as possible for the community. Yes, for ourselves as well. But those are some real life examples. And that's page nine. We reported on it. It's there. The 2024 one was the one before that.

Thank you very much.

Council Member Cepeda.

Thank you for the presentation. I agree as well. I wish that we lived in a place where we didn't have to use any military-grade guns. However, we're not quite there yet. I don't know if we can put any signs, say, don't bring your guns inside of Richmond. Don't think it'll work. We try that with fireworks. Can you tell me, I don't know very much about guns. I don't own one myself. Can you tell me more about guns? What's the difference between and I don't know if you're wearing a gun now or not, but just a regular handgun versus these military-grade guns. Why not just stick with the ones you have?

So, and I'm going to have Captain Lopez chime in here too, but so a pistol or a... Sidearm for lack of a better word are usually for close range Emergency situations. They don't have the same accuracy We qualify on a rifle a minimum of a hundred yards distance Each rifle is sighted specifically to that user so you can't have like a 10 that everybody shares because everybody's optics are different. Everybody's height is different. Everybody, the way they carry something is different. So a rifle is sighted in for accuracy uniquely and specifically to the individual operator, to the individual officer. Qualification is up to 100 yards. A SWAT team actually might go further. I'm not sure. It's 100. Okay, 100 yards also. And that is... All of the science in the state of California training applicable to municipal jurisdictions, cities that are high density, that's the range in which that you would likely have to use that type of a weapon. Also for barricaded suspects, we have stories of serving search warrants where people start firing shotgun rounds or rifle rounds through walls. Actually, the officers that were killed in Oakland several years ago, the four of them that were killed, they were shot through walls, and the capacity to return fire, to have a round that can go through the same wall in self-defense of the rounds that are coming in at them, are all some of the reasons why the different calibers and the different tools would be used in different situations. And I don't know if you want to add anything.

You nailed it. Thank you for that. I watched a documentary on Pulse nightclub. And there I learned a little bit about the different types of guns. And the documentary, I was not expecting to cry during the beginning of the documentary. But when the 911 calls came in, the officers ran to the club not knowing what was happening yet. And then they realized this person has a rifle, a semiautomatic rifle And the officers as they were doing this documentary, they also started getting teary eyed because they could not enter to help. They were hearing the people crying and literally dying, but they could not go in because they had pistols. And they could hear a semiautomatic. And they said if we go in, we die as well. Like there's no way to help anyone because we don't have the right tools. They had to wait over 30 minutes for SWAT to arrive. and we know what happened at Pulse nightclub. So that kind of shared the perspective of the different types of guns. I wish we live in a much better world but unfortunately these criminals have these guns that are making our community not very safe. I hope that we can make better laws at our state level and federal level to remove guns from other individuals that should not have them, and then I feel like we can act accordingly. I just want to put that out there. That documentary really showed the difference of the guns, and they also showed the drones they were using and the robots they were using, and some of them were not very well equipped. So again, it was a tool that they could have had. If they didn't have a drone, they just had a robot But the drone, as they were mentioning, could have entered and they could have seen where the individual was because he was hiding with other bodies and other people that were still alive under the body. So they just couldn't see it because they didn't have the right tools. Again, it was a matter of waiting for time and time and time and time, and more and more people ended up dying. In regards to the drone, I want to thank you and actually pause to thank you for the great job for the 4th of July. I did hear about the multiple site shows and stuff that were happening and you guys did a great job in making sure that the community was safe and you had them go back home. So thank you for that. And then a great job catching the sexual predator that was happening in Point Richmond. It was a drone that helped capture that I believe there. I remember driving over and seeing the drone flying and you were trying to figure out where in the bushes and where in the park he went to. And we don't have the human power to try to find them, but the drone was able to see from far away. So that's another win for the community. About how many hours does it take TO PULL THIS REPORT AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN AT THIS MEETING FOR A WHILE ALREADY. TRYING TO QUANTIFY.

SO WE ACTUALLY SAT DOWN AS A TEAM NOT THAT LONG AGO TO TRY TO QUANTIFY THAT ALSO. CAPTAIN LOPEZ HIMSELF PROBABLY LOGGED ABOUT 250 HOURS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. AND THERE WERE PROBABLY ABOUT A DOZEN MEETINGS THAT WE HAD THAT WERE ANYWHERE FROM ONE TO TWO HOURS EACH. AND THAT'S JUST TO QUANTIFY US. Lieutenant Patchen is our drone as a first. He's our unmanned aerial, what's the actual? Unmanned aerial UAS. UAS. Systems. Unmanned aerial systems manager. And the hours that he put in with his team making sure the information was coming back accurate, because we don't have automated systems, so we're doing, we're tallying and we're counting, we're verifying, we're going back checking logs and making sure that what we're putting out is correct. We have a crime analysis, that's her full-time job. She's actually here tonight as well, extra hours, has spent extra hours with us making sure that the information that Captain Lopez is putting together and that we're gonna report on is all accurate. So we're probably close to collectively around 500 hours WORK BETWEEN EVERYBODY THAT WAS INVOLVED TO MAKE THIS THING HAPPEN, WHICH IS WHY IN MY OPENING I WAS URGING THE COUNCIL TO PLEASE KEEP THE GOLD POST WHERE IT IS BECAUSE IT TAKES A LOT IF IT GETS MOVED AGAIN.

FOR THE GOLD POST, TONIGHT WE ARE NOT APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ANY AMMUNITION OR GUNS OR ANYTHING ELSE. IT'S JUST RECEIVING THE REPORT.

So it's actually for acquisitions for next year as well. So all the consumable ammunition, the 10 rifles that were already approved on budget. So this is us coming to council. This is what's mandated. And then what else was there? The armored rescue vehicle, as the chief was mentioning, that's for consideration. That's something we're still discussing. And there was one more that was on there.

Yeah, that's not for an approval tonight.

That's not for an approval for tonight.

So all the other stuff we have current contracts for. So what I was saying earlier is we're not asking for any new contract on anything. There's no request to bring in a new vendor right now or add anything extra. We did include the rescue vehicle because we would like to come back to council when we find funding. We would like to come back. A lot of the funding opportunities that we find require... pre-council acknowledgement that they would consider a purchase of a rescue vehicle before we would even qualify for grant funding. So we want to have this in front of the council tonight to get some guidance on whether or not we can bring this back to council later if we find funding opportunities.

If I can add one more thing, I appreciate what your statement was regarding the shooting and the mass shooting that occurred. I always want to put something forward to the council. The men and women of the Richmond Police Department are trained in active shooters to go in. We do active shooter training for City Hall, for the employees here at the city. If I'm in a situation, even as a captain, and I'm not wearing a vest right now, If I hear of an active shooter going on anywhere in the city of Richmond, probably anywhere at all, I have six children. I am going into those buildings. And if I don't have the proper resources and tools, guess what? I'm still going in. But it's better off that our staff, our officers, they have the resources, they have the tools, they are needed to get home safely to their children as well. Thank you.

That was part of what we learned with the Columbine shooting and the Valdi shooting. And if you followed either, there's other ones too, but officers stood outside while people were being killed. And our training and our policy and our expectation when we take that oath of office is you understand and you accept you could find yourself in that situation. And your role is to put other people's lives above your own if you can.

Thank you for that. Thank you for your service. And hopefully it doesn't come to that. In the past couple of years, we've had six incidents in our local high schools since 2022 that involved some kind of gun either inside of the school or right around the high schools. So hopefully we don't get anything worse. It sounds like they were contained and taken care of. So I want to appreciate it. Thank you for everything you guys have done. Thank you for the report. I have no other questions for this time. And thank you.

Councilmember Jimenez.

Yeah, thank you. I wanted to thank Chief Simmons for meeting with me.

Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Councilmember Brown had her hand up at the same time I did.

Okay, so go ahead.

Thank you, Councilmember Fonda. I want to recognize and honor that many of the community members who have expressed concerns about disproportionate police experiences. But yet the report states that there were zero formal complaints and zero policy violations related to the equipment during this reporting period. And I'm not saying that those zero complaints equates that there were no concerns. But what I'm saying is that our department has done an amazing job at improving a now robust reporting system. And if you could please clarify, I think the last time we met on this topic in this item, we even extended the reporting period. FOR THOSE WHO NEEDED MORE TIME TO MAKE THE REPORTS. IS THAT ACCURATE?

YEAH, WE ACTUALLY WILL TAKE ANY, WE WON'T STOP ANYONE FROM REPORTING NOW. WE WILL TAKE A COMPLAINT ON THAT AT ANY POINT IN TIME.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND TO THAT POINT, COUNCILMAN BROWN, IF I MAY, SO I WANT TO, BECAUSE THE WORD TARGETED WAS USED TARGETED AGAINST. YEAH. AND I WANT TO ACTUALLY SPEAK TO THAT IF THAT'S OKAY?

SURE.

OKAY. I want the council and the public to know the Richmond Police Department does not proactively deploy AB 41 equipment on individuals, on people. Military equipment is deployed in response to a call for service. It's in response to a critical incident. It's in response to a criminal investigation. Officers do not decide who becomes the subject of a criminal investigation or based upon personal characteristics. Those decisions are driven by facts, evidence, and circumstances of each individual case that is brought before or that precipitates the need to deploy a drone or the need to deploy a rifle or a flashbang or a SWAT callout. Those are not proactive activities. Those are the results of investigations where facts and evidence have brought that situation into fruition.

Okay, so that's similar to like the next question that I have because I was hearing from many of the callers and folks that expressed concerns that officers are casually deploying these rifles. And so I just want to ask what prompts a rifle deployment? Is it at the officer's discretion or is there a specific protocol?

It is at the discretion of the officer, but it's predicated on the need to use that tool based upon the call that they are being responded to. They're responding to a call of an armed individual or like that little video clip we showed in our presentation where we knew we were going and somebody had an automatic rifle that we were able to see. And knowing that who knows however many weapons are there amongst the group. how to safely, tactically enter and go in without having to deploy any kind of force. But it's predicated upon the facts, known at the time by the officer.

Okay. Thank you for that. And so again, tonight we're going to be, the recommended action is that we're approving no new weapons, but like the continued use of the existing equipment, correct? Yeah. Okay. And then are there any penalties associated with rejecting this report?

Yeah, it would have an immediate impact on our ability to have our officers use the equipment that's listed in this report.

Okay, is there like a state mandate that we approve this report or is there any penalties associated like on the state level as well?

Not a penalty other than it restricts the police department from being able to utilize any of the equipment that's listed in the statute.

Okay. And for the sake of time, I'll save my other questions so my colleagues will be able to speak as well. But I just want to reemphasize, reiterate the goalposts mentioning earlier. I think that's so significant, especially in this situation, because we've seen the department just make so many abrupt changes and modifications. And you all delivered and provided that. And so it's like now we want to, it seems like we're trying to create a problem that doesn't exist. Because if you look at the reports, you're seeing a massive number of deployments, but the deployments are, are they sort of preventative tactics to reduce the, to reduce actually the use of excessive force.

Like rifles, for instance, 86% of them were on SWAT high-risk search warrants.

Yeah.

So that's almost 100% of all of the use of the rifles, right? So yeah, I mean, they're used in very unique situations.

Okay. So I just again want to reiterate the goal post because you mentioned something very critical earlier in your presentation about the surrounding departments having very structured and minimal reports. And this was, if I've never seen a comprehensive report before, this was that today and should be modeled amongst other folks as well. But I just would hope that we do not continue fearmonger the community with the word militarization or try to weaponize the word transparency because I believe that the department has been extremely transparent and extremely responsive to the council's request. Thank you.

Council member Jimenez.

Thank you so much. Again, thank you, Chief Simmons, for meeting with me and we talk about these. I sent you some information that I am going to read here so you can, I hope that you are prepared because I sent it to you ahead of time. First, I want to say that the department has taken seriously the policies and the direction that the council had been telling you to do with this report. I think what we want to continue is to improve. We are more transparent, especially because it's not us calling this military equipment. It's the state who is calling that. And it's military equipment. Let's call it like it is, right? And if we were not being here doing this report, it's not something that the council PUT THERE, IT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME FROM THE STATE, AND WE AS CITY COUNCIL HAD A MANDATE TO TELL HOW WE WANT THIS, AND I AM REALLY HAPPY THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN SO OPEN TO REALLY IMPROVE THIS IN A WAY THAT IS LIKE 50 PAGES. Many of these pages, like ten of them, are, I believe, the incident log. which give us a lot of information. And more information will be better so we have information for the community and the answers of all the questions that the community has. And one other thing is, I am surprised, even if not any report, but I would like to see, like, how many reports in the Community Police Review Commission, because 17% of the population is the black community, and 32.6% since the black community, the use of this equipment, 32.6% or almost more than that, was deployed to the black community. So that is a question, right? And we don't have to answer it right now, but there is something that we should be taking into consideration. I want to also, my question is about the drums, and particularly because I want to make sure that we are following the requirements of AB 481, and especially to protect the civil rights of community. So one of the things that I understand is that every time that military equipment, according to the leads of what military equipment is by the state, you had to come to present the use policy of that. HAVE AUTHORIZATION. IT SEEMS THAT THE RPD HAS ACQUIRED SEVEN ADDITIONAL DRUMS SINCE IT WAS REPORTED LAST YEAR, WHICH DID NOT INDICATE INTENT TO ACQUIRE MORE. AND THIS NEARLY DOUBLES THE NUMBER OF DRUMS REPORTED LAST YEAR TO 15. But what I didn't see was that it was coming for request approval, so of acquisition of these new ones. And then the use of the drones, especially new models, are not as clear in the drone use policy um so i just want like i think like we need one of the things that i will require of this is to really work on uh outdating these uh policies so it gets to what actually you already have and how you use it because one of these drums are the ones who can go inside the house and like

They are so many other things that our policy addresses that already I could speak to some of this if yes Yes, please so let me first speak to the acquisition of the new drones. I'll take that as a two-part question so under a previous administration the belief what the time was that if The council had approved these these use this particular items that were in the report that then if That authorized then the purchase of items that were in the report because they were approved by the council. The cost of those drones were minimal. Like I said, I think a few of them are the same ones that you can go get at Best Buy. So they didn't reach a threshold where it required a council expenditure amount or there was no new vendor required. They were one-off purchases and the interpretation of what was in the report and the law at the time WAS THAT THESE DRONES WERE AUTHORIZED TO USE IN THE LAST REPORT. SO ADDITIONAL ONES WERE ACQUIRED. NOW, MY POSITION ON IT MOVING FORWARD NOW THAT I'M THE POLICE CHIEF IS ANY TIME WE ACQUIRE ANYTHING NEW THAT'S ON THIS LIST OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT, IT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.

WHAT ABOUT THE USE?

SO THEN THE USE OF THE INDOOR ONE ARE THE PREAMBLE OF THAT WHOLE POLICY STATES, POLICY Yeah, pull it up for me, please.

UAS policy.

Yeah.

One second.

UAS revision policy 607. So.

That's the revision.

Yeah, where's the section I want to read? We have a there's a there's a slot while he's looking at I'll speak to it there's we have a section on the policy that mandates that drones that are that are being used inside indoors that they comply with Exigent circumstance law or search warrant law so exigent circumstance search warrant arrest warrants it is safer to deploy an indoor drone than it is to deploy a human being, right? So previously I think somebody mentioned, I can't remember, but going into a situation where we're not bringing a weapon in, if we can clear a house with an indoor drone, that I think anybody can see and understand how that would be a safer option, a more clear option. We have either an exigent circumstance or we have a search warrant or we have an arrest warrant So there's a lawful reason to be in that house. And that's what's covered in the policy section that mandates when a drone is to be used indoors, it has to comply with those laws.

Yeah, I know. I don't disagree with you in these things, but I think they are some new models of drums that you acquire that maybe a better explanation in the used drum policy will be needed. Maybe we can talk about that more.

Is my time up? Okay, well...

Mr. Mayor, we have just a couple of seconds. I move that when this meeting adjourns that it stands adjourned to this coming Tuesday at 5 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. That's my motion. I second. I'll repeat it. I move that when this meeting adjourns it stands adjourned to this meeting coming Tuesday at 5 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.

It is 11 o'clock. Yes. We are adjourned. Well, this motion stands.

This second happened before. Trump did another motion, so we'll have to take a vote on it.

For staff's sake, can I understand where does that leave us at on Tuesday? Like, what do we enter in? Where do we come back to?

I'M CONFUSED.

RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CONVERSATION.

CAN I MAKE A MOTION?

WE ARE PAST TIME. WE ARE ADJOURNED.

THE MOTION WAS ON THE FLOOR PRIOR TO THE EXPLORATION OF THE TIME.

THIS TRUMPS ANYTHING ELSE. VOTE, PLEASE.

I NEED TO LISTEN TO THE MAYOR. MOTION TRUMPS THE ENDING TIME? YES.

THIS PARTICULAR MOTION. I'M NOT STARING AT THE CLOCK. WAS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR BEFORE THE END OF, YES, IT WAS BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE TIME.

MORE OR LESS. IT STARTED BEFORE AND ENDED AFTER.

I'M WATCHING THE CLOCK.

I WAS TOO.

Obviously because he would have seen that the motion was on the floor before the expiration so for clarity what councilmember Zepeda is doing is trying to to adjourn this meeting to a date certain of so adding an additional meeting on Tuesday July 14th to continue this item and the remaining items from the agenda Trying to add a meeting

I already did that before the time expired.

Can you repeat the motion? Yep, just what the, she phrased it.

Can you repeat the motion? Yes.

So my understanding of his motion is that he is, we're ending the meeting now, except it's being continued until next Tuesday, which is July 14th. at 5 p.m. So you provided a date and time certain. And the purpose of that is not to add new agenda items, but it's to continue this item and then the remaining items that are existing on this agenda. So it would be adding an additional meeting.

I will not be here next Tuesday. I'm on vacation starting Friday.

I'll just require a motion. We're done with debate.

We're not.

I haven't spoken.

And I haven't spoken.

Is anybody else on the list?

Oh, I was waiting until...

Well, if we're continuing the meeting, we'll pick back up where we left off.

Yeah. He's out of town. Can we continue with...

The motion's still there. It is actually not up for debate, so we're debating it. So this is the only motion that does not require debate. So, Ms. Clerk.

I'm sorry, next Tuesday at 6 p.m.? 5 p.m. But don't you make it 6 p.m.? We can make it 6 p.m.. Yeah, next Tuesday.

No you make your motion Then we'll stick with five is she amending the motion We'll stick with five Meetings usually start at 3 30 supposedly if we kept to the rules So there are we ready to vote on this item yes councilmember Brown I

Yes.

Council Member Bonner?

Yes.

Council Member Jimenez? No. Council Member Wilson? No. Vice Mayor Robinson?