Youth Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'm going to call to order the meeting of the City of Sacramento Disability Advisory Commission for Wednesday, June 3rd. Oh, roll call. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. It's been a minute since I've chaired these meetings. Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Yes, thank you, Vice Chair. Commissioners, if you can all please unmute your microphones for roll call. Commissioner Greenbaum is absent. Commissioner Barnbaum?

Here.

Commissioner Patel? Here. Commissioner Guerrero is currently absent. Commissioner Wilson?

Here.

Commissioner Dyson is absent. Commissioner Knapper? Here. Commissioner Polin? Here. Commissioner Iguigbe is absent. Commissioner Carr is absent, Chair Kramer is also absent, and Vice Chair Ellis.

Present.

Thank you, we have a quorum.

Thank you, Clerk. Will everyone please rise, if you are able, for the land acknowledgement, which will be read by Commissioner Barnbaum.

Thank you, everyone, please rise. Please rise for the opening acknowledgements in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands. To the original people of this land, the Nisenan people, the Southern Maidu, Valley and Plains, Miwok, Patwin, Wintun, peoples and the people of the wilton rancheria sacramento's only federally recognized tribe may we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for sacramento's indigenous people's history contributions and lives thank you

Please join me in 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. Thank you. You may be seated. into our agenda. So our first item on the agenda is the consent calendar. Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar?

Mr. Vice Chair, Commissioner Barnbaum, make a motion to approve the consent calendar as written by staff.

Is there a second? Vice Chair, may I? Sure. Yes. Commissioner Knapper? All right.

I should say my name. I'd like to pull item two for the follow-up log from the consent calendar Sure, we can take them each item separately.

So I will accept the friendly amendment to pull the follow-up log by request of Commissioner Poland Sounds good.

So this first motion is just to approve the minutes. Is there a second?

Second

We can just do a voice vote. Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Abstentions? Unanimous. And then is there a motion to approve the follow-up log? Any comments on the follow-up log? Sorry, discussion on the follow-up log. Commissioner Pullen.

Thank you, Vice Chair. I pulled item two because the follow-up log is the mechanism by which this commission places items on future agendas and tracks the status of our recommendations. Approving it on consent without comment makes its current dispositions our record. I wanted to focus on recommendations six, seven, and eight from the 2024 annual report, which is the DEIB training update, the RGEAP revision, and the Racial Equity Committee presentation. On Recommendation 8, the log correctly reflects that this commission presented to the Racial Equity Committee on October 21, 2025. That part is done. But for Recommendation 6 and 7, the log shows not implemented, and the only update in the staff status column is that we presented at the REC meeting, which isn't a status update. It's a trigger event for what should have followed. Three things have happened since that October 21st that should be in this log and aren't. First, at that meeting, the then interim city manager, Milstein, committed that phase two of the mandatory DEI training would include disability content and that future phase one make-up sessions would as well. That commitment isn't reflected in the log. And then phase two procurement Procurement is currently titled mandatory racial equity training, not mandatory DEIB training. So whether that request for proposal scope language honors this October commitment or not is a live question that I think we should address. And then second, the Diversity and Equity Manager stated that the ODE convened in September 2025 to develop a results-based accountability framework, and that she's open to reimagining the thing that we are recommending to include disability using that framework. But it expires this year. Also, Council Member Vang encouraged this commission, the DAC and the ODE, to connect directly on that work. And none of that is in the log. And then finally, the Workplace Diversity and Salary Trends Audit was heard at Budget and Audit on May 26th. 206 pages, zero mentions of disability. The audit doesn't engage Recommendation 7 and that isn't referenced in the log either. So under Rule 17b of Council Rules and Procedures, the follow-up log is required to include estimated agenda date or disposition of each item. So I'd like to request on the record that the next version of this log include status from the three offices on Recommendations 6 and 7, from Human Resources on Phase 2 training, scope, language, and whether it requires disability awareness content, from ODE on the RGEAP successor framing, and then from the Office of the City Auditor on the scope of the workforce diversity audit. With those requests on the record, I will support approving the log. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Pullen. The records shall so reflect, and I believe staff can move forward accordingly. Any other discussion on the follow-up log? Seeing none, is there a motion?

I'll move to approve.

I'll move by Commissioner Pullen. Is there a second? I'll second that motion. So seconded. Do a voice vote. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. All those opposed? Abstentions? Unanimous.

And for the record, there were no public comment.

on the consent calendar. Thank you. We're going to take a couple items out of order on our agenda. Instead of moving into the discussion calendar, we're going to take up the staff report. So I'm going to turn it over to Jesse for the staff oral report.

Thank you vice chair Ellis for our project updates Stephanie size and for me we have no updates. This meeting, but we do have some special guests. So Jennifer don and why it is here and Eric of the lane allow them to introduce themselves and report back on some topics that have come up and some of our project reviews on the topic of scooters. So with that, I'll hand it over to these two.

Great. Thanks, Jesse, Vice Chair Ellis, and commissioners. I'm Jennifer Donlan-Wyant. I serve our city as division manager for mobility and sustainability within the Public Works Department. And with me is Erica.

Hi, I'm Erica Gallang. I am the section manager at the Mobility, Parking, and Curb Management section. And our team focuses on the shared rideables and mobility.

Great. So Erica is new to our division and our team, and I heard that you all had some comments and questions on the scooters. So I thought I would just come give a quick update, get a feel for where you're at, and see what we can do for next steps. So our team manages the policy and the permitting program for shared rideables, otherwise known as shared scooters or shared bikes. We come to the DAC any time we have an update to our regulatory framework. So I think we've been here at least three or four times because we've had three or four updates to the regulatory practices that we had. It's been a couple years since we updated them, though we will be, it's in our work plan to update them again. I understand that there were questions and concerns about two main things, scooters being parked on sidewalks and then people scooting on sidewalks. Want to share that scooting on sidewalks is prohibited by California law. It's not even our regulatory framework. It is the state that prohibits that. Enforcement of those regulations are through the police department. However, through our regulatory policy, what we have enacted are a couple of things. We require that all scooters have stickers on them that say no scooting on sidewalks so that users understand that they're not supposed to. We also require that the operators do education to their customers so that they know that they are not supposed to scoot on sidewalks. Another issue that I understand that you have and that you face is something that we've been working on is scooters parked blocking accessible paths of travel. That is prohibited by the city regulatory framework and of course by federal ADA requirements. We have one, we also require that scooters be parked at either a bike rack or a drop zone. That is city requirements. We have partnered with a separate division, our parking division, our parking enforcement officers, issue citations for scooters that block an accessible path of travel. And so if it blocks a curb ramp, any part of a sidewalk, any those sort of areas, there is a $15 citation plus $12.50 state fees that we issue to the company because we can't know who parked the device. and that we require the company then pass on that citation to the person who parked it because they will know.

Excuse me, is this an agendized item? It's under the staff oral report. This isn't an oral report. This is the equivalent of an agendized item. This should be agendized as a separate item.

Okay, well maybe we can just summarize it with just what the California law is.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, I think you would need to bring this back as a separate agendized item.

My point, my question would be is what does the commission want to hear on so I can know who is the appropriate entity to bring back? Because if it's around enforcement, that's not my team. We set up the policies and procedures. Enforcement is through either the parking division within Public Works or through the Police Department.

Well, that seems like that would be something to talk to Mr. Goffin about what would be an appropriate agenda item to bring back.

Okay.

Can we at least allow the commissioners to at least kind of give staff a little bit of direction to bring back an item?

No. This is the equivalent of an agendized item. This needs to be brought back as an agendized item.

Mr. Vice Chair, per the advice of the attorney of the commission, I would make a motion to place this on the agenda for Wednesday, August 5th. Yeah, we can so direct staff to bring it back.

Well, why don't we, with the direction from the city attorney, I do apologize to my colleagues for coming. We're glad to be here. And we'll bring this back at a future agenda for a little more robust discussion. But maybe in the meantime, I can work with Jennifer and Erica and you, Vice Chair Ellis, on just the specific topic.

and try to formalize an agenda item. Yeah, okay.

Absolutely.

My apologies. Thank you for coming. Thank you for coming. We really do appreciate it.

We love coming to the DAC. We're happy to come before you. We've come before every iteration of our regulatory update. Thank you. We'll come again. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Did you have anything else as part of your oral report, Jesse? No, no, I don't. Thank you. So then we can move into the discussion calendar. And it's the item number three. So item number three is our recommendation from our annual report for a... CITYWIDE ACCESSIBILITY COORDINATOR POSITION, AND I BELIEVE, JESSE, THIS IS YOUR ITEM THAT YOU'RE PRESENTING ON.

I THOUGHT I'D COME DOWN HERE. SO, YEAH, THIS, AND I WANT TO INVITE OUR DIVISION MANAGER, OPHELIA AVALOS, TO COME DOWN AND JOIN ME. But we wanted to give an opportunity to discuss the disposition of this recommendation that the Disabilities Advisory Commission has put a lot of work into. And just for the record, it's to prioritize the reinstatement of the citywide ADA coordinator position in the next budget cycle. This position would enhance ADA programs citywide, collaborate with internal and external stakeholders, coordinate ADA activities, and provide leadership to advance the city's commitment to a strong and effective ADA program. The ADA coordinator would serve as the city spokesperson on ADA issues, staff the Disabilities Advisory Commission, bring forward at least one item annually under each of the commission's powers and duties, and recommend ADA-related policies and programs to the city council and city manager. This position does not currently exist in the city's salary schedule or classification And so this was heard by the commission, recommended on January 14th of this year, and it went before the Personnel and Public Employee Committee on February 24th. And they recommended that it go to the Budget and Audit Committee for consideration. And this was heard by the Budget and Audit Committee on May 5th. And City Council did approve the annual report on March 24th. And so there was discussion at the committee meetings and we want to acknowledge though that the position was not established in the current budget. And so our understanding is that the rationale of that is that each department has subject matter experts and within parks, within public works, public works hosts the commission and we bring our items before the Commission for Review and Comment. And so I just wanted to give this opportunity to rehearse the history of kind of where we've been this year and then offer the Commission the opportunity to discuss the item. And then also my division manager, Ophelia Avalos, is here also to give any additional feedback from staff. So maybe with that, I'll just turn it back over to you, Vice Chair.

Sounds good. Yeah, I think you recap kind of the history of this position pretty well. It's been in the last three or four annual reports, but this was the first time that the City Council pulled it out of the report and referred it to Budget and Audit, and I think that was a huge move. but again, it didn't get across the finish line. But I'll open it up to the rest of the commissioners for any kind of comment, discussion, or questions. Commissioner Poland.

Hi, Jesse. uh... thank you chair or vice chair uh... so i do have a few questions on this item so i will pause after each uh... so first just on the research uh... process for tonight's report i went and reviewed all the publicly available records related to the term ADA coordinator in the city of sacramento uh... and i didn't find any council action removing the position But the public record names at least five ADA coordinators or ADA managers, including citywide, going back to 2003, which is Michael Whipple, Rocky Burks, Michael Paravagna, Neil Alberton, and Jamie Kinney. And then in 2016 and 17, the budget documents the transfer of one FTE program specialist position from HR, to Public Works to support the ADA program. And the transfer represented a $124,000 reduction in human resources expenditure for risk management administration. So the position was funded, and then it was moved. Again, this was in 2017, moved, not eliminated. And so it was funded by the Risk Management Administration. So my question is, in preparing tonight's report, did staff examine the historical ADA coordinator function in that transfer? And do you know where that program specialist? I know the report says that you're requesting a program manager classification, but upon information and belief, THE PREVIOUS ADA COORDINATORS WERE UNDER THE CLASSIFICATION OF SPECIALIST. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHETHER THAT REMAINS IN PUBLIC WORK'S BUDGET, IS IT ABSORBED INTO OTHER DUTIES, WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT?

SO IN RESEARCHING WHAT THIS POSITION WOULD ENTAIL AS A CITYWIDE COORDINATOR, I COORDINATED WITH HR AND LABOR RELATIONS AND THEY SAID PROGRAM manager position would be most comparable if it were established. As to the history of the program specialist, the various staff who have occupied that position I believe were program specialists in the Public Works Department and provided guidance on accessibility as related to improvements in the public right-of-way. Since then, I serve as that, as well as the senior engineers who would come and present projects to the DAC on accessibility in the public right-of-way. We're the subject matter experts, along with our electrical engineers. But as to how that position has changed, I can't really speak to that in terms of what happened in the budget cycle for the program specialist position. So, yeah.

Okay, so it's sort of this report, because specifically this report says that it doesn't exist in the salary classification, right? And so you're creating it.

The citywide one, right? As I understand it, the citywide ADA coordinator position, as envisioned, would be a program manager in the city manager's office. And that does not exist currently, yeah.

Okay. So the response from city council is that it's a budget issue, is that correct?

I don't know how to speak to that, honestly, yeah.

I would say that that would be my interpretation of what was said, more or less. I mean, they didn't specifically, you know, disapprove of it. It just wasn't included in the budget.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, I'm really... I'm really interested, rather, in that $200,000. I understand that when talking with labor relations and things like that, you're asking for a program manager. I completely understand. I think I can speak for myself. I feel like the commission would definitely prefer an ADA coordinator be a program manager that has the teeth to make things happen. But if we are sort of begging for scraps, Wouldn't it make more sense to rather reinstate what the city already has the mechanisms around than try to argue for a brand new position, especially in a deficit? I guess the question is, what is the determination between making it a manager versus a more comparable $160,000 if we're begging for money?

I think I would say that we cover it within the department right now in public works. But as the recommendation put forward, how does that work in HR and in labor relations? It would be a program manager position. So maybe I'm not following the question. So I think if it went back to Public Works, we're managing that with our staff, but we don't have the program specialist.

The way I understand the question is that we're asking for position A, and historically we had position B, right? And so can we ask for position B? Would it be more successful to ask for position B versus position A, which is the program specialist versus the program manager? I don't think that's... I don't see that as the issue, and this is my interpretation of what happened with this. It's not the city saying it. It's just what I'm viewing as being an attendant at the meetings. I don't think it's a matter of what type of position it is at, that's something that we can clarify in the future. It's getting an approval for the concept of an overall citywide ADA coordinator. Because the feedback that I have received is that we are doing our best to address ADA in each of the respective divisions. that a total ADA coordinator is not a specialist in a parks project, in a roadway project, in a facilities building, so that if we share that responsibility of making sure that all of the ADA requirements are being met in all of those specific technical areas, and that those are the best folks to incorporate those improvements, ADA improvements, following the laws that are given. And so an ADA coordinator would not be able to provide the technical guidance as a city overall, because we expand over various technical fields that are very specialized. And so that's my understanding of why spreading that to the specific departments and to everyone doing that work and making sure that all of the ADA compliance is in our documents, is on our plans, it's within our roadways, it's within our policies. Even IT, there are things that they need to do with the deadline with the California laws, too. They need to abide by. So they're the ones, we can't advise them how to do that. They know what the law is, and they have to figure out a way of doing it. And they're specialized in the IT programs. And so that's just an example I'm using. What, so by sharing the responsibility of ADA throughout the city and incorporating it into our technical documents, that that's the best way that we can reach this, you know, reach the goals of getting ADA compliance within the city.

So the program manager, so you're saying that the program manager

I'm not comparing the program manager with the program specialist. I think that's just a nuance with what we call what the position is. I think that just having an overall position is what I didn't see a lot of support for an overall position.

For ADA overall position.

I didn't see that in any of the council meetings. You know, it didn't come through like, and there was no champion coming behind that saying, yeah, we need this. It didn't come in through any of the memos that the council members submitted to the mayor. So I didn't see the support. And when asking why do you think we didn't get the support we needed, the feedback that I received was we are... There's too many specialties that one person can't help out with.

And I would agree with you. I think that is a fair characterization of what occurred. While our proposal did get referred to full council, that's why it didn't end up as a priority in the budget. That's kind of where it landed is it didn't then become part of the budget process in that it didn't become a priority in those memo documents and with the work between the mayor and the city manager. And I believe kind of the view from the city manager's point of view is they are that coordinating function across all the departments. Whether that's effective or whether we agree with that, I think that's where we disagree.

So then the report is not that there's no funding identified, it's that there's no support.

Is that what you're saying? No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that there was no funding identified. So, but your question was not about the funding. Your question was about the difference in the position. What I'm saying is that I don't think the, it's not, right now it's, we're not, we're not asking about, I don't think the nuisance is in the position name. It's in the actual getting an additional position for that in the city manager's office, right? That's what the ask is. Yeah, whether we have a position or not have a position. Okay.

Any other comments?

I'll let that sit.

Okay. Commissioner Wilson.

I'm going to skip because she asked my question. Commissioner Wilson. Good career. That's fine. Thank you. It's all good. Go, go, go. I don't have any comments because Commissioner Paul said the question that I was going to ask. So can you skip to the next commissioner?

OK, thank you. Commissioner Knapper.

Yes, thank you. Thank you for coming. I love all of what Commissioner Pullen stated. Is this currently under the role of the city manager? Is that what I heard, Vice Chair Ellis?

I'm sorry, can you say that again?

Did you say that the role, Jesse, is currently under the city manager? No, okay. So it's to create the role within the city manager's office. And the role is not to be in the nuance or the technical nuances per city department, right? There's ADA coordinators or whatever their titles are there. The position name. The position name would be the ADA program manager within the city manager's office. And they would have the citywide oversight to support all of the work that I made some kind of oversight in making sure everybody's following the rules and projects are moving along accordingly, according to the ADA, et cetera. So this is a broader role, right? That's what the ask was. Yes. So it's not to get in, it's not to talk about the, not to be so worried about the nuances of, you know.

A program specialist or program manager, yeah. It's a new position in the city manager's office is what the request was, right?

Correct. So the role that the Commissioner Pullen, may I ask a clarifying question if I may? Absolutely. What you lifted up, I'm not sure, were you lifting up that maybe there was a position existing and that position is there but vacant?

So what I was specifically mentioning about, I think we got off track with the idea of specialist versus manager. My argument was if what we're being told is there's not enough funding, that asking for the bigger position is probably politically a harder ask than saying, hey, we already had this throughout the years. We want it back. Now, it was never removed. The people that were there just retired. So that was my question about has it been absorbed to anything. And it was just a previous program specialist. And I think my specific question was, If it's just about budget, then why the program manager at the $200,000? Because that's a harder ask. But two, now I'm getting that we're back at the everybody thing, that we all have our role to play, which defeats the purpose of the recommendation. So that's what I was confused about.

I agree, and I thank you for lifting up your question. Is that role vacant? And then the other is, is it a role, if it is vacant, that could easily be moved over to the city manager's office? Anyway, I know it's not a, I can answer that question now, but I think I hear what Commissioner Pullen's saying, and I have similar concerns. I don't disagree, but thank you for, thank you. I guess I look up to a follow-up at some point.

Yeah, my guess, yeah, go ahead, Jesse.

On the question of is it a role that, I believe the perspective of the city managers, and maybe I'm restating it, and you all understand, is that there's, the responsibilities of the accessibility reviews and implementation are being handled by the departments, and there's, maybe not much in addition that this role would add to what Public Works, YPSE facilities are currently doing. So I think maybe that's the rub. And then would it create, maybe some overlap, right? If Human Resources is managing the accommodations for all city employees, what would a program manager as a citywide ADA coordinator assist that? And so maybe it's kind of like what you're saying, just maybe supporting each department in their roles.

yeah that's that's i mean that that's yeah there's two different things here that's the way it was and so your question is where is the position now and what happened to it we i don't we don't know i don't know that yet i don't know at this time i would have to go back and and follow that position in in our records and and figure out where that is because i wouldn't be able to um i mean i i got here four years ago and there was no ada that that position was not there in my division. So I would have to follow where that would be, you know, check in with HR and see.

And my guess is that. I don't have an answer for that. Yeah, what probably, my guess is what probably happened is from what just the history of me being on this dais is those duties kind of got spread across multiple positions. So the position is probably still within Public Works. doing a portion of this, but it's spread across, you know, several other roles within, I would guess. And I was on the commission ten years ago when it was under H.R. and it It was a very different time, I'll just say, in comparison to where we are now. So I think that's something to kind of keep in mind, too, that, you know, is this what we wanted it to be? And I think also I'll just take a point of privilege as the chair. I think this is some food for thought. uh for us to kind of ruminate about over the next several months as we go into doing our annual report for next year is i think there may be we may need to reframe this ask in a different way for it to better resonate with the city council if this is our you know i think this is a learning opportunity to see what we got and then kind of going from there and maybe we need to reframe it in the next report um taking into account some of the history um do we have any other speakers commissioner patel the way that i think i understand the role that we were hoping to see um i i have a wondering um

You know, I think we sit on this commission and we look at projects often. So it sounds like potentially a role existed in a different way slightly, and then it disseminated. So lots of people are touching it. And I think what it feels like often, I know things in the city move slowly. And I think when I first stepped on here, I was a little bit like, oh, we're looking at something for 2028. Okay, getting my head around the pace of things. But I think it feels sometimes like one of those bikes where you put like 20 people on them and everybody's pedaling. Some people are pedaling different directions and the bike never moves. And then when you finally get everybody going... it still takes a while to get it moving. And I think that the purpose of this position is to have someone shove that bike along. I have a wondering, I think that some of the things that come forward to us, I remember one of my early meetings when I first joined the DAC, there was a pretty new intersection that we were looking at because it needed refurbed. And I'm like, what, how did, how did that go wrong? And so I think about the cost to go fix the problem because it was done wrong is so much city money, so much city time, which time is money, so much city planning. And it feels a little bit like Our bike, we're all pedaling on this deck in the same direction, but we don't get very far because we're in the business a little bit of fixing existing problems that someone put in wrong. And so if we think of the last 10 years, there's not been this position. Well, we're fixing all the things that went wrong. And so... we're not moving forward. And I think some of the dreams I know, Doris came to us and she's this like one man, one woman planned a little side project that she wants to make our city events more accessible. Our city has hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of events. I was actually just at one and there was a little ramp and I was so excited, but that little ramp led on Capitol Mall to a big grassy patch and was like, cool, we can get You can't get anywhere else because we only got halfway. This position's purpose is to move us forward instead of keeping us stalled. And so I really wonder if some of the work we do is to go back really diligently and if we can find specific projects and list them that were done, projects that were created in the last 10 years And then the city went back and paid hundreds and hundreds of $1,000 to fix it to make it more ADA compliant. And if we could throw that money forward, I bet it is more than 10 years times $200,000 over the 10 years. And maybe showing that we are trying to get stop putting out fires and start planning in a preventative fashion, maybe if we can show that through the actual dollars the city has spent and the time that this position has not been available, maybe that is what the city needs to see the value.

I would like to propose something. I would like, I know, I would like to get what we're reporting, what Jesse and I are reporting today are just perceptions from what we were at the council meetings and from what we've heard. But I'd like to really go back and do a follow up on this item to go talk to our leadership and get, you know, and get more direction on, you know, what their official thoughts were of, why we didn't get this position. So I would recommend us to come back and do a followup on this item, if that's okay.

Yeah, I think so.

And I think in that, you know, in, in this like curiosity piece that I have, we are one of the few cities that has this. And so there are dreaming things such there, there are great ideas. I sat down with Doris and had some great, like, ideas but without this position you can't get past the like fix the problems that exist that we already spent a bunch of money and did it wrong and so i think um maybe also just if i may like maybe we in our report need to put in some of those bigger dreams. One of the things I said is why is the city spending tons? Why, why would we propose, um, why would we propose for every city event to have to pay for these ramps? Why doesn't the city just buy them themselves? And, You rent that instead of the third party, how much money are you paying for 700 events a year? But things like that can't happen if you don't have someone at the top really coordinating through. And there are ways to save the city money by providing a position that focuses on that while still us being maybe one of the forefront tiers that people look at and say, look what Sacramento is doing different than everyone else in this world.

Commissioner Pullen.

Yeah, I mean I just want to say it's it's really striking to me that disabled people are saying we need this and non-disabled people are saying that's not best for you. This commission is for disabled people written in the bylaws to discuss and advise to the city council, to the city manager, to the city, what disabled people in the city need. And if now I'm finding, first in that report, it doesn't say there wasn't support. That's not what this report said. It's just said that the no funding was identified. So when I say, well, look, there's ways we could fund it through risk management, it was already funded through risk management. And Eric Guerra specifically said at that city council meeting, hey, staff, have we considered looking at the liability or the self-insurance? Does having an ADA coordinator save us money on insurance? He brought that up. I haven't heard any response to that or looking into that at all. So just to say, hey, there's no funding, and then when you come before us and then suddenly it's, well, the city manager doesn't like it because it overlaps. That's a completely different framing than what the report and what I read and prepared for earlier is. And so I'm a little taken aback by that. And I completely agree with Commissioner Patel about, you know, maybe we, and Vice Chair Ellis, if this is what the city says, then our recommendations cannot just be we want an ADA coordinator. Now the onus seems to be on us to tell them why they need an ADA coordinator. Not a recommendation. It seems to be that the onus is on us to do the research, to do the reports, and to argue rather than advise. So I think a follow-up is absolutely necessary. There has been a citywide ADA coordinator that is called a citywide ADA coordinator that advises citywide that was just a program specialist. So that did happen before. Whether it's successful or not, that's a completely different thing. But to say this didn't exist, this didn't happen, we didn't have it, now we're asking for this, Public record Lee not Where we should be so I I really I would like to ask vice chair if we could definitely put this on Future agendas and really get to the bottom of what this position is and what the city thinks of it because this is Fascinating to me. Thank you very much.

Yeah, I think we can do that Commissioner Barton bomb

Yes, so I wanted to go on record and agree with fellow commissioners that have spoken before me, Commissioner Paul and Patel and Vice Chair Ellis in regards to this topic in front of us. to the point made, yes, you know, we need to be a strong voice, a strong united voice that we are the commission that needs to put at the forefront individuals with disabilities first. And the argument is very much there that there needs to be an ADA coordinator that we just not advocate for it but argue for it and get the necessary votes. that we so need for it. And I'll just close to say that one of those votes happens to be evaluating us right now in person. If you look to the far corner of your left shoulder, I'd like to recognize Councilmember Phil Pluckybaum in the audience today. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Barnbaum. Commissioner Wilson?

Okay. So, uh, kind of a video of us called this, uh, this day is filled with saying about the disability community, because that's Nothing could bound us without us. God, two million people, good power. I think it's a suggestion, good recommendation, but my message is it's a requirement, kind of demand from the disability community that we are treated as a priority instead of a side project. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jesse. Thank you, Jesse. We appreciate all of your work.

All right, good discussion.

I'll just close by saying, you know, this has been an ask of the commission in a number of our reports, and it's a coordinating function that I think we think the city is lacking. And at least... When I rejoined the Commission a couple years ago, and this was in the reports and we were pushing for it, I viewed it similar to a role at the University of California. Right before I came back to the DAC, I had the privilege of serving on the Board of Regents, and the UC created a system-wide Office of Civil Rights and there were several different roles in there and one of them was disability rights. And the university was moving in this direction of they hadn't had this type of coordinating role across the entire university. And that's what it was. It wasn't, they weren't going to just do like reasonable accommodations and that HR function. That was still going to exist. This was going to be, you know, It's a vast enterprise, just like the city is, and it's a coordinating function that we're asking for. Like we're saying, there are all these specialists in the different departments, in public works, in IT, in HR, that do a component of this accessibility work, but where we're seeing some fragmentation is there isn't a point person to kind of ensure all these things are moving in the same direction. And we see some of the disparate issues, the speaker slip issue, the door button issues, and it's something at a level where the city is taking it seriously enough because there is somebody at a high enough authority to get it done and to work through a lot of the issues that we've been raising on this dais. So that was my hope for this role, was it was going to be more of a grandiose role to ensure, not just ensure compliance with ADA, but ensure we're living up to the principles of inclusion. Because I see this in the work that I do for the state of California at the Department of Rehabilitation. Yeah, you can be ADA compliant, but if we just did this one extra thing, it would make things so much better. Like for example, so I manage two inspectors that go out to assess ADA compliance for the lotto retailers. And so they have the check a ticket so you can go up and see if you won the lottery, right? And we're in there and we're like, there's this hat rack thing right next to it. If they had moved the hat rack out of the way, there would be three more feet of clearance. But technically, by it being there, it's compliant. It meets the measurements. But it sure would be nice if this thing was not in the way. And we see this all the time in all over the place. It's not the built environment necessarily. They've put something there. The scooters are another one. So there's those things that, you know, if we could do, just be a little more attentive and be like, let's not do that to ourselves. So that, and somebody's pointing that out and, you know, doing it in a way that, yeah, we're compliant, but it would be nice if we just didn't do these things. So anyway, that's kind of my point on this, but I'll belabor it and I'll move us along to our next. Oh, Commissioner Patel, sorry.

I'm probably being redundant too, just as I am a processor and as I'm processing through what they shared and what was shared, what Jesse shared, it sounds and you know, commissioner Poland, I, it sounds like it is either of or both. The issue is maybe we don't have the money or don't want the money to go that direction or we don't see the purpose or need. And so I agree with commissioner Poland. We need to build, we need to research and have this as a discussion item so that we can help ensure that both of those ideas are locked tight. There is a clear need that is different than what you are doing right now. And, hey, we'll save you money. Because I actually believe that if we research, we just would probably uncover that.

Commissioner Pullen?

I'll just be really quick. I know at this point we're just saying it in a circle, but honestly, I think it's important to say the words out loud on the record on this dais, because I know all of us commissioners, because we are disabled people and we are commissioners. We all know this. Currently, we're saying stuff about like, it might be nice, we're compliant, but we could be better. We're not compliant in some things. They just approved Granicus for another contract. that went through city council. And they were told it's not compliant. This commission did an official ADA grievance with the city about Granicus like five years ago or something. And the city clerk responded and said, you know what? You're right. It's not captioned. And it's confusing because there's a logo. So let's remove the logo. That is not compliant. It's not OK. And because everything's so fragmented, nobody has the exact purview to say that's not OK. IT can't say it, because guess where it goes? Procurement. Procurement can say it, but then guess where it goes? City Council. City Council says, well, we've had it for so long, I guess we keep going and hope that Granicus fixes it. And yes, maybe the city could say, hey, Granicus, you must fix it or we will not pay you. But whose job is that to do that? IT? Well, I asked IT. They said they're a third party. They are not in charge of Granicus. That is exactly what this role requires and the city manager and everybody else does not have the purview or ability to do so. And so I think it's really important that we are so clear about what this role will do for the city. This is not even, we are not in the dreaming part right now. We are in the desperate part. And that was my point about the specialist, about the manager. I don't care how it happens. It just has to happen. And then we can make it better. We can make a real, like the county has a disability compliance office. Wouldn't that be great? But we're not in that place yet. We are just begging. And so I think that's so important that we as a commission are clear about that with the city because the city thinks these subject matter experts are okay and there is harm happening at this moment. There's harm. I just had to be here an hour early to help the city fix their assisted listening devices and thank god they did fix it. But they said to me well nobody has really asked for it and so we've never really checked. What would an ADA coordinator do? Oh, wait, check. That's their job, right? And of course, IT is not there to check every single time because they have so many other things to do. That is what the role is. And so for the city to say we have subject matter experts, I don't think we can allow that when we are not compliant. It's not working. That's all. I'm sorry. Yep, that's it.

It's all right. Thank you, Commissioner Polin. I appreciate your passion. It's definitely needed and appreciated. Okay, move on to item number four, which is Vision Zero School Safety Project. Anthony Grace, thank you.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Anthony Grace, assistant civil engineer with the engineering section of Department of Public Works. This is my first committee meeting of any kind, so please forgive me if I stumble through this. I am here tonight to present on the Vision Zero School Safety Project phase two. This is a continuation from the Vision Zero School Safety Project, which was built off the Vision Zero School Safety Plan. which I believe was approved by council in 2020 as the leading plan for 20 school sites in the city of Sacramento. This plan was developed with input from school communities.

Do you have a clicker down there?

I don't see anything other than this.

Yes, you can navigate with that.

Okay. I'm gonna turn the screen here so I can actually see it. The Vision Zero School Safety Plan was developed with input from school communities and city staff as well, included walkabouts, meetings, discussions on safety concerns. And ultimately, it provided a list of short, medium, and long-term recommendations. Some were to be handled by the school districts, and then others to be handled by other entities within the city, whether it's Department of Public Works or parking or who have you. The first project, the Vision Zero School Safety Project, is implementing recommendations at seven schools. That one's getting close to... close to being listed for construction, hopefully within the next year, finally going to construction after several years of a lot of back and forth on design and focusing on really how to make those school sites implement those recommendations as best as possible. the Vision Zero School Safety Phase Two, initially we were gonna be implementing recommendations at 11 school sites. One of those schools, Earl Warren Elementary in District Six, has both two projects that would be implementing all the recommendations made in the school safety plan and no longer has need to be with this project. Those two projects, one is with the school district where they're doing a lot of frontage improvement and on-site improvements for the school itself, and then the other project is the Fruit Ridge Road Safety Project. I'm not quite sure of the title of that one, but that one's being managed by, she left, but Stephanie. Two of the projects that were initially included in the Vision Zero School Safety Project are also being addressed through district-led efforts to make improvements. And I've heard recently as of today that it sounds like Miwok Middle may be also seeking to make improvements along their frontage. So I'll be learning more about that and determining if there's things being covered by that project that we will no longer need to cover with our project. The schools that we are Working towards making improvements include H. Allen Height in District 1, North Natomas, Garden Valley Elementary in South Natomas, Northwood Elementary, I think that's the Del Paso Heights area. It's kind of at that border. Mustard Seeds School in the River District, Washington Elementary in Midtown, Miwok Middle School in East Sac, Sacramento Charter High School down in South Saco Park area, Bret Hart Elementary in the Curtis Park area, and then two in the South, Capital Collegiate Academy and Rio Casadero High School. The purpose of the project was to improve safety and access at schools. Again, there was a list of recommendations put together determining following the site visits, input from the school communities, technical analysis, there was review, city staff were included, we had a consultant on board, all kind of working together to really devise how best to address these concerns and make these recommendations to improve the safety and accessibility around these sites. LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE ITEMS SUCH AS MAKING SURE ALL THE SCHOOL SIGNS AND MARKINGS ARE EXISTING. THERE ARE SCHOOL CROSSWALKS THAT DON'T HAVE THE SCHOOL CROSSING SIGNS. THERE'S FADED MARKINGS. THERE'S SOME ADVANCED MARKINGS THAT NEED TO BE PUT IN PLACE. WE'LL BE ADDRESSING ALL THOSE ITEMS. WE'LL BE INCORPORATING THE PARKING RESTRICTIONS NEAR THE INTERSECTIONS AND CROSSWALKS, MAKING SURE THAT VISIBILITY FOR THOSE PEDESTRIANS IS ENHANCED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. improving pedestrian ramps around school sites. We've got a lot of curb ramps from just the built environment that we will be addressing. I believe Washington Elementary probably has the most ramps around it, and we'll be making sure all those are ADA compliant. There's a lot that don't have the raised bumps, so we'll be implementing those at those sites as well. Another aspect of this project is to install pedestrian crossing enhancements. Again, just whether it's the tough curve curveball bouts where it creates that sense of separation from the travel way and then provides that extra visibility for the pedestrians as they're crossing, better signage, better markings. We are gonna be evaluating the installation of rapid rectangular flashing beacons, particularly at Alhambra Boulevard and I Street by Miwok Middle. And then there's several intersections that will be evaluated for traffic signals. So with this project, we've split it into a couple phases. There's some items that we can tackle in a really short term, and we're coordinating with our traffic engineering group to get those in place. That includes the installation of the signs and markings, updating the controlled crosswalks so that they meet the current guidance for the ladder-style crosswalks, making sure all the markings are remarked and visible around the school sites, restricting parking near the intersection, reconstructing and improving pedestrian ramps, and then the passenger loading zones. Like I said, we're doing that in conjunction with the traffic engineering group and our street maintenance folks. This is a list of intersections where we'll be updating curb ramps. As you can see, it's pretty extensive. Some of these have just one curb ramp that needs to be updated. Some have two, three, some are all four. It is getting pretty extensive. So we've split that into two different fiscal years just to kind of help absorb the cost. But we will be starting on that this summer. THE CIP SETUP AND THE FUNDING IDENTIFIED TO BEGIN THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THE OTHER PHASE OF THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE THE FEASIBILITY AND TRAFFIC STUDY AND THIS IS FOR THOSE LARGER SCALE ITEMS THAT REALLY NEED A GOOD THOROUGH ANALYSIS. AS MENTIONED, THERE'S several traffic signals that we are looking at. There's three intersections, so we want to make sure that, one, they're warranted by the C8 MUTCD, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. And then following that, if these are feasible and how we can go about installing those, do we need right-of-way, all that kind of determination. We've got a couple areas such as on North Park Drive where one of the recommendations included installing a buffer zone or some kind of raised element along the bike path, so we want to evaluate the feasibility of that. We don't want to impede the bikeway and make it a hazard for bicyclists, but we do want to make sure that they have that separation if it will be feasible. There's areas where we're looking at widening the sidewalks. Again, there's a component of right-of-way, so we really need to make sure do we have the right-of-way and how much that's going to cost if we can do it. Over by Northwood Elementary, along Taft, the west side of the roadway has no existing sidewalk along the fronting all the residential properties. So one of the elements is we're going to look at evaluating constructing those sidewalks, what that will take, what that looks like, the drainage elements, which will be a major component of that. And then on Franklin Boulevard, one of the major recommendations was for traffic calming elements. And so we'll be exploring what that will look like and how to best move forward with that. Currently, we have $700,000 in local funds dedicated to this project, $400,000 from the Vision Zero program, and then $300,000 from the Quick Build Traffic Safety Funds, which is a relatively new program. Like I said, we've been able to coordinate with our traffic engineering group to really get those initial funds addressed. In order to complete all these funds, we will need additional funding. And then the items included in the feasibility and traffic study will be determining different estimates for those to determine how to best move forward with constructing those improvements. Here's our timeline. As I mentioned, we're starting this summer with constructing those initial improvements. And then our feasibility study, we're underway to get a consultant under contract. And so they believe they'll be able to complete that by December. So hopefully, following that, we can have a good thorough discussion on where that will lead. And then following that, we'll be searching for how to best move forward with those other components. Thank you. Any questions?

Thank you, Vice Chair. Hi, thank you so much for presenting. Can you go back to page 9 of your presentation, if you don't mind? And you said Norwood Elementary is a part of the project. Why is not Norwood here? Am I not seeing something?

So this specifically speaks to the curb ramp elements. And it's not Norwood, it's Northwood Elementary on Taft Street, just north of El Camino Avenue. And so that one, we're not looking at it for curb ramps. That's being included in the feasibility study for that sidewalk along that western side of the roadway.

Thank you for the clarification.

You're welcome.

Okay. Commissioner Patel.

Hi. Thank you so much. The school element is a big piece of my heart. Can you go to slide six? I just have a couple questions. I'm happy to see that these are getting started in the very near future. You used some lingo that I think I know what you are meaning, but I just want to clarify. So when you're saying traffic calming, is this picture on the top left, the white, is that rumble strips? Is that, when you're saying traffic calming, are those the kind of things you're talking about?

So that is an element of traffic calming. We generally try to steer clear from using those near residential zones, because we do get a lot of complaints regarding roadway noise from residential properties. So that could be an element of traffic calming. Part of the problem with saying traffic calming is that it's very extensive. And when reviewing this Vision Zero school safety plan, that was what the recommendation included. And so that's part of what we're gonna be working with this consultant on, really identifying what kind of traffic calming can we pursue here, especially on Franklin Boulevard where it's already a really tight roadway. I know we allow parking on both sides and we have the travel lane, but then there's no space for anything else. So yeah, we'll be working with that consultant to really identify what does traffic calming look here and how to address that.

Well, it's interesting because, and that was, Franklin was one of my, Franklin and Meadowview specifically, and I would need to think through some of the crossings, some of the other schools. I mean, Meadowview, the speed, right, the rumble strips are loud because they're working. Because if you drive over them fast, then they're, so, right? Like, they're serving their purpose, so it's this weird double-edged sword. But I used to work at that school a very long time ago. It is a dangerous place. Whoever put that school on that road, it must have been, like, way before the traffic was what it is now. It is not a safe road to put a school on. I don't think we'd ever construct a school on that busy oven intersection in the future. And so I was specifically wondering about the rumble strips here when I'm thinking about what that looks like, the speed of traffic. And this kind of goes to that multiple iterations till we get to the right place or doing it right the first time that I was speaking on an earlier section. The signs aren't going to do anything for the traffic. They're still going to go 60 miles an hour in front of that school. And so how can we keep those students safe? How can we slow down traffic who are about to fly through a red light because there is a young student or someone in a wheelchair who takes longer to get across crossing? And so the rumble strips was something I was hoping might be part of that traffic calming, so to speak, plan, and especially in places like Meadowview. So I think it's something that I would hope that you guys would consider. And Franklin were two of the ones I was thinking of that are pretty... less safe right when you think about each island height it is tucked inside of a neighborhood doesn't mean people drive great there because i drive that multiple times a day every day but it's a little bit better um right you're a little protected because you're between um homes then it's a lower uh that you've got stop signs and things that that prevent you from going fast you've already got the speed humps there um or tables or whatever version they're called um So just something, just a comment and a consideration because we know those signs don't do much. And if we look back historically at intersections where we try to put the signs, we just keep layering things in until we eventually get to the right marker, which is probably something like rumble strips or speed tables in those areas. um and then my other question was um in this picture this this picture on the bottom right you said something about widening sidewalks so i wondered about that because when we look at i know we're supposed to be looking at the school sign there but my eyes instantly went to the probably 18 inch sidewalk at that at that pole and so anyone in a wheelchair or who walks with a cane can't really safely access through that space, because it's not wide enough. And so students can't go home on their own. They can't be independent when they get old enough to do so, because they can't get out of their school. So when we look at this sidewalk, there isn't a right of way for our disabled community when our sidewalks are like this. you know, there's a picture further on that I actually think it's H. Allen height on slide 10 where it's a much wider sidewalk. That's what we do now. This is definitely an older neighborhood. But how are we fixing that? Because if we just get to the school crossing, we can't, the many students walk home. And so how are we giving that equal opportunity?

Anthony, maybe I can... answer, Commissioner Patel. We're going to bring back an item on a future agenda that looks specifically at utility pole challenges, and particularly the issue that you're pointing out. Because it's something that happens. It's not just particular to Anthony's project, and it is something. So I think it's worthy of a deeper discussion. And so I have talked with Ophelia about bringing back an item that looks specifically at Utility poles so I just want to put that out there, too.

So that's great. Yeah, I had heard him mention widening sidewalks, so I didn't know if If where where is that kind of happening up?

Yeah, and I will say that you know not all the recommendations apply to all the schools The widening sidewalk component is specific to Garden Valley Elementary School up there off of Northgate Drive. It's a Northgate and patio And so we were looking around patio avenue, widening those sidewalks around Larchwood, widening those sidewalks, that's where that component is specifically looking at. And I think, you know, mainly the biggest challenge will be cost. I believe those are both city-owned parcels along patio avenue, but I'm not quite sure, and I'm not sure what coordination that will require with those other divisions to coordinate that.

Thank you. Commissioner Poland.

Hello. So you chose an interesting council meeting to come and present. Anyway, for the rectangular rapid flashing beacon that is being evaluated, This obviously is not going to be anything that you will be able to answer at all, but to look forward, I know that there is different types that also allow for, for example, dimming when it's night out, things like that, and determining... how quickly the flashes go for photosensitive people. I know that those specific, the rectangular rapid flashing beacons, they aren't regulated for the specific flashes. They are a little bit, but not into photosensitive area. So if that's something that the city could consider, if you guys do go ahead and do that particular beacon, Is looking for the ones that are dimmable at night and that are Able to be tweaked as far as those those flashing because some of them aren't some of them are And I know you're just in the planning phase. So just something to consider.

Thank you. Thank you and Commissioner Barnum

Yes, I wanted to follow up with a comment that Commissioner Patel brought up on traffic calming. I've lived in the city since 1995. One of the most controversial traffic calming projects the city has undertaken was the one in Midtown some years, if not a decade or more ago. are you looking at traffic calming measures like half street closures, roundabouts, or additional speed lumps, or converting one-way streets into the opposite direction, or something similar to what Midtown went through around these schools, or is that just discussion around the water cooler?

I'll say with the traffic circles, the main issue comes around, especially with the existing infrastructure, the space available to us. Franklin Boulevard is a tight roadway. We don't have a lot of space in the intersection to install items like traffic circles. I would be consulting with the traffic engineering group as far as speed bumps go, speed lumps. That depends on the roadway classification, the volume of traffic on the roadway. But if it falls within our city criteria, then that is definitely something that could be explored. We wouldn't be looking at any half street closures. I know they are very controversial. Some people love them, some people hate them because drivers just go around them anyways. And so is that really gonna increase the safety if you have a driver going the wrong way going around them without the enforcement aspect that can stay there constantly cracking down on it?

Okay.

Thank you so much for your presentation. I think this has been a long time coming, and I really appreciate the level of detail you've provided us, and definitely the level of detail that my fellow commissioners have provided you. And yeah, that's all I have. Clerk, and I neglected to do this on the previous item. There was no public comment on the previous item. Clerk, do we have any public comment slips on this item?

Thank you, Vice Chair. We do not have any speakers for this item.

All right. Well, thank you again. Thank you. And we will move on to... Yes. We will move on to our next item. We already had our staff report. So we will move to Commissioner comments, thoughts, and ideas. So if you... Commissioner Barma.

Thank you. Just looking at the calendar, I see... formal meeting until Wednesday August 5th so maybe this will give folks a little bit of chance to look up some things we've had discussions on today and I'd brought one item I want to bring back tonight to that I had brought up at a different meeting so I'd like to recommend maybe not a motion per se either into the log or onto the agenda, whichever the feeling is, to bring back the matter relating to the scooters, okay, and I don't know if we're ready at this level to bring it to the commission, but just maybe a status update on where the city is in regards to the Arden-Auburn mobility plan. I brought a sheet of paper about that at the last meeting, and I don't know if it's transferred departments yet to come here. And if it's worth jumping ahead of ourselves, I understand. if we are, would it be appropriate to put it on the work plan for 2027 rather than the August 5th agenda?

If that's the one I'm remembering from last meeting, I think that one's at least two or three years out, right, Jesse?

Yeah, it's with our planning division currently. And so typically the items that come before the disability advisory commission and the engineering services because we're having a greater level of detail. But you know what? I'm going to be working with Jennifer on a report out on the scooters. And so maybe I'll ask if maybe that can also be part of her report is a brief update on that plan effort.

Okay, and if that's the case, great. Let's make sure that we get the text and the language into the agenda so we aren't stopped by legal as to discussing something they feel that wasn't worded properly on the formal public paper 72 hours in advance. Yes, yes. Correct. Thank you. Will do. Commissioner Knapper?

Yes, thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you, everyone. So I want to announce I've been here. So it's Pride Month, and I know we have a big event happening here in downtown Sacramento. I hope people are able to participate. And then it is also we'll be celebrating Juneteenth, which is very near and dear to my heart. as an African American person. There are events around the city. I encourage everyone to participate. If you haven't, come out and join the community. The other thing I would like to lift up is I know it's a bit of a touchy subject, but thank you for this opportunity for us to have announcements. Our in-house community members, many live with disabilities. And there was something of an issue that happened in the last few days where many people were displaced who were in transition or interim housing in hotels. A city contracted hotels or motels And quite a few people were displaced if some fiasco happened. People did receive some emergency vouchers to rehouse because they were displaced. And the vouchers weren't enough to cover getting another room for the night. These are families. These are children. These are people living with disabilities. And so I am sharing this in this sense of, as a commissioner of the Disability Advisory Commission, we have folks out there, it's hot outside. We have young children and people with disabilities that don't have access to electricity, for example, if I need to plug in my nebulizer to breathe or my chair if I need to, if it's mobile. I don't have blankets at night. Children are, you know, reporting that they're cold, right? People don't have water. They don't have ice. They don't have electrolytes. They don't have much of anything right now who are displaced, and there's an ask for help. And... I'm not asking the commission itself. I mean, I think something we need to consider to continue to put at the forefront that disabilities also includes our unhoused neighbors here in Sacramento and in the city of Sacramento. Sacramento Steps Forward is really supporting this community, and I would encourage anyone as an individual, if you'd like to contribute, to help our displaced unhoused neighbors until the city get sit together with them to get them back into housing or transitional housing in the hotels and motels where they were contracted to stay. Please contact Sacramento Steps Forward if you care to drop off some water or, you know, a big bag of ice or whatever it is, some Gatorade or snacks, whatever it is for our folks until it gets sorted out. And that's my, those are my announcements for today. And thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Pullen.

And actually to add on to Commissioner Knapper, like 60% of all unhoused people are people who identify themselves as being disabled. So it is definitely a disproportionate amount of those folks who are like us. And so absolutely any homeless services is also a disability services. So I really thank Commissioner Knapper for bringing that up. Yeah. As far as future agenda requests, I would like to request sometime at the future that we consider formally accepting Council Member Maple's request from the May 5th budget and audit committee uh... where she asked for two-way communication with the city manager's office uh... and our commission uh... on the eighty eight coordinator question uh... i think what was brought up today shows that uh... clearly the city manager's office and us are not quite something's going on there uh... and i would really appreciate us uh... either formally sending a letter to the city manager's office as a commission saying, hey, we need to talk about this, inviting them to come, et cetera, or if staff just wants to invite, however you want to do it, but I do think that the city manager's office needs to be the one, not just public works, not just HR. It seems to be the city manager at this point that needs to be the one that comes and talks with us. If we could put that on an agenda to discuss going forward, not making any motions or anything now. But that's it.

Thank you very much. If that is a motion, I'll second it. It sounds like it's coming from a council member.

Thank you. And then Commissioner Guerrero.

on okay hi hi everyone um and yes juneteenth is very important i have it on my calendar i'm going to all the community events and my job is also hosting a big party so i'm excited um so yes um i wanted to ask a request for a particular topic i know i know i'm fairly new and a lot of our conversations have been around infrastructure, planning, city, but as you know, last year, HR1 passed, which did a big, significant impact to us as they did cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Medicaid expansion, and that obviously impacts people with disability and so i wanted to know if there would be an opportunity to be able to talk about the impacts i know that in southern hospital the cancer center a lot of patients have to be turned away because they don't have health insurance so i just wanted to curiously you know this i just want to know um you know what the city is doing to address i know it's more of like a state issue but i'm wondering at the local level what's being done based on the cuts that have been done due to HR1, which is a federal law. So I was curious to know if there's anything, if there is like a discussion that could be done here in that. And then another random policy idea that I was thinking tagging along to scooters And, you know, I live in downtown, so I have to talk about this. But, you know, another way to tax and bring money is, and also, it's also a disability issue because, believe it or not, in downtown, there are a lot of people with disability that live here, as well as seniors. And is there a way to, like, I don't know if it's in the law or anything, is there a way to find people who don't pick up poop after their dogs? Because, you know, we step on it, wheelchairs roll on it, you know, so maybe that's a way of an incentive to try to get money to help fund the ADA coordinator. So, you know, something to think about we can bring into discussion, you know. But, yeah, this is something to think about.

Love the ideas. I think looking at the federal funding the city's pulled down, looking if there's been any changes. Maybe, Jesse, that might be the right framing of that.

Well, my initial reaction to the HR1, that's not an activity or program of the city.

Yeah.

Not that specifically. Yeah, so we're really trying to stay on point with kind of what we should do. But I don't think the city's really lost a lot of federal funding.

Like resources available or maybe, you know, just because I just— Maybe the county. The county. Okay.

Yeah.

My apologies.

Health and human assistance is more of a county function.

But scooters and sidewalk issues I think we're going to tackle with.

We're working on it.

And dog poop.

And dog poop. Commissioner Knapper, you wanted to queue up again?

Yeah, thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Guerrero, yes. I think it's very important that HR impacts to our community members that are maybe receiving Medi-Cal and many who are disabled. And so if people have interests, I recommend take issue. There is a Disability Advisory Commission under the county There's also the Board of Supervisors as well. I came on to, Jesse, I wanted to, if I may, you mentioned the utilities. You're gonna bring something back? Thank you, because you know Northgate Boulevard, right? Okay, so I hope that, and then I know you mentioned an update regarding that at some point. So I'm imagining that all of that will be in whatever that presentation will be.

Yeah, so the way we've envisioned it is that utility poles in sidewalks presenting an obstruction is an issue on many arterial corridors, and it has come up as a comment as projects come before you. And so we have staff with a lot of years' experience implementing corridor projects and kind of what works, what doesn't work, And then why is it so hard, right? And kind of educating the commission on the challenges that we come up against when we're doing projects and you identify there's a pull out there. Where's it gonna end up? So, yeah.

thank you so much for that and i i look forward to that um being on the agenda hopefully um i know we just um calendar we're gonna do this it's one of your work plan items it's it's we're gonna capture it under like the reviewing of the plans and projects yeah thank you sir and like we don't have a strict rule about re-queuing up in this segment but just for the sake of the city attorney

Let's try not to comment too much on each other so we're not having a discussion about an item not on the agenda. But you're free to say what you want in the space, but just since we've already. But anyway, Commissioner Patel.

Hi. I love the ideas. I couldn't help myself. I think I smiled and almost just was like, there's an example. Just wanted to note, like, slide nine has the project that we just looked at. to my point earlier, has six, seven, eight, nine, 10. and I'm like, how much money? It was $700,000 for that project, probably 400,000, right there, boom. There's two years for this position, just because it wasn't done right. So we already have a piece of data to start the data poll. I saw that slide and I'm like, whoa, there's all the money right there. Putting out the fire. So just had to say that. I don't know if anyone else thought of that when that slide went up, but... Let's do it right the first time. Let's be that city that does that. And then my question and or comment to think about, just to clarity, we keep saying scooters. She did say shared rideables. So are we... Just in the vein of everything I've said tonight like smarter not harder smarter not harder Are we talking about just scooters so that we're not solving the e-bikes because the problems are the same or Okay, so we're saying scooters But what we are because the e-bike has their own new set of laws And there are separate over here and scooters have these laws and so are we we're talking about it all when we come back together and

That's my impression at least, but I had expectations.

I just wanted to make sure we don't have to then go redo the same thing. Thank you.

Okay, and then Commissioner Barnbaum.

Yes, thank you for everyone for the healthy discussion we're having about ideas and future agenda items. One thing that kind of popped into my mind was and maybe make a suggestion either to expand the work plan or add this to the 2027 work plan is the suggestion of a joint DAC meeting combining forces at 700 H Street with those here at 916 H Street to have a collaborative meeting, maybe on an annual basis to start. And if we go semi-annual or quarterly in the future, great. But kind of hear what everybody is having in their business plan and stuff, at least annually, and get the two DACs together.

That's a heavy lift, sir. But I think our staff can coordinate.

OK. Yeah.

So we'll leave it there. Thanks. Just a suggestion. Seeing no one else, we'll move to public comment. Items not on the agenda.

Thank you, Vice Chair. We do not have any speakers.

All right.

Well, thank you all for a very robust and passionate meeting this evening. With no other agenda items, I hereby declare this meeting adjourned.

We love you, Jesse. We love you, Jesse.

Thank you.

do do