City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay, it is 7.07 and I'm calling to order the Monday, July 20th, 2026 meeting of the City of San Leandro City Council. My apologies for our tardiness as our closed session ran just a little bit long. At this point in time, I will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join me if you can.

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. CHRIS JERRAM, M.D.

: Madam Clerk, would you please take the roll to assess quorum?

CHRISTIE WOODLAND, M.D. : Council member Fred Simon is absent. Council member Victor Aguilar. VICTOR AGUILAR, M.D.

: Present.

Council Member James Aguilar.

Present.

Council Member Sue Obon. Present. Council Member Dylan Bold.

Present.

Vice Mayor Viveiros-Walton. Present. And Mayor Gonzales.

Present. The State of San Antonio conducts orderly meetings to fulfill its mandate. Discriminatory statements or conduct that would potentially violate the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act

California penal code sections 4 3 or 4 15 are per se disruptive to a meeting and will not be tolerated Please see the City Council handbook and City Council meeting rules of decorum for more information Madam clerk your announcement, please If you would like to make a public comment during the meeting you can do so in person or via zoom if you are present at the meeting Please complete a speaker card and submit it to the city clerk before the item is presented then wait for public comment on that item to be called If you wish to participate in public comment via Zoom, you can use the raise your hand tool when the item is called. During the public comment session, speakers will be invited to speak and will have a set time to share their comments. A countdown timer will appear for their convenience, and when the time is up, the microphone will be muted. All raised hands outside of public comment will be lowered to avoid confusion. Once public comment is opened, hands may be raised to speak. There will be a 30 minute window for public comments on items not on the agenda Which will take place under item 7 public comments as per the published agenda After this time is up. The council will proceed with the rest of the meetings agenda If you have not had the opportunity to speak during the initial 30 minute period There will be another chance to do so after item 12 City Council reports Thank you

So a couple of other announcements. Today we do have Chris Cocatalo here as our acting city attorney. And for those that were not present at our work session meeting on July 13th, 2026, I do wanna let the public know that we did adjourn that meeting in honor and memory of our former Alameda County supervisor, Scott Haggerty. And we observed a moment of silence. We did meet in closed session. There was ample discussion, deliberation, but there is no reportable action that was taken. We do not have recognitions on today's agenda, but we will move on to the consent calendar. I'd like to see if there are any items on the consent calendar that council members would like to pull for additional discussion. Council Member Bolt. Yes, I'd like to pull item five E. Okay, so five E is being pulled. Council member, and I'm assuming that's it? Correct, okay. And then vice mayor, please.

I'd like to pull item five H, please.

What was that, alpha A? Or eight?

Oh, there it is. H as in Harry.

Thank you. Council Member Victor Aguilar.

Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to move the consent calendar with the exception of 5E and 5H.

Okay. Just as a matter of clarification, I will be pulling Item 5G. Would you mind amending your motion accordingly? Okay, so we do have a motion by Council Member Ayud to move the consent calendar with the exception of 5E, 5G, 5H. Do I have a second on that?

I will second it, but I think that Vice Mayor has a statement first before I have to second it.

Perfect. Vice Mayor. Yeah, I apologize. I meant 5G, not 5H.

There was... So I'm agreeing with you, Mayor. No problem. So then I will go back to the motion maker, Council Member Victor Aguilar. So Council Member Victor Aguilar, are you fine with the suggested update, namely that we approve the consent calendar with items 5E and 5G removed? Just for the record again. Yes. Yes. Then Council Member Bowen, just to clarify, is that the motion that you're seconding?

Yes.

Okay. Council Member Bolt, did you have something in addition to that? No. Thank you very much. We've got a motion from Council Member Victor Aguilar. with a second from Council Member Bowen to move the entire consent calendar with the exception of 5E and 5G. At this point in time, we will take public comment on the consent calendar.

Mayor, we have received one comment card for the consent calendar that doesn't pertain to the items that were just removed. And there are currently.

I'm sorry that does or does not.

Let me restate. We've received a number of comment cards for the consent calendar. However the majority of them except for one pertain to the items that were just removed. So we only have one item that still pertains to the consent calendar.

Okay, our general process is to take all consent calendar comment at one point in time, so we will continue to follow that process. But let's start with the one that is not on an item that's been removed yet, then we'll move into the others. How many hands do we have raised online?

And there are three hands raised online.

Okay, we have a total of how many cards in your hand? Seven. Seven, okay, thank you. Let's proceed with our standard of two minutes.

Our first in-person speakers are Jeff, where this council asked staff to get real cost estimates for the project.

There's been no meaningful progress as was the original intent when it was given to the city, which the city has completely failed in accomplishing. We want the cost of preserved. We do not want it torn down to create a park as Brian Simon proposed in one of the previous meetings. Oakland's shameful failure to protect its historic homes, including the recent fires at the Peralta House in June and the Cameron Stanford House in April, should be a cautionary study.

Starting in 2020, we received a planning grant to study protected bike lanes along both Bancroft Avenue from city limits to the north of Oakland and down to the county limits to the south and Williams from San Leandro Boulevard all the way to Neptune, Neptune Drive. The project has undergone community outreach and with that outreach, with the vision of the protected bike lanes along both corridors, we were able to submit grant applications for both the federal and Alameda CTC. So I believe that combined about four million dollars, a total of four, enough to get us through the design. So we have a combination of grant and local funding. And the $5 million for the consultant includes the project management, stakeholder and utility coordinations for all the required coordination for both of those corridors, so that includes utilities and also Union Pacific Railroad. and also the development of the plan specs and estimates to get us to the complete bid package. At that point, that also puts us in a very good position to request for additional grant funding for construction funds.

And then the magnitude, if you can just number of linear feet or miles or whatever metric because again it might feel like oh well that's just you know a hundred yards but can you give us some sense of the scale yes what comes to mind is three miles but i'm gonna look to our city engineer if i have that number That is approximately right given the distances that are involved. Again, to be clear, you have to relocate potentially things ranging from sewer access, electricity access, lighting. It's not even as simple as let's just put up some curbs to separate bikes.

Correct.

Are there any other questions related to that item? Because that was a question that was raised by the public and I just want to make sure that we had a little bit of information before we decide whether or not we want to also pull that item. Council Member Bowen.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. Can you clarify the first amount, the $5,756,180 versus approved amendments to the agreement up to a cumulative value of $575,618?

I'm gonna hand that over to our city engineer to answer.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and members of the Council. Jason Imai, I'm City Engineer of Public Works Department. The $5,756,180 is the contract amount for the design of the project. The 500 plus thousand is actual contingency like we do with most design contracts or construction contracts. It will allow us to work more efficiently should the scope change that has a justified additional cost. we could increase the contract up to that additional amount without having come to come back to council thank you and um

Director Marquis, as you mentioned at the end of your comment that we received federal funding and ACTC funding to be able to do the design process, which sets us up to be able to go back to both federal funding opportunities as well as ACTC, given ACTC's emphasis on pedestrian bicycle safety as a very high priority. Is that correct?

Any further questions? OK, seeing none, then let's proceed to a vote on the motion by Councilmember Victor-Aguilar, with a second from, was it Councilmember Bowen? VICE CHAIR BRYANT- Yes.

CHAIR BAILET J.

Yes, thank you.

All votes are in and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes and Council Member Simon being absent.

At this point in time, we will take up item 5E. This item was pulled by Council Member Bolt. Council Member Bolt, I would ask for you to lead the first step of this discussion. We'll see where the discussion goes. Casa Peralta, there you go. Thank you, proceed.

Yes, thank you. I pulled 5E. I too want to express that that dollar amount feels extremely high. I was in the meeting that we actually had for facilities. It was a great day out there at Casa Peralta. There was some discussion about community group given us some money to update an older scope for design and that amount was researched and thought about by them and that was as mentioned twenty thousand dollars and now we're at over half a million five hundred sixty six thousand five hundred ninety six I feel like, as the city manager has said before, things change and the thought that the amount of money we're looking to cut and do things with in our city, for me, just to upgrade a 10-year-old study of the house can raise that much, I am not comfortable with that. I cannot vote yes on that, so I pulled it, but the idea of it coming back to facilities and us reviewing some of the options that were there and the thought that it goes into a park, I don't think anybody wants that, but it's an option, right? And we have to discuss it. I don't want that to happen. I'd like to see Casa Peralta saved, but I think we need to send it back to facilities to have a real meaningful discussion. It's been 14 months. We haven't proceeded. and any of the upgrades to this point, and I'm not comfortable with us saying yes to this, so I pulled it, and I would like to send it back to facilities for us to reevaluate where we're at as a city, what kind of funds we have, because I'm afraid that even if we were to approve this, which I don't support, it gives an unrealistic expectation that somehow we're gonna find some more money to actually do the things that this report asks us to do. If it's this number, I can only imagine what the actual repair costs are gonna be and I don't wanna give an unrealistic expectation of our community that okay, here we go, we're walking down this path, now we're gonna spend this money and then the next thing we're gonna do is fix it once we get, that's not the case. So again, I would like to see us bring it back, I don't know if that's,

So why don't we do this before I take a motion let me just hear very quickly if there's any other concerns because I'm taking what you say as a motion that you would like to be the motion maker and I'm fine with that but if there's any other elaborations such as potentially well let's go to you Vice Mayor and see where this takes us.

Thank you, I also have a concern particularly around what is the difference between the 10 year report and what is the kind of added value and I would question that that actually, that that delta is actually worth 560 plus thousand. And so I am supportive of sending it back to facilities. I think... This is a community asset that is consistently, for those of us who are newer to San Leandro and were able to experience it for just a little tiny bit, it is a truly beautiful, magical place. And I only had the privilege of walking and being in that space for the first couple of years that I was living in San Leandro. Now it's not open to the public. So I would like to explore all the options to have an informed discussion about the tradeoffs and what we're investing in and what we choose not to for it to be a transparent process. And I... I would second that motion to send that back to facilities to have that cohort of, that committee of the council really vet through all of the options and have that discussion. I don't feel comfortable with spending that amount of money on updating a plan that is 10 years old.

Okay, so just to be really clear, we don't have a motion yet, but I hear you clarifying the scope of what that motion would look like, namely that we consider all options, that it's not just limited to something about this specific study, but what are the options for Casa Peralta? I'm coming to Council Member Bowen next.

Thank you Mayor, I would love to hear from our director to kind of give some clarity around what that consulting service and that amount of 566, what that scope actually looks like to understand what is being done if it's something, like if there's a gap between what was done 10 years ago versus now and just so that I understand better.

Certainly. Brian Simons, library director. Good evening, mayor, council. So the scope of what's being proposed, we need to take a little bit of a step back to that evening when we discussed it at the facilities committee. And one of the things that we were instructed to do is to investigate what it would cost, to get an up-to-date cost. We had used industry standard inflationary escalators, but they were all giving a nearish. We used three of them. They got approximately a similar cost, around $10 million for hard cost. It was also estimated to be about five more million on top of that to renovate for soft costs. But in that 10 years time, and this is why we were instructed to go that route, is to look at something new, is in 10 years time, a lot more degradation had happened. our chief building official had gone through it and He noticed more rot more sinking of the floors So we were in a place where more damage has already happened to it so to Just use escalators probably was not going to be accurate so in order to get a real accurate price and the direction at the time was To not leave a stone unturned to make sure if we were to go down this path to know as best as best we could with whatever was available at our disposal to get an estimate for to make sure we're not surprised later on as we get into the construction of it. let's say it just hypothetically it was gonna be 15 million and then we start tearing things apart and rebuilding we discover something oh now there's another 2 million 5 million what-have-you we wanted to do our best effort possible and do everything we could to not only redo what was done but then add those three elements to dig as deep as we could to make sure we weren't surprised by a bid later on to then have to come back and say, well, we know we said it was 15 million, but now we're running into more problems and there's more millions we need to put into this. So we're trying to stem that off at the beginning.

Understood. And is the CASA, I'm trying to think back to our capital improvement plan of projects that we're committed to working on. The CASA Peralta is included in that, correct? Anybody that can answer that for me, Chair? Jesus.

Hi, good evening, Council Member Jason Imai, City Engineer. The funds to fund this study are currently within this capital improvement project, plan, I'm sorry.

Can you clarify, what do you mean is already included, as in it has already been allocated to that specifically?

It was allocated to the Casa Peralta project in general. There was money still in that account when this decision was made, so we earmarked a portion of that money to go to the study.

Got it, so we had specifically earmarked some funds to go towards Casa Peralta. That does not necessarily mean that those are the only funds that we could or would spend towards Casa Peralta.

That's correct.

Okay, and also the question of potentially giving Casa Peralta to a non-profit, what would that process actually look like? If anybody could just clarify that.

Can clarify it to some degree What we know is it's a little complicated because the gift grant deed where when we got the property in 1971 is very specific and it has some specific requirements that the city is IS REQUIRED TO OPERATE UNDER, WE HAVE TO KEEP IT AS AN ELEMENT OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND CAN BE USED FOR ART AND HISTORY. THERE HAS TO BE AN ELEMENT OF HISTORY INVOLVED. what in order to Move it on to another or even for us to do something else with it the first thing we would have to do is offer it back to the donating family and then they would have to either decide to take it back or or they would have to decide that they didn't want that and relinquish that offer back. And then that would open the door to potentially gifting it to someone else. But that would be the first step. So there would be some legal actions that would need to take place. But that's the gist of it.

And can I just take one more minute to add something? I appreciate that clarity. I recognize that there seems to be a desire to go back to facilities, and if facilities is interested in doing that, I certainly welcome it. I also appreciate understanding that the amount that we're putting to it is actually has been allocated towards it and I do, I am really supportive of finding ways to be able to support the Casa Peralta. I've actually held an organized Easter egg hunt at the Casa Peralta for like hundreds of kids. That was actually kind of overwhelming. And then also, we've done amazing projects there on the environment, so I know that the community really does appreciate the space. I also recognize that hesitation to spend money when we may not be able to find more money in the short term for it, but if we do have the funds already available, I would like us to be able to work towards getting Casa Peral to a place where it is restored.

Thank you. Council Member Victor Aguilar.

Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion to move item 5E to go back to Facilities Committee for further discussion.

And would the scope of that referral include analysis of all possible disposition, funding sources, and the like, the totality of the breadth of discussion? Yes. Okay. Is there a second on Council Member Aguilar's motion? Council Member Arbold? Second.

Okay.

Without going into a lot of detail, I think that this house has significance for many reasons in addition to its historical significance to the city. I don't want to get into those things right now because we do have a motion that I support along with a second. I look forward to a robust discussion in facilities. Seeing no further discussion, please vote on a motion to move this to facilities. A yes means take it to facilities.

All votes are in, and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes and Council Member Simon being absent.

Okay, at this point in time, we will take up 5G. I polled it, but Vice Mayor, would you like to lead the discussion on 5G, the ACTC proposed CIP? Vice Mayor.

Thank you. I would just like to start off with a little bit of exploration some wonderings that I have in terms of just refreshing my memory on the process by which we decide what to submit applications for. Please. That's the question. Okay.

So we will go to Director Marquesas. There you are. If you could please proceed.

Good evening. Sheila Marquis is public works director. So for projects like projects submitted to Alameda CTC, we, the staff, look at the most competitive projects after reviewing Alameda CTC's notice of funding opportunity. We review these. to the various categories that they put forth and we look at our projects that are a highest priority and when I refer to highest priority, I'm referring to our master plan. So we have a bicycle and pedestrian master plan, local roadway safety plan, any other site-specific plans. So when we look at those plans and projects that we already have supporting documents for, so the good example is the Crosstown corridor, we already have a lot of momentum So we look at the various projects and we make a staff analysis of which is gonna be the most competitive. So for, if I may get into the current ACTC funding opportunities, so for example they'll put forth eligible project categories so for this year's funding opportunity they list six eligible categories and so that's our first pass of which projects that we have in the pipeline that would be eligible for these projects And so kind of fast forward once the staff has identified those projects, we come to council with the request to support these projects. And then we're also working on the grant applications in the background. I'm going to look to our city engineer if there's anything else he wants to add.

No, I should just add so the the the release for the call for projects was at the end of May May 28th and actually the first workshop for The grant was in the beginning of June And then applications were due at the end of this month in one week. So it's a very quick turnaround so staff had the charge of doing a very quick assessment to determine which which projects best were most competitive based on the criteria set by the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

I think I inadvertently turned off my mic. Just to be clear, the council as a body, this is the first time we've seen the request to submit grant applications to the transportation commission, the county's transportation commission. So we are, and they're due at the end of this month.

They're due in one week.

So just as a, are we just doing questions or are we rolling them both?

Just proceed.

Okay. So just in terms of what we submit application, and what is the total amount that we're, what are the projects? I pulled up the CIP process, the CIP project, and now I don't have the amounts. But what is the total, well, what would be the total grant amount should we be successful in getting all these applications?

If I may just read for each project, so we have about, we requested 3.7 million for the rescue project, 863,000 for the East 14th North Area Pedestrian Lighting Project, 1.394 million for the Fairway Drive Traffic Calming Project, and 495,000 for the Safe Routes to School Pedestrian Safety Enhancements Project.

I think just in terms of what are the types of projects that go forth for submittal just in terms of our role and the kind of oversight and I would like to have at least have like the menu or the universe of projects that are up for analysis to just kind of understand what is the universe of projects that staff is thinking about submitting for the county commission for possible funding. I would say just in terms of timing, I'm just a, you know, we're a week out or 10 days out from the deadline. And I definitely don't want to kind of put the brakes on any of these very important projects throughout the city. But the process by which the projects that are eligible it seems a little unclear to me. But maybe it's, you know, I'm not on facilities, I'm not on ACTC. So as a member of this council, I just felt a little bit like, in the dark about what was even being considered for analysis and what projects didn't make the cut. Anyway, so I'll just leave that there. I don't have any time to seek back, so those are all my comments.

No worries. Coming to Council Member Bowen.

Thank you, Mayor. a few questions so i'm looking at the different projects that we're submitting to and submitting and for east 14th street north area pedestrian lighting fairway drive traffic calming and safe routes to school pedestrian safety enhancement projects That makes sense to me in terms of bike pad safety, again, which I had mentioned earlier is a priority for ACTC. Can you share a little bit about the regional emergency stabilization for coastal utility egress and why that is a competitive application?

Hi, I can take that, JCD, my city engineer. So per the Alameda County Transportation Commission guidelines, they have $200 million, but there are several different pots of money that make up that $200,000. Specifically, there is a program category called Three Major Trails. and one of those three major trails is the Bay Trail. So $15 million of that $200 million is available specifically for the major trails program, and we felt that the rescue project would compete favorably, or actually pretty strongly, for that money that's available.

Thank you. And then the other clarifying question that I had and I mean I do sit on ACTC for Supervisor Tam and I also sit on the policy committee which actually approves their CIP plan that then goes to the full board. I do actually remember in May when we approved it to go out for bids and bringing it as public comment for the council as well, and I think encouraging staff to continue the work to fund these projects. And I think it's important I wanted to dig a little bit deeper with you, Director Marquis, about that process for picking the projects. So we have our CIP plan, too. I get all my acronyms mixed up. We have the plan that we say, these are our priority projects. Then we have our master plans, like local roadway safety. We have Vision Zero. for example, and then you have to overlay that on top of the eligible project categories, bicycle and or pedestrian capital projects and programs. So specifically for bike and ped, complete streets capital and road improvement projects. So our cross town corridors project is a good example. I think, Director Ruiz says you've actually been pulled into ACTC meetings for all of us to give a presentation on it because people are so excited about that project, which is why they were so willing to fund that. Transit-related capital projects, so like the East Bay Greenway project, so that we have, no, not that one. Bus, bus, got it. And then shuttle and other program operations and technology projects. So that specifically are the eligible project categories, and that's why these particular projects are on there.

Did I miss anything? No, you got that right, correct.

Okay, thank you.

So I'm just going to clarify before going to Council Member Reguilar. So we've got major trails at $15 million. Do you have the funding for the other categories handy?

Yes.

If you could proceed, please. Sure.

For the bicycle and pedestrian program, there's $31 million. Transit program, $21 million. Community and transit-oriented development, $35 million. Technology program, $20 million. Freight and economic, $10 million. Three major trails was the $15 million. The multiple program eligibilities, which includes toll revenues, fund for clean air, one Bay Area grant program, and community action and resource and empowerment is $68 million.

6-8?

6-8.

Thank you. Council Member Aguilar, coming to you.

Victor Aguilar. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to move item 5G.

Since I have not made my comments yet, I'm going to ask you to pause before accepting your motion. So there have been a lot of discussions. I represent the city of San Leandro and ACTC. And there have been discussions with ACTC about ways to bring funding specifically to Lake Chabot Road. There was a meeting with supervisors, county supervisors, folks from Bay of Vista, and others around methods to get funding and exploring that funding. I've had individual conversations with the executive director. And the reason that I'm struggling, because our vice mayor has said that she doesn't want to stop this, but at the same time, I think there's a certain angst there, because if there were an opportunity to receive funding for Lake Chabot Road, It seems like our efforts to pursue that, there's no opportunity in this as we continue to have those discussions at the political level on behalf of the city. And so what I'd like to see is an expansion of this list for, I don't have a better term than placeholder, that if we were able to get some indications from ACTC with respect to the viability of a Lake Chabot Road investment at this time, with a full recognition that their priorities keep evolving and the like, it would be my preference that in addition to these four, that we add a fifth item that effectively says, Funding to support the stabilization of Lake Chabot Road with a focus on slides two and three. I know that we've got historical design. My recollection is that we do have a 100% design. There has been some additional slippage, and we might need to update that. So funding for updated design. And I'd work with staff on getting the best language. But all I'm looking for is for council support to have a placeholder with the recognition that it might not work out, but that we at least have the option to explore. And if ACTC says, no, that's really not going to work, it's not viable, That's OK. We only have seven days. I think the date is seven days, not 10. That's correct, right? So with that in mind, I want to come back to Vice Mayor, because I knew you had this thing in mind that you were trying to verbalize. And I don't know if I have captured it or not. And then I will proceed with other council members, and then we'll look for a motion. Yes, Vice Mayor.

Yes, I don't want to pool a list of projects that we have. These are all very worthy and important projects. But I'll leave that there, and then I'll, because you asked me a specific question, and a colleague clocked in before I did. So I'll log off and then get back on the queue.

Okay.

Council Member Bowen. It's fine. I was trying to explore, given the, sorry, I gotta pull this up. The categories and the priority areas and the criteria for the projects, the MacArthur Roundabout is a very good example of a project that ACTC would fund and has been part of the conversation with actually, we as in ACTC has actually launched a program called CRISP which is specifically focused on those sort of right away or those areas around ramps to make sure that they can be safer and so I was trying to figure out if we have had past funding in the past for ACTC or if there would be a potential to get more funding from ACTC so that we could take those funds from the general fund that we have allocated for the Big Ratha Roundabout and then use it for other projects.

I can do a quick answer. So MacArthur Boulevard roundabout was certainly considered for this round. However, the funding for this capital improvement program for ACTC is going to be available in 2028. And that is after we are hopeful that the construction of the roundabout is going to start. So the funding would be available too late for us to use.

Okay, great, thank you so much. And I love that we've affirmed that we are going to get it done, maybe even sooner. Okay.

Vice Mayor, please.

Certainly, these are not just grant applications, but these are grant applications that we'll be submitting, and I understand that adding a fifth one would add an additional application. Mayor, and I just wanted to clarify, are you proposing that we direct staff to have conversations with ACTC about the viability of that before we submit an application? I'm just worried about the timing.

So the timing would consist of, you know, it is my personal intention to speak with ACTC executive director tomorrow. Okay. Because I do want to understand just what is the, is it realistic? Is it aligned with what they're doing right now? Because if it's not aligned, I really don't want to submit something that's going to take the place of another project. It's very important to me that we not be, pursue the wrong opportunity. And so that's something I want to be mindful of. But the problem is as written, there is no opportunity to explore. And so that's why I'm saying it would be nice if the motion left open that possibility. And I'm fully cognizant that there are seven days. And so the most that it could ever take is six to write the application. But first, let's find out. And without that ability, without that opening, it obviates the need for a conversation.

Thank you and I appreciate, I think this is one of our, this to me shows two things. One, how we can support each other in terms of where the various committees that we sit on and You know bring that back to the council and I I know council member bowen mentioned it at the end of the council meeting where we provide reports, but I think one this provides a learning opportunity I think for me to keep kind of a closer eye on these reports, because I think it might have just like slipped, but second, I appreciate Mayor using your position at ACTC representing San Leandro and kind of utilizing that positionality to explore whether this is even a feasible thing, even if it is a reach, and I understand that it will put, you know, if there is even If the executive director expresses some sort of, like, it could be. I certainly don't want to put other projects at risk where we know that the analysis shows that we have a higher incidence of getting it approved. appreciate Mayor for utilizing, that's the whole reason why you probably sit on that commission to represent us and advocate for that. But also just as a learning opportunity to make sure that as these funding opportunities come up and the committees that we're all sitting in that we elevated in a way that it kind of raises the consciousness of like, okay, grant applications are coming up for BCDC or MTC or, you know, and kind of understand, you know, have a better understanding of all the intersection of all those committees that we sit in. Thank you.

Okay, Council Member Ayala and then Council Member Bowen, in that order.

Thank you, Mayor Gonzales. I'd like to again move item 5G to include possibilities to figure out if there is potential to build an application to fund Lake Chabot Road and to have the conversation with Tony Zavars from ACTC. That's my question. Thank you.

One moment please. And can you, I think, add into that motion the recognition that we do not want to put the existing grant opportunities at risk? Yes. Okay, thank you for that clarification. Council Member Bowen, please.

Thank you, I just had a follow up question that I just remembered. I know that for each project submission, there are award minimum requests and maximum requests and then the minimum matches for them. I can't remember, Mayor, if you might know or if Director Marquesas, for ACTC, amongst the 14 jurisdictions, is there a cap on how much we can be awarded per jurisdiction or they can just give San Leandro all of? all of the money.

There's no cap per jurisdiction, but there is a cap of $10 million per project.

Okay, thank you.

And then, Vice Mayor, you're set. You had been in there a little bit, but you're set. Okay, so I will go ahead and second the motion made by Council Member Victor Aguilar. Seeing no further discussion, please vote.

All votes are in and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes and council member Simon being absent.

Okay, at this point in time, we do not have any city attorney or city manager reports. Public comment, we will take public comment on items that are not listed on our agenda today but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of this council. How many cards do we have, Madam Clerk?

Mayor, we have not received any comment cards for this item.

Okay, so we will close public comment in person. Do we have any hands online?

Yes, we have three hands raised online.

Okay, please proceed. We open public comment online.

Our first online speaker is named Celia Esposito Noy.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. My name is Celia Esposito-Noy. I am speaking on behalf of our family and homeowners in the Fulton Avenue area next to Assumption Church. As you may have heard, there is a vacant lot there that is owned by PG&E. It is unfenced, and for quite some time now, there have been homeless encampments there. Both Assumption Church and neighbors along Fulton Avenue have been documenting the frequency in which the homeless encampment has been established there, threats to the neighborhood, possible break-ins to the church. And we certainly understand, while this is not the city's responsibility, we are asking for assistance from the mayor from staff regarding connecting with PG and E this property has been unfenced for well over 60 years. And the fact that there is plenty of room for fencing and access for those who have an easement agreement with PG&E, they have never fenced this property and it's become more and more dangerous. So I'm asking if staff could work with me and the other neighbors on Fulton Avenue to see if we can pressure PG&E to attend to this issue and at least fence off their property. Thank you.

Thank you. The next online speaker is Douglas Spaulding.

Thank you very much. A little potpourri here. First, I want to give a shout out to Brian Copeland. I think a lot of people are very happy. Thank you so much, Brian, for yet another incredible edition of Comedy in the Plaza. You know, he looks remarkable. Although I will say I did try to give him a chest bump and for some reason he ran away. If I wasn't laughing, I'd be crying. I do not think there's enough time for the hazard mitigation plan, which is closing on this Friday. I don't know why you don't widen the window and also why you're not taking public comments on this. It seems like a very important issue that touches on many things from not just wildfires, but what about earthquakes? And what we learned from the WEGO presentation is we don't even know where to go to if there's an evacuation. So it seems like there's a lot of work to be done. Third up, I want to say, I want to thank the SLPD for releasing the video and the critical incident report from May 7th. And thank you, Mike for pointing out it was way overdue. I did watch the video. It's difficult to watch, but I want to send a compliment, especially to Officer Q in particular for his calm demeanor and de-escalation techniques. I thought the team as a whole worked together very well up to the moment of the shooting. And then we need more information. So when and where did the gun appear? Was it appointed to officers? And our use of force things. This seems very analogous to the 2019 incident, which involved Anthony Gomez in a suicide by cop kind of scenario. And finally, in 10 seconds, I want to say, hey, we have a data center debate. Make no doubts about it. Currently, the mayor and at least one of the city council persons are in favor.

Thank you, sir. Your time has elapsed. Our next online speaker is Christopher Bammer.

Hello, can you hear me? Yes. I've been called a lot of things in my lifetime, but not a professional anything. I'm not claiming to be a professional, but I do know when you build something, you got to have a good foundation. And once it's built, you got to have a good roof. two things that Casa Peralta needs very badly, foundation and a roof. So just those two costs alone are going to be probably over $10 million. You guys are worried about the windows and this, that, and the other thing. Why don't we use this property to make some money? Why don't we do a long-term lease and have a restaurant buy it? And they can use some of the special tiles and some of the special features and things from the house in the design of a new restaurant. And then you can make the waiting area and all throughout the restaurant history of the Casa Peralta. And we can get some tax revenue and we can have a long-term lease. And maybe that'll help out somebody, you know, that's possibly down in the marina, which is falling apart and it looks like a dump site. Just some thoughts. I would like to see a complete and thorough reconciliation of the bank account for the Casa Peralta. Let's just say from 2016 till now, I'd like to see the ins and outs of the money, where it went, why it went, things like that. The bus stops around the greenhouse, I mean, I've spoke about the greenhouse for years. Now that we've got this brand new navigation center that we spent way too much money for, and we're helping a couple dozen people, there's a lot of loitering going on. the bus stop in front of FoodMax, the bus stop in front of the old Goodwill, the old Goodwill building. I mean, that's been a discussion for years too, and it looks great. They just took the bus stop out in front of McDonald's on like Friday. I drove by this morning and now the new bench has already knocked over. My daughter's got to use that bus stop to get to school. And it's not a very safe area right there. Can we do something about the greenhouse? Maybe.

Thank you. Mayor, there are no more hands raised online.

Thank you. So at this point, we will close online public comment. Please give me one minute. OK, at this point in time, we will move on to our next item on the agenda. We do have a public hearing regarding some 2026 liens for nonpayment for various charges. And I think we do have our Assistant Finance Director, if I remember correctly, Felicia Silva, here to present this item. Thank you for joining us.

Thank you. Felicia Silva, Assistant Finance Director. Mayor Gonzales and Vice Mayor Viveros-Walton here to present the City of San Leandro annual liens for 26-27. So the San Leandro Municipal Code allows us to collect certain delinquent fees through an assessment lien on the property tax bill. These are primarily related to public health and safety and allows the city to ensure fiscal sustainability. Charges subject to assessment lien include sidewalk and driveway repair, code enforcement and compliance, solid waste through ACI or Alameda County Industries, fire inspections, CUPA, which is our certified unified program agency, and wastewater charges for commercial users. The typical process that the lien will follow is we start with an initial billing for services that the departments work with the customers and it will be through either issuing a citation or through a service provided. An invoice is sent by finance and then both Program staff as well as finance work with customers to answer any questions on the billing as well as to provide potential payment options we do everything in our power to work with our Customers to make sure that they have every opportunity to pay before we start the lien process Following that, we do have monthly statements. Statements are sent monthly, and again, working with the departments to make sure that they're given every opportunity to pay. We have some legal notice requirements. It is required that we publish in our local paper, and we did that on July 3rd and July 10th. Also, in order to reach more potentially affected, we did an additional on July 17th. So in addition to those published legal notices, we also do send three notices of intent, starting in May, June, and July. And in July, they also get information regarding the public hearing details. After the legal noticing, we have our public hearing, and of course, that's where we are today. And after we have our public hearing today, then we will go through the collection process, again, giving all of our customers every opportunity to pay anything that is outstanding. at the end of July, right before we need to submit to the county in August, any of those potential property owners will be taken off the lien list. With that, I want to point you to a three-year lien summary. We have three years of history. I want to call your attention to twist 26-27. We have a count of 257 accounts that will be assessed. And then at $753,000, again, an important footnote at the bottom that these amounts reflect balances as of July 9th, 2026. Again, those ongoing efforts to collect before any account is sent to the county for a lien assessment. And we have been continuing to do that. We'll continue to do that all the way through that August submission to the county. Our recommendation today is for city council to take the following actions. Close the public hearing, adopt resolution to impose liens for non-payment, and adopt resolution to overrule protests. And happy to answer any questions.

Okay, so prior to opening up the public hearing, I will see if there are any questions from council members. Okay, seeing none, the time is 8.32, and I am opening the public hearing. We have members from the public who are commenting at this hearing.

Mayor, we have not received any comment cards from here in the room, but we do have one hand raised online.

Okay, please proceed online.

The first online speaker is Douglas Spalding.

uh thank you very much i i just would like to clarify i didn't hear it in your presentation so i hope it's not true but um you know if someone has uh overdue parking tickets is that something that the city might place a lien on i tried calling the citation processing center but you can't get a hold of anyone so i would have asked a question there uh i kind of need to clear my tickets i need an abstract so i can take the dmv so i can register my car but

there's no way to do that either.

So here's another CSA, I guess we hired somebody to do our parking for us way down in the Southland and you don't pay, well, you're out of luck. That's what stands for due to process these days. Thanks.

Thank you. Mayor, there are no more hands raised online.

Okay, the time is 834 and I'm closing the public hearing. I do have a question to follow up on our public commenter. Are parking tickets part of this lien process?

No, they are not.

Okay, thank you for the clarification. Is there any further discussion from council members? If not, I will entertain to adopt staff's three recommendations. Council member Victor Aguilar.

I'd like to make the motion to adopt Staff's recommendation.

Vice Mayor?

I second.

Okay, so we have a motion from Council Member Victor Aguilar to adopt Staff's three recommendations with a second from our Vice Mayor. Seeing no further discussion, please vote.

All votes are in and the motion carries unanimously with six yes votes and Council Member Simon being absent.

OK, at this point in time, we do not have a presentation. Item number nine. Item number 10 is a motion to appoint David Jackson, 10A to be precise, a motion to appoint David Jackson to the Committee Police Review Board. I don't know that we really need a presentation, so to speak. OK, so are there any questions about this item? On this item, because we already had public hearing on the nomination, do we need public comment on this item? Typically, we handle this through a minute order that we don't. We normally do not, because people have spoken at the nomination period. With that being said, I would move, because he is my appointee, I will move the appointment of David Jackson to the CPRB, Vice Mayor.

Second. Okay.

Having a motion and a second for the appointment of David Jackson and the Community Police Review Board. And no further discussion, please vote.

The motion carries unanimously with all members voting yes and Council Member Simon being absent.

Okay.

Thank you. At this point, we've got item 10B. 10B is a second reading of the ordinance. As you may recall, last time I voted no because I wanted a little bit further discussion on this item specifically. So if we can proceed with your presentation, Planning Manager Lee.

Good evening, Mayor Gonzalez, members of the City Council. My name is Wayland Lee, Planning Manager for the City. The item before you is the second reading adoption of an ordinance amending the city's off-street parking regulations and establishing new transportation demand management or TDM requirements on new development. The council introduced this ordinance on July 6th by a vote of four to one with two council members absent. What does the ordinance do? The ordinance has two primary components. First, it repeals and replaces zoning code chapter 4.08, which is the chapter of the zoning ordinance which regulates off-street parking requirements for new development. The amendments serve to simplify our existing parking requirements. They update minimum parking standards to better match actual demand. They modernize bicycle parking standards and it requires unbundling of parking for housing projects of five or more units. For clarification, it does not change parking standards for single family homes. Second, the ordinance adopts a new zoning code chapter to add transportation demand management requirements on new development. And this complements the parking updates by encouraging a reduction in vehicle trips and the demand for parking generated by new developments. This slide summarizes the reasons why we're proposing this ordinance today. First, it supports the city's climate action plan by reducing vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions through the new TDM program. Second, the city's housing element identified minimum parking requirements as a constraint to new housing production and identified that applications for parking reductions add time, cost, and uncertainty to development review. This ordinance removes those barriers to housing production. Third, new state law now dictates where and how cities may impose parking requirements, and this ordinance brings San Leandro into alignment with those state laws. Just real quickly, the ordinance builds on several years of work, beginning with the 2021 Climate Action Plan, 2023 Housing Element. It went through community workshops and stakeholder engagements in 2025, and was, and first reading for the council occurred on July 6th. In conclusion, staff recommends the council hold the second reading and adopt Ordinance 2026-009. If the council adopts the ordinance this evening, it will take effect within 30 days. This concludes my presentation. Available to answer any questions that the council may have. Do we have any questions?

Okay, so I will begin Chapter 410, the Transportation Demand Management Plan. There's a mandatory provision for all projects to have bicycle repair stations. Tell me a little bit more about that, how that would work as a practical matter for, let's say I redo the strip mall, tear it down, rebuild it on East 14th. How does that work? Who gets that station? It's a separate, bay and the strip mall?

That's a good question. Actually, to summarize, the transportation demand management regulations has some mandatory components and some optional components. Originally, when they brought the item forward to the Planning Commission, the bicycle repair station was an optional element. And in discussion with the Planning Commission, they felt that it was such a low-hanging fruit that it required so little... so little capital costs and operating expenses that it should really just be a mandatory measure that all new commercial and residential developments undertake. So it wouldn't be, in practice it wouldn't be a large physical commitment in terms of space towards the station, but it'd be the, it would just house some basic equipment to conduct the repairs.

So every new building built in the city of San Leandro will have a bicycle repair station.

every new building that meets the minimum thresholds for triggering TDM requirements, which I forget the square footage for commercial development, but I can turn that to you in just a moment.

But it's going to be anything that's a material.

Right, most requires most significant.

The reason, one of the things that really troubles me about this is that if we think about What we're trying to do with parking is have joint use of parking. We're saying we need to have shared facilities. And much in the same spirit, it strikes me that we shouldn't have every single new building within the parameters needs to have a bicycle repair station. It seems like there are some economies of scale. I just don't understand how that cost imposition on every building is a good thing, particularly commercial buildings. We can argue about residential buildings. Should every residential building have a car repair location or a bicycle repair location or any variety of transportation repair locations? Because people live there, that's where they're gonna have their vehicles, their bikes, et cetera. But to say every new, building of any real size needs to have one. I'm really struggling with. Can you explain the motivation other than, oh, well, it's, why not have it as opposed to there's a logic why every new building should have it?

Right, our TDM consultant for the project evaluated a menu of different options for mandatory and optional TDM elements, and they're selected because they actually move the needle in terms of reducing the reducing vehicle trips reducing the demand for demand for parking overall And it was up and through the public process. It was important for It was conveyed through this the stakeholder sessions. It was important to have to not be an impediment to to development so the the option the the mandatory measures that were recommended or ones that staff evaluated or consultants evaluated for kind of the reasonability in imposing on new development without being a barrier to development of, in this case, commercial development.

May I add through the mayor? There is a good faith effort clause so that if in the determination of the zoning enforcement official, a applicant has made a good faith effort to comply and it doesn't make sense given their certain parameters, the zoning enforcement official can can waive something if it's infeasible. We do like to provide a bit of discretion because not every situation is alike. And then I think the threshold you were looking for, Wayland, was the 50,000 square foot buildings? That's right. Yeah.

Thank you.

So larger projects.

Thank you. So, for example, could someone meet the requirement by having a repair station just on the back, the loading gate area?

Absolutely. It won't have to take up a large space. It definitely wouldn't take up a leaseable tenant space. Our ordinance is meant to be like an introductory ordinance. Some cities take TDM very seriously. They're very stringent requirements that are monitored and they're at quite a cost. This is an introductory level where people make their best effort. There are some mandatory and some optional items, but it's meant to still facilitate development, which is a primary goal here.

Thank you. How good of, Council Member Bowen, please.

Thank you Mayor, your questions brought up some things for me and then I had an additional question. I remember asking about some of the options that developers could have and I remember the consultant saying that they were like low cost, like education, et cetera, for like a bike repair, like could it be something as simple as like having like a pump available or you know, so that if you get a flat tire, you can fix it? but it's not like a full, you can come here, it's a one-stop shop to fix your bike.

I think the way you expressed it is correct. The intention is to have that basic equipment to allow residents or employees to repair their bicycles so that they can get to work, get to home, get to where they need to go.

Okay, great, and then if we could just go to slide three around, the policy direction and why we're doing this. Yes, that one. I really, really appreciate this, especially as we're talking through the work plan, like how do these things scaffold up, like this is directly it. Is our Vision Zero plan, is that built, is that part of our 2021 Climate Action Plan, or is that something separate that we could also, I think, call out as policy direction?

not to speak for other departments, but I think Vision Zero is more about safety, and there is some overlap. The bicycle and pedestrian planning looks both at Vision Zero and climate goals, and so that's the merging of the climate and the safety piece, is the Pedestrian Bicycle Master Plan. But for this particular item, I wouldn't say that it is rooted in Vision Zero policy.

Okay, I was just thinking about the fact that we're trying to enable more people to use their bikes. And so I just part of like, how do we, I guess, because I guess this was focused on safety for bicyclists. Yes, got it. Okay. Okay, that's it for now. No comments later.

So do you have one other question? I know that the parking minimums, there's part of the work that results or that is being driven by compliance with state law. And then there's a separate part which is just our desire that's introduced but it's not necessary for compliance with state law. The concern that I had expressed at the other meeting specifically focused on construction in parts of the city where street parking at night is already quite challenging. And to say that we aren't introducing parking minimums, that some of those parking locations are residential, My concern was that residential neighborhoods could well be impacted in locations that already don't have enough parking through the introduction of construction that doesn't have parking minimums. And Ed specifically said, well, can we impose an assurance that the people that don't have parking spaces will also not have cars? So the question is two parts. First, when it comes to the residential impacts of the construction of those facilities that don't have parking minimums or have reduced parking minimums, how are we taking the externality, the impact on those neighbors? How are we taking that into account? Because it's to the benefit of the builder, but it's to the detriment of the existing property owners. So I'll just start with that one. How do we take that into account?

and recognizing that there are residential neighborhoods in the city where there are existing parking problems. I think the updated parking standards, the attempt to right-size and calibrate the parking minimums to the actual demand that's established based on the use, and that's based on peak demand. So I think the intention of the order is not to create standards that would in and of themselves push the impact onto residential streets, but be calibrated to what the actual anticipated demand of those uses are. In those neighborhoods, I'll also point out that in largely single family neighborhoods, the ordinance doesn't, the ordinance, the revised parking requirements don't affect single family homes, so those standards would not change. And the ordinance also applies prospectively to new developments, so there'd be no obligation for, there'd be little effect on those existing streets. Does that cover your question?

If I build an apartment complex that has very little parking and it's not near public transit, I'm assuming that we recognize that people will then end up parking in the neighborhood streets near the building.

May I add to that, Waylon? Yes. I think one thing to be mindful of is that the standards are scaled based on the number of bedrooms in each unit. So there's not a one-size-fits-all parking standard. Larger units are required to provide under the ordinance more parking spaces. but the feedback we received throughout many professional analyses of our code was that we had very, I would say like suburban, more old-fashioned parking requirements that hadn't kept up with the times. And so the two spaces per unit for the three bedrooms and the one space per unit for the studio and one bedrooms is meant to right size the parking requirement, not over park. And so I think you're absolutely correct. We cannot cap how many cars people have. Trends change with vehicle ownership. In general, it's getting more expensive to own a vehicle and there are more options like ride share and other things that make it easier. And then even with like autonomous, I think there's a prediction that in the future there will be less vehicle ownership, but we're not designing this code to that future. We're designing it to what we understand the demand to be today from the professionals we hired. But I do just want to highlight that scaling because it is critical. If you have a three-bedroom unit, one car is not likely to be enough, right? Okay.

So I'll end with one last question. And that's when I think about Central Callen, I think about the fact that they are looking for additional parking. When I think of 1388 Bancroft, it was going to be sufficient parking because the parking was going to be on the street. And so I'm struggling a bit. outside of our high density network. And I think the old map, I can't remember if it was the green zone down East 14th or if that was a blue. But one was one color and the other one was the other color. I really don't have a problem with our high density focus East 14th. But I am still struggling with outside of that. Legally, we have to do East 14th. Outside of that, we're choosing to do it, and I just, me, I don't feel comfortable yet, but you probably have the votes. I'm gonna go to public comment on this item.

Mayor, we have not received any comment cards on this item, and there are no hands raised online.

Okay, so we'll close public comment. Any other thoughts, questions, comments? Council Member Bolton.

Yes, thank you. I would like to thank Council Member Bowen because those were my exact questions when you asked at the beginning of yours. The only other part of that was I know there's a menu that the Planning Commission looks at and says, okay, this is less. So there were some other things that were a little more I'll just say maybe extrinsic or cost prohibitive that they chose this one to be a part of the program. I think it is the right approach. I was going to ask, what does a typical bike shop look like in this scenario? And oftentimes, it's just a room with a bike stand and their ability to change a tire, fix the chain. It's not meant to overhaul a bike for a long period, so it's a smaller space. And that was captured in the comments, so I was just reiterating that. Anything, my comments, or anything we can do in the process to help us, you know, garner more housing and development in our city is what we need to be looking at. And obviously bringing us up to the state codes is very important to us. So I will be in favor of this and I appreciate all the hard work you guys have done for this process.

Thank you. Council Member Bowen, please.

Yes, I just wanted to move the item. And I love that the policy direction is still up there because that's why.

Okay. So then I'll offer my comments. So I have a motion from Council Member Bowen. My quick comments are focusing on two things. First, I'm not convinced that the evidence points to the housing minimums causing the lack of development or the parking minimums causing the lack of development in San Leandro in particular. I think there's lots of other reasons why housing is not being built in San Leandro and this is not one of them. I am also very concerned about the result on neighborhoods. There are places where we have to make the change. I'm totally fine with that. We need to be compliant with state law and that's good and that's appropriate. We have talked about driving development into the East 14th corridor and this achieves that goal to the extent that parking minimums are keeping housing from being built. I look at Central Cal, I'm looking for more parking, that's just an indication that no, they need more parking than what we let them build parking with and I think that the same thing will happen at 1388. So my approach and is very much focused on let's do what we have to do to be compliant and let's focus on the other areas to make sure we understand the impacts to neighbors and to neighborhoods because I do not currently believe that that's the impediment to housing being built in the City of San Leandro. So I will not be supporting, but it's that piece. I do support the densification along East 14th. I've said that since I started on the council. I do support the development of downtown and Bayfair, more housing, more housing, more housing. But the way that we're approaching this as a bundle, I do not agree with. I'll come back to someone for a second, please. Council Member Bolt. Second. Okay. Any further discussion on this item? Seeing none, please vote.

All votes are in and the motion carries with five yes votes, one no vote from Mayor Gonzalez, and one council member being absent, Council Member Simon.

Okay, at this point in time, we'll move to our next item, which is item 11. We do not have any council requests to schedule agenda items. And then we've got item 12, our reports. Please proceed, Council Member Bowen.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to share something that we had an extensive presentation at our last stop waste meeting focused on stop waste. It was the stop waste campaign date, label update, and this is important and something that I have to get used to and want other council members to be aware of as well. But the issue with date labels is there's a confusion over expiration dates. So if you ever buy food it's like sell by date, best by date, use by date. And what's happening because of that is over 20% of the food that we buy goes to waste and we look at food waste and how much of a detrimental harm that causes to the environment. It's one of the core focus areas of stop waste. And so California AB 660 which was signed into law in 2024 became effective July 1st, 2026 and what AB 660 did was to standardize food date labeling by requiring the use of best if used by for quality and used by for safety. So there's no longer a sell by label and that was purposely, that was actually something between like the distributor and then like the grocery stores. So that wasn't actually meant for consumers. So that's something for us just to be more aware of for food safety and then obviously talking about the environment. The other thing that I wanted to highlight is that I had the opportunity to have a very busy travel week, but I went to the local progress conference last week, and I just wanted to share a few things that were really, were highlighted as critical focus areas for electors across the country, but the conversation that we had, which we've talked about, was really focused on affordability and how do cities work together, especially with state closures in the community and in partnership with the council and staff to figure out ways to identify what are the causes of people, in terms of affordability and what we can do to move that along. Immigration we talked about, and then also mitigations around data centers and the questions around AI also was a big focus area. And then the one thing that I would have to say that the facilitators of a workshop that was one of the most popular said five years ago we never had to have this sort of workshop, but it was really around safety for elected officials, whether that was to do with just the state of political discourse and political violence, and so harassment, threats, things of that nature. And so that was a really interesting thing that I really appreciated. And then at AAPI LEAD, which is the only national organization for local up to federal appointed and elected officials, was this weekend, and the focus was on public-private partnerships. something that we've been talking about at this council, combating anti-Asian hate, civic innovation and AI, and then also being able to hear from our highest ranking AAPI elected ever, which was VP Kamala Harris, which was really wonderful. And inspiring, and then the last thing that I want to spotlight and take direction from Council Member James Aguilar, when he did the staff highlight, I want to say that I had a constituent reach out and tell me that there was like a stop sign that was faded and could staff do anything about it? It was one of those situations where staff could and we happened to have a stop sign and it was taken care of and so I really appreciate that promptness. And then the work that we had talked about at the last work plan around the really collaborative effort that the departments have focused on helping our unhoused and also public safety for our residents. I had a situation that where we learned of a potential public safety, a real public safety issue, and staff were able to go out there with all of the different departments and find out that here's how we can address, starting to figure out how to address it, and that many of the folks were actually on the list to go to the Navigation Center. So it means that there is this pipeline, and obviously we need more housing, but shout out to staff for being able to be really responsive in the best way to figure out a solution and move us forward.

Vice Mayor, please.

two announcement or one announcement and one event that I attended that I wanted to encourage my colleagues to explore a little bit one. wanted to alert the community and the council that SLIA is looking for an executive director. So they're currently recruiting. And so if you have any candidates that you think might be a good fit, all the information is on SLIA's website. And then the other event that I attended was on Saturday, June 27th, at the San Leandro Library. The Bay of Vista Homeowners Association, along with the mayor and Supervisor Tam, co-hosted a presentation on a study that the community funded through a UC Berkeley startup and accelerator that specializes in creating models of evacuation. And it was a really powerful presentation. And what I just want to elevate for us to think about was this is something that the community uh had voiced in terms of concern um and the the data and the various scenarios um actually reflected that reality um and it was a a really powerful presentation and um i know that the bea vista Neighborhood Association, Homeowners Association has been reaching out to my colleagues to do like a mini version of that presentation. I would really want to ask you to consider that. It is done by folks who are experts in this and it is a really compelling and actually quite scary as a person who lives in that neighborhood thinking about just how much it matters if you evacuate between one minute to five minutes to ten minutes and how long you wait and what that could mean. for those folks. So I just wanted to elevate that presentation and also my gratitude for those who organized it. It was a really well attended event and it was just enlightening but also informative and also a little scary. I also, since I was not here at the previous meeting, I just wanted to elevate my gratitude to the San Leandro team for a fantastic 4th of July celebration. I wasn't here for the last meeting where y'all probably gave those kudos and those appreciations, but I did want to elevate that. And those are all my comments. Thank you.

Okay, so I'll wrap this up. Also, I think one of our commenters mentioned the Brian Copeland Comedy in the Plaza event. Very well attended. Just really good, wholesome, lots of laughter, lots of smiles. Thank you to Mr. Copeland. He had a number of donors who donated in kind. They raised enough money to provide 150 backpacks and new shoes. to folks that work in collaboration with Davis Street. I had the opportunity after that event to join the all-star game of the Women's Premier Basketball Association, which is a developmental league that is hosting games here at the San Leandro High School gym. It is apparently the only league of its type working with professional players who are looking to get into the WNBA, who have come oftentimes out of college, many of whom get placed on international teams if they're not placed in the WNBA. And so there's a lot of encouragement to just spread the word, because they'll be playing here at the Soundlater High School Gym over the next four weeks and spend some time with their founder today to explore ways in which we might promote this activity here. I can tell you that from watching the game, extremely fast-paced. professional quality basketball. These are D1 players that are looking to make it into the pros. So there's no there's a lack of activity energy on the court. Join the California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce gathering. in Oakland and it's always good to represent the City of San Leandro by being present, meet with a number of business owners who are thinking about where they operate their businesses and so sometimes being present is a good thing and I'll leave it at that. Friday also involved a visit to the Lawrence Berkeley Science Hall or Lawrence Berkeley National Labs. The Bay Area Council is very focused on making sure that electeds understand the cutting edge of technology that is being developed in these labs, finding ways to work with Activate, which is their, I'll call it their accelerator, to make sure that businesses find a home. So I continue to encourage folks to make those connections with those startup companies as we look to expand business into San Leandro. Grateful for Walmart for their grand reopening after their remodel. So much joy. It was great to see so many employees. I was astounded by the number of employees that received certificates for decades of service. at this Walmart location. So that's pretty cool when you see that kind of commitment to an organization and the organization reciprocates. There is an ask from the senior commission specifically, but I have heard this from other commissions, that it's good for us to visit them from time to time, just to drop in and see the work that they're doing, because sometimes I think they feel a little bit forgotten. And even though what they do percolates up to us to watch them in action, I think can provide them some satisfaction. So it was a specific request to my council that I promised to bring back to join meetings, but I'm extending it to all the commissions because I know the commissioners do work hard. From ACTC projects committee, one of the things I just want to highlight is that the East Bay Greenway has gone from idea to concept in motion to design it's now going to be built. And so the contracts have been let for contracts approved for the San Leandro Boulevard portion of that. And the next step of the, the next construction contract letting will be for the East 14th portion of that. So over the next, three-ish years, maybe four-ish years, we should expect the East Bay Greenway to be realized. I know that the original dream had been to put it along the railroad tracks. It's not a decommissioned track line, but it's an inactive track line. But as a practical matter, that could not become a reality, and so there was a pivot, and we should see lots of activity here in San Leandro, construction activity. I do want to thank Senator Grayson for coming out to San Leandro and spending time in Lena Tam's office and in particular just fielding questions, cold questions, just whatever they were, and addressing them head on and meeting with constituents about their concerns. So I'll pause and come back to Council Member Bowen.

I don't do it on purpose, I just remember something when you started talking there. I did want to acknowledge, and I know that we can't do recognitions for everything, and there are many things we want to recognize, but July is also Disability Pride Month, and one in four adults have a disability. And as somebody who has spent a lifetime trying to acknowledge and fight off shame around a disability, I just wanted to acknowledge that for folks. I appreciate that and maybe at some point we can have it be a resolution part of our annual plan. Thank you.

Thank you. The last thing that I will end with is that I do want the residents to understand that this council is very focused on efficiency and keeping track of projects. A lot, just more focus on projects finishing on time and on budget. I do want to specifically highlight the very large scale project, Elevate, which has reached its first milestone, namely the payment of employees as part of the first bridge cycle. We'll kind of keep working through, monitoring, making sure that all payments are processed correctly. But by all accounts, we're off to a great start for a project that was delivered on time and on budget. And I know there was an approval today and consent to just continue some work on it. That's all been budgeted for and it's on the timeline that was expected. So I want the community to understand that we are committed to on time, on budget, if not ahead of schedule, delivery on our projects and it's something that your council is paying a lot of attention to. So with that being said, the time is now 913 and we are adjourned.