Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to a closed session for Stockton City Council. Today is December 12th, 2023. City Clerk, please take roll. Council Member Padilla is absent. Member Lenz? Present. Council Member Villapadua? Present. Vice Mayor Wormsley? Present. Record. Thank you. Item 2, additions to closed session agenda. There aren't any, so we'll move on. Item 3, announcements of closed session. Item 3.1, conference with legal counsel. Existing litigation. This closed session is authorized pursuant to section 54956.9A of the government code. Item 3.2, conference with labor negotiator. This closed session is authorized pursuant to section 54957.6A of the government code. Items 3.3. through 3.5, public employee performance evaluations. These closed sessions are authorized pursuant to government code section 54957. Item 3.6, conference with legal counsel potential litigation. This closed session is authorized pursuant to government code section 54956.9b. And item 4, public comments. City Clerk, do we have any comments from members of the public this evening? We have none. Okay, thank you. Item 5, recession to closed session. This body will now adjourn to closed session. good evening everyone and welcome to the regular session of study three city clerk please take absent councilmember blower present mccoy thank you for a right to lead us in the pledge thank you and at this time i'd like to in tyler's from oasis church Hey, Father, first love that are here and gathered, thank you for your many blessings. Thank you for the honor of bearing appropriate for your sharp mind. Thank you for what you say that we are intended to obey all of authority to promote your peace, your order, and your justice amongst your tonight for wisdom to govern this community well, the sense of welfare and a clear understanding for the needs of the people, a hunger for just peace in the lives of those that are here in this room. and those that we govern. This clarity of what you would like to have happening. I mean, city clerk, I'm sorry. City attorney, do we have any report offers from the operations and maintenance and trades and maintenance units? The city has offered to the union representatives and requested it be presented to their members. The primary items of the cost of 5% fiscal year 23, year 24, 25, 3% fiscal year 25, 26, and bringing all members to the meeting are items to report. Okay. Thank you. Item nine, additions to regular session. There aren't any, so move on. Miss Tiffany, Faith Tiffany Gomez to the podium. A certificate is in congratulations on achieving a championship title intermediate Stockton City Council on this 12th. Thank my family, thank my sponsors, and thank Stockton for recognizing me here today. You want your belt? Yeah, we got it. Oh, that, right. My ticket's not there. Show us your medal. This is from Louisiana. I just won USA Boxing National. Number one in the country. Let's go. Here, help me out a little bit. I got the second one. There we go. Okay. move on and we're going to skip to public hearing the hearing is back on for the record and while staff is coming in the public the adoption of an ordinance and municipal code to establish new logistic warehouse standard we could shut the door yes thank you Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. So staff was in presentation as we did that a week ago, so we are here to provide information, answer any questions, reach a decision tonight. Okay. Thank you. Clerk, do we have any public comments on this item? We do, Mayor. Beginning with... And on behalf of the we write to advocate for and those measures include numbers 11, 13, 14, and 15. And without the cannot in good faith agree with how this inclusion will guarantee that addresses the economic development as well. 13, 14, and 15. Prepared to discuss this complex matter yet, then we implore the city council to motion for continuance. See if. THEY WOULD ALLOW THE PARTIES SUCH AS THE DEVELOPERS, CITY STAFF, ENVIRONMENTAL TO NEGOTIATE A DEAL ON THIS. ALL OF THE SPECIFICS, SO HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS WERE ABLE TO GET THE SPECIFICS ON THE AMENDMENTS, BUT FOR MEASURE 11, ONE OF THE THINGS I REALLY WANT TO MAKE CLEAR, IT HAS A WORDING THAT SAYS UNLESS DETERMINED TO BE PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. WE THINK THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH HOW CITY OF FONTANA HAS IT, WHERE THEY HAVE CURRENTLY HAVE STATED that actually it is feasible and there doesn't need to be any provisions on that specific side of setbacks. And so that's why we provide building setbacks from warehouses to sensor receptors, a two to one ratio of building setbacks to building height. Additionally, the loading docks, truck entries and truck drive aisles shall not abut adjacent sensor receptors. Loading docks also need a setback. With all loading docks, the loading docks shall be oriented away from the nearby sensitive receptors. Thank you. Thank you. Hector Olivares. Hello. My name is Hector Olivares. I'm with the Catholic Charities Diocese of Stockton. And I want to speak on Measure 14. As it is written, Option C only covers heavy, heavy duty. vehicles. For consistency purposes, we highly recommend including light heavy duty LHD and medium heavy duty to cover all heavy duty trucks being given future electric charging stations. Not every distribution facility is going to primarily have heavy heavy duty trucks because they also include light heavy duty that handle deliveries within the region. To ensure all facilities maintain a clear transition to future zero-emission vehicles and trucks fleets, we recommend that all applicable facilities are in accordance with the following. A, to facilitate the installation of future electric vehicle charging stations for light heavy duty and medium heavy duty and heavy heavy duty trucks in connection with each individual development proposal. The subject building improvement plan shall identify an area for future LHD, MHD, HHD truck charging stations, and the subject developer shall install conduit from the power source to the identified area. B, electric vehicle charging stations infrastructure for trucks provide conduit to provide EVCS to meet future needs. Conduit should be provided on the site to serve 50% of the number of truck docking stations, location of conduit at a discretion of the developers, e.g., truck trailer parking spaces or docking stations. Thank you. Thank you. SB Nima, followed by Pandora Crowder. There's a lot of noise out there. Okay, good evening, Mayor Lincoln and esteemed council members. I am here representing, my name's Esperanza Villalba and I'm representing Environmental Justice Coalition for Water. I serve as the executive director and I'm a lifelong resident of Southside Stockton and I am, basically coming back to offer some more free advice as far as the electric vehicles, the solar panels, the heavy-duty vehicles. All of those have incentive programs. So those are grants that are offered through the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. And that being said... these incentives can be tapped into by the developer, owner, or the person who's going to lease the warehouses. And so that's not written into the ordinance, but I just wanted to make sure that everyone was aware that those grants are available and they were taken full advantage of by the Frito-Lay, PepsiCo, Modesto plant. that was 500,000 square feet and so they were able to take advantage of that and so all of those components that are part of the warehouse ordinance would be a savings for the developers and a win-win because then the residents would have clean air especially those residents from Southside Stockton and all of Stockton so I want to make sure that that is that everyone's aware of that and that, you know, we can assist with that if you all, you know, need any kind of introduction to any of the staff members that are part of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The CEO is very interested in working with the city. Thank you. Thank you. Pandora Crowder followed by RC Thompson. Good evening, Mayor Lincoln, City Council. My name is Pandora Crowder. I am a Stockton resident and community leader that resides on the south side. I'm here to express my support for the amendments to the option C, which are amendments recommended by our environmental justice advocates and our South Stockton residents. The environmental justice amendments presented are ones that need to be integrated as part of the warehouse ordinance because it incorporates consistency with environmental and public health protections as well as being mindful of economic development. Option C as it stands isn't enough. It isn't enough to protect me or my community. South Stockton residents should not have an average life expectancy of 70 years, while when in North Stockton residents have an average life expectancy of 81. The feasibility analysis for option B or C does not take into account the health impact costs that the cumulative population from all heavy polluting sources brings to South Stockton. The feasibility analysis does not consider the long-term healthcare costs for residents suffering from lifelong illnesses such as asthma, lung disease, and heart disease, which, side note, I suffer from all of those as well as my husband, and this would cut our life expectancy much shorter. And I have children. The feasibility analysis does not consider a resident's health and is never considered in the equation of development. We hope the City Council considers a resident's health in their justification for their decision and recommend incorporating the environmental justice amendments to option C. Thank you very much. Thank you. R.C. Thompson, followed by Faridja Andrews. Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council. I'm R.C. Thompson, the Executive Director of Reinvent South Stockton Coalition. I want to remind you Where you live determines how long you're going to live. The Center of Disease Control and Prevention CDC reported that those who live in area code 95205, South Stockton, are less likely to live longer than those who live in 95207, North Stockton. In one census tract of 95207, they were given an average life expectancy of 81.9 years. However, in one census tract in 95205, they were given an average of life expectancy of 73 years. This is why public health context is important when deciding these important matters that involve land use and not just the economic benefits. Thank you. Thank you. For Ray J. Andrews, followed by Alicia Valenzuela. Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Councilmembers. Incorporation of labor standards in the ordinance, as an environmental justice advocate, we recognize that environmental justice workers and worker justice are interconnected because both address issues of fairness, equity, and well-being of communities. For instance, similar to those environmental hazards that disproportionately affect low-income communities and communities of color, Workers in certain industries, especially in work housing, may face hazardous working conditions, inadequate safety measures, and insufficient labor protections. Additionally, there is a shared concern for addressing economic inequalities. Environmental justice and worker justice advocate for fair wages, decent working conditions, and equitable distribution of the benefits of burdens associated with economic activities. to not include some aspects of labor standards into the ordinance is missing the bigger picture on who is covered here and how the city aims to protect workers' rights. One example of a good labor standard for construction is City of Berkeley's hard hats, which means helping achieve responsible development with health care and apprenticeship trading standards. Ordinance. If the city needs more time to assess this piece, then we'd advocate for this to be presented at a later time with the understanding the city in good faith would get this in a hearing in 2024. Thank you. Thank you. Alicia Valenzuela followed by Alyssa Leyva. Good evening, Mayor Lincoln and council members and city manager Black. So I'm here to speak on behalf of the environmental justice advocates Just reiterating all the points that we're making that we really like option C as long as it can be inclusive of those amendments that we're suggesting. And just to share that there is a willingness to come to the table. I feel like we can't innovate, we can't reach sustainability without understanding the perspectives from all angles, being able to have those conversations. And we've been in communications with Bob Gutierrez, who is like a liaison or on behalf of the developers to try to figure out a best case scenario. And it's been a lot of work. I don't think my colleagues have shared just the number of hours that we've been spending on Zoom in person just trying to figure out what is the best ordinance for Stockton for the warehousing. We all care about our residents throughout the city. We really care about the future as far as youth and our health, because someone is going to bear those costs. Whether we're making those technological decisions now, investing in infrastructure or not, it might look like an externality. For example, the increased health care costs of those who are going to be experiencing increased incidence of asthma attacks or having to go to the hospital or more prescriptions. So I think we all want to work together on this and definitely consider those amendments to option C. We're really for it. We're really excited. I hope that we can leave this meeting with more cheer and welcome Christmas and welcome 2024. But if we do need to continue into the next year, we're also understanding of that because it's a lot of work and we appreciate it. Thank you. Alyssa Leyva followed by Roberto Contreras. good evening council my name is Alyssa Leyva South Stockton resident of 26 years I just wanted to reiterate my environmental justice advocates and uplift option C with the amendments recommended by them in 2021 San Joaquin County was number three in the country for how many warehouses we have in a populated dense area warehouses to housing number three how many warehouses very very high anyways I just wanted to make a poster and just show you just some examples. This is Mariposa Road. Maybe you guys don't come to South Stockton often. Maybe you don't know what it's like to be in a food desert, information desert, resource center desert. That's South Stockton. Here is Little John Creek. You have, there's the warehouse right in somebody's backyard. This is where Cesar Flores lost his life in between two large trucking sites. There's not very many green spaces, and here is our only green space in the Mariposa end where there's trucks parked along the side. There's an image of our traffic and just shows more warehouses surrounding the neighborhood and neglected land. So I just want to reiterate, put our public health first and add the environmental amendments. Thank you. Thank you. Roberto Contreras followed by Reverend Dwight Williams. Good evening, Mayor Kevin Lincoln and council members. I can imagine how difficult it's been for you guys to vote and make a decision of these new changes that are going to affect our city. And I just want to say that I do think about how hard it could be for you guys having to be dealing with all these difficulties and having to make decisions. But I do remember that back in 2005, 2006, Stockton was the number one crime in the nation. Now we've got something in our hands that we might be able to set up a standard and be an example for other cities if we make decisions that is going to benefit the residents, the citizens and then at the same time be beneficial in all aspects for the environment for you guys as well because this might even well put these decisions on the map and then I don't know I'm pretty sure that you guys are going to make a wise decision and i just want to thank you beforehand thank you very much thank you reverend dwight williams followed by mary elizabeth mayor lincoln vice mayor warmsley members of the stockton city council on last week i stood before you and said briefly well within the two minute range that preachers try to do to keep with time the importance of passing this measure. Tonight I want to add a little bit something to that and encourage you to pass option C. You received a letter from the Stockton Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, which I serve on that executive committee. Our president and another colleague of our executive board is here tonight and we are encouraging you to pass option C with the necessary amendments. We also are encouraging you to pass it tonight and do not delay into the new year. Give certainty to the business community which is very important to do. All of you as council members, all of you as council members have appointed a planning commissioner. And those planning commissioners work hard. I know from experience, I was a planning commissioner for four years from 2005 to 2009. We helped develop a general plan. They, with city staff, came up with a unanimous decision of a 7-0 vote in support of option C. Tonight I'm asking you, members of the council, to support city staff and to support your appointed planning commissioners and support option C with the necessary amendments. Give stability that the business community and the environmentalist community can share together. And I think there's enough common ground within Option C to make everything necessary and to flow perfectly. So tonight I want to reiterate, support Option C, and we encourage you to do that tonight with the necessary amendments. Thank you. Thank you. Mary Elizabeth, followed by Margo Pross. Greetings. Back in 2020, the city of Stockton certified an EIR based on a city-wide level analysis in the city's general plan EIR adopted in December 2018 and did not fully mitigate and in fact made a finding that compared to full build-out, not actual conditions, the Amazon warehouse would improve air quality. The Attorney General's office began involvement, but the project was rapidly approved without incorporating the additional mitigation necessary to protect public health and the environment because the city made findings of overriding significance rooted in local control and economic development. The Mariposa Warehouse project that started this process was a result of blatant disregard of the comments by the trustee agencies and local environmental justice advocates. at a considerable cost. According to the City of Stockton, CEQA requirements do not take into account already overburdened high poverty areas. We know in our community that there are haves and have-nots. Just because CEQA doesn't require consideration doesn't mean the City cannot employ more sensitivity and enhance responses for our disadvantaged residents. Now is the time to fully consider our overburdened residents and develop fair treatment policies that follow the Department of Justice Warehouse Project's best practices and those outlined in various Sierra Club and others' correspondence. I call your attention to Policy 2.1, which is not included in your letter but referenced, and Policy 2.3 that states, focus on reducing the unique and compounded environmental impacts and risks in disadvantaged communities with an action item to provide translation services and translated materials when needed. You all have been presented with significant amounts of evidence showing how the existing policies and local control has created highly impacted areas of our community. Stockton residents in areas of the highest impact from Warehouse did not arrive at this state. Thank you. Margo Pross, followed by Mary good evening mayor and city council members I'm Margo Prowse born in Stockton longtime resident of Stockton and current chair of the local Sierra Club group at the meeting last week you heard from many residents you had many pages of letters and data on the ordinance topic and you chose to continue the issue due to the huge amount of information you had to digest I was going to skip this part, but I've been hearing too much about option C, and I need to say that, just to clarify, before the final Stockton Planning Commission meeting, it seemed as though the planning staff were leaning towards option B. We've never actually asked them outright. The Planning Commission chose the industry option, and then they said, we're just going to vote on it, move it along, and the city council can make their own choice between the options. So tonight... You know, if you're going to make the decision tonight, it's your choice. First, I hear the fear that the projects will leave if you mandate strong mitigations that would help the severe pollution that's being produced. But developers don't leave. They don't. They adjust. They're waiting for the ordinance so they know for sure how to design their projects. They don't want to move forward. They're waiting for the future. And they want to hear what you have to say. So please think carefully about your decision. Look at the options with an open mind. The proposed mitigations are feasible. They are being implemented in other areas such as Fontana, such as the Frito-Lay project that you've heard already. And lastly, I want to ask what do you suppose the city manager meant when he warned you last week that the California AG and the Sierra Club are invasive and the city council needs to take the offense against them? He implied that we are outsiders, imposing our will on you, the council, forcing the city to take action when they didn't want to. He said the AG and SC will continue to compromise Stockton's ability to do self-determination when it comes to development. Think about that. Mary Kennevic, followed by Scott Grafius. Good evening, Mayor. Oops. Good evening. That is not the mic. Good evening, Mayor Lincoln and the City Council. My name is Mary Kennefik. I am not a Stockton resident. I am a Manteca resident. But as chair of the advocacy committee for the League of Women Voters over the last couple of years, I have been watching with shock and horror the rapid development of warehousing in the county. I understand exactly why this is happening because I have several degrees in history, but I also have some employment background in transportation. I am concerned about the loss of agricultural land. I'm concerned about the negative impacts on the health of our citizens. And I want you all to understand and remember, please, as you make a decision about this ordinance, that you do not only impact the city limits of Stockton. because you will be, when you do approve an ordinance, the lead dog of a group of municipalities across the county, which will likely follow your lead in whatever it is you do. And whether that's good to the good or not is up to you. And the long-term effects are going to be very profound in San Joaquin County. Please think before you vote. Thank you. Thank you. Scott Grafius. Mayor, City Council, my name is Scott Grafius. I'm the current president of the Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce. I represent about 850 business owners. I have copious notes and things I was going to talk about and Bishop Dwight came up here and basically did an outstanding job. The chamber is in favor of option C. You each got an email yesterday from our CEO, Tim Quinn, with some stipulations on modifications to clarify language. And the terms, and I just wanted to let you know that that is the way that we want to go. That's what we would recommend. But I do appreciate your time and efforts and everything. Difficult decision, but that is where we stand. Thank you. Thank you. Jason Lee, followed by Matt Arnaz. Good evening. First, let me say I've met with Jonathan and his group, Pat Barrett, and a lot of the other folks from the Environmental Justice Advocates of Stockton, and I've read their letter, and so I'll save my time, because two minutes isn't enough, to just say I stand with them in everything that they've said. I believe that in my research about the warehouse ordinance, that building business in Stockton is... important of course everybody knows that I want to publicly say to Dan Wright I sent you an email saying thank you for creating a conversation and holding people accountable to giving people enough time to have conversation and get information so you make a well-informed decision and I saw how people were trying to bully you and say that you were being mean to city staff I didn't take it that way I think advocacy sometimes is complicated and difficult, but at least it gave folks another opportunity to talk about their concerns tonight. Everybody that I've talked to that's in the room that have spoken are from the South Side. A lot of their voices and why they're so frustrated is because they haven't had anybody to talk to. They haven't been able to say these concerns and talking about the advocacy of lives of their families, their children, my family, my friends that live in the South Stockton area and my home in South Stockton area where I live. I think two things are simple, right? Because one of them I haven't even heard addressed. One, clearly a partnership-based approach that includes the developers and the environmental advocates to figure out a way to be empowered to make decisions that move the projects forward under the recommendations that they have supported tonight, but also ensure that the taxes and the money that comes from building in South Stockton where these environmental issues exist return back to real economic development plans in that side of town. I mean, when you look at South Stockton right now, you heard about food deserts and information deserts. South Stockton has been considered and treated like a third world country for a long time. And there's a person sitting up there that knows the low-income families that are talking tonight because they represent them. But you can't represent people that you don't talk to. The people are here. Listen to them. I stand in support with them. Thank you. Thank you. Matt Arnaz, followed by Liz Sutton. Good evening, Mayor Lincoln, members of council, Matt Arnaz with Holman Investors. And I just wanted to touch on a provision of the first law of support ordinance C as presented to you by the Stock and Planning Commission. And as far as the applicability section, you can see I have some language highlighted that I would like you to consider incorporating into any ordinance that is adopted. And primarily this is consistent with the settlement agreement from the Sierra Club where I think their intent was to This ordinance was to be applied to future warehouse projects. And much like in the second paragraph of my letter to you or in the Attorney General, also had a comment that they intended this to be for future projects. And it's such because most of this deals with mitigation measures. And these mitigation measures can only be applied to future CEQA acts and not to previously approved projects. Speaking from my own project, we were first annexed in 2009. and had a land use change in 2019, but our environmental issues were resolved and CEQA document certified many years ago. So I just want to speak on behalf of myself and others in my position that we have projects in various phases of development that some of the provisions in this ordinance could be very detrimental to continue to finish those projects out as intended. That's it, thank you very much. Thank you. Liz Sutton followed by Eric Parfrey. Good morning council members. My name is Liz Sutton. I'm a business representative for sheet metal workers. And I'm here speaking on behalf of 130 of my members, plus the iron workers, electricians, and sprinkler fitters. And we understand that we need something done. We need to have something greener done and stuff. So we are here speaking on support of option C. Thank you. Thank you. Eric Parfrey, followed by Pat Barrett. Hi, I'm Eric Parfrey, 33-year-old resident of the Victory Park neighborhood, retired city planner. I'm representing the Sierra Club. We have submitted... a letter from our attorney, Shoot Mahaly Weinberger, about two hours ago, and I've given a copy to the city clerk. I hope you get a chance to read that letter. The letter critiques the feasibility analysis that was done for specifically options A and B. There was a number of unsubstantiated claims in that feasibility analysis. that are not going to hold up in court. It's important that the city also consider the email exchange between the state attorney general's office staff and your planning staff dated November 1, which I also submitted earlier this morning. And I hope you had a chance to read that because it goes into a certain amount of detail about how the AG's office, that staff member in particular, was frustrated with how things were being characterized. And I'll just read one clause from that long email chain that I think summarized how that person, Rob Swanson, from the AG's office felt. In addition, I'm frustrated over the feeling that measures suggested by myself and others have been held to a higher standard for proof of feasibility than recommendations from industry. And then he goes on to cite the VOC measure. And then he says, compare that to the industry suggestion to tie the solar provision to a community solar program that does not yet exist and will have uncertain impact. Thank you. Thank you. Pat Barrett followed by Rob Mitchell. I'll review draft planning commission on this ordinance because it was said we're going to go with option C and the city council wants to change it, then they can change it. No, they didn't work hard. City staff worked hard. When reviewing the comments from last week, I noticed the developers requesting the same option, which is all the shortcuts but one. developers stood out and his words were, option C with some amendments. Kudos to Bob Gutierrez. He is listening and he gets it. When reviewing the comments from council, Mayor Lincoln, I address this to you because it's your order. Three of your members commented, one, thank you city staff. One said, thank you staff, recognizing the developers and other groups. And one, thanking city staff and the developers. Not one of them said the word residence, but then again, two are not from this district in question. I feel for city manager trying to get things rolling for the good of the city, and I too feel that council should take a huge consideration, defined as consideration, to think carefully about something, especially before making a decision. That was simple. Which is said and done. So here we stand at stalemate, the solution for all involved. We'll obviously be option C with the amendments 11, 13, 14, and 15 suggested by the residents. So can we have a motion stating that we adopt option C with the amendments to measures 11, 13, 14, 15 as noted, second it, take a vote, everyone goes home, comes back to moving on with the pending projects, and happy holidays. Thank you. Rob Mitchell followed by Mike Souza. Good evening. I want to make this pretty simple for everybody. Can I see a raise of hands of everybody including council members who wants to provide jobs for the city of Stockton? Everybody. Nobody wants to provide jobs? Can I see a hand? Seriously. Hands. Who wants to provide jobs for Stockton? Well, to provide jobs, developers like myself, we have to build buildings. To build buildings, provide jobs. And to be able to build buildings, they have to be cost effective for us to be able to build them. Measure C, which we put forward in front of you, is the development community speaking, saying this is what it's going to take for us to put the measures in. to abide by what we're putting forward for us to be able to build buildings. Point of order. So you'll need to sit down with your sign. You can't block the audience behind you, even with the sign. Thank you. I've heard the comment that the developers can make it work. The developers can always make it work. Well, that's not the case. We're not rocket scientists. You put together a performa. You have rents that you get paid. You have construction costs that come into a building. And if it doesn't put out the performer to be able to pay your loan back, you can't build a building. You can't relay everything onto the tenant. I've heard people say, well, it's Frito-Lay. We brought Walmart to the city of Stockton. Walmart and Frito-Lay is not every single tenant that comes to the city of Stockton. You have to be able to make it where you can build a building. I agree with Matt. When Matt got up here and said it's for projects that are moving forward, I've talked to council members about that. You can make the order to have buildings that are 500,000 square feet and up that affects the distribution centers and everything that we're bringing forward. But you can't get up here and say that we can afford to build things that we can't. Every tenant's not Walmart in a Fortune 500 company. Thank you. You have to look to prove measure C so we can build buildings in your city to bring jobs. Thank you. Mike Souza. followed by George Gudino. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. I'd like to echo some of the previous people who were up here and support option C with the amendments that the chamber and Mr. Arnaz were talking about to the applicability section. We have worked very hard with staff and with the Planning Commission to look at what's feasible and what we can do in this city to still be able to provide jobs and still be able to provide economic development in this community. We believe option C provides that and is still feasible for us to be able to do that. So we would ask for your support for option C. Thank you. Thank you. George Gudino. Alrighty. So basically I'm just worried about my address is 4463 on Marfa Gold Road. I'm right at the borderline behind the new Walmart. The only thing I'm worried about more or less is health issues. So that's about it. that it yes all right unless you unless you have additional comments you like to know basically I'm just worried about like health issues I guess the Walmart already done with right we're just worried about the new development and so this this public hearing this comment portion is to establish an ordinance yeah so basically about like health issues you know that's about it yeah thank you That concludes our public comment for item 16.2. Thank you. Council comments? Council member Wright. Thank you. All of you received the environmental justice advocates option C with amendments form. looks like this either by email or or by hard copy just checking to make sure that I'm not talking about something that none of you know about yeah clerk can you confirm for the record that council received that correspondence yes mayor it was sounded sent as council correspondence from Allison this afternoon yes what time was that sent That was sent out Monday, December 11th at 7.34 p.m. Okay, so had it for close to 24 hours. I find it very well measured. I mean, it looks at option C, and it takes into account many of the environmental justice concerns that others have. It sounds like... Mr. Pruitt and his team did outreach to the business community on this. I guess my biggest concern on this is it's been presented to me as an all or nothing that we approve option C with chamber amendments or we approve something else. And from the very beginning I've said that I don't see this as an all or nothing consideration. So It comes down to some of the issues of what's feasible to do or not feasible to do. And I don't like that word, to be honest. Because when you talk about feasibility, it all comes down to, like history, the victors make the rules. So I'd like us to get away a little bit from that and just talk about what is best for the citizens of Stockton. There is a line out. On the green column section, there's a line out and underlining for new sections that were placed in. But otherwise, they are requesting approval of option C as it stands, just with these line outs and underlines for additions. So if staff is available, I'd like, I know this will be time consuming, but I'd like to go through each one and ask for staff feedback on it. Let me just pull it up. No worries. I may be bringing forth additional staff as there's different parts that we all worked on. Absolutely understood. I know the issue is we only get one bite of this apple. Okay. You know, so I want to make sure we do it right. So I'm going to start with our planning manager, Matt Diaz. He worked on a number of these. Before he starts, though, I do want to clarify the issue of feasibility that you brought up. Feasibility is actually a defined term under CEQA, which is required per the agreement with the AG. So that is why that is used so frequently, is that we have to show... why something's not feasible as defined by CEQA. So I just want to put that out there. And what is the CEQA definition of feasible? I have it as a footnote here. And just to be clear, this would be the definition anywhere we see the word feasible in a document, this is the definition the city will be using and applying. That is what we had to base our analysis on, yes. Feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. That's CEQA section 15364. Is CEQA defined reasonable? I would defer to legal on that. Just as mushy. But, okay. Thank you. All righty, so let's start, if we may. Building setbacks, 2.1 ratio building setbacks to building height. That's an underline, meaning it's an addition to option C. Is that feasible? So staff has concerns with option number 11. When we were drafting that initially in terms of the options we were given, the examples we were given, one of the things that kind of wasn't clear is how that would actually impact a future design of a project coming forward. Especially when you talk about a 300 foot setback or a 100 foot setback. So we drafted option B originally to kind of reflect some of the existing options that are out there. And the reason why we did that is we didn't want to indirectly influence design before an application came in. If you look at some of the proposed changes, it doesn't seem to be too big. However, limiting some of the truck movement, turning radius within that 300 foot, within those buffer areas would indirectly influence a design, especially if you had a smaller irregular parcel. So if you had a parcel that was 400 feet and you have a 300 foot setback, that kind of tells you how to design that facility. So you can only put the address here. You can only put the entrance here. You can only put the building in one location. So that's why staff drafted Option B originally, to at least capture what was in Option A, but still give us the tools to be flexible in those future designs. So if you were to implement those changes, there would be no wiggle room for those one-off properties where the site might be a little difficult, or again, to allow truck movement around a building if the building's pushed back. Okay, so you've moved on from the underlying part to the line out, which is the unless determined to be physically impossible. Exactly. And that was the example given us directly by some of those consultant groups from the city of Fontana. So if they were in a location where it was physically impossible, they have zero responsibility for mitigation? No, the idea was if there's an irregular parcel and we have to apply a 300 foot buffer or a setback building structure, we would have some flexibility, almost like a variance would, to look at it and say, well, there's no way they could achieve this on this property. they can't do the project as is. They couldn't do any kind of industrial warehouse. So it gave us some flexibility to say, well, if you have a unique situation where there's no way whatsoever it can be achieved adhering to the standards, we can take a look at that. And we took that example directly from Fontana, which apparently now is changing to remove that language. But we did not know that at the time. OK. But it doesn't state. what you just said that different mitigation would be required it doesn't that's been our issue with that requirement from the get-go is that we want to be flexible we want to adhere to the measure however we also don't want to indirectly impact project designs as is and I think there was in the last PowerPoint slide these exhibits that we've showed to the Planning Commission and these exhibits and I think it's impacted 613 tonight's agenda show the potential implications of applying a 300 foot buffer on a variety of different industrial uses and when we first did that it didn't look too promising in terms of us getting some kind of development yield from those sites which is why we work to create language that adhered to the 300 foot adhered to some of the EV requirements allowed some circulation around the building but stopped short of saying you couldn't do anything without the 300 foot buffer and that's what we've been really trying to not designed so to speak at the dais. So what would be a problem with something that said building setbacks two to one ratio building setback to building height loading door loading dock door setback unless determined to be physically impossible which would then subsequently trigger alternate mitigation procedures. So to stop short one quick, these measures are for objective zoning standards. They're applied across the board for projects. Right. If a discretionary project comes in that's subject to CEQA, that's subject to annexation review, they would have project-specific mitigation that they would have to adhere to in addition to this base standard. So there could be a project that comes in where... Let's say we do a special analysis for that project and there is an impact that's beyond the impact or the standards that are shown here. They would have to show that that impact can be mitigated as part of that project specific review. And that's the distinction between what we're doing here and what Mariposa Industrial did which is to mitigate project specific impacts versus a citywide objective zoning standard which we're trying to have some flexibility with. Okay. I'm going to move on from there. Next question. When adjacent to sensitive receptors, a loading dock door shall be oriented away from the sensitive receptor and located at a distance of 300 feet from said receptor unless the dock doors are utilized by zero emission trucks and equipment only. And my only issue with that one is emissions from carbon based fuels are not the only problems with that. The tires are emitting particles. The impact of the truck on the land around there may cause the land to separate, which can create dust. So while I fully encourage the use of zero emission vehicles, there are other pollutants caused by vehicles besides just the carbon emissions. Okay. The building and auto parking can be located within the 300-foot distance, and that's fine. Loading docks, truck articles, truck entries, sorry, and truck drive aisles shall not abut adjacent sensitive receptors within the required setback area. And that is underlined, meaning it's new. Loading docks, truck entries and truck drive aisles shall not abut adjacent sensitive receptors within the required setback area. And then there's the definition of sensitive receptors. Is there a problem with that particular amendment? So the inclusion of that last sentence about adjacent sensitive receptors and basically prohibiting access movement, I think that speaks directly to what you were referring to in terms of particulate matter from tires. impacts. I believe that stems from a conversation I have with one of the EG representatives. We met a couple times as part of this whole process and staff did look into some of the resources that they cited for that particular matter. While we did find evidence that, you know, there was a discussion about it, there was a presentation given by it, it was one of those situations where there isn't as much literature on the item in terms of its direct impact versus how much actual reduction that measure could bring. Could tires result in increases to air quality pollution from rubber tire materials? Absolutely. It looks like there is some evidence that support that. Is there enough evidence to say we are going to say stop circulation around the building or do this because of it? And that was one thing staff wasn't confident enough drafting the original measure because while there is a couple presentations that have been given I think through the EPA there wasn't enough information to indicate it if you do this your greenhouse gas reduction measure your air quality stance will be X versus Y like there's nothing that shows that that quantitatively can be achieved which is why we purposely left it out at least for this discussion here now we could continue to research that as part of other efforts to just given the time constraints and bring this for the council consistent with the agreement You know, we didn't have time to research all of the suggestions that were made to the nth level. Okay, that's important. Okay, then moving on to item 13. There was only one add-on in item 13. They were acceptable with everything. And this one seems to me super easy to include. Solar system installation should be done by owners, operators, tenants, or a qualified solar system contractor. It doesn't appear to be too substantial to me. Again, I haven't had a chance to vet any of these through the... So when I did ask Mr. Pruitt about this, he said that with some of the research that he and his partners have done on this... said that many of the fires that have resulted because of solar installations have resulted primarily as a result of incorrect electrical wiring and not the presence of the solar cells themselves. So the causation of fires, I will leave to the professionals, but I will say that someone could not obtain a solar building permit unless they are a properly licensed contractor. Is that correct? So it's kind of a moot point to include that because a permit wouldn't be issued to a non-eligible contractor for solar. We all know, unfortunately, that there are contractors that maybe don't do things right. We're human. Mistakes happen. So in terms of feasibility, it seems to be a moot point and not a necessary one to add. So who's checking on that then? How do you mean who's checking on that? To make sure that the installations are going. So all projects are inspected? Again, when a report or investigation is done post-fire, you know, a lot of the evidence is burned, literally. So it's always hard to tell exactly what went wrong. Okay. Continuing on with... Okay, let's say that that's a moot point then. We just leave that out. Don't worry about that. Let's move on to 14 because there's a lot of change there. Okay. Um... Crossed out correspondence to delete amendments in option C and underlines are new. So this is new and that's that issue of the difference between light heavy duty, medium heavy duty, and heavy heavy duty trucks. And why were light heavy duty and medium heavy duty excluded? Option C was a suggestion from the developer community. you'd have to speak to some of the represent again we haven't had time to fully vet this with all the groups that commented on that application at first glance it doesn't seem to be that big of an inclusion and if you look at both what they revised and what was added it does look like that is essentially a combination of B and C so from a staff point of view I don't see why it would be too much of a challenge for us to implement but again you're talking about adding measures to measure C which was as a suggestion of some development community so I'd have to you know, kind of relay any suggestions to that. Okay, so I would propose that we would include that because that's a significant change. That's two classifications of vehicles that aren't included currently. Okay. I've just been informed that one of the things we might have to do is to update a feasibility analysis if we're proposing any alternative recommendation. Okay. Not to say that we can't, but I just want to inform the council on that. Okay. Next section, electric vehicle charging stations. Infrastructure for trucks provide conduits to provide electric vehicle charging stations to meet future needs. Conduit should be provided on the site to serve 50% of the number of truck docking stations. Location of conduit is at discretion of the developer, e.g. truck trailer parking spaces or docking stations. So staff at first glance doesn't appear to have any real objection to that measure. It looks like, and even their summary indicates that they took it verbatim from the Fontana agreement. It's an option we looked at originally. It's just that the option A was not that, so we didn't really consider that at the time. But that, I mean, it makes sense because by 2040, if you forget the magic dates, but at some point in the very near future, they're going to be required to use. electric vehicles. Correct. The state has a 2045 carbon neutral objective that all municipalities are going to be told to adhere to. Now this seems solely focused on electric vehicle charging, but my understanding is that there's a hydrogen option out there that many trucking companies are considering. Are there any other options out there? We're keeping the options open right now. I think that's been part of the conversation in that hundred percent EV fleet but what we're hearing from some of the professionals that near zero emission alternative fuels is a path a lot of air districts are going to achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets that are unable to meet current EV requirements so it is something for consideration I think we mentioned it at the Planning Commission meetings but it is open for discussion The Planning Commission also questioned why is electric vehicles the focus in this, and that is the language that was given to us from the Attorney General and via the Sierra Club settlement agreement. So it is an important question to ask why aren't alternative options being visited, but for the sake of this and to address the MOA and to meet timelines, this is why it was presented the way it is. Okay. Okay, moving on to item 15. In the, I believe this is the option C column, it says provide EV charging stations for automobiles per building code. Do we currently have EV charging station standards in our building code? Our chief building official will be able to answer that for you. Good evening, John Schwager, Chief Building Official. Yeah, the California Green Building Code has a base, requires EV charging for a certain percentage based on the number of stalls on the site. And what's that percentage? It's based on a table in the code. I don't have it handy. But as you increase the number of stalls for the site, the number of EV vehicles increases as well. So our friends in the environmental justice communities are proposing at least 10% of all passenger vehicle parking spaces shall be electric vehicle ready. Does that sound close to what we have in our building code? We would have to do an analysis because, like I said, it depends on how many stalls are provided. So if we had a large site where they had hundreds of passenger vehicle stalls, then the percentage might actually be higher than 10%. It would just depend on each site. Okay. And then continuing on, at least 5% of all passenger vehicle parking spaces shall be equipped with working level 2 quick charge EV stations. Do we have standards that require any working spaces as opposed to just the quick charge EV charging stations installed and operational prior to building occupancy? We do. So the way the code is set up is you have to have a certain number of what they call EV ready stalls. And that's where the condo has been provided to the site. The electrical service is equipped to accommodate it. But the chargers themselves are not installed. And then on top of that, the Cal Green code requires a certain percentage of the EV ready stalls to be provided with EV chargers. So that's already in the code as a base right now. So unless superior technology is developed that would reduce the EV charging units, facility operators, and any successors in interest shall be responsible for maintaining the EV charging station and working order for the life of the facility. That doesn't sound too oppressive. It's take care of your equipment. That's correct. There's been an expectation of monitoring for these successors and interests. So this is designed where we issue the permits at the front end. Staff does not have the capacity to be monitoring indefinitely whether or not they're keeping these stations in operation. For lack of a better statement, it's an unreasonable request. We don't have the staff. to ensure that their charging stations are working. So that is where this would lead to is, well, you said they're gonna keep an operating order, why aren't you enforcing it? So a lot of these where maybe it doesn't appear on the face to be much of an issue, there's these expectations of maintenance and monitoring that the city just cannot bear. And I really wanna make that clear, especially for things of this nature. Okay, so I want to go back to what I heard at the beginning, almost the very beginning of this, where you said you would be uncomfortable with us adopting anything tonight unless you've had a chance to fully look and evaluate it for, did I hear that correctly? Staff would be comfortable based off of implementation ability and feasibility that option C get adopted tonight as is. That is what staff's comfortable with. Yeah, and I'm not comfortable with that. Understood. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. My first question is about conditions. So there were and, you know, I do understand that we got this email with some of the conditions pretty late and last minute. However, just out of curiosity, we know that ordinance modify at any given time? If adopted as is, would there be availability to consider some of these conditions with staff committing to do like the fiscal analysis to some of the recommendations made today? Well, any ordinance can be amended. So the simple answer would be yes. I will say, and I know you were listening at the last meeting, you were remote. There has been significant time dedicated to this effort to the cost of $170,000 of city staff time. So there are a number of efforts that are being delayed because of this as well. So to be completely honest, we would like to get something adopted so that way it's your starting line. It's better than what you have now. And we can always, at the pleasure of the council, revisit it. And then my last question is as it relates to the table setting. I think I asked this, but I wanted just to be clear. When there were conversations about this ordinance, was there two separate tables? Or was, like, industry and environmental at the same table at the same time? There were a number of discussions. We had the ad hoc committee with the planning commission. We had meetings, phone calls, meetings, and public sessions. The public study sessions included all gamuts, everywhere from industry to environmental justice representatives. The planning commission did the ad hoc committee so they can work through the language at a faster pace than could be done in a study session setting. And then there were also follow-up calls and staff was available to whoever needed to discuss. terms of any other meetings outside of those public study sessions which were noticed and we sent extra emails and did extra notification no there weren't additional non-public meetings we tried to for transparency purposes have everything in a public setting so that way everything was documented to the best of our ability and then last question when you received the last email with the proposed conditions, did staff take those conditions into consideration? You mean today's emails? Yesterday at 3, I think it was 336. So the agenda was already posted last week, so we were not able to make any amendments further. Any changes to the proposed ordinance options would require further feasibility analysis per the AG agreement. Got it. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Lentz. Now, it's my understanding we need to decide by December 31st, isn't that? My understanding, and I will defer to legal, is that the option needed to be presented for the council's consideration by December 31st, and per legal's comments at the last meeting, that has been met. Okay. So, but if we did adopt something tonight, we could always amend it in the future, near future? Sure, any ordinance can be amended. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Blower. So did you make, I think I heard you say that any kind of amendment that we make here is gonna need to go through a feasibility study? Yes, in order to provide you with the options before you, we had to do a feasibility analysis for anything that differed from what the AG recommended in the MOA. So to add any additional language, strike language, whatever that may be, would then also need to be analyzed. because then it would be in compliance with the MOA. So we've received suggestions from the Chamber. We've received suggestions from Sierra Club. So any of the suggestions that any of them have given them, we really can't do that right now without doing a feasibility study. Is that true? I can only speak as to what the MOA requires. I will defer to legal to answer what or what not the council can do. However, it does sound like if we do pass Option C as is, then we could later go in and tweak it after you do things like that. Certainly. Okay, yeah. Okay, thank you. Tell me about the feasibility process. How long will that take? It really depends on what changes are being recommended. So an interesting part of this process that I witnessed is that some of these measures are not really quantifiable. There isn't strong science. We're being told you need to provide evidence. You need to provide science. You need to provide economic impact. Yet the opposite, where they're saying, well, do this. We weren't given any information on how that's effective to lower greenhouse gas, for example. So it's challenging, because we are now having to meet with consultants. We're having to meet with subject matter experts and say, OK, here's the impacts that we think. Are we missing anything? We have to talk to those who are affected. And that's where those study sessions came in, where we had a lot of this language out there for people to look at and say, this is what we're seeing. Does this sound right to you? And that's where we were asking for input. We were telling people, please tell us what you want, because we did want to be inclusive. But it could take, really depending on what the impact is and what measure, it could take months, especially if you want us to balance all the other efforts we're responsible for. We are a very, very trim team. We don't have a lot of staff and we have a lot of work. So if we're talking about, because if I'm understanding everyone correctly, I've heard the residents, I've heard business representatives suffer the council and I've heard the word necessary amendments but I'm so we're talking about 11 13 14 and 15 okay I'm doing a feasibility based off of that in addition to that the applicability you know we need to consider that impact we got we have the public comment from home and investment LLC regarding these standards shall not apply to any new building constructed on property that was incorporated into the city of Stockton prior to December 31st 2023 so if we're taking into consideration everything that everybody is saying here today if the council were to direct staff tonight to do the feasibility assessment or study based off of those items, I mean, how long would that process take? My response would be a follow-up question as to what would you like us to put on hold. Our housing element will not be certified in time. Our code update will be delayed further. Our design guideline updates will be delayed further. Our climate action plan of which you have an item in consent to accept funding to develop would be delayed further. You have to tell me what to knock off the plate to add this on. It's the honest truth. So I'm saying at least six months to do the feasibility. But with all the other efforts that's going on? Yeah, probably February, March at the earliest. At the earliest. When I hear at the earliest, I like to add a cushion. So I would say maybe the summer. I'm being honest with you. Especially if we need to do... additional public outreach, because that takes time. I'll come back. Councilmember Wright. Just a couple things. One, I'm actually in agreement with Mr. Arnaz. This idea that this can be applied retroactively, we've already stated we have issues with, you know, on other things when the state tries to come forward with them. So if these are projects that have already been approved, it seems... a bit unfair for new standards to apply retroactively to them. What's your opinion on that? There is no language stating that this would impact projects retroactively. Further, if you look at Chapter 16-04050, there is clear language on how ordinance amendments affect projects that are pending. There is a subsection talking about projects that are still in the entitlement stage. meaning they've submitted an application, but they haven't gotten approval. There's a subsection that discusses projects that have gotten planning approval, but have not yet submitted their building permits, and that's all laid out. So it's not retroactive. There is a process identified in the adopted code. Okay, can you... Would you like me to read it? Yeah, give me the highlights version. uh... okay so this is for projects with a pending entitlement application so they've submitted something to planning and it's been deemed complete so that's an important thing to remember a land use permit application that has been determined by the community development department to be complete before the effective date of the ordinance codified in this code or any amendment a may be processed according to the requirements in effect when the application was accepted as complete unless the review authority determines it is necessary to apply new or amended development standards to the project approval to ensure public health safety welfare and orderly development subsection b provided that the application is acted upon within 90 days of the adoption of the ordinance codified in this development code. If an initial study negative declaration is required, the application shall be acted upon within seven months, and if an EIR is required, within 13 months. So essentially what that means is if you've got an environmental process in the queue, you have to, once that's done, you have to move to the next step within either seven or 13 months. Or if your application gets approved, you have to act upon it within ninety days and so acting upon it would be moving forward in that process if a project's already received its land use entitlement from planning an approved development project for which construction has not yet commenced as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this code or any amendment may still be constructed as approved if a required building permit is obtained and construction is diligently pursued before the expiration of any applicable land use permit or applicable before the expiration of any approved time extension. So what that means is as long as their entitlement is active and they've submitted a building permit and they've submitted plans or they're in the plan check process or they're working on plans and they show good faith, they will be able to proceed based on the code that was applied during their approval. If that makes sense. Okay. City Manager. If I may add to that, if you're inclined to be supportive of that particular language, I would still recommend that you add additional clarification, clarifying language so that there's no confusion with respect to what the Director just said. Because I had a discussion with the Deputy Attorney General last week and I think a stronger clarification would be necessary. Otherwise, my sense is that the interpretation would be something different from this as these projects come up. But there was nothing in the MOA referring to that, was there? That is the spirit and the intention of the MOA that needs to be considered. There's a specific language in there. Not that says retroactive. Okay. But I think that the source of this concern is probably a legitimate concern. Just based on past behavior. But one of two things would have to happen. Either we would have to make the finding that you pointed out in the first role that if you could go back to that first one and read it again. Are you referring to the public health, safety, welfare? The section on public health, yes. Yes, so you would have to say that the current code needs to apply for public health, safety, and welfare and orderly development. I think I, if I may, I think what city manager is also trying to clarify is that any changes, again, require that feasibility. And on what grounds would we be able to deem exemption from applicability like how do I how do I even analyze the feasibility of that like how do I support that what's the Nexus that would be a challenge if I'm if I'm in understanding right so but then I'm not clear on why we would have to include clarifying language on that I mean, that's a lot of narrative that she just laid out. And it just doesn't come across as being very explicit to me. It's not as explicit as if I'm a developer, it would not make me comfortable because it's just not explicit enough in my view. It seems pretty straightforward. Unless we make that other finding, that applies. And if we make that finding, then we have to do a feasibility study that backs that up. Technically. Okay, that's one thing. My second issue is the trigger at 100,000 square feet. I mean, there's very, very few projects that start at 100,000 square feet. There might be a handful of little tiny ones that are small warehouses for... small businesses. But what we're really looking at here are the mega projects. The million square feet, I would say we could bump this up to 400,000 square feet easily. And we would still not capture, we would still not be eliminating very many warehouse projects. Most of them tend to be around the million square feet these days. Would you like a response? Yes. Okay. The language was very explicit on the 100,000 square feet threshold. There was data that was researched that showed typical warehouse sizes. However, what's presented to you is to ensure consistency and compatibility with what the AG listed in the MOA. If that is something the council would like to change, that is at your discretion. I've talked to a lot of people. lot of people and I don't know anyone except the AG that thinks that that's the reasonable number I think the reasonable number should be higher you know I and I think I will just sort out there I think four hundred thousand square feet is a good number understood yeah vice mayor I do want to get back to the modification and the possibility of that. I know that staff is knee deep into projects, but wanting to see if we can consider maybe a six month review, giving staff more time to do the fiscal analysis for some of the, is it the feasibility study? Okay, feasibility study in regards to like the EV charging station, I think that that's a pretty reasonable ask. Is that a possibility to come back in six months with a few of those amendments? In addition to what the Director will share, is that assuming adoption of option C tonight and then the six-month due diligence process would kick in after that, or are you saying NO ADOPTION OF OPTION C TONIGHT PENDING THE SIX-MONTH PERIOD OF DUE DILIGENCE. I'M SAYING ADOPTION OF OPTION C AND COMING BACK IN SIX MONTHS WITH A FEASIBILITY STUDY ON SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE TONIGHT BY OUR PARTNERS, IF THAT'S A POSSIBILITY. WE WOULD VIEW THAT AS A REASONABLE APPROACH. COUNCIL MEMBER VILLAPUTUA. Yeah, I just have one question. I know we mentioned about projects being on hold right now. How many projects are on hold and how long they've been on hold? So I listed a number of policy projects that we are working on. So we're currently working on the development code overhaul. We're working on neighborhood action plans, housing action plans. We're working on design guideline update. We're going to be starting work later this year on the climate action plan. In addition to all that, we have our day-to-day works. We have a number of entitlements in the queue that need to go to planning commission. We have entitlements that have to go to cultural heritage board. We have the PFF nexus study that we're working on, the ADA transition plan that we're working on. There are a number of heavy lifts right now. I'll be on hold. have been significantly slowed down. We are trying to maintain progress but that progress would have been faster were it not for this effort. Further questions? Councilmember Blower. So I think it's pretty important that we do pass something tonight because it does seem like a lot of projects are on hold and that without us doing something that's going to have a bad economic outcome. I think a lot of projects may get dropped so But it does sound like some of the things, these tweaks, we can't really do them. I think the idea of waiting, you know, coming back and revisiting in six months and having time to look at possible tweaks makes a lot of sense. It did sound like you said from what Councilmember Wright suggested, bumping the size applicability from 100 to 400. We can do that right now without. Study or can we? It's also an amendment. Okay. So that would probably be part of the due process. And what about the city manager suggested some clarifying language? Nope. Is that also something? Is that something we could do or? I mean, it's just clarifying what's in there. I think it depends on how you're clarifying it. If it's consistent with what the AG wants, I think that's okay. Again, I'll defer to legal, but I tend to be a bit of a stickler, so if it's different, I would say you need to analyze it. I concur. What's that? I would just add it as a part of the due diligence process as another item to look at. Yes. Council Member Wright. So I'm struggling with this. I do understand the need to pass something. We're in Never Never Land. I'm a Catholic from birth, so purgatory is the word I would use. How do we make this happen? So I want to make sure what we're studying. We're studying all of the proposed in the EJ letter here. We're studying the change from 100 to 400,000 square feet. Are we talking anything else? I believe the applicability. Yeah, the applicability. Okay, studying the applicability question. Now, I was prepared to vote no tonight unless these amendments were included in it. And so I'm wavering slightly from that. And I know it's difficult to include language that would trigger, if things were feasible, they would be deemed approved. If they came back and were deemed feasible within the letter of the law. I cannot determine whether or not the council should choose to approve something. It would be at your discretion. Yeah. vice mayor if I may to my colleagues point if it if it fits the criteria for the city I would say to bring it back to Council for full adoption is that a possibility not to after feasibility so it would be adoption tonight and then bring it back for an amendment in six months mm-hmm If a proper feasibility analysis is possible, then you would be within the MOA's requirements for adoption. How about that? Is that appropriate or an opportunity, city manager, I guess? I think as a part of the due diligence process, we will explore all of these items. And we would also do it within the context of the dynamics or the dynamic interplay between whatever we would bring to you for that due diligence process and the MOA to see if there are any potential conflicts. Because what you're doing with this is you're... I would look at the MOA as, let's say, one of your policies, and you turn it over to us as staff to execute it and to implement it. So this is an implementation exercise, really. Bless you. So we just need to make certain that whatever we implement is consistent with the intent and the spirit of the MOA. OK, and then just last, the point of clarity. So regarding the applicability and the retroactiveness of it in the comments that was made, the section that was read earlier. And the comments made by the Home and Investment LLC. So you're familiar with that project? Yes. OK. So based off of that current interpretation, it wouldn't be retroactive to that project? If I'm not mistaken, they have a permit already submitted for that project? Yeah, so they're already starting the permit process, so they're essentially locked into what the code is today. Okay, so, okay, okay. Not just a clarification, not the code today, but the code at the time the... Yes, which has not, forgive me, which has not changed since the permit was submitted, yeah. Except for the MOA, which says that for any new projects that we will apply the MOA until such point as we approve. Yes, which is, yes. So there are, until an ordinance is adopted, there is the language identified as enhanced measures that would apply that stem from the Mariposa project. So, correct. So we adopt C tonight as is. We come back in six months after the feasibility study has been conducted. Or as soon as possible. Or as soon as possible. I like that February, March deadline. That was thrown out there. He's optimistic. He's optimistic, I'm not. No, I get it. Right, right, right, right. But maybe we can split the difference there. I want your staff to be able to sleep. Right. I like to be able to send them home to see their families once in a while, so. So by including the applicability in that additional language, as long as it's feasible, it would further strengthen our ordinance. up to six months from now when we amend it? If I'm understanding what you're saying, yes. If you have proper feasibility arguments to adopt things that differ from the MOA, that is a stronger position. Okay. And those will come back to us for certain? Yes, you're telling us to do it. We're going to come back with it. Okay, yeah, just know that's an important thing. Of course. No, we do what we're told. We brought this before you. This is a little theater of the council member here. I had to make sure I got that across. I would like to remind the council that because it would be an amendment to Title 16, it would have to go through the Planning Commission for recommendation. That is part of the standard process. But then would be come back to us. Yes. Yes. That's how it works. So what's six months from now? What council meeting six months from now? June. So the first or second council meeting in June. First council meeting in June. No, I think we need to be clear. We need to be clear for the public. When is the budget typically adopted? Because that's a heavy night. Do you want it the same night as budget? Because we should do it at the meeting that's not the budget in terms of not staying here until 1 in the morning. I mean, I'm thinking logistically. So I would say the second meeting of June, but preferably the first meeting of July would be the preferred in that the budget would be put to bed. That's seven months? No, that's six and a half, six and a quarter. If I may, that's not six and a half, six and a quarter months of staff work. We have to publish all of that much earlier in order to get it to planning commission and before the council. So that does not give staff six months. Just a friendly reminder. All right. First meeting in July. But no later. I think a motion would be needed. Okay. Well, before we get there, we need to close the public hearing. Okay. Public hearing is closed. I'll make the motion, option C at this time as discussed and I would make the motion for tonight except option C. Second. Was that of the city? We're going to need some clarity here. Okay. Okay. So what I heard was that the council would like to make a motion to accept to, one, find the proposed ordinances exempt pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15061B3, common sense exemption. and that no future environmental review is required for proposed code amendments pursuant to CEQA section 15183 consistency with general plan and community plan and two adopt an ordinance amending title sixteen development code of the Stockton Municipal Code chapter sixteen point eight zero standards for specific land uses to add a new section sixteen point eight zero point three nine zero logistics warehouse under option C as currently written with direction to staff to perform a feasibility analysis as to applicability size and the environmental justice proposed amendments and then bring that back in roughly six months with the feasibility analysis recommending adoption as appropriate following planning commission review and recommendation at the no later than the first council meeting in july of twenty twenty four do we need to specify the four hundred 11, 13, 14, and 15? No. Yeah, I think we got it on the record. We know what you're looking for and it'll be included in the feasibility analysis. Okay. So we have a motion. That's my motion. Yes. You're right. You're right. You're right. And we have a second. Yes. Okay. And cast your votes please. Motion passes 6-0 with Council Member Padilla being absent. Okay, item 11, public comments. The city of Stockton invites public participation in multiple forms. You provide your comments by using one of these methods, e-comments. A link is located on the city's agenda page. You may email your comments to city.clerk at stocktonca.gov. You can leave a voice message by dialing 209-937-8459. Your message will be transcribed and included in the meeting's record. If you have any questions regarding any of these forms of participation, please contact the Office of the City Clerk. This is the time for citizens' comments, announcements, or invitations. You may comment on any subject within the jurisdiction of City Council, including items on the agenda. Members of the public will have an opportunity to comment on specific agenda items, such as consent, new business, Public hearings as we take those items up. To ensure sufficient public participation and conduct the agendized city business, the public is limited to one two-minute comment opportunity. Citizen public comments are not a time for discussion with the council regarding subjects not on the agenda for this meeting as the Brown Act limits such discussions. Comments made by members of the public may not reflect the viewpoint of members of the council. We ask that you maintain the rules of decorum as outlined in city council policy meeting decorum policy title 4 chapter 4.07 paragraph 2 which reads persons addressing the council shall not make personal impertinent unduly repetitive slanderous or profane remarks to the council any member of the council city staff or the general public nor utter loud threatening personal abusive language nor engage in any other conduct that disrupts disturbs or or otherwise unreasonably impedes the orderly conduct of the council meeting. Any person who makes such remarks, who utters loud, threatening, personal, abusive language, who is unduly repetitious or engages in extended discussions of irrelevancies, or who engages in disorderly conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise unreasonably impedes the orderly conduct of any council meeting shall, at the discretion of the presiding officer or majority of the council, be barred from further audience before the council during that meeting in short we do not allow personal attacks therefore please be respectful of these chambers of all who sit here and of the viewing audience city clerk do we have any comments from members of the public this evening we do mayor we'll begin with ralph white followed by mike deanda Your mic's off, Mr. White. No, hit the button. There you go. Slight problem. On the 27th of September, not September, November, I brought my nomination papers in with 10 names on it. If you look at 702 in your charter, it says 10 to 25 you can get, but they only give you a paper for 10. I brought them in on the 27th. I went to Dallas on the 28th. I came back on the 1st. No, it was the 2nd. I come back. When I got back in on Monday, I called the clerk's office to check on them, see how many names I had, how many good names I had. Wasn't no problem. She hadn't heard nothing back yet. By telephone, all you have to do is call right over there, and they got contact with each other real good. So when I come back, she said no. I call again Wednesday. No, I call it Thursday. No, councilman called Thursday. And they said, yes, hers was all good. Wasn't no problem. They called me. At 1.30, I think she took them over to the county to be checked. She put all of them in. I don't know how many it was. But they didn't tell her nothing about mine until 4.28 that I needed three names. Three names that I needed at 4.28. I called her. She called me. I called her back at 430. I think it was 436. I called her back. And they haven't even checked my papers. But don't forget, I put them in on the 27th. So I urge you all, because of the constitutional problem here, both in state and federal, in discrimination, in selective, as they call prosecutions, selectively ignoring my petition, and then tell me that I didn't have enough names. And on Sunday, can I finish? This is very important. This is y'all, because we're talking about maybe a $2, $3 million lawsuit. I'll extend your time and everybody else's time one minute. Okay, well, anyway, so this is very important. We're talking about millions of dollars that could come up. Don't discriminate me, because I go straight to federal court. They didn't come back. I didn't get them back. But my 27, I put it on the 27. A whole lot of them got cleared up. between that and 430, 428. How in the hell am I going to go out at 428? I had to go get an old lady that was 98 years old and bring her up here to sign her paper, sign her address. Not her name. Her name was already signed, but there wasn't an address on it. So I contacted her, and to this day, and you have the power under 702 to extend the thing for three days, and that's all I'm asking. For everybody else, a whole lot of people got screwed up like that. But check everybody's Everybody's people, they came in after mine and see if they went through. And you saw with your vice mayor, she learned about hers Thursday. If they had told me Thursday, I would have shot right out, got two or three names, and I'm good. But it wasn't done that way. So I want to know how many people and when each one of them was certified and how. And why was mine the last one on the last day? not even thirty minutes before five o'clock national i asked the council to extend only backup all these other people to get messed around too for three days she has the power thank you may be in the followed by henry torres good evening uh... might be under operating engineers union business representative. I'm currently at the negotiation table with the O&M bargaining unit and the trades and maintenance unit. And I kind of shifted my speech tonight because of what was said in the very beginning on closed session. So yes, yesterday we did receive a last, best, and final from you folks yesterday. And I got to tell you, essentially it's our third. It's our third, last, best, and final from you. And you know, all core proposals are not being addressed, they're just being dismissed. They're not being addressed at all. So when they pushed that across the table yesterday, it was very disrespectful and insulting to us. And I want you to understand that the difference is the market study, and you've heard it before. It was completed in September of 22. As of today, it's about 15 months old. It will not be implemented until next year, essentially putting it almost past two years. Then you're going to take the findings and you're going to deduct the COLA that you want to offer us and deduct it from there. It's just flawed. It was one-sided. The employees didn't have any say in it. So that's why we shifted off of the market adjustment into the COLA. And our COLA ask is different than the other bargaining units. With all due respect to all the other bargaining units, it is different. And it's different because we're not just accepting this market study, it was not vetted by the employees, so it's flawed. So I just want you guys to understand that it's a false narrative to say it's current market, because it's not. It's essentially three years old. So I just want you to understand that. And I know you were all elected as individuals, and collaboration is a big part of your job. And I just find it hard to believe that all of you are in agreeance with the offer that's coming across the table. We have key components to our proposals that are just not being addressed. And it's really, really hard for these employees to accept. And I just want you guys to understand that these are the employees that when you go home tonight and you drive down this city in these streets, you go through lighted intersections, they're called controlled intersections. And there's lights on the streets. There's no flooding on the streets. The trees are up. The wastewater is being treated. The water that's being sent to your house is disinfected to the letter of the law. These are the employees that are in these bargaining units. And they invoke the right to go on strike. Think about it. To go without pay to be heard, it's a form of communication to you. Please listen to us. We have some issues at the table. We have some issues with communication. So essentially, in Arcola, it's a 4% difference, 1.3% per year, or closer than you realize. Thank you. Thank you. Henry Torres, followed by Mark Moreno. Mr. Mayor and honorable council, Mr. Black and city clerks, my name's Henry Torres. I've been a city employee since 1985. That's longer than most of you probably have lived here. Some of you may not live in this town. We understand that making the decision to go on strike so you would hear us is big. That means food off of our tables. That means making a demonstration hoping to be heard. I've been at this podium four years ago, three years ago, in 2019, asking the same thing for a fair contract. The city was in good financial situation then. It's an even better situation now. From what I understand, there's people all across the country striking in order to be heard. You had Kaiser just had a strike, 65,000 workers in order to be heard. From what I understand, there's been civic leaders from cities, counties, and elsewhere standing up with the Kaiser people. They were asking for a cost of living increase. They got 21% over four years. That's an average of 5.25%. That's more than we've asked for. We haven't even asked for that much. We would like the city to think about the employees that do everything. I believe the last council meeting, there were accolades given to Mr. Chad Reed and Ms. Grace Smith for the work that the public works people were doing, picking up all the mattresses and all the trash and everything else. Our guys do that. We drive the tractors. We pick up the homeless encampments. Those are our guys. We do all the traffic signals, traffic lights, sewers and drains. Every time the city floods, we're out there in the rain, in the elements, for the citizens of this city. And all we're asking for is for you to hear us and give us a fair cost of living increase. That market study is flawed, heavily flawed. And we weren't included in some of the cities that were included in that. We're losing mechanics. We're losing street workers to the surrounding areas. Brentwood, French Camp, down the road to Elk Grove, PG&E. We're losing mechanics to PG&E. Those are the people that work on the fire trucks, work on the police cars, all the city vehicles that people use. Those are all of our people. And all we're asking is for the city to hear us and give us a fair contract. Thank you. Thank you. Mark Moreno followed by Nathan Kastanen. Mayor Lincoln, Vice Mayor Warnersley, council. My name is Mark Moreno. I spoke last week and I'm here to speak again today. Today I want to talk about a little bit about retention of our employees out of the municipal utilities department. We've had 35 people in the last 8 to 10 years out of a certain division move on to greener pastures. In that time, we've only had two people retire in that same period. The onboarding cost has got to be astronomical to bring on 35 employees and not have them stay. We are currently going to lose two more employees with 50 years combined experience here in the next few months. Currently, 45% of the employees in one division have less than five years experience. We have over 800 miles of storm lines, over 1,000 miles of sanitary lines. It takes eight to 10 years to become competent. to understand the system. It's an antiquated system that we have to work with. Stockton should be a landing spot, not a springboard. We are just losing people all the time and it's due to our pay. I can't emphasize enough what these guys have said. Everybody calls on our department 20 to 25 times a day. And you don't even realize it because it just works at your house. Your water works. Your bathrooms work. You have drinking water. All we want to do is be heard. Get a fair contract. Going out on strike was tough. Tough. Three days of no pay just to be heard. All we want to do is be heard on the other side of the table and have what we've put across the table at least be considered, not just pushed back and said it doesn't fit our framework. On any given day out at the water treatment plant, out on Navy Drive, we process 28 to 30 million gallons of water a day. A day. in an antiquated system. You guys don't know what it's like to get up at two in the morning because something broke and we go out to fix it. No questions asked because we are dedicated employees and that's why we're here. We want to work in this city. Born and raised here. Thank you. Thank you. Nathan Castanian followed by Timo Aguilar. Ladies and gentlemen of the council, Mr. Mayor, thank you for the extra minute. I'm going to pose this question to you first and foremost. I'm sure most of us are parents. How many times have we told our kids, just because little Johnny jumped off the bridge, does that mean you're going to do it? Thank you for the opportunity to be heard. My name is Nathan, and I work for the city in Mudd for 13 years now. I'm here tonight to address the city's continued unproductive negotiating tactics and what I believe to be a lack of communication between the city's negotiating team and you all up here and even our city manager. I don't believe you are all being properly informed of all the proposals and efforts being made by the union's negotiating team at our 25 and counting sessions. We are not asking for an unreasonable contract. In fact, I believe that we have made, we have been more than fair in our asks and our concessions. in this ongoing process. I'm simply up here requesting that you all take an active and honest look at everything that we have proposed and consider the impact of the services that we so greatly take pride in providing to the city and its citizens. I also want to add that I live here. I have houses here. I purposely buy things in Stockton for the simple fact that I live here. I want the tax dollars to be in stock. I don't want it to be in Lodi. I don't want it to be in Manteca. I don't want it to be anywhere else. I do shop in all those places, too. Don't worry. But I'm equal opportunity when it comes to my money. But I just need it to be understood that we want to be here. We love what we do. We're good at what we do. We like training the new guys or girls, whoever comes in. But we can't keep... What's the point of me training somebody that they're just going to take off because they met their... or they got their certs and they left for greener pastures or more money. We're not asking for a lot. I don't believe that we're being unreasonable. I truly don't. And I truly believe that your negotiating team hasn't been either forthcoming or, frankly, simply just excluding things that we have tried to. We've been creative. We've tried to mix things up to try to come to an agreement. And it feels as though that they may be telling us that they're bringing it to your attention. I don't believe that they are. And if I'm wrong, so be it. I'll be wrong. But I'd encourage any of you guys to reach out to any of the negotiating team of the city, excuse me, the OE3 side, or Mike DeAnda is probably the more appropriate person. And we will discuss all these things, and we will tell you all the things and ways, the creative ways that we've tried to come to an agreement with the city. We don't want to be out of a contract. You don't need us out of a contract. You also don't need your services disrupted either. So I'll just ask for you for further consideration and a little bit more in-depth. Thank you. Thank you. Timo Aguilar followed by Mary Elizabeth. Good evening, Mayor, city council members. My name is Timo Aguilar. I'm a field representative for the Northern California Carpenters Union. and a Stockton resident. I'm here tonight to request the City of Stockton adopt labor standards and pre-qualification language for future projects. One labor standard is the use of a state-sponsored apprenticeship program, which prevailing wage jobs are mandated to at least request. Construction apprenticeship programs can be a better option than going through traditional college route for many individuals. With NorCal Carpenters Union courses being accredited, the graduated journeyman has only a few classes left to actually obtain a construction management degree. This is also made further appealing because our apprentices graduate with zero debt and have a great paying skilled trade career. Vets are also able to collect their education benefits as well, as I did. Construction apprenticeship programs are a proven escalator to the middle class for tens of thousands of construction workers every year. Another great labor standard would be the requirement that contractors provide health care. Approximately 1 out of 4 or 26% of construction workers in California lack health insurance. That statistic is 2.5 times the rate for all California workers. These workers that lack healthcare are forced to rely on emergency programs for their medical needs, which are already so overly taxed in our communities. Once we have policies that require contractors to offer their construction workers a fair healthcare program, it will raise standards in the construction industry, creating a level playing field for employers who already offer healthcare. And just to throw a few numbers out there, we have over 1,800 signatory contractors We have almost 900 members right here in Stockton that are in good standing and over 2,000 in the San Joaquin County. And with these numbers, with these local workforce, I know that we can responsibly accommodate any future project. So I'm going to leave my card with your clerk over here and hopefully you guys will get a hold of us and hopefully we can meet. Thank you. Mary Elizabeth followed by Jason Lee. Thank you for the extra minute. I added on a few things that I hadn't planned on bringing forth at this time. Mary Elizabeth, first generation Stocktonian. I heard monitoring and then I heard not willing or able. We need to monitor and enforce all of our codes. It made me wonder about the rental housing enforcement. The city of Stockton does not have a public list of permitted rental housing units. Renters' protections are afforded by city monitoring and enforcement of the housing laws. I plan to only bring to your attention that years has passed with annual promises that this NEXUS study to update the 1990 transportation fee will be completed. Developers have not paid their fair share of transportation road costs. Climate adaptation and assessment draft, I'll just briefly on that, looking through that agreement. You need to have more opportunities for Public review of works in progress, not reviews after the work are done and with limited amounts of non-profit partners. General Plan Policy 2.3 Focus on reducing the unique and compounded environmental impacts and risks in disadvantaged communities. Build strong ties with disadvantaged communities to ensure that local residents can make significant contributions to planning decisions through the following. A great list. And I feel like... You heard a lot of disadvantaged residents here, and I don't know that you took their concerns to heart and, you know, went ahead and made that decision. Policy TR 3.2, require new development and transportation projects to reduce travel demand and greenhouse gas emissions, support electric charging, and accommodate multi-passenger autonomous vehicle travel as much as feasible. Climate change is now. When you continue to allow overriding considerations of greenhouse gas emissions, you're pledging us to a future more difficult than it already is. Thank you. Thank you. Jason Lee, followed by Pat Barrett. One of the things I was going to say was you guys need more than two minutes, so three minutes is good, so I'm not going to waste time asking for that because I got it, but I do think you guys should really consider allowing for three minutes because I think for me, Two minutes. I'm such a passionate person that sometimes it comes off a little bit more aggressive than I intend to be. But I'm just a passionate person. I wanted to come up here and say we're doing a Toy for Joy Christmas toy giveaway December 23rd from 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. at Aspire Stockton Secondary Elementary School. We are giving away thousands and thousands of toys from my nonprofit, Hollywood Cares. The only requirement is that you have kids when you get there and that they be 10 years old and younger. There's going to be food, music, all that kind of stuff. I know it goes against the Brown Act to have all of you there, so I won't invite all of you, but Mary, you're invited, so hopefully you can make it. The other thing I want to say, because I didn't plan on complimenting anybody tonight, but I do want to compliment the city clerk's office because... They're extremely professional. I've been going in there doing what you know I'm doing. And there's a little bell out there. And I hate people when they come and ring the bell because it's annoying. But I always ring it even if they're sitting right there because it's just funny to ring the bell and watch their reaction. But everybody there has been super professional. And thank God I had family to work with me to help me get 20 signatures in 24 hours. That's when you're putting in the real work. Some people don't understand that. The other thing I want to say, too, is I felt it was extremely disrespectful earlier. for that man who didn't look like a lot of the people commenting tonight about the Warehouse Act to, in the midst of them complaining about environmental issues that would hurt them, their children, their families, our community, to say raise your hand if you want a job and just be happy that we're going to give you a job. That was insulting. It was disrespectful. I'm surprised nobody said anything to him about it. And thank God it's an election year because people can actually be watching at home and sit in the audience and all the people that left from the area you know they're from are going to go back and organize and vote. Two hundred people came yesterday complaining about how upset they are. Today, most of them left upset and the lady that just spoke before me said she doesn't feel like people were heard. And I think it's two reasons. Sometimes it seems very performative when people in the community are talking to you because the real power sits at the person who just left the room. This person who manages the city is the reason why you have unfair labor practices being filed against the city. Now, somebody who, you can shake your head, Ms. Lins, it's all good. I worked for a union for 11 years as a labor director and as a labor leader for Kaiser Permanente. And the most embarrassing thing Kaiser never wanted to happen was go on strike. So that strike was a huge, huge deal. And when I joined the strike line for the city workers and put on my Instagram for 1.2 million people, people all over the world were saying, how is that happening in the city that you're from? It happens when you don't care, and it happens when you don't hold your city management accountable. And so I would say to the union folks, stop giving your support to people who aren't going to stand with you when you're put out in the cold. Thank you. Thank you. Pat Barrett, followed by Brian Bauer. have Barrett Stockton resident my god why are our employees groveling for something that should be granted as a natural thing we did that measure a so people didn't want to do measure a I understand why where's that money yet why aren't they getting paid just these guys are saying we didn't get paid for three days I was a trucker I was trying to get them to sit down so they could organize a strike why are you guys still working I PAY TAXES. I'M A PROPERTY OWNER. I PAY TAXES, AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW I'M SUPPOSED TO GET BACK A REFUND. MY STAFF THAT I PAY FOR AREN'T GETTING PAID RIGHT. THEY WORK. I'M UP HERE MULTIPLE TIMES TRYING TO GET THAT STREET SWEEPER GUY TO ACT RIGHT. FINALLY GOT HIM TO ACT RIGHT FOR ONE DAY. BUT YOU GUYS ARE THERE DEDICATED 24-7, AND YOU HAVE TO GRAVEL. That's so degrading. I don't get it. I don't get it. And I'm not here for you guys. I'm here because the people of South Stockton are groveling. I'm here because the people of South Stockton are groveling and y'all say, oh, well, it's only one vote. No, people, it's collaborative, okay? You all need to understand, you don't live in my neighborhood. You don't live here. You go home to that white privilege stuff. Okay? You don't live where I live breathing that dirt, that dust. Okay? You don't live where I'm suffocating. You don't live where, thank God, some of these folks take care of my neighborhood. Okay? Y'all don't come to my neighborhood. Y'all don't come to my neighborhood and come down and breathe for the weekend. Just do it. Make my day. Come down my street. Do-do-do-do-do-do-do. Every street in our neighborhood, my dogs know the minute I turn on my street, oh, we're on our block, because we're doing all this. It's time you guys listen to us. Not the developers, white privileged folks, okay? It's time you listen to the underserved people that live there. City manager, we need these guys taken care of. Okay? They need to raise, they got families. It's hard. I raised four kids on my own. I know what it's like. Okay? But you've got to sit there and stop thinking about, oh, the other people. The other people don't count. It's us. It's us that's paying your wages, keeps your lights on, puts water through your pipes. We have to breathe. You guys need to stop, step back, and start thinking. you are on the right track tonight you are on it i really thought we were going to get a continuance or get those amendments but they could have gone through mariposa and the people of that side could have got their two hundred thousand dollars for every warehouse thank you bryant bowers followed by nathan brunn uh... bryant bowen uh... probably messed up on the riding council mayor city manager uh... I'm actually taking classes right now for public speaking, so bear with me. I just want to say I'm born and raised in Stockton. I love my city. I work for Public Works. I'm a member of the OE3 Laborers Union. And I work with the criminals. I work with the alternative work program for San Joaquin County. We take out the AWP workers, the guys that are getting out of jail, trying to recover, do something positive with their life. They made a mistake. They're trying to do all this. I transport those guys around. So not only do I pick up the trash from the service request that comes in, Michelle Padilla, Northside, Southside, Stockton. I'm also a counselor to these guys. Being in that position before, like I said before, I'm born and raised in Stockton, and we're in negotiations, and we're not asking for much. We're asking for a fair contract. I love my city. I don't want to go to Brentwood. I don't want to go to Lodi. I don't want to go to the Bay Area. I actually just turned down a job in Elk Grove because I don't want to go there. I want to come right here home. take care of my city i have family here mothers kids grandkids i just want to see my city better so just help us out give us a fair contract thank you thank you nathan brum natasha brown First of all, I want to say good afternoon, night. Everybody in these seats up here is capable of everything in every neighborhood. District 6 have been filled, whether you want to hear it or not. Let me tell you a story that I have to go through today. Today, I'm very inspired by what Jason Lee is doing for us, because he don't have to come back and do anything. He can stay where he was at. Stockton is Jason Lee home. Born and raised on Scribner, Maybill Tanner, if anybody's familiar with that. district six is familiar with that not only it was a very disturbing thing to be out there inspiring people to be involved in the youth what have district six done from the youth nothing nothing nothing is promised for the kids the kids is what keep everyone's going in the families okay today at south stockton had a very disturbing person Ralph White was sitting in that chair right there, said that he'd been in the community and he's running for our community for what? We don't need no one running for our community that has anything to do with sex for rent. It's not going to work like that, especially with our kids. I'm sorry, it's not. We need someone strong out there with our kids and with our environment of what we have to live. I have to live out here. I'm 37 years old. I've been in Stockton my whole life. My kids have to watch somebody die at Southside Market that he owns. NOT ONE BODY, TEN. IT GOT TO STOP. EVERYBODY NEEDS TO STOP GOING AGAINST DISTRICT SIX AND PROMOTE TO THE SOUTH SIDE. WE NEED HELP. IT DON'T MAKE NO SENSE. NOW, MAYBE Y'ALL CAN SLEEP ON THIS TONIGHT, BUT A CHANGE NEEDS TO HAPPEN. NEEDS TO HAPPEN SOON. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU, DISTRICT SIX, BUT A CHANGE NEEDS TO HAPPEN, AND YOU'RE NOT FITTABLE FOR IT. PAUSE YOUR TIME, PLEASE. Any comments that you make in addressing this council, you need to make them directed at me. Not at any council member. But why we can't make District 6 incapable? Make your public comment. We will hear your public comment. But you cannot address your public comment directly to any member of this council, to any member of the audience. Ain't this a freedom of speech? And you're allowed to speak. You're being allowed to speak. That's why I paused your time. But what I'm saying is... Do not directly engage any other council member. You want to make a comment, make the comment, but look at me. Okay. I'm talking to you. Okay. And whoever else want to hear it. Everybody got to hear it. It is what it is. We're tired. It has to change. We're tired. We're not doing this for the adult. We're doing it for the kids. It has to be a change. The kids ain't got nothing to do. Soon as they come out the house, they got to go to the liquor store. It ain't not that liquor store, but drugs, guns. Weed, vape pens, smoke shots, liquor, people going in the store buying the kids what they want out of the store. Don't nobody care. It seems like everybody just want to run for a district for a name. It's not going to happen like that. It got to change. So rather, anybody like it or not, we're still going to push our movement. We're still here. We're going to help others and hoping y'all can get on board. Have a nice night. That concludes our public comment. Thank you. Item 12, consent agenda. Are there any items that council would like to pull at this time? If not, okay. Do we have a motion to approve the remainder? A motion to approve. Second. Remain here. Cash your votes, please. Motion passes 6-0 with Council Member Padilla being absent. Thank you. Item 12.2 pulled by Council Member Wright. Thank you. And through the Chair and Mayor, we do have two public comment cards for this item. Okay. Did we have any comments for any of the other consent items? Okay. good question here yeah we will hear those comments before we get to questioning Mary Elizabeth Pat Barrett cap you're it glad I know who I am On page three of the staff report, it states, the new climate action and adaption plan is intended to organize efforts in the improvement of public health, environmental efficiency, air quality, and lessen the impact of commercial and residential operations through environmental planning activities and measures. I particularly like organized efforts. With that being said, it is my hope that we revise the Climate Action Plan Committee if Council and staff truly mean this. Had this committee been in place sooner, we would have had plenty of public input and recommendations for an ordinance regarding warehouses. Please bring back the committee and call it the Climate Action and Adaption Commission. This way, the public can work with the staff to properly vet ideas that will be directly recommended to the council. With all of the new rules, regulations, and laws regarding the environment being treated, environment being treated, created, I'm sorry, it is best for us to be prepared in advance by having thoughtful, inclusive, equitable disclosure, discourse with representatives from every district in the city. And I think that's really important that we remember this, that it's not just you guys in this whole mess. We're part of it, because we're living under it. For us to be the biggest stakeholders, let me say that, for us to be the biggest stakeholders, the biggest stakeholders, and I say it again, the biggest stakeholders, we should always have a seat at the table, no matter what. I don't care if it's from flood, I don't care if it's from planting trees. I don't care if it's from the parking lot. The stakeholders of that district should always have the biggest seat at the table. To deny us this seat is denying the people the right to vote for you guys to represent us. It's a darn shame, sorry. But we need to be at these tables. we need to be at the committee and we know we need to and I remember that I was outside somebody said did city staff interact with everybody no we had that mediator in between they had to do the go for stuff and language gets lost when that happens so for us to be at the table other committees do it we need to be able to do it thank you thank you Jonathan Pruitt Hello, Council. My name is Jonathan Pruitt, and I also wanted to echo what Pat was saying. You know, when reading the Climate Action Plan and how it started, you know, one of the things was to ensure that the community and those who are involved and the residents who are technical experts on the environmental stuff, they have voting power. Right now, unfortunately, I don't see in anything of the grant that it shows where they're going to bring back the commission. And I think... You know, when hearing from staff, when hearing from Matt Diaz, he says, you know, we're ensuring environmental justice in our work. Environmental justice ensures accountability, transparency, and allows residents, especially disadvantaged communities, to have voting power on what they would like to see in their community. Local self-determination, that is voting power for that community. And so I really recommend that that is incorporated in some aspect for a commission because we believe The community, especially the environmental justice community, should have a representative there at the table, but it also should not be where it just reports straight to city staff. It shouldn't be watered down. I think it needs to go directly to city council. And really, that's it. Thank you. Esperanza Vilma. Good evening. council and mayor Lincoln on this climate action commission hopefully it will be a commission and not a committee again to reiterate that component I serve on the environmental justice advisory group for the San Joaquin Valley air pollution control district and so we report directly to the board so that's a large board the whole entire valley so I think that Stockton can do the same thing in this case there are other examples again offering up some free information again because of the fact that you know we have the experience to Jonathan's point we do have that technical experience in working in these different arenas here in Stockton and throughout the state and the region so we're here at the disposal of our residents to be able to give our information to be able to serve on these type of commissions and so we hope that you're able to take this into consideration considering that the residents do want to be involved and anything, any kind of information as far as what the setup looks like as you're forming it, we are here to help serve on that technical piece of it. I guess on the technical piece of it, I just want to note that also with the California Air Resource Board, they have technical experts that they just have us working on how to outreach. to the whole state of California how to outreach. And so I serve as one of those representatives for the state. So just to give you kind of a guidance in that component, from the Air District to the California Air Resource Board, there are different examples that can be utilized in order to set this commission in place. And so we hope that you're able to do that and tap into our expertise. Thank you. Thank you. Alicia Valenzuela. Good evening again, Mayor Lincoln, council members. I was an intern back in the day, worked on City of Lodi's greenhouse gas emissions reporting that was incorporated into their climate action plan. And I am excited for this opportunity to do a climate action plan within Stockton. If a commission is established, I would like for that to be incorporated within within the scope of more inclusivity, recognizing all the resources and assets that we have in our community as far as expertise. There is a lot of passion, but I think it's extremely important to recognize that those that are most impacted by climate change are our most vulnerable members of our community. And with the lack of literacy, lack of language, access, news, we have to do our due diligence and making sure everyone's at the table because they're the ones that are going to be most impacted. I'll give you an example. If a tenant who's a renter is experiencing a really hot summer, they have to deal with it. They have to figure it out. If they don't have HVAC, they're going to tell their landlord, hey, it's really hot. Can you help me out? Because the... the window unit, or if they don't have a split unit, just the ventilation with their open windows isn't cutting it, that puts a lot of people at risk. And we may have cooling centers that can help meet those needs. But just know that disproportionately, people will be impacted by this future that most science experts support the extreme climate changes that are going to be affecting not just our valley, but our region, San Francisco airport. I mean, everything is going to be continually having to adapt to these unavoidable consequences. And so being able to set a bar saying, you know what, because everyone's going to be affected in different ways, we need to give more voice and amplify those who will be impacted the most. So by making sure that we have a commission rather than a committee who answers to council i think that that might be really effective ways an effective way to help improve that communication in that relationship with citizens and the city that they live in thank you thank you that concludes public comment for item 12.2 thank you council member wright you have the floor thank you so i pulled this so I could celebrate it, but I appreciate the input from the community and well said and well heard. Okay, I've come full circle on this. When I ran for the appointment to the city council back in 2016, I decided before going through that interview process to attend a couple of council meetings. And the first one I attended, I attended both meetings in December that year. And the first meeting in December that year was the adoption of our very first climate action plan. And so I think it's hugely appropriate that we're discussing this tonight, and especially considering the amount of time we spent earlier on the warehouse ordinance. And I think this can be highly informative to not only that decision, but a lot of other decisions we're going to be making in the future. We've got... Climate change is absolutely real. I've spent some time talking about flood dangers that San Joaquin County is going to be facing if the state and the federal government doesn't help us take evasive actions on that as well. But yes, we're dealing with air quality issues, flood dangers, particulate dangers from forest fires that make their way all the way to Stockton, even though they might have occurred north of Sacramento County or in the Bay Area. So all of those things need to be considered when we talk about our climate action plan. But I wanted you to come up and tell us a little bit about this process going forward. Who's going to write it? How input is going to be taken? And so go ahead, Grant. Yeah. Grant Kirkpatrick, city manager's office. Yeah, this is very much step one. So we applied for this grant, I want to say like March or April of this year. And we were awarded only in June. So since June, we've put together this very brief scope of work to bring to you all today, which then represents, you know, then we can actually sign a grant agreement and get moving. So that will look like posting an RFP within the next, I think our schedule is by the end of January. We would try to then bring a consultant back to this group by April or May. That includes both a professional consultant to lead the development of the plan itself. Those are like highly technical documents that involve, you know, reviewing documents existing ordinances on the book, making sure they're consistent with all the state's regulations and laws and requirements, all these different climate objectives that keep getting set by the state, making sure that we're consistent with those up to date, that we have a plan to achieve whatever those requirements are. And in addition to that professional consultant, we also set aside about $220,000 to fund contracts with community-based organizations who would assist in leading all the community engagement efforts. So those will, of course, be tied with everything we do. We want to make sure there's consistent touch points. I'm not sure exactly what that body will look like at this point, but there certainly will be a large group of stakeholders that include a lot of our nonprofit partners that we work with on things like TCC, AB617, The STEP grant, there's, you know, all sorts of environmental programs and coalitions, and there's, you know, four different recurring meetings at this point. So I think we want to be careful how we think that through. We don't want to be overly, you know, taxing to all the folks that show up to all these meetings, and we want to make sure if there's points for synergy or to combine conversations that we can do that. But there certainly will be a consistently convened group of stakeholders who will have opportunity to review things as they come out to provide feedback on these plans we'll be sure to of course I'll give regular updates the city manager who will provide those to you all and I believe the timeline to finish the first step which would be the climate vulnerability assessment is by September and then essentially from September to October of the following year is our timeline to try to get the rest of the climate action plan done, which is a very ambitious timeline. The grant only allows us to go through January 31st of 2026. And, you know, as far as I'm concerned, this is the first time I've found a pot of money that the city could really use to address this dire need to get a new climate action and adaptation plan. So I said, you know, we got to go for it. So that's going to mean we have to be careful about timing. We want to make sure we stay on track and come back to you all regularly and make sure we get those things done. And it's an evolving plan, and it really should be a living plan, right? It's unfortunate we didn't have, you know, the staff we needed to... upkeep the current climate action plan and it was sort of allowed to sunset. But it really should be something that's updated regularly and it just provides us a framework and a strategy to advance all of your objectives and how you see the future of the environment moving and gives us a real opportunity you know, this is our time to think through and be strategic and invest our time and limited resources in the things that are most impactful for the environment. Not just one-off green opportunities that come up and they seem glamorous so they catch our attention, but these are things we've studied and we have identified the top things that we can do to make a real impact and then we pursue those, you know, objectives to the best of our ability. So that's what I've been really looking forward to. And so that theoretically means we should be back to you all October 2025 with that climate action plan. So that's sort of the high-level overview. Excellent. That's all I have. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. First and foremost, Grant, thank you for your vision and all that you do with collaborating with our nonprofits. I've said this before. It's been an honor to really see you thrive and evolve in these realms. especially with the EJ work which can be complex I wanted to bring something as we're talking about climate issues we're talking about disadvantaged communities I know that the the city is moving the needle in in transformative work I think that as we talk about like the warehouse ordinance we talk about the climate issues one thing that I think we need to really put on the board, put in perspective, is that you can be on one side of the street and be within the previews of the city of Stockton and cross the street and be within the previews of the county. I know with myself, Council Member Wright, Council Member Belapadua, we've been talking about the importance of intergovernmental bodies and committees to really work through complex issues uh... that evolve it within our community so i just kinda wanna put it out there uh... i don't know where to put it uh... but we are talking about climate work we are talking about uh... environmental aspects and i think it's disingenuous to say let's just talk about three hundred twenty thousand people when in reality there are uh... areas within the county that have the same disadvantages so how do we come together collectively and then the spirit of collaboration to formulate a body that can really govern the issues and the difficulties that are this complex. When we're talking about warehouses, we're talking about eons of years of these sites and or areas. So I just kind of want to put that out there as something that we need to be talking about as we think tank transformative climates. But great job of what you're doing. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have a motion? Move to approve. Second. Council votes, please. Motion passes 6-0 with Council Member Padilla being absent. Thank you. Item 13, there aren't any administrative matters or 14, unfinished business. So we'll move on to 15, new business, 15.1. Stockton Police Department Traffic Safety Update. I remind the public that this is an information item only. Council would not be taking any action on item 15.1. Staff, you have the floor to present. Good evening Council. Captain Gary Benavidez with the Police Department. I'm here this evening to provide an update on our current staffing and current deployment plan for our traffic section and I'll go over some of the where we're currently at and then as we improve staffing what that may look like. Our current staffing currently for our traffic section consists of two motor sergeants and six riding motor officers. As our traffic section deploys, there's four areas of deployment that we focus on. And I'll briefly go over each one. The first one is our top six primary collision factor areas. And these are identified through monthly crash data reports, And these can include automobile, motorcycle, bicycle, pedestrian data. And that identifies the areas within the city that we focus on. The second would be our traffic complaint log. And these are the complaints that come into the traffic section and they come in a variety of ways, whether it's at Stockton, telephone. And these are anything from speeding to parking issues to abandoned vehicles. ICAP focus area this is intelligence information that we gather through monthly crime data reports and statistics that identify violent crimes specifically and often our motors are able to go in those neighborhoods you see that it's in red this is one of the areas with our current staffing that we're currently unable to do and the fourth one is our proactive enforcement by district with full staffing we're able to assign Motors to each of the six city districts, and part of that would be enforcement, education, and assisting with engineering issues. So as staffing were to improve, ideally we would want to have two squads consisting of one motor sergeant, seven motor officers for each squad, giving us two motor sergeants and 14 motor officers. With improved staffing, this would facilitate the ability to address all of these areas in a much more effective way. And again, as we look at these areas, to be able to address our top six primary collision factors, to actually spend quality time in those areas doing enforcement education. Addressing our complaint log, which can stack up fairly quickly and often take a month to two months to address some of these complaints based on our staffing and also our proactive enforcement where we can get back into the community especially having motor officers assigned to each district so those that's just a snapshot an idea of what as staffing improves what we would want to bring back so that's an overview of where we're at where we'd like to go as staffing improves and I'll open it up to any questions Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much for this presentation. I had a clarifying question when you talked about engineering issues. About what? Engineering issues. So that would be our traffic division works with the engineering department. So maybe there's a need to put a stop sign or a speed bump in an area. So that's what I'm referring to. Okay, got it. And then... Can you tell us a little more about, I've been always curious about your, like the multi-region special assignments for better, lack of better words. Like how is, does the city pay for like when Lodi comes to help you with traffic enforcement speeding? Sometimes I see other districts and cities, so that factored into our budget or is that just a special ask so those agencies that come into our city they're being paid by their agencies okay and in turn we would go into their cities if needed this is happens four times a year where we may be in Manteca once a year and then the folks from antique or Lodi come into our city and give us some assistance but we don't pay for their okay I'm here thank you for that And they're paid through grant funding? Pardon me? Is it through grant funding as well? So there is grant funding, but for those missions, those are not through grant funding, as far as I understand. Council Member Biaputa. Yes, those are not grant funding. I just want to say thank you for everything you guys do. Appreciate everything you guys have done. I just had a few questions. One was... How many motor squads would be needed to meet the demand of enforcing all the primary collusion factor locations across Stockton? So our goal would be to have two motor squads consisting of a sergeant and seven officers per squad. Okay. And then how many primary collusion factor locations does SPD monitor throughout our city? So we identify six. and right now the reality is we're able to really address three of those six. Okay, I think that's pretty much. I just want to applaud all my councilmen who have recently supported this and thank you for all you do. Councilmember Wright. Thank you. So when you talk about the top six primary collision factor locations, does that also include pedestrian vehicle collisions? Yes. So what happens is anytime there's any type of collision report, including those, it enters a database and our crime analysts will look at all that information and that's how they determine their top six. Right. Because I've, again, I've made a point several times about how Stockton has the worst per capita rate in the state of California. for pedestrian auto collisions. And so I appreciate every effort you guys are doing in that respect to bring that number down and save lives. So thank you. Great. Thank you, Captain. Item 15.2, adopt a resolution to authorize transfer and appropriation of funds for the California Street Road Diet Project. Staff, you have the floor to present. Good evening, the American Council. Excuse me. My name is Chad Reed. I'm Interim Director of Public Works. Tonight we have a short presentation on the California Street Road Diet project. So what's the purpose of a road diet? It's to create traffic calming measures to help reduce vehicle use and encourage alternate modes of transportation while enhancing public safety. So the project is split into two phases. Phase one is from Alpine Avenue to Minor Avenue, and phase two is Minor Avenue to A Street, and then on A Street from California Street to El Dorado Street. So here we have some renderings of what the finished product should look like. The top two pictures, we see a class two and a class four bike lanes. So you see a lot of buffers there. And then the bottom pictures, we see aerial shots of a typical road diet where it was originally four lanes of travel and has been reduced to two lanes of vehicle travel with a two-way center left turn lane and enhanced bicycle lanes. So the improvements include 1.2 miles of class four and 3.8 miles of class two bicycle lanes with vehicle reduction from four lanes to two lanes. We're also gonna see signal upgrades, we're gonna see sidewalk upgrades, and we're gonna see ADA upgrades. So additionally, we've had a lot of citizen requests for a crosswalk at the intersection of California and Vine Streets. This project incorporates those concerns. All right. So during project design, it was thought that there would be a potential loss of approximately 35 parking spaces. Staff is currently evaluating the number and will conduct public outreach once we have a final number determined. Excuse me. So in 20 and 21, we were in design. Oh, sorry. There we go. In 2020 and 2021, we were in design with Siegfried Engineering. In March of 23, we advertised for construction. We awarded construction in June of 23. We started construction in October of 23, and we anticipate to complete construction in fall of 2024. So the project budget, the total project cost is roughly about 12.9 million, and we have multiple funding sources that include grants and Measure K monies. So the recommendation, this is a little bit lengthy, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TRANSFER FUNDS TO THE CALIFORNIA STREET ROAD DIET IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,396,000. WE'RE GOING TO TRANSFER 20, REQUESTING TO TRANSFER $20,800 OF MEASURE K FUNDS FROM THE HIGH FRICTION SURFACE TREATMENT PROJECT. REQUESTING TO TRANSFER $125,005 FROM MEASURE K FUNDS FROM THE BICYCLE MASTER PLANE. REQUESTING TO TRANSFER $260,000 OF MEASURE K FUNDS FROM RULE 20 street lighting program requesting to transfer two hundred forty four thousand five hundred from a measure K from the traffic signal modification program 100 we're requesting to transfer one hundred and ninety six thousand from measure K funds from the California vine rectangular rapid flashing beacon improvements and finally requested to transfer five hundred forty nine thousand six hundred ninety five dollars from measure cave funds the public facility air quality fund balance and It is also recommended that the city manager be authorized to take appropriate actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution. That completes the presentation. Thank you. Do we have any public comments? We have none, Mayor. Okay. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to say that it feels good to see this project coming to its final stages. And I am very excited for the sidewalks. And I know that that may sound strange to folks, but when you know, you know. I'm also excited about the crosswalk. A couple things, and I know that I always ask for things, but, hey, all you can tell me is yes or no. Because we're promoting walkability and bike, ride, share, because this is a whole thing, concept and theory of, you know, the redesign and active transportation. Wondering if we've ever considered doing or looking for a grant to promote opportunities for residents who reside in that area to get bikes. And the reason that I'm thinking about that, and you can feel free to park in line. I'm just throwing out the idea. is because that is one of the most impoverished communities within the city so if we're promoting it it would be nice to provide some type of support for those residents in the community thank you city manager I see you council member Wright just very quickly I want to applaud again on that crosswalk at California and Vine For those of you who don't know, before I came on to city council, I was principal at what used to be Commodore Stockton School at on Vine Street there. And I remember placing a call in 1999 to Gary Tsutsumi, who was the traffic engineer for Stockton back then, on that very same subject. So it's absolutely blowing my mind that it's going to happen. So 20 years later, 25 years later, but hey, persistence right yes sir so good work on this we're making work happen you know even though we're not necessarily getting the big grants that we were looking for to fund this we're still making it happen so kudos to the city manager and kudos to you second cash your votes please motion passes 6-0 with council member Padilla being absent Thank you. Item 15.3, approved motion to authorize professional services contract amendment number seven, amendment number two, and authorized contract language order number seven for the new city hall renovations and relocation project. Staff, you have the floor to present. Thank you. So good evening again, Chad Reed, interim director of public works. So tonight we have an update and requested actions on new city hall. Tonight's actions will reset change order authority for the city manager. No additional funds are being requested. So I just want to start off with that right. Get that out of the way. Get that out of the way. Not tonight. Excuse me. I know we can just end it right now. So okay so highlighted in red right here is a slide. It's the it's the current site of New City Hall and the future parking lot. So as a recap of the project, the existing site is about 4.8 acres with two five-story buildings. Improvements are being made to the tenant space, on-site parking lot, and the vacant lot across the street. So for some brief history on the project, 2018 to 2021, we awarded a contract for space planning. In November of 2021, a construction management contract was approved. And in May of 2022, we issued a contract to Roblin Contracting for the construction of the new city hall. So our main goal is to consolidate city departments for ease and efficiency of doing business. All the departments listed on the slide will now be housed in one location. So right here we have a current picture of admin services counter. And right here we have a picture of what it will look like when it's finished. So the project is coming along really well. Here we have a rendering just to kind of remind everybody what council chambers is gonna look like, right? And then here we have a rendering of city manager, mayor and council office lobbies or lobby. So right here is another current picture of economic development. and then here's another side shot of the north side corridor for economic development so we're about 60 percent complete with overall building renovations we're looking to go out for construction bids for the parking lot in summer of 2024 and we anticipate completing construction on the parking lot in summer of 2025 or i'm sorry spring of 2025. we're expecting to start moving departments in in the fall of 2024 so the next steps the action you're taking tonight resets the administrative authority which allows a city manager to continue to approve change orders and amendments so we don't have to come back to you all every time a change order comes in tonight's recommended actions again do not increase the overall project budget The project has built-in contingency funding to absorb these change order costs. So the recommended action that city council adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute contract change order number seven for the construction contract with Roebling Contracting in the amount of $93,261.41 Execute Amendment Number 7 to the standard agreement with Indigo Hammond in the amount of $820,000 for design construction support services. And execute Amendment Number 2 to the standard agreement with Griffin Structures in the amount of $288,464 for construction management services. And that completes the presentation. Are there any questions? clerk do we have any public comments we have none mayor it doesn't appear to be any questions do have motion to approve so I guess your votes please motion passes 6-0 with councilmember Padilla being absent thank you item 616 public public hearing 16.1, adopt a resolution approving the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan 2024 Development Fee Schedule. Public hearing is now open. Staff? Good evening, Mike McDowell, Assistant Community Development Director. Here before you is the annual fee update for the habitat plan. I'm going to refer to it as the habitat plan because it's a long name. So the plan was adopted back in 2000 and it provides a strategy basically for protecting species in open space and also accommodates development as a result. The key thing here is it's voluntary for developers and I've only seen one developer in my career here attempt to go outside of the habitat plan to negotiate with the environmental protection agencies and they went right back to the habitat plan to pay the fee and and let the COG take care of it with the habitat process. So this just shows the mapped area, and you can see for Stockton, most of the area, the core areas of the city are not even subject to the habitat fee. As you might expect, most of the areas are on the peripheral of the city limits, but it's still relied upon as development occurs on the fringes. So in your council packet and what's represented here is we've obviously got a decrease proposed, 7.4% decrease. And that's in addition to what occurred last year. There was also a decrease going on. So most of it relates to land valuations as far as the way the fees made up. This just shows as far as the actual fees as proposed and it compares 2023. And you can see it's just a further reduction that's going on. So I'm sure it's better for everyone as far as developers paying the fees and the program itself. So in conclusion, again, the plan streamlines for development projects. And again, it's decreasing the fee. It's based on COG's financial model. And again, it's voluntary, but most developers choose to use this plan and comply. So it's a great program. And that's my conclusion. Thank you. We do have a COG representative in case you have a question here that I can't answer, but just wanted to make you aware that we do have a representative from COGS. Thank you. Do we have any public comments? We have none, Mayor. Okay. Council Member Wright. I don't have any questions. I just want to say this is one of the great examples of what can happen when you have environmental activists and developers coming together to solve a problem. I mean this has been going on for how many years? I guess I do have a question. I think it was 2000 as far as when it was approved. Yes. But it took probably nine years I think as far as negotiating and I know staff when I started with the county that was working on it and it took about nine years to get it in place. I'm not surprised that it did. We're one of the few jurisdictions, counties, that actually have a plan like this where you just pay your fee and you're satisfied. I mean, there's a lot of folks that are out there still negotiating with the environmental. And there is habitat replacement, you know, for anything that you're impacting on your development project. This is genius. Yeah, the COGS program is really good. And we are fortunate that we had people that put this together. So very supportive of it. I'll be voting yes. Thank you. Well, public hearing is closed. Move to approve. Second. Cash your votes, please. Motion passes 6-0 with Council Member Padilla being absent. Thank you. Item 17. City Manager, give us all those updates that you have ready for us. I just have one. Just one update. Just excited to announce that our new city website will go live on Thursday. uh... steps with a lot of time and effort into getting us to this point it will provide for a modern contemporary local government website look and feel uh... as i said to look and feel will be very modern looking uh... utilization of it will be easier and improved BY LEVERAGING OTHER TECHNOLOGIES SUCH AS GOOGLE AND OTHER NAVIGATION TECHNOLOGIES. IT WILL BE ABLE TO TRANSLATE WEB CONTENT, NOT NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, ATTACHMENTS AND DOCUMENTS THAT WE MAY PLACE ON THE WEBSITE, BUT THE WEBSITE CONTENT ITSELF, IT WILL BE ABLE TO TRANSLATE THAT INTO MORE THAN 100 LANGUAGES FOR PEOPLE. AND IT WILL BE ADA COMPLIANT. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. SO THAT WILL HAPPEN ON THURSDAY. thank you for that update so we'll skip down to 19 move to adjourn I'm just kidding yeah just kidding I'm just kidding colleagues well I mean there's no lights flicker in here so I mean councilmember blower Thank You mayor I'm going to keep my comments short and sweet. I just would like to invite any of you that would like to join me next Tuesday morning. It will be 7 a.m. to 1. The Emergency Food Bank will be doing their holiday food box giveaway. I want to thank Councilmember Wright and Vice Mayor Wormsley for joining me for the Thanksgiving. one, that was a good time, so we'll be doing that again next Tuesday. I will be joined, as always, by my oldest daughter, Caroline, who I would like to recognize. Today is her 20th birthday, and so we celebrated with her. We had dinner last night because we had this meeting tonight, but anyway, just wanted to throw out a happy birthday to her. Thank you. Council Member Wright. Yes, I returned last Friday from the CalCOG retreat and quarterly meeting in Riverside. A couple points on that. First of all, if you haven't been to Riverside at Christmas time, it's amazing. They have activated their downtown as a Christmas festival, basically. Vendors start showing up around 2 p.m. and they stay till 10 p.m. Restaurants and bars put on specials. There's free live entertainment. And it got me thinking about what we're doing with the Lantern Festival and how maybe we can activate more of the area around the ballpark while the Lantern Festival is going on. Maybe reaching out and allowing people a chance to raise some funds. and increasing the holiday spirit in Stockton. Secondly was the work that we accomplished at the meeting. Our focus was to approve the legislative principles. There were a couple of issues affecting the legislative principles. First was the budget deficit. Last year, California had a $54 billion budget deficit. This year, it's expected to increase $14 million to $68 billion. There will be cuts. They will be painful. So let's be ready for it. Let's cut where we can. Let's be ready to get less and try to do the same with it, you know, is all I can say. It's almost impossible, I know, but this is going to be a big hurt this year. So anticipated focus areas that the Council of Governments, the California Council of Governments hopes to focus on. in 2024, SB 375 implementation and reform ideas. For those of you who don't know about SB 375, that is a transition from the gas tax to a vehicles mile traveled tax to support roads and construction. So it's, as we transition to electric vehicles, one of the things that wasn't anticipated and wasn't dealt with was that gasoline is going away. And so if nobody's paying the gas tax, how are we going to fix our roads? So that's SB 375. It's pretty contentious. You've got some of the bigger metropolitan areas that have great transit districts pushing one ideas, and the rural counties obviously pushing other ideas. Smaller cities, I hesitate to call us a smaller city. We're the 11th largest in the state, but But we don't compare it to LA, certainly, in terms of size. Secondly, it's expected there will be a RHNA revamp this year. The Department of Housing and Community Development is due to submit their RHNA revamp report to the legislature by December 31st of this year. So we can expect the RHNA, the Regional Housing Needs Analysis, has always been basically fairly toothless It's something we were required to do, but there was never any consequence if we didn't meet it. And they have been tasked by the governor and the people doing the revamp to create some consequences for communities that don't meet the arena goals. And Brown Act improvements. The CalCOG is working hard to get a few more freedoms for us involving remote meetings. The California legislature is has been very reticent to improve any sweeping Brown Act changes. As our city attorney has reported a couple times, there's been slight movement in that area. But there are other bills that will be coming up this year, especially for those of us who sit on committees that cover large regional areas. I sit on the AVA Community Energy Board, and the vice mayor is the alternate for that. That covers cities all the way from Berkeley to here. And they hold the regular meetings in Oakland. And I try to attend those in person just simply because it's a different meeting in person than it is online. You get a little bit more opportunity to engage when you're there in person. But if I didn't have the ability to do that, I couldn't do that without posting as we have to do for these meetings, posting my location in Stockton and posting the agenda here and allowing people to attend the meeting. And so if that city hall is closed at that time, that creates some complications. And those meetings start at 6 p.m. REAP expenditures and REAP 3.0 is another focus area. And REAP is a housing planning support bill, and it is moving toward a housing expansion bill when we get to REAP 3.0, where there will be some funding to go beyond planning and actually improving additional housing in the cities. And that's it. So I hope that report was clear enough. Let me know if you have any questions. Oh, and I do want to say thank you to everyone who was here tonight to speak on a very difficult issue. I just want to say for myself, I was originally unwilling to approve option C. I'm counting on all my council members to fully consider the revisions that are being examined for their feasibility. And when we get back to this in June or July, that we consider them fairly. I believe they're reasonable, for the most part, and that they are feasible. So let our staff get around to that work, but again, I encourage you all to support them when they return to us with the findings. Thank you. Council Member Villaputua. Yes, thank you, Mayor. As we close our final Stockton City Council meeting of 2023, I want to thank our community, all the hard workers in our beloved city. I'm especially thankful for all those who helped give up the backpacks to our community through this holiday season. There's been so many numerous toys, food, holiday events this season. Had an amazing time at the City Stockton Christmas Tree Lighting Event alongside with hundreds of Stocktonians. The next holiday event we have ends in District 5 is on December 14th at 5 p.m. hosted by Stan and the Housing Authority there's also another weekly food pantry giveaway on December 19th 1130 hosted by the Conway Homes Residents Council and as we enter 2024 let us continue to band together work with one another and build Stockton to a world-class city And as I close, I want to thank city staff, our city manager, Harry Black. Thank you for everything that you've done for this community. What would we do without you? Thank you, sir. And I want to thank all my colleagues, all of you, especially today. You know, this was our closing day, very important meeting. So I'm glad everyone made it here. uh... just wanna wish everyone a merry christmas and a happy new year and i'll see you guys next year thank you uh... vice mayor thank you ma'am uh... i just wanted i think sometimes uh... when when public and community comes it's it's hard to not recognize the great work that this council and this body has done uh... First of all, the extraordinary work of the transformative climate communities is significant. It's a game changer. I also want to elevate this council's work with the community. I can't say it right now. The green energy program that we attempted to bring to the city of Stockton until we got an injunction that set us back. uh... a significant amount of time a year uh... so if that attorney general's office is out there listening uh... can you help the city out because that could help uh... continue pathway to a green infrastructure in a timely manner for the city of stockton so i do want to elevate that i do want to elevate this council's work uh... historically and in real time with the investment of our young people from the tablets that we have provided and using the census tract with the most impoverished community was historic. And also the two million dollar investment that we did for youth programming where we invested in 26,000 profits. We've done extraordinary work with our parks and making sure that our parks are up to par for our community. Now am I here to imply that they're perfect? No. However, this city and this body is moving the needle to ensure that our community and our residents are invested in. And for that, and the ending of 2023, I thank everyone in this body. I thank the community members, the residents, and the staff. I do want to point out, because we heard a lot from the operation engineers today. I just want to let you know on a personal level, I validate... and appreciate your concerns. And I know that you were on the frontline, especially during those natural disasters. They were out there with their coats on and picking up trees and responding to floods. So we see you and we do validate your work. City Manager, I won't let you get away from that question about the bikes. another ask, as we're talking about asthma mitigation and poor health outcomes, it would be nice to kind of explore that possibility. You don't have to answer today because you know I'm going to ask you tomorrow. I also want to actually probably just close with my last comment of the year, giving a very special 21st birthday to my daughter, Lanai. I don't know how she's 21 and I'm 30. I don't know how that happened. But she told me she was 21. And if we could. It's a miracle. It's a miracle. Oh, my God. I always wanted a younger sister. Also, City Clerk, if you can spend some time with Mr. White today to see if we can talk about his challenges or concerns he has, that would be great. Thank you so much for your time and your hard work with the elections. I know you worked very, very, very hard. Appreciate you and your team so much. Thank you. Council Member Villaputa. Yeah, one last thing. Only because it's the last meeting of the year. One last thing. I just forgot. I don't know how I forgot, but I just got to mention it. I want to thank Council Member Michael Blauer. FOR BRINGING THE DESSERT TODAY. IT WAS VERY TREMENDOUS. I KNOW YOU PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT AT COCONUT CAKE, BUT IT WAS GREAT. SO THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. APPRECIATE IT. YEAH, AND AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO THANK THIS BODY, THIS GOVERNING BODY HERE FOR THEIR WORK, THEIR COMMITMENT TO THE CITY THIS YEAR. And I want to thank the staff from the city manager's office to the city attorney's office to the city clerk's office and all the employees of our beautiful city for their tireless commitment. And again, I'll thank the residents as well for showing up and being engaged. I have seen this past year civic engagement just continue to increase. uh... i think that's something that uh... you know we all desire in we all hope for because you know when the public speaks uh... we we we have to listen i see councilmember right is uh... yeah go ahead go ahead turn on your mike turn real quick comment and i'll let you finish yours uh... i had for a couple meetings now i've intended to do this but i want to do this uh... right now there's been a lot of concern from various people who have come to meetings about our process for taking public comment. And that's not just us. That is happening statewide. There's a lot of different concerns on that. So I think it would be worthwhile for the Ledge Committee to take a look at what people are doing statewide with council comment. And if we could agendize that, if I could get another council member to agree with me on that. Agreed. Okay, and so we can agendize that, take a look at it. I've got some ideas on it that I'm willing to put forward and then we can kind of, I can send, I can talk with the League of Cities and see if they can send something out for us. Excuse me, you said, just said council comments. You mean public. Yeah. Public comment. I'm sorry, I didn't mean council comment. I meant public comment during council meetings. Yeah, no, but it's been... We're actually very fortunate in that we don't take online comments because some of the things that are happening on the statewide level with the racist comments and anti-religious comments that are being made, they're just intolerable. And so you have to... do it in person if you're going to do it in Stockton and we can hopefully limit their ability to do that. Shut the mics off if they get too profane. But anyway, I think it's something we need to talk about. I think a lot of different councils are going to be taking action on this in 2024. So I think we should be a part of that group in examining it. Thank you. Yeah, and along the lines of process, you know, for the public, that is our process. You know, we have, you know, charter policies uh... that uh... which this is one of those uh... that this body uh... could take action on at any given time uh... through the appropriate process and in this case is is the ledge committee and so uh... that is something that will be taken up uh... art the chairman of that committee is a council member blower uh... and so you know he has the ability to set the agenda for that in addition to take recommendations from from from city council as well so look forward to any changes that we can make that can continue to encourage i mean clarifying streamline you know the process so that more people could get involved uh... in in our local government uh... again thank you for the work that has been accomplished with our use this year uh... we've made she's tremendous strides in that space where there is the two million dollar uh... you know youth services grant or uh... the implementation of our summer jobs program for our youth where we were able to hire six you know sixteen to nineteen year olds i want to say a little over a hundred of those uh... and we were able to to uh... over the summer and we were able to actually hire a few of them uh... onto the city part time which is creating opportunity uh... i had the privilege of uh... also attending this past Saturday, the Discovery Challenge Academy graduation. And there were 86 cadets that graduated. These are second chance students that maybe lost their way or didn't have necessarily support system to be able to meet their academic requirements. And they committed to a program and 86 of them graduated from that program this past Saturday. OF THAT 86, THERE WERE 27 OF THOSE STUDENTS WHO WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO ATTAIN ENOUGH CREDITS TO EARN THEIR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA. SO NOT ONLY DID THEY GET THEIR CREDITS, BUT THEY TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER AND ACTUALLY GRADUATED. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS BREAKING GENERATIONAL CYCLES OF DESPAIR AMONGST THE YOUTH IN STOCKTON AND SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY. AND THAT'S CREATING OPPORTUNITY, IT'S CREATING HOPE, AND CREATING NEW LEGACIES FOR OUR YOUTH AND THE FAMILIES THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY. SO I WANT TO THANK THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION AND THE STAFF AT DISCOVERY CHALLENGE ACADEMY FOR THEIR CONTINUOUS INVESTMENT IN CRITICAL SPACE AMONGST OUR YOUTH. AND SINCE I'M ON THE TOPIC OF YOUTH, I HEAR THERE ARE SEVERAL BIRTHDAYS Vice Mayor's daughter turning 21, Caroline Councilmember Blower's daughter turning 20, graduating from her teens. But I just want to give a shout out to my son, Kevin Jeffrey Lincoln III. He's turning 18 this coming Sunday. And I'm proud of the man that you have become. I know that your future is extremely bright. I know that my ceiling in life is going to be just your platform for growth and opportunity. And I always told my kids, I said, you know, it's my job to give you everything that I can right now because one day the student is going to become the teacher. And I can honestly sit here and say that one day in days, you know, in the near future, I look forward to coming to you, son. Kevin Jeffrey Lincoln III for advice. And so happy birthday, son. Hope you continue to fulfill all your dreams and your heart's desires. And again, Merry Christmas to everybody here in Stockton. Happy holidays. Have a safe and wonderful celebration with your friends and family and loved ones. So without further ado, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. All in favor? All right. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you.