Recommendation to Receive a Report on the Status of the Emma Hood Swim Center Repairs and Provide Direction on Options for a City Aquatic Center; and Adoption of Resolution Amending the General Fund Transfers Out Budget for Fiscal Year 2018-19 by $250,000 and Capital Projects Fund Transfers In and Appropriations by $250,000, Each, for Costs Associated with Repair of the Emma Hood Swim Center. (Recreation and Parks 280)
entirety Ordinance 2030 to 27 concerning land use requirements in the Zoning Ordinance of the Aluminum Civil Code, Section 30, Dash ten, cannabis that, among other things, permits retail cannabis dispensaries in certain zoning districts subject to a conditional use permit and permits the sale of non medicinal cannabis in certain zoning districts and an ordinance C concerning cannabis regulations and Amateurism Code. Article 16 Cannabis Businesses of Chapters six Businesses, Occupations and Industries that, among other things, establishes the number of retail close dispensaries to be open to the public, including delivery dispensaries, disperses their operations, creates a buffer zone from sensitive uses and permits the sale of number to small cannabis. And lastly, Audience D concerning the land use requirements and zoning ordinance, the code section 30 Dash and cannabis that among other things, permits retail, cannabis dispensaries and certain zoning districts subject to a conditional use permit and permits the sale of numbers of cannabis in certain voting districts. Okay. Councilmember decide that I'm here as before. I will recuse myself from this matter. So. All right. Thank you. Assuming there's no comments on the approval. Second. Okay. Of of all four together and no speakers. Spanish speakers. Okay. Okay. All in favor. I. And oppose. I'm going to oppose for reasons that I've stated in the past. So the motion carries 3 to 1. Thank you. Okay. And now we are. Considering. Moving on to the regular calendar. So item six, a. Recommendation to receive a report on the status of the methods from center repairs and provide directions on options for a city aquatic center and adoption of related resolutions. Okay. And who's that? You, me? Wooldridge, our recreation parks director is coming up. Do we have speakers on the side of Laura? We have one speaker on this item. Sorry. In this. PowerPoint advanced. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director and Interim Assistant City Manager. And I'm here to give you an update and receive input on the Emma Hood Swim Center at Alameda High School and changes happening there. So as you know, some recent background, it's a very old center, swim center. We have a joint use agreement with the school district and the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. I'll refer to that as the county from here on out has red tagged. The facility will close at the end of May. I negotiated with county staff to work out a plants in that we could get general agreement to work with the school district, come back to the county with a repair plan, with a specific scope of work, and along provide them with a long term plan on how we would build build a city pool with some specific milestones built in so they could see we were making concrete progress. So what we've done since then is we have an ad hoc committee that's of two members of this body, two council members, as well as two school district board members, including one of their youth representatives. There's staff from each agency and three members of the aquatic community. What the aquatic community has done in parallel with the ad hoc committee is they. So this ad hoc committee meets weekly every Tuesday and the community group meets every Wednesday. And so that group is a wide group of representatives, from what I've heard, 20 people that meet every week from swim, water polo, diving, recreational users, masters swimmers, and so they get community input on what the needs are of the community as a whole and work through all of those issues. And then the three liaisons bring that information back to the ad hoc committee. So it's really been, I think, a really great collaborative approach. It's been really helpful to to get information back and forth between the community and then the ad hoc committee. So what the repair plan is and what you have in front of you is funding of 70%. We're estimating a maximum amount of $350,000 to do the repair plan for this is just for the immediate repairs, immediate health and safety repairs. The city would pay 70% of those costs, which is a maximum of 250,000. And the school district would pay 30% of those costs. What that would do is we is is that items before you would be addressed re plastering the dove pool dressing air leaks which helps the water turnover rate things like that. Those were all the key items identified by the county and with the school district has already started addressing some of the smaller issues that are really kind of the low hanging fruit, such as drain covers and things like that. We did meet with the county staff two weeks ago. We're waiting on final confirmation of the approved scope of work. The reason this amount is a little bit higher, 350,000 is really just a just in case. If we if the county provides us written confirmation, which we expect next week and we stay within what we anticipate was the original scope of work that we had talked about with them. I expect it to be more around $250,000 at most in total. And so by authorizing the 250,000 that's really in not to exceed, I expect it to be lower than that. And we would only expend obviously up to what repairs are made. Another piece of the puzzle is the division of state architecture. So any building on a school site has to be reviewed is under the purview of the California Division of State Architects. We don't believe that this requires what's called a DSA permit, but the school district, especially because there's currently with all of the construction happening at Alameda High School, there's two DSA inspectors on site every day, and we have to make sure we do it correctly. So they're going to be to as soon as we get the written confirmation from the county, the school district's going to take it to DSA to confirm, here's what we're doing. We want to let you know and then make sure there's no permit required. The reason that's important is because if a DSA permit is required, it will slow this whole repair process down by 3 to 4 months. Yes. And just in case, I might have missed the explanation, but DSA stands for the. Division of State Architecture. Thank you. So in terms of the new aquatic facility and components, I want to be clear that these this is simply just initial conversations. And these are recommendations that have come from that community group that has been talking a lot about what they'd like to see in a new swimming, new swim facility. These are the major components and we've discussed them at the ad hoc committee. Come to general consensus there as well, a 32 basically two pools, a 30 to 50 meter pool, which would be the main competition pool, a smaller 25 yard pool. That would be for practice. Swim lessons, recreational swim, birthday parties, things like that would have a zero depth entry because that's really for both ADA access and is great for seniors and little the little tots and such lighting for evening programing which would extend our potential for revenue and make it a more usable facility for the community . Potentially a recreational splash play structure such as structures that have water splashing out. And that's helpful for the recreational side, again, for revenue generation, for birthday parties. And also just to attract families, we would update and modern or provide a modern fully ADA locker rooms, make sure that there's sufficient seating for bleachers and open lawn for pop up tents. And this is important, especially for larger meets. We've also talked about a multi-use room for training like Red Cross trainings, lifeguard trainings, things like that, a whole host of trainings for classes and also for birthday parties and also a concession snack bar and picnic table area. What's also been discussed is an option to have a noncompetitive the noncompetitive pool, the 25 yard pool indoors. So maybe a mixture of indoor outdoor facility. An example of that would be the city of Albany. They have a pool that's jointly that's at the Albany High School campus and is jointly managed by the city. And they have an indoor pool with swim lessons and such. And they also have an outdoor competitive pool. And also that. Well, I'm going to get in a minute into kind of the next steps and how will be what some opportunities are for even further input. Another thing that the ad hoc committee looked at as potential locations in your packet. There was a list of pros and cons and that that is what the committee brainstormed. And looking at all of those ten locations as to locations that really kind of rose to the top as more ideal locations. One is the existing site at Emerald Swim Center, but we've looked at how we can push out into push out from the existing sites, such as moving the facility all the way out to Oak Street and and moving that tennis court over to another side or the fields and pushing out in different ways enough to nearly double the size of the facility. The other side is at Thompson Field. That obviously would require moving the existing football field first. So I want to be clear that we know where in this plan to we want to move out other sports. So we would need to make sure that there's a suitable football facility done and ready to go before we even started at Thompson Field to put a pool space in there. The up side of Thompson is a really large amount of space, so you could do nearly anything you want at that site, but again, requires relocating the field and being in a very tight neighborhood area would require parking and other transportation facilities on site. Damn good swimmers. The current Emma Hood Swim Center location in a bigger footprint. It's a tighter fit to get all the components that we looked at earlier. But there's existing infrastructure such as the water and the util, the sewer and all of that. It's really close to parking with the parking garage nearby and public transit. I want to be clear that neither of these sites, none of these ten sites have been vetted by the community. Again, it's just gone through the process and we're on a pretty quick timeline. And so that's why we've been moving through the process in this way. Some additional information on how we're considering this new aquatic facility. It is being discussed as a city facility, city built and then ultimately operated and maintained by the city. We are really looking to make sure that it serves both competitive and recreational needs. Currently, both the sites that we've identified as having as being more ideal are on a state owned land. And so that would require some sort of land agreement between the school district and the city. The mechanism of that is still being discussed and definitely has not been finalized. The school board is will be discussing that in closed session next week at their next Tuesday at their meeting. In terms of next steps for the immediate next steps to repair and reopen. Again, it's too for both agencies to authorize the funding. The school board is is an open session next week to authorize their portion of the funding. And we're waiting next week for the county to formally confirm the scope of work. The plan is that the pool at Emma Hood would close at the end of May because then all of the swim teams and everyone can finish their season. We would close for the summer to get all of the repairs done and then and get all all of the inspections and permits finalized and then with the goal to reopen for the school year. In terms of the long term plan, so the reason we're doing this long term plan is really in such a quick timeline is really to address the County Health's request that we do so. And and the requirement was that we provide some sort of really high level plan so they could see we we're making progress and that so there would be milestones that they can hold us to. It's really the M.O. you that we. So the first step would be that we would provide an M.O. you to the county and it's a really high level M.O. You wouldn't stipulate stipulate for example, the location, but it would stipulate that the that will be a city pool, city built, city operated and in partnership with the school district in that they will be a key stakeholder and that they will work with us on any land agreements. And so that's kind of the level of the the M.O. you that we would present to the county. Our current deadline is to get an MRU to them and get the timelines to them is May 31st. We've asked for an extension to June 30th and hope to hear on that next week. I want to be clear to that in terms of finalizing the location, finalizing what exactly type facility we're looking at, indoor outdoor size pools, things like that. There's time for that conversation. We don't need to get to that that to the county right away. What we need to give them is a timeline. So the current timeline has that the M.O., you would give them the M.O. you that I mentioned before, by June 30, we would have a land transfer agreement or not necessarily even a transfer, but some sort of land agreement between the school district and the city by December. And so by December, we would have to have a finalized location and the mechanism to do that. Then we would work on the development of the conceptual design, which would be due by by mid 2020. And then we would start to confirm funding mechanisms around that time, whether it was an infrastructure bond, private funding, some combination thereof, and then look toward timelines on permits and approvals and design and finally construction. So. So we have time to finalize the location until really, you know, sometime this fall and then finalize the mechanism by December and get that all into an agreement the way I have. We've also been looking at the input process on design is then in July to have potentially a joint meeting, public meeting to discuss the design ideas and location and then engage an architect to do conceptual designs such as and provide different options of conceptual designs with cost estimates attached. Because then we can have very real conversations about what's possible and then also work jointly with the school district to finalize a location. So that concludes my report, and I'm open to any questions. Okay. Are there any clarifying questions on the staff report or should we go to our have a speaker question Council member Dave. I can wait. Just a quick clarifying question. In your presentation, you said you indicated as your first bullet point that the pool could be anywhere from 30 to 50 meters. It struck me as kind of odd and people here will know a lot more than me. Aren't most swimming races like, you know, divided by 50, like 25 meter, 50 meter or 100 meter? How would you do a 100 meter race in a 30 meter pool? I'm actually I'm sure some swimmers can answer that better than I can, but we'll just put that question out there. But I mean, in in some part, I'm following the the desire of the community. A 30 meter pool isn't uncommon. What always boggles my mind, there's also a 25 yard pool. So there's there's different dimensions. But the 30 meter pool is standard. A 50 meter pool is considered an Olympic size is also standard. So they're both standard sizes that are that are used. But perhaps a. Person can surely dance. Okay. So Councilman Rivera and Amy. Thank you for your presentation. My question is really trying to understand the resolution that's attached and and how it relates to the presentation. Mm hmm. So you had mentioned a high level M.O. you and benchmarks in the. And I just want to clarify, because in the resolution in the amended resolution, I think it's the seventh whereas paragraph requiring that by May 30th, 2019, we've now asked for an extension to June 30th. So potentially it could be May or June. Right. For that paragraph? Yeah. Since we uploaded the staff report, we're trying to get a little bit longer. Yes. Okay. And then in terms of the long term replacement plan in place, we could we could say something like high level long term replacement plan or something like that or conceptual replacement plan or something. Yeah. Okay. And. Uh, okay. And then for the July meeting, you're talking about July of this year, correct? Correct. And it'll be a joint meeting with both the school board and the council. And we would follow the. I think I think our open government policies are a little more robust than we would follow all the the posting regulations. Okay. Thank you. Yes. And just to clarify what that to your to your first point, what what what it could look like in terms of M0, you language would be some a high level agreement on the type of land use basically saying that the city will have full site control but not identifying the specific location. Thank you. Councilman Brody, thank you. A few questions. Thanks for the update on this. So the district's meeting in closed session, you said next week. Correct. And I mean, at a high level, because you only have to do a high level for closed session. I mean, what is the what is the topic they're going to be discussing? It's on options for on land, what they can do with their land, what their options are. So like price in terms of payment, things like that. No, not more. Much more high level than that. Okay. What are the what are the what are the available mechanisms to transfer land from the school district to the city? I mean, I guess I'm wondering if it's worth our council, you know, having that same discussion. Because, you know, we haven't weighed in on that as a full council and given any direction as the committee goes forth and discuss this with the school board. Direction. What specifically? Because what they're really talking about is what since they own the land, what their legal options are to transfer or sell, lease, whatever the mechanism is to the city and what tools are available to them is what they're. Well, I think it'd be good to know from a council perspective what, you know, our options are as well. And, you know, based on the different options they're looking at, you know, they have to be there has to be a finite number. Right. So what the impact would be for us as well. I mean, I just think that would be it'd be worthwhile for this body, at least if we're sending off a team to negotiate on the city's behalf that they have some direction and input from. So just to be clear, we're not negotiating location. We're not negotiating pricing terms or anything like that. I am vice mayor and that's why it. Wasn't quite finished, but. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Cause I wrote them a call in there. And then on this M.O.. You. So overall scope of the facility location responsibilities you have land transfer in there milestones. So that's an email you that the city and the district is going to negotiate. Correct. And again, I mean the direction as. Who's who's negotiating that is that the subcommittees that you. The committee will be looking at it. We're starting a draft of that just kind of high level bullet points for it. The draft of it would go to each body to discuss and approve and then make tweaks and then come back and and and so so each body would be weighing in on the menu before it was finalized. Okay. So there's going to be an opportunity for the body as a whole to kind of give priority and negotiating authority on, you know, what we want and don't want in that milieu, right? Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure that happens. By summer next week. Well, I was going to help answer the question that that was half of it right there is that we're not negotiating the ammo. I think that the conversation tonight hopefully is, you know, we're having the conversation about, you know, what are our various interests. Right. And the school district has some real legal requirements about, you know, required field sizes, etc.. The reason they're going into closed session is because their decision on A, do they do anything with the land? And if they do something, how does it impact their standing with the state? There were some legal issues that they had to deal with. I think our assumption and why we haven't gone in a closed session is unless there's a, in my view, to to negotiate that has legal issues. We felt that we could have the conversation starting tonight with questions like, you know, you know, do we want to do a long term lease? Would we prefer to own the land, etc.? We actually developed a list. The subcommittee did today I have that I can at some point in time propose it. The other thing that I and I may have looked away for 2 seconds here in the presentation, but I don't think I heard it, was that we've also proposed holding the final two meetings of both the board and the Council in June, as so from 6 to 7 before each of our our final meetings in June as joint meetings so that if there are issues with the IMO you that need to be negotiated between both parties like literally we need to sit down and is out before the June 30th deadline. We will have it on our calendar to call those meetings so that all ten members can do it. But I think our assumption is, is that in the same way that we negotiate and we'll use and whatever else is that staff will do most of the work. The subcommittee, because it can meet every week and can talk to our counterparts, is trying to make sure that we're doing the bidding that we hear from from this group and whatnot. But that yeah, of course, everything will come back here. Nobody nobody is going to take something for signing and say, here, we've negotiated it at the subcommittee. I mean. Council member. So I don't know whether it's to the chair to the vice mayor or to our assistant city manager. I know. I forgot the question. So is there a contingency plan if there's request for a June 30th extension is not granted. I mean to have this these discussions in May. Ms. Wooldridge. We certainly I mean, we're working as quickly as we can and we can certainly hold a special meeting and try and organize one for the last week of May as needed. When I met with them on site a couple of weeks ago, they seemed quite favorable towards the June 30th. So that didn't seem to be a major obstacle. I mean, it just it might make sense to have something planned in schedule just in case worst case scenario, because the last thing I want to see happen is that we lose that extension and then all of a sudden we don't have an opportunity to weigh in. Okay. We'll know something next week. You think, from county health? Yes. It's been two weeks and they told me 2 to 3 weeks and I've been hounding them. So I'm hoping by next week to get written confirmation from county health. And I'll add that. Mr. Aldridge and the city manager Eric Levitt, and I also met with our county supervisor, Wilma Chan, to keep her in the loop on this and she's offered her assistance. So we are covering the bases. Okay. If you know. When we're coming in. Vice Mayor. Do you wanna go first? Okay. I wanted to ask for clarification from you, from your perception. We have spent a lot of time talking about CITES and we've narrowed down to two and that the school district is certainly talking a little bit more about specifically a rate that the subcommittee has kind of been talking about my hood . We're open to other ones, but it's not that we're going to send them a and start a whole new conversation about sites in July. The hope is not to because at the end of the day, one of our deadlines is going to be a signed land agreement in December. We're not going to be able to have another month and a half of conversations on where and then hopefully because that's going to hold up the design, etc.. I just you kept saying in July, we'll talk about the sites. It's true. So we're not necessarily selecting the site now, but there is also been a narrowing. And if there are concerns about that or if there are sites that people feel we're not, that this would be a great time to debate that. Absolutely. And the conceptual designs will be based on a certain site. Right. So I certainly want all to hear all of your questions and clarifying clarifying questions and comments for Ms.. Walters. We do have a public speaker, and then we'll go into our council discussion. But if you're still in the clarifying stages, escalate. Councilmember Vela. So. To that end. I guess my question is if the school board makes a determination because all I look through the list and I think half the list are are properties or, you know, city parks, that sort of thing, and half the list are school district properties. If we are talking about a school district property, ultimately it's their decision whether or not they're going to. Make one of their properties available to us. So I guess my concern is, you know, can we even make a determination tonight on on a school district parcel when ultimately it's their decision to make? I think tonight's really more to brainstorm and hear if there's other ideas and if if we're not necessarily going to for confirmed only select a site tonight but it's it's a continuing it's an evolving conversation and it's a quickly moving one. So I think if there's other sites to be considered, we should talk about that tonight. I think if the school district ultimately decides that they're not interested in doing any kind of land agreement with the school or with the city, then we look at some of the other sites that are sitting on site. Okay. Any more clarifications? Okay. Then let's have our public speakers, so on. Okay. And Amelia Besant, it's. Okay. So my, my rule for conduct of a council meeting is I'm sure she's absolutely awesome, but we, we don't applaud, we don't cheer, we don't boo, we don't do the wave just because it keeps the council meeting moving along. And for some speakers, they actually find that intimidating and it might discourage someone from speaking. But with that, the floor is yours. And I'm sorry I didn't catch your name. Hi, my name is Amelia Booth Notes. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor and Vice Mayor and City Council for hearing me. I'm lucky enough to live in Alameda, be raising two young kids in Alameda and also work in Alameda. One of the biggest problems is that I don't leave the island. Not a huge problem for me. I'm also one of the lucky people who gets to see the sunrise at my herd pool and the sunset. I coach masters and as a masters coach on the island, I can tell you that there is not nearly enough accessibility to the water for the city of Alameda. We have a lot of people who have come to ask to learn how to swim, but we don't really have adult learn to swim programs. We try and accommodate them, but there's not enough space. As a mom, I can tell you that there is not nearly enough facilities available for Parks and Rec to grow their aquatics program. The wait lists are already full, like there's already waitlist for the summer, and I would love my kids to have access to the pool here as the high school some coach. We just finished our season. We had a great season. I coach over at ends now and I can tell you that both Alameda High and ends now both have burgeoning aquatics programs and it would be, I believe, crippling to both of those programs if we had to rely on one high school pool. I'm also a member of the Alameda Aquatics Alliance, the group that's been getting together, and it was brought up before how many people this group represents? It's a massive number. You have USA swimmers, you have master swimmers, you have club swimmers, you have club water polo. The list goes on. I'm also going to say you have swimmers who don't realize they're swimmers yet because they haven't had access to water here in Alameda. If you build it, they will come. And this group has had access to these conversations and we're in great support of the plan as it's coming out. Um, and I would just really like to emphasize that it has to move quick because the where we are, there's a great wave of energy around aquatics. And if the district isn't interested in helping build the aquatics program here, I really hope that the city council continues to get behind that so that my kids grow up and they have access to pools. I love living here and hearing this every meeting I've gone to all of the aquatics meetings like this well in 1954, and then there's a really great statement and then in 1973, and then there's a really great statement. And what I would really like to have happen is that in 2019, the really great statement as the city of Alameda got behind aquatics and didn't just leave it up to the district. And that is all I have to say. Thank you. Okay. So that's the no, thank you. That is the other I think under a certain age you get away with that. Okay. So now we go to our council discussion of the the issues before us. Who wants to start Councilmember de SAC? I'll start acting. City Assistant City Manager Amy Wooldridge asked for council input on a range of items, one of the items being the location of the pool, recognizing that the decision is partly a decision of a USDA and also a decision of the city of Alameda City Hall. My take on on this particular thing is to give you how I would see the location decision, the lens through which I'm looking at that decision. And the lens that I would look at this decision is basically to encourage either parties, whether it's a USD or a city hall, to come up with a decision that has the least amount of moving parts, meaning like if you put the pool here, you have to then move this here, then you have to move that. Then there strive. I hope for the decision that is the most elegant with the least moving about parts because, you know, as Occam's razor suggests, the most elegant, parsimonious decision that oftentimes is the best decision. So that would be my encouragement. As you have your discussions with your counterparts at a USD, let's resist any Rube Goldberg type of contraptions because and honestly, I think in the past the city of Alameda and a USD have have entered into such agreements that are very, very complicated. And given that there's possibilities that there are very elegant decision choices, that that would be my suggestion is to resist. Look. Decisions with the most moving parts. Thank you. Councilmember de so Councilman Rivera. So I actually, I think that, um, we need to have a contingency plan and I think that contingency plans help move both parties along to get to where we need to be. So to that end, I want to make sure that I'm happy to hear that we're holding spots in June for those joint meetings. I actually think we should try to agenda is one of like just plan on agenda using one of them rather than just holding it so that we can have that joint meeting. And if we need to show that we have the full authority of council or or anything like that, we have it where we're building it and we know we'll be there. I'll be there with my baby. And who's going to be a future pool kid? Because I was a poor kid. And, you know, I think the other the other thing that I think we need to do is to Councilmember Ortiz point. We may maybe need to look at a date in May just in case and get it agenda is because we have the ODC issues and I know we're doing a million things and trying to get the budget ready and everything else, but I really believe that we need to do that just in case something doesn't work out . I also think that we need to have, just like we can pick, hey, here's our ideal a USD site. I think we need to think about what's the ideal city owned site in case a USD doesn't come through. And I went through this list. I know we have other properties in mind, or we have other properties that we own as a city. There was a long conversation a while ago about the Alameda Point officer's pool. I know it's on the other side of town. I know it's not necessarily next to a U.S. but there's you know, I think it rates higher among the city owned facilities in terms of parking. Yes, we're going to need to work on transit. We're going to need to work on some other things. But I think that it strengthens our position to be able to say, look, we have a backup plan in the instance that a USD isn't for some reason able to come through with one of their facilities. You know, I learned to swim in Franklin pool I swam from when I was a little kid. I did double days during summer. I reported my times to Dr. Parker whenever I saw him in middle school. I did water polo in high school and college. And I think that being an island and peninsula community with so much water surrounding us, we really owe it to our community. I'm swimming now. It's the only one of the few activities I can still do, and it brings me great relief. So I really do think that we need to find a way to think about options. I appreciate the work that's gone into this. The reason I was asking the questions about the resolution is I think that just how it's worded could be a little misleading. I know I got a couple of calls from people and, you know, there are shared constituents. So whether you're, you know, a student at Alameda High School or, you know, you're you're not just under the jurisdiction of AOC, I want to make sure that they have access to pools as well. And, you know, and to that end, I also think that if there is some sort of land transfer involved, at least for me , I want to start having a conversation of how do we make sure we preserve Alameda High's access to pools? So I don't, for instance, want them paying for pool time. I want to make sure that we we build that in so that that's part of the cost to me of of having the pool. And if if they're willing to give us the land, yes, we're going to have to build it. But, you know, we need to make sure that our students one of the great things about interscholastic sports is that it's the great equalizer. Everybody should have access. And I think that that's an opportunity that a lot of kids get a lot of things out of being able to just go right after school into their extracurricular activities. So I look forward to the conversations that we can have with the school district on this. It would be great to partner with them on it. I think that there's a lot of potential there. I want to make sure that the facility also meets the needs of the community, and I really appreciate the community work that's gone into this. I want to make sure that there's an opportunity for all of our constituents to weigh in and at least hear from us. I think that there's going to be a lot of input. And and strong feelings. And I just want to make sure. I think that it's helpful to have both of our boards together to hear that input, because I think everybody needs to hear it. And I think asking people to go to two different meetings is very difficult, which is why I like the idea of the joint meeting so that we're all hearing the same thing and hopefully we can get on the same page. And whatever happened in the past with AUC, we can move forward and use this as an opportunity to build a partnership. But I'm also worried about their budget and their ability. I mean, they're having a hard time paying teachers right now. So I don't want to I don't want to nickel and dime them. And I think we're coming up on our budget talks. So I think it's kind of makes sense that we're having this conversation, even though it needs to be expedited, that we're having it in line with when we're talking about our budget and and what that looks like. Okay. Thank you. Next, we hear. I'll be. Sorry, Councilman Rudy. Thank you. And I appreciate my colleague's comments. I mean, I agree with a lot of what both of them said. But, you know, critically, time is of the essence here. I mean, this is something we should have done literally years ago. So I think it's important knowing that time is of the essence, as Councilmember De said, not to over engineer something that, you know, may look great and, you know, with all the bells and whistles when you really need to get something done and we need to get it done fast. So I think it's critical that we when we pick a site, we consider that in mind. So if you have all these moving parts, you know, there's just more more chance that something gets complicated and followed up and delayed. So we've seen that. So I appreciate Councilmember De SA contributing that to the discussion and to Councilmember Vela's point. These are our shared constituents and we do have to be cognizant of the school district. And I think that to the extent, you know, we have one time money that that we've been successful in in earning as a city and the school district is in financial distress, that it would make sense that the city use some of that one one time money. I mean, the 7030 split is fine, but I mean, there's no reason why, you know, if it's 250,000, you know, why the city couldn't pitch in the other 75 or the other 80,000. You know, and I don't know if it's necessary to, you know, browbeat the school board into submission, you know, because they're really not in the business of running a pool. They're in the business of educating children. So I think we should be cognizant of that as we do our negotiations with them. I also think it's important that, you know, we treat them with respect as an equal partner, as they are an equal partner. And some of the details on this are really fuzzy to me still. And I'd like to have a little more clarity. You know, land transfers, we've done those before and those are super complicated. They have appraisals. You know, do you do we pay for the land? Do we transfer the land? You know, if we transfer land, you know, do land swap like we did with the the school district a while back, I think it was for the island high property. Now, that's a super complicated transaction and that's a policy decision that I think the council needs to weigh in on sooner rather than later over what types of properties we would be willing to transfer and, you know, how long of a process that is. So I appreciate that having a June meeting. But I do think, as I think I asked the question and my colleague, Councilman Avella agreed with me, we should have some contingency plan that we have a meeting on calendar for May. So if any of these issues come up that we have a chance to weigh in because when I see that an IOU is going to be drafted and I don't have any input in the high level terms and bullet points and don't even really know, you know, what they're going to look like. You know, I'd like to have a chance to do that and have the community weigh in if it's something we can do in open session. So, I mean, those are kind of my general comments. You know, I reserve the rest of my time in case I want to respond to anything else that comes up. But let's not like nickel and dime the school district, especially if they do decide to transfer the land. I think we have to. If we own it, then we have a bigger responsibility. And I think that responsibility extends to what the speaker said to make sure we provide, you know, priority one would be the schools and the school aquatics programs because the district would be giving up land to us. So I don't want to lose sight of that either. And, you know, and I you know, I think as Councilman Abella said, you know, I think charging the school district to use land that they transfer to us just so we could build a pool, I think is kind of ridiculous. Did you already. Do? Okay. I have some questions. Okay. Um. Excuse me. I want to make my comments now. So I am on the pool subcommittee. Vice Mayor Knox White and I are on the committee and subcommittee, and I want to compliment the members of that subcommittee and especially the Alameda Aquatics Alliance. If I got that right, because it's been really helpful to have the community input. And as I am learning all the time, we have such talented residents in Alameda and they're very generous with their time and sharing their expertize. I mean, we even have a gentleman who's a pool designer on our on our subcommittee and on our the this joint use committee. And we have representatives of the different aquatic communities and swimmers and parents, and we also have members besides the two school board members. We have the shark, the facilities manager should come and and we have the athletic director from Anthony El High and we usually have the principal from Alameda, but he wasn't there today. But anyway, we're definitely getting good input from the schools. I'm a little surprised to hear that we shouldn't browbeat people. I don't see browbeating going on. Maybe it's in the eye of the beholder. We're having discussions. I mean, quite frankly, the city would love to own the land and and put in the majority of the the funding into it, if that can be worked out as far as charging for use there. There's a formula and right now, all daytime use during the school day up till 530 is provided to the school district and no charge. We had some discussion today about what happens on the weekends when there are tournaments and tournaments are revenue generating events. And so, you know, whether there would be some charge for that because those are also when those events are going on, then the city's not collecting revenue when those pools are used for, you know, members of the public. And so I, I do understand that the school district has budget challenges. So do we will we'll get into that next week. But I what I like about this committee is they are truly they we are truly working with the objective of wanting to move as quickly as possible, quickly, but carefully to get Alameda pool reopened when those necessary repairs are made. But then, you know, simultaneously be working on the plan for a new pool. And it's exciting to me to just to see the potential that's there, you know, not one but two poles that can be used because you need your your warm up pool and you need your competition pool. And we hope to have a splash zone for young kids and families and the zero entry pool that Mr. Aldridge described. But everyone is bringing their expertize. I mean, I don't know about scheduling swim events and tournaments and all that, but boy, are there people on the committee who can who can tell us that. But when it comes down to locations, there really are a finite number of possibilities and in kind of declining order of of suitable this suitability the the officers pool just to comment on that. It certainly has some potential as far as space. But again, this would be the pool for Alameda High. And it's a matter of you know, it's not to say that you can't transport kids across town, but that adds another layer of of complexity. But always good to have a plan B. And I think that when one of the things that we are looking at when we do this community meeting in July with both of our, you know, the school board and the city council is this is a community meeting where the community will come. Now, we're not going to start from square one because a lot of vetting has already been done and a lot of really informed decision has taken place because of these people with expertize who have informed us every step of the way. So I think that we are. I think we're all. Moving forward in good faith. We have more decisions still to make. But I do think everyone's moving in the same goal. We want there to be very little time that we are without two poles in Alameda. I mean, it will happen. It will have to happen because the army, the pool is is going to have to close down at the end of the school year swim season. So those repairs can be done, but hopefully we get the sign off from county health that they approve the repairs we've proposed and we get those going. And I miss Wooldridge has done a masterful job of reprograming, our city programs, summer swim programs to other, other locations, and we'll keep working at that. But I just want to just a shout out to the aquatics community. I know a lot of you were in the room today and, you know, thank you again for sharing your your time and your your information with us. And I and kudos to the vice mayor because he really helped be the bridge and get the palsy aquatics community together because he's had at least one, if not two sons who were in aquatics at at Alameda High. So with that, would you like to make your comments? Yeah, I have some comments. I guess I guess. Whatever. They're they're their comments. But I actually and I know some people are low on time and I'm hoping this might be an item where we actually allow people to go past the nine minute. Not myself, but I want to comment. I don't think there's a scenario, Amy, there, correct me if I'm wrong. Where? We may not have a commitment in May, but but there's not a scenario where we have to have an MRU by May. The June date was really chosen and suggested by us because the school district goes dark and we know that we're going to have to have a plan and a land use agreement and everything else by the end of December at the very, very latest. And in fact, actually internally we're talking about October because we go dark in August and school district goes dark in July. The end of June was the the last time we can do anything is as far as both bodies before September. And if we start talking about these issues and finalizing these issues in September, there's no way we get to a land use agreement in October. So we did talk about the idea of a joint meeting at the subcommittee today, and the general feeling among everybody was that unless there was a real reason to do so and folks in the room didn't see one at this time, but we're open to hearing one from this council. From the council. If if there was a feeling that that that that that instead we're at a time we're kind of getting this is this is a great time to get the feedback now. Councilmember Odie, the first question on on the list that board member Harris and I agreed to bring back for for discussion was kind of this do we have does the city care about long term lease versus exchange versus sale? At the committee level, we've been talking about supporting solutions that allow the division of state architect to get out of to not be involved. Right. We want to have just one regulatory agency involved in a city pool and let's not have it be the one that also oversees the schools, because it's all we will have county health no matter what. So so a question I would propose if there are feelings about is is, you know, is are any are all of those acceptable? Are any of those acceptable? The school district is probably going to drive a lot of that because they're the ones who own the land and they have to agree. But if we have one that we just say we're not willing to do that, now is a great time to say that. We have heard that people are fairly comfortable with the city proposing and maintaining the building and maintaining the pool. I felt like the comments here said that pretty well. Well, jump to the fees issue, which I'm glad people brought up tonight. The other issue that we're talking about right now is how do we account for the time that AOC is given to use the pool? So currently they have a joint use agreement that outlines very specific hours that are school hours. Right. The city cannot prioritize that. It cannot supplant those in the school, doesn't want to use them, but they actually are using a few more hours than that with some of their programs. And so there has been some discussion about which hours do we, you know, do we block out in our email you in our agreement thing specific hours for your city and which hours do we use or the current use hours? Are they the joint use hours, etc.? Do they include weekends or do we keep things really simple and keep it to weekdays? And then lastly, the fees issue is the fees for use of the pool that that I've heard at least two members here mentioned. You know, first off, is that the sense of the council also, you know, if there are if there are free out some hours that are not charged for is it any hours the school district wants, even if they expand their hours in the future? Is it only for the hours that are in the agreement that we sign and they pay the community hour, which is again still below operating cost? So those are those are the big ones that we will know next week with the school district is interested in moving forward with Emma Hood is the site that has been the site that the community for members in this council two, three weeks ago said that they thought would be great if we could make it happen. And I'd be interested to know if that if it were to happen, if that would be a site you would be able to support. And then, you know, and then hopefully we will have that will become the backbone of an MRU that staff will draft and bring back to the full council. But I think those are kind of the key questions that we've agreed are kind of on the table that we're discussing for this high level. And so you and I would be, you know, I think now is a is now is a great time to to provide that input, because the hope of the subcommittee is that there's not a need for a joint meeting unless for some reason our two organizations are at loggerheads and need to sit down and hash it out together. Councilmember Vela. I say you guys are my percent. Yeah, I. Actually think that those are the exact reasons why we should have a joint meeting. Um, because I think that there's nuances in every point that you raised. So, um, you know, I would want to hear from, I would want to have public comment on that. I would want to hear from the school board, I think, uh, agenda using each of those things that people know, those are the topics that we're going to be talking about. Um, and going over would be helpful. Um, I think that right now we're, we're working off of a proposal that Emma Hood is in fact the location and that the school district's okay with the transfer. In terms of the hours, you know, I think that we need to have a longer conversation about what what does future use of the pool look like? Does it if it's at Emma Hood, does the city, you know, is there separate access during the day time? So maybe it's not during school hours that those that they get blocked off. But there is a difference in time. They do have swim meets that happen on the weekends for high school. That happens. They also have water polo tournaments that happen. And I wouldn't necessarily want to charge the school district for use for those sorts of things. So from my perspective I feel like we do need to agenda is a joint meeting and I think if we add those points and we can have that conversation, we might be able to get to a place of resolution fairly quickly . Council member, Daisuke. Yeah, well if you're asking me what to what side I think is preferable. You know, having outlined what I see as the key issues, i.e. the site that has the less moving parts, frankly speaking, I think that's the good project mode site. So if I was, you know, forced to make a suggestion, that would be it. But at the same time, I don't want to, you know, speak for the school district, the school district, while that will have to, you know, go through their process and in determining if their if that's a site that they want to work with . But speaking for myself as one of five, I would suggest certainly Emma Hood, because as I said to me, that looks like the has a less moving parts on the details of fees, user hours, etc.. I have every confidence that our staff members, both at District and and City Hall staff members can figure out the details that are fair to to each to all parties concerned, not just the institutions of the school district and city hall, but also to the users and the various organizations. Thank you. Counselor Brody. Thank you. I mean, I guess push comes to shove if I. Based on the information I have now, you know, I would agree that Emma Hood is probably the best place for it. But, you know, there may be something that comes forward that changes my mind. I don't know. I mean, what's concerning here is more of a process issue as opposed to anything else, is that I think those are important questions the vice mayor raised. But, you know, they should be raised in a staff report with some analysis that the council could have some time to think about rather than being raised with , you know, each person having two or 3 minutes on their clock. And we can chime in without any background or any, you know, any thought. So I think that's why I was hoping we would have a meeting. So our council as a whole could give direction on some of these important high level points. Thank you. So, um, if I, um, understand the concerns, I think that we need to hear back from the school board after they meet next week, I would say. And Council. Member. Vice Mayor Knox way. I mean, I would say that the the will of both of our bodies in fact the three because there really are three elements to this but the community representation and the school districts in the city, I mean, I would say that Emma Hood is the site that we're we're definitely focusing on. And I mean, the chart you saw has, you know, pretty pretty much lays it out. I mean, I don't think it's a bad idea because it's to say I think it's a good idea to have a plan B that the contingency plan people mentioned so that if for some reason Emma Hood just becomes untenable. But there's there's a lot of reasons that people are moving moving towards making that work. But, you know, you never know what you don't know. So, I mean, but even so, you could look down that list of the pros and the cons and see, I don't know, what would you say the the next one would be. Well, it could be. Uh. Thompson Field. But speaking of moving parts, there's a lot of moving parts on that one. And then when we get out to Alameda Point, well, it seems like it's wide open space. Some of that is spoken for, but it's also dependent on infrastructure going in and that means a delay. We can't do that right away. And yet you know that we've got this need for the pool sooner rather than later. So that's I mean, that has to be a significant factor. There's there's there's some factors that are in our control. We cannot decide, you know, we want this developer now to enter this agreement and start paying for infrastructure so we can get moving. I mean, that could be a few more years. And that and the need is now and I agree with everything the coach said about we are we're underserved as an island community. We don't have enough water and space. And and yet I also think. A. Predecessor of mine, Maria Gilmore, when she was mayor, used to often say, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. You know, we could spend a long time chasing that perfect project. We will make this as perfect as we can. And we don't have unlimited budget, so we can't do everything in the world, but we can do quite a bit. And I understand your concerns, Councilmember Ody, about process and you'd like to, you know, have more input on this. We did it as subcommittees because there were just a lot of sort of preliminary things to get out of the way that didn't need to take the time of the whole council and school board. But so here we are now. And I think the vice mayor posed some some good questions when he said that to do so. So I think one of the questions, and I don't mean to speak for you is to chime in anytime you want. But first of all, for this body, are we comfortable with the concept of the city building and maintaining the pool? Just as an overarching theme? Because I reflect on one place, my expectation is the next three council meetings will have some form of more discussion of this board in developing this. The goal is not for the subcommittee to hear comments today and then bring back a recommended M.O. you at the end, you know, two weeks before this thing is supposed to be signed. So I just want to honored Councilmember Otis point that that there is yes. The the full entire intent is for that to happen. We're trying to get some initial feedback to give to basically we're giving it to staff. We'll find out where the school district is next week. And then staff can work together with shark to to hopefully have the that that draft initial discussion menu that will be agenda ized fully for discussion. Can we do a quick housekeeping matter since I was on the subcommittee that did the rules on timing council comment and I'm now not speaking because I see my clock is at zero. Um, can, can we have a vote to extend our time on this matter, which I think is fairly significant. Move approval to waive the time constraints. I think we can. Yeah, just wait. Let's just we need to have this. This item only to have a second. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor. Hi. Okay, I heard. One, two, three, four. That's all I need. Do I have a four? I have five. It's unanimous. Okay. Thank you. Who was speaking? Was that you? Love it. I had my hand up. I hadn't been recognized yet. So we've wave. Okay. Where's not waving the chair? I don't know. I mean, I understand the the need for the subcommittee because there were some urgent decisions that had to be made, especially related to the closure and the budgeting and the repair schedule. But it seems to me that a lot of those urgent decisions now are passed and we have the opportunity to have I mean, it sounds like everyone in the community has gotten to weigh to weigh in except one, two, three, because we're not allowed to go to these meetings or hear what's going on. So I think, you know, I think we're at a time now where the purpose of the subcommittee to take care of the urgent issues is kind of expired. And the community as a whole, including 60% of the council, should have an opportunity to to weigh in on the these intricacies. I mean, that's pretty much what it is. Okay. Um, is that. Did you ask me? Yeah, I was just going to say, I it's also that there's three members of the school board that haven't been able to weigh in. So I think, you know, I don't I don't hear necessarily a theoretical disagreement, um, per se. I just think that, um. I guess I don't see the difference between we're going to gender is this on our council meetings and then the school district is going to agenda, is it on theirs? I think we can do that. That doesn't preclude us from having, let's say, one joint meeting or something like that. And I think we could do both. So that would be my ask. And I think when we do that and what I heard from council member Odie and certainly what I would like is, you know, something, some analysis about the finances from staff in terms of, you know, what the what, what the components of the transfer would look like, what are concerns. And that's why I was asking the question earlier, what comes first? Right. If it's Emma Hood that we're talking about, then we need to hear from the school district first and then we can talk about what they're looking for, which is a staff to staff conversation. But then staff would come to us and say, this is this is basically what the school district's looking for. These are your options. So I think on that point, um, I'm not saying no to Emma Hood. I'm just saying I just want to make sure if for whatever reason, there's something that comes forward where somebody challenges, let's say, the use of that or the transfer from the school district to the city. Um, do we have a contingency plan? And then in terms of funding, you know, if, if we could hear from staff about laying, I mean, we still don't even know how we're going to fund the construction of it, let alone the usage of the pool, that sort of thing. So I think if we can get that information from staff, I'm fine having that agenda used at another future council meeting. And then if we can have that joint meeting with the school district where we can have the conversation, I would find that acceptable. Yeah. And, and I don't disagree with that. And it'll also be up to the we can't compel the school district to have a meeting with us, but when they're ready, I'm sure that will get done. And just a quick question for the city manager. Um, do we will we in our budget workshops, will we be looking at a cost for a pool? No, at. This at this time it's not been looked at in the in the upcoming budget. You can definitely. Give direction during the budgeting sessions. But this has been going well. The temporary. I think the temporary cost will. Be is either. In this year's budget or next year's budget, but I think it's in this year's budget. But the long term cost is not being looked at and we probably would need a some type of stay because the capital is one one thing and there would have to be a bond or or fundraising or something major for for the capital side. But it's the ongoing operations. And subsidy of the system that's going to be the more critical issue, I think, long term for the council. So good good items to add to our list of discussion. But it's those are those are things details that can be worked out later. We we are on this timeline to get you know our are deadlines with county health and then to the end of the year. But we're not going to wait until the December deadline. I, I still would like to see if we can have some consensus or not about whether people would be comfortable with the the concept of the city building and maintaining the pool with the understanding that we just heard from the city manager that we don't know where that money would come from. So but you know, conceptually. We got that. First. Meeting. Yeah. Okay. That's already. Okay. Well, you pose that is one of the questions I'm just going to agree with. But anyway. Okay, so we've established that. Is that was that correct. Okay. And then, oh, you said something and I was going to comment, but no, I don't remember what it was. Well, um, so okay, what, what more do we need to discuss tonight? So can I ask a couple questions that I proposal for how to move forward? Councilmember De Saag So I heard I heard councilmembers Odie and Vela say that they feel that the for the fees, there's just should be no charges for the schools. Can I ask just a quick question? I'll get to the joint meeting. I'm not ignoring that, is there do you think for any hours they want, no matter how many hours they want, is that based on whatever? You know, if we come to a here are the guaranteed school hours every year. Is that what you're. Because I heard Councilmember de SAC say he's comfortable with what staff wants to do. Correct. I'm sorry. Yeah. No worries. It's okay. Is that. So? Well, I. I mean. Okay. I'm sorry. I mean, do we have an idea of what these fees would be? I mean. About $21,000 a year based on what they're really current usages. That's like budget. Dust. It seems like, you know, if we're going to demand that the district pay that, I mean, I'd like to see analysis like what what it would be, what they're willing to do, what they're not willing to do, what they'd be. You know. You know, it's like a negotiation in order for us to give direction. You know. I guess what we're trying to do tonight is get a sense of whether you have things you would like analyzed, negotiated for that, or should staff just go off and make their own list? I guess that's my frustration is I hear nobody's arguing that that that shouldn't exist. Now is a time that I think, okay, staff is asking for. What do you think's important for that analysis? Well, is that is that something urgent that has to be done, like outside of a transparent council meeting? Or is it something that needs to be done in order to meet this deadline? It is definitely something the school district is very interested in discussing. And they they are the ones who raised it and said they would like to see where we can get for it on it. Yes, I would say yes. So we need it in order to do that. MRU. That's a yes. Unless the school district decides they're not. I mean, I look at this and I see our reserves are like in the thirties and maybe, you know, upper thirties and those are in the thirties now that those are in the thirties. There's just like 329 million. The district is 29 million in reserve. Yeah. Okay. Well, I thought there was a state law. They were supposed to reduce that report and. Our teachers have a one year contract. And, you know, we're sitting here talking about $21,000. It just seems to me kind of ridiculous. I don't I guess the question is understanding that you don't think they should pay the $21,000. Should they pay for nothing ever? Or is that $21,000 that they're not paying for, for the hours that, let's say, are in the current use agreement? Well, I don't know. I think a lot depends on where the site is. I mean, if it's Emma Hood and they're going to either transfer the land to us through a swap or some type of sale, then there might be something that they might be entitled to more than if, say, we built it somewhere else. I mean. So may I. Sense a resistance to like having a transparent and open process and discussing this and that? We have to discuss this today and let a subcommittee where 60% of the elected members of the two bodies aren't allowed to participate. Let me say, uh uh. Rudy. So let me say one thing. Were we to have a substantive discussion on specific items? The details that I speak of, whether they are the details of how the fees are shared or not shared, the details with regard to poor usage in time, things like that. To me, it seems as though that discussion necessarily has to begin with some kind of staff assessment and staff recommendations, perhaps even encapsulated in a staff report. So at some point in time, it just seems like, you know, that not just because, you know, there there are hired professionals and they and they have proven themselves in in many projects in the past. It just seems as though for us to have a robust, substantive discussion that the public can really engage in is going to begin with staff assessment and staff information anyways. So, um, so I just, that's why I feel comfortable in, and, you know, leaving it to staff and getting their recommendation. I don't necessarily have to agree with what they have to say, but I know that they're going to give their best professional judgment. Councilmember Vela Yeah. So Councilmember Desai, you had said that you don't necessarily have to agree with it. Does that mean that the expectation be that there's some sort of staff analysis and then it comes back to council and then we weigh in and then the subcommittee goes back. What's going to have to happen? So if I if I could ask intervention, which, by the way, I'm really trying to be mindful of when I go and change venues so you can be more comfortable. I will ask you. Okay. You tell me. Right. Okay. Um, so I'm wondering if what we should do now is have our list of things we want staff to bring back to us at our next council meeting. Because I'm hearing that that people want some further input in. And also by the next council meeting, we'll know what the school district decides next week and hopefully have time to get it into a staff report. Um, but I do think we should take a look at the resolution because that's authoring authorizing going forward with the money for the repairs. And I think we can all agree that we need to get those repairs done to meet the deadline set by county health. So. Councilmember Avella. So I don't have a problem with that, assuming the questions or the interpretation of the seventh paragraph is that the authorization requiring because it says by May 30th. Tell me where we are now. It's the seventh, whereas paragraph it says is requiring that by May 30th the city oh long term replacement plan in place, that what we mean by replacement plan is some sort of high level discussion and that by May 30th it could be. Or June 30th, essentially. And that really this is this is, again, the high level stuff and that we're still going to have the staff assessment come back to council council feedback so that we can give you guys authority at the subcommittee level. Whatever. That sounds reasonable. Ms. WOOLDRIDGE Do you have a good idea of what it is that counsel you know, from, from the discussion, what counsel wants you to come back with or do you want to run it by us? Sure, absolutely so. And I just want to give kind of a I'll tell you what I'm what I'm hearing of what you want me to bring back, which is absolutely not a problem. And also just talk timing for just a second. With our Sunshine Ordinance, we have to post staff report 12 days in advance, which means for the next council meeting it's due to it posts tomorrow by five. We don't even know Thursday. Sorry. Today's Tuesday. Thank you. So Thursday at five, we don't know. So it's sort of I understand the frustration and part of it is because it's such a fast moving process. Right. So I can't post a staff report before I, I can, but it won't have information about what happened with the school district and what some of their what they're talking about. Right. So. So I just want to give that caveat that we're we're doing that. That's why not all the information is here tonight, because we're continuing to meet and things are evolving every single week. And our our sunshine ordinance doesn't allow for a quick moving process. With that, what I heard for the May 21st staff report is a financial analysis. I can provide a financial analysis on estimated construction costs, estimated land value, estimated operation and maintenance costs as well as I can give you some high level on fees. Really in terms of fees, we just have our existing fee schedule, but there's also concessions and potential revenue for that. There's birthday parties. There's all these things that we don't even have fees for yet. So I can give you a very ballpark on potential revenue. Yes. You also include what the current, um, usage or attach to the current usage agreement, um, the joint use agreement, joint use agreement. And I assume that outlines the hours of use and that sort of things that we can, we can have that informed conversation as well. Yes, I can attach. Do you want me to charge the full joint use agreement? I'm happy to. I'll just. You could also highlight the relevant. Right. That's what I mean. I can also just abbreviate in the staff report that the if you attach it and then abbreviated in the report. Okay. There's also a difference in the committee has been talking a lot about this about the hours that are stipulated in the joint use agreement versus the actual hours you used. So I can bring to you kind of the draft high level points for the memo you. I can also bring you sort of some of the mechanisms that have been talked about. Again, not knowing what the school district is interested in doing. We don't know their legal analysis. We don't know any of that. And so it will be a very high level conversation. We also have looked at our in our committee a draft layout of hood. If you're interested in seeing that kind of what it could potentially how it could play out and why we think it's a site that could work. So you could attach that to a staff report, the the drawing that we've got. So those are the types of data points that I have that I currently that I can provide to the council. How's that sound? Good. Okay. Okay. So with that, let's take a look at the resolution. This is to authorize the repair plan not to exceed $350,000 transfers from one person to another. To do this, to have a motion to approve. So moved. A second. Second. It's been moved by Councilmember Otis, seconded by Vice Mayor Knox White. All in favor. I. Okay. That was unanimous. All right. With that, we're going to close this item. I'm going to allow a change of venue for the city councilmember. And how are we? Are we hooking up as soon. As you want to do that? Yeah. We're going to take a. Five minute break. From. Eric. Yeah. Okay. Do we want to take a five minute break? We will take a five minute break. Without ever able to give you. Any time. We went somewhere else in the desert. And people ask me if I'm like. You, everyone? Yes. Okay. So we are resuming the city council meeting and we just for the record, if you're in the room, Councilmember Vella is joining us. She's in the building, which just in a remote location that's a little more comfortable for her. So now we are moving on to item six B. Madam Clerk, will you introduce the item, please? Introduction of ordinance authorizing the city manager to execute a 15 year lease with two five year options to extend substantially in the form of the attached with novelist Data Technologies, a Delaware corporation for Building 530, an 82,251 square foot building located at one 2120 West Oriented Avenue and the adjacent building 529 a 3200 square foot building and building 608 343 square foot building at Alameda Point. This item requires four affirmative votes and it was continued from the April 2nd. And also note that we closed public we have a public comment at the last meeting. So this is now just staff presentations and council discussion. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor. I am Ninette Mercado and from the Community Development Department. As was stated, as has been a topic before the council in three closed sessions and tonight is its second time in the public. At the April 2nd City Council meeting, the Council received a public presentation of the proposed lease with Nautilus Data Technologies for the