Recommendation to Approve a One-Year Extension of the Slow Streets Program through December 2022. (Planning, Building and Transportation 20962740)  [Continued from December 7, 2021]
But as policymakers, though, we need to make a tough call as to why does this street get a slow street, and why does the street not get a slow street? Why does Buena Vista Avenue not get a slow street? And I think that's kind of a policy discussion that we really need to kind of hash out. So I'm going to vote no on continuing the social programs for the reasons that I said. And I'm going to encourage us, though, to kind of come back and figure out, you know, you know, how it is that that that , you know, why does one street get it get designated a slow street and another doesn't? I mean, are there issues of equity that we need to think about? I don't know about that, but, you know, we definitely need to figure that out. Were you asking staff to explain how these streets get chosen to be so street? Oh, no. Ultimately, I think as we go citywide, I think there's a process in place now that that we're going to get to it. So so I'm confident that that process is going to have that discussion. But but in a way, though, if you're asking us to continue that, I speaking from my, you know, see if I feel that we have to have that conversation now. But but I get that it's it's it will be underway. Well, perhaps just for the benefit of the listening audience, who might be curious as to whether this was just an arbitrary decision as to which states were chosen? Was Wheeler or whether this death. Do you want to touch on that briefly? Sure, Madam Mayor. I'm happy to. Yeah, there were a variety of reasons. We selected the streets. We did. One is that all of these streets are already bicycle routes or. And or. They were also being considered as future bicycle boulevards. And the active transportation plan effort, which are bike boulevards, are low speed and volume neighborhood bikeways that are shared with cars. They're also streets that already had a relatively higher number of people walking and biking on them, streets with relatively less traffic because there are two lane residential streets that could be made into those streets so that there would be less traffic disruption, whereas larger streets would obviously disrupt a lot of traffic. Obviously, we kept them off of bus routes as well because we didn't want to disrupt bus traffic. Yeah, I get it. But but people on our streets also deserve to live to to live on a street where it would. Seem every day to save everyday. Hello? I'm still conducting the meeting. Let me. Let us, please let us have our staff comment. Now, go right back to you. Ms.. Wheeler, please continue. Sure. Just two more points. We also, in our first survey, asked the community where they'd like to see slow streets. And these streets that were selected were the ones that were most frequently selected as those streets. And we were looking for having that kind of equity across the island and looking at providing that. So those were the reasons. Thank you. Councilmember Desai, back to you. Yeah, no, no, I. I appreciate. And every reason that you said is absolutely valid. But I think as policymakers, you know, we need to think about some of the neighborhoods and residents, even if they don't self, you know, self-select themselves as wanting slow streets. We need to say, hey, they're just as worthy of having a slow street. So it's I think it's, you know, it's who gets the lottery pick of full streets. And we need to kind of figure out and I am and don't get me wrong, I know you guys will do that through the process that that's coming underway . So don't get me wrong, but I'm just saying that that should be done now for me to support extending this. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Vella. So I want to think thank you, Mr.. For clarifying the fact that our safety and calming efforts are actually not to blame for the traffic deaths. I think that that's a really critical point. I also think that there has been a lot of staff work, a lot of commission work, a lot of discussion behind the selection process in terms of where this bus streets are located. And I think in many ways, at least, the behavior that I've seen is that as vehicles are driving down even other streets, we're seeing the type of driver behavior we want to see, which is people are slowing down. That's the whole point. People are driving in a way that we would hope they drive on every street, which is cautiously keeping an eye out for others who are using the road whether or not they're in a vehicle. These are really key things. And I think in many ways, if we need to expand the types of traffic calming measures on some of the side streets or the streets within the vicinity of slow streets, I'm very supportive of that. If we need to put more resources towards those things, I think this council has been supportive that in fact we've taken steps both in our past meetings to make sure that our streets are as safe as possible and that we are prioritizing that. I think that I would like to see our slow streets become permanent. I would like to see an expansion of them. I would also like to see an expansion of traffic calming traffic calming measures. And I think that in many ways, making sure that we are allowing for safe routes to school, allowing for safe travel across across the entire city, using slow streets, I think that that's very appropriate and in line with our vision and our community's vision in terms of what we want and really opportunities, equitable mobility opportunities. So I'm it sounds like there might be the votes here tonight continue. It's very happy about that. I find seeing an expansion and a discussion in terms of what Councilor Knox White has put forward. I think that there's been some other comments that are helpful. You know, I think that, you know, I'm ready to move forward tonight with, at a minimum, the staff recommendations. I don't know. Councilmember Knox, why did you make a motion earlier? The question to the chair. I know that there were some suggestions. And I just want to chime in. I want to see this move forward. But my comfort level is with what the staff has recommended. I, I feel that's most respectful to the staff. They put a lot of time and effort in this into this. And so I'm more than happy to support the staff recommendation, and I don't believe we've had a motion yet. Councilor was adamant bossy he and needed. I hear that I hear the concerns about that about the expansion and won't propose that so I'll move that we continue the program extended until the implementation consistent with the upcoming AGP is complete. And I'll second. In accordance with the the staff recommendation, correct? Yes. With a change in the timing? Yes. What changed in the timing. So not ending in a year and coming back for further extension, but extending it until such time as the ATP is implemented. That's the planning document that's deciding what to do with these streets, whether to remove them, etc.. So before I decide how to vote, I would like to hear from staff. So. Ms.. Wheeler. This, I believe, is your staff report. There was your recommendation or anyone else who wants to take this on. The recommendation is to. Continue this. For. I'm really sorry to. Have an. iPad that freezes. I'm sorry I cannot pull it up. Hello? If we can, maybe we can jump in. Yeah, I think you. Jump in and save the mayor. Things like that. Rochelle, do you want to add the recommendation? Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Yes. Thank you. The recommendation is and the staff reported to continue it through the end of December 2022. So a year from now, I think that we could also tie that to the adoption of the HDP, but I'm not sure that's what council member Knox White. Let me for. Let me jump in. I think. Mr. Thomas. Either thought that staff thought was extended for one more year by then we hope to have the eight the Alameda Transit, the active transportation plan done. And that's going to that's going to determine and that is the process that Councilmember De Saag was talking about, picking which streets, you know, become permanent slow streets or permanent bicycle boulevards . I think what council member Knox. Right. Is saying is. That logic makes sense. So let's just make the council direction clear. We will extend the slow streets until such time that you get back here with the active transportation plan, because that's the plan that's going to determine the future. I think what Councilmember Knox White was trying to avoid was a situation where we're working through the public process where. You know, you're about ready to finish the active transportation plan. But then we hit this date of December 2022, and we're not quite done with the active transportation plan, but we're close avoiding the need for another council action to extend it until the time that active transportation plan is done. So from staff's perspective, tying it directly to the active transportation plan makes a lot of sense. Well, that's all well and good, but it sure wasn't anywhere in the staff report. So I, I do understand that. I'm not sure that I think it's so onerous to ask for another extension, and we hope that it's done. But I. I guess I'm one who well, I'm not a transportation professional, and I very much respect what our staff comes forward with. And I ask questions, you know, I do. And but I was satisfied with this recommendation. So. But what I do want is to move this plan forward. But. You know, again, I was prepared to support the staff recommendation. Okay. So. Its face mirrors that your hand up to speak. And I just have a chair for this comment. Is it possible to just make sure or, you know, that, you know, to have that you're saying that you think that the plan will be ready in a year? Is it perhaps that they are? We just have the direction to the plan come back along with this in here? Well, I've said that. Let me just jump in really quickly, if I might, that I would be satisfied if we had in a year's time an evaluation, a check in. Staff can look at lessons learned, information gotten over the course of the year, still moving forward towards the actual transportation plan, finalization. And we can it to that. But I do think we should come back for a for a review, just an update in a year's time. Mr. Thomas with that? Yeah, no, that's look. And that's absolutely. Staff can do this either way. It's it's if you want to see us in a year, we can absolutely be back in one year with an update on the. And at that time, if we're close to finishing the act of transportation, but not quite there yet, the council at that point can decide whether to extend a little longer or. Or not. No, I'm. I'm willing. This course is a compromise. I'm willing to go with Councilmember Nuts for its motion. However, I would like the addition of a review in a year's time of this both streets program. From staff perspective, that certainly works. Okay. Make her the mission. Are you asking me to add that I'm not supportive of the staff spending time doing a review of something, that we are going through a planning process and have a plan that's already going to be done. I just I'm worried that we're going to send staff off to spend dozens and dozens of hours to do a report . They're going to come back and we're not going to do anything with the report. I just worry that we have such a small staff. We have things that we've been wanting. We have a bridge RFP that is not out there because we keep piling on for staff. I just worry that the review ends up not being much more than just a report back. And I think the ATP is the purview. That is the place where the planning has been done, where the conversations have been had, where staff has come in with their best recommendation based on the conversations they've had with the community and the. Well. I've heard staff offer that they're able to do this. I don't think it sounds that time consuming. Are you asking me to withdraw my motion? I'm happy to do so. Vice mayor. So to make a motion. I think I think the vice mayor. Yeah, it's probably better to go off camera because her audio has been getting a little shaky. Sorry my zoom is doing. And I was so I can't I can't see anyone. I was just saying you could actually turn your video off because I think it's impacting your audio or maybe your is just weak. And for clarification. When does staff anticipate having the actual transportation plan? We suggested December because we think we will have an active transportation plan to you before the end of next year. So that's why we suggested that December 2022. To us in December. Okay. They were saying the same thing. Okay, Vice, we're going to try it again. Okay. Tell you what I would call a break. I think everybody's audio needs a little or their connections need a little rest. So it is 904. We'll be back at 915. All right. Thank you. So. Okay. I am counting. This is. There's Malia. Yeah. And team. Oh, let's. No, I shouldn't have said anything. One of the. Oh, darn, she has gone. One of the things we talked about is maybe she if she didn't like you suggested mares leave her video offering help her bandwidth issue that we think she's having. Right. But she disappeared altogether. She's reconnecting again. Sorry. I'm here. No. Rebooted the wi fi. Yeah, but if you think it's too much to have audio and video on it once, feel free to ditch the video. All right. So whenever everyone's ready. I think we're ready. Okay. Councilmember Knox, wait. So I think I have an amendment to the motion on the floor that may get us where we need to be, which is that if staff has not returned in 18 months with a finalized ATP, they will they will return within 18 months with a review of the city streets for counsel, consideration and direction. So they get allows staff to get to the ATP on the time when they expect it without having to stop and do additional review of the Slow Streets program. But if for some reason they fall behind, they will have the ability to do that review and come back for final. This, Wheeler said. December was when she anticipated. Yes. And I'm saying if they can't get back for that bad, they come with the ATP. There's not going to need to be a discussion about those streets because the the streets for bike boulevards, etc. will be already identified in the ATP. Right. That that that plan supplants the the Slow Streets plan. So there's there's not Slow Streets and the ATP, it's the slow streets until the ATP, if they fall behind for some reason, hopefully they won't then then there will be a review of the slow streets. But we're asking them not to spend any time reviewing Slow Streets, put it into the ATP and let's just get past the Slow Streets era. To let it go 18 months before a review. Yes. If if the ATP doesn't come back, the ATP will be the review. That is where they will come back and say, here's what we want to do. We've talked to the community. Here's how we want to move forward. There's not an we don't need to review the streets at that time because they're going to end regardless. Vice mayor. I'm fine with that. I think that I know. You know, I mean, the main thing is, is that I want to see the slow streets continue for a year and. I guess my question is to staff in terms of what they think the timeline is. I also just want to avoid having additional kind of items coming back to council when we have other business to discuss, if, if, if it's going to be 14 months or 12 months or something like that. I don't want to have a second agenda item, but. I'm open to hearing the shadow of doubt. But Mr. Chairman, just look, we staff can guarantee that we could get a ATP back in 12 months. But as you know, it's the the the staff work to prepare an ATP is not the tough part it's the working it through the process with the Transportation Commission and the community. So I think that's where we we struggle to give you a definitive date because we like to bring these plans to the council after they've kind of gone through the natural kind of public review process. So we are, as Rochelle said, we're pretty confident that we think the that process will get us back to council in in 12 months. We also do appreciate Knox Councilmember Knox White's point, though, that it was sure would be a shame to take if we're within a month or two of getting back to council with the final ATP, it would be a shame to put it on hold. While we do a lot of work on a update report. I would say though that if that is the situation, I would reassure the Council and Councilmember Knox Way we're not going to spend a lot of time on that annual report or that update report. We're going to that annual update report is going to say, hey, we're almost there. Council will be there in two months. And this is what the ATP says about the streets, because at that point it'll already have been to Transportation Commission at least. So the draft ATP will be out and in circulation that we can guarantee. Okay. Thank you. I do rely on staff recommendations. We've had a motion and it's been seconded. You seconded? Correct. Vice Mayor. All right, we have a roll call vote, please. Yes, Councilor. Responsive. Thank you. I'd just like to echo member de Sox comments in regards to this, that staff should be considering the equity of having these. And there have been many suggestions of rotating those streets. And I don't think I've ever heard anyone volunteer for more car traffic. But as we've heard, there are many people that are very happy to have less car traffic. And so I think that's a legitimate concern. And we have heard and I have heard people especially on this, to say that they have increased car traffic as a result of the Pacific Street. And I think that the equity issue is a valuable one and I really appreciate Member De SA raising it and I hope that staff will take that to heart. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor said. Just quickly, you know, at the end of the day, what the slow streets is about is putting barriers that prevent basically through traffic. And, you know, there are some streets who want those barriers and they should be have valid reasons to get it just as anyone else. And that you're out of time. Thank you. We have that roll call vote, please. Councilmember. You know. However, spencer. No. Not quite. I Vela. I may. As Ashcraft say that Carrie Strait is here. Thank you. Okay. Now we move on to item six, B and C here. I think some of the same staff are probably. Staying for this, correct? Yes, I believe so. And would you like me to? Yes, please. Recommendation to advise the city manager execute a Second Amendment to the agreement with close associates to increase compensation by $270,906 for total aggregate compensation, not to exceed $345,876. To continue providing technical services related to roundabouts. So that we have public speakers on this item. We do not. Oh, we have one now. Okay. And so because I was going to ask counsel, if you had just clarifying questions of the staff report before we discuss, because this is an extension of a contract, but any of. Any clarifying questions from Council on me? Do you want a staff report? We are trying to move along and maybe even get two council referrals tonight. Kelso overheard Spencer. I don't have clarifying questions, but I thought I heard that there is at least one public speaker. And I am. But we we do clarify on questions and then we go to. I understand. But there was also comment, I believe I heard you say about skipping the presentation. And I do not support that. And I do support hearing from our public. Thank you. It was, in fact, a question if you would like a presentation. I take that as an affirmative answer. So let's go ahead and have the staff presentation and then we will go to clarifying questions from the council and then we'll go to our public speakers, however we may have. So, Mr. Thomas, are you introducing this item? I will. Mayor Thank you very much. Andrew Thomas, Planning Director. This is a contract extension. It's in this contract has been focused on the question of an evaluation of roundabouts. Roundabouts serve two purposes for the city of Alameda. One is they increase safety at intersections, but they also smooths and improve travel times so they are can be very effective in both achieving our vision zero goals and traffic safety goals, but also our goals to keep traffic moving. They also have the benefit of being in the long term much more much less expensive to maintain than traffic signals. So that's another plus. There is a downside. They're expensive to build. So what we have been doing with this contract is evaluating locations in Alameda that would be appropriate for roundabouts. The two then put us in the position to come to council and recommend where a roundabout really makes the most sense because a roundabout is expensive to build. We want to put the city in the best possible position to to compete for outside funding, regional and state funding and federal funding to build roundabouts. We put ourselves in the best possible position if we as a community have identified the location and the conceptual design ahead of time. And that can only be done through this kind of study and with community and council participation. So that's the goal of this of this contract amendment. Thank you. Clarifying questions from counsel. Counsel for her, Spencer. Thank you. And does this well, this work include the videos of what they think it's going to actually be. At this point. This is just trying to identify where roundabouts can physically and practically work. The next step would be once we've narrowed down the limited locations. They don't work everywhere. These are full scale roundabouts. They don't work everywhere. Once we have a have identified the locations where they work, where they could work. And we start designing conceptual designs for those specific locations. We can do graphics and videos and those kinds of things. Does this work include doing that? It's much more preliminary. It's more preliminary. Okay, thanks. Other clarifying questions, counsel and I let's see, is Mike Austin is he one of the presenters? I think he's Michael is part of our consultant team that he's here to help us answer questions, I believe. And I think I saw it. Did I see your hand go up? Mr. Austin, did you want to comment? Yeah. That's okay. So please offer. In addition to what? Yeah. Sir, can you first tell us to tell us who you are, what you do? Sure, absolutely. So, I'm Mike Alston. I'm with Kinsman Associates. And we've been working with staff, as you mentioned, on roundabout work throughout 2021. And what I just wanted to mention very briefly is we actually do have a task in here. As he mentioned, it's much further down the line if alternatives are are advanced. We do have a task force three visualizations exactly. To the council members point. So that task is and is in the proposed scope of work. Thank you for this amazing conservatory, Spencer. Thank you. So then I want to just clarify so that this additional money does, in fact, cover what you're calling this visual. Sexualization, I think. Yes, ma'am. That's correct. For each of the proposed round about center. What is that within the scope? Your choices. So as he mentioned, we do include it not for a multitude of locations, but for if alternatives are identified at certain locations where a roundabout would be viable. Once a project concept got to that point where we know enough about it to visualize it, then we do have a scope and task in that scope to visualize a proposed concept. So we're not going to go making a bunch of videos about roundabouts, but if we identify locations where it's viable, we then develop a design at a certain location. The point at which we bring it to transportation commissioned the public and City Council. We would provide a visualization. That's the purpose of that item. Thank you. Thank you. And my one clarifying question is so I have I seen the recommendation, the staff report, we're recommended to approve the next steps and they're laid out. What's the time frame like? How soon? Assuming we approve this extension tonight, how soon would you get started? And what's the approximate length of time you think this will take? Michael. Do you want to down? Go ahead, Mr. after thing. Yeah, sure thing. So, banks. We have a proposed schedule in the back of our back of our amendment that indicates that this work would happen throughout 2022. So we'll keep we'll keep staff in the loop as we progress our work. There's several guests in there, but we've got it all occurring in 2022. Mayor, you're muted. I was saying it was in the back of the head. I must have missed that. Okay. Good to meet you. Okay. How many public speakers do we have now? Just one. Okay. Let's hear our public speaker. We now have two. But the first is Zack BOLLING. Geddy Lee, Speaker BOLLING. Why they even council. I am a big fan of roundabouts. I'm always a huge advocate and from past meetings I just wanted to talk about this item specifically just around the contractors work on the First Amendment of this was some of. The outreach meetings they did. One of the things that would be great for this second amendment the additional work. Scoped they did some. Work with helping staff around doing outreach with community around the McCartney Rhode Island Drive. One of the things that kind of came out of that is I think there's some misinformed ideas of of of roundabouts that would be great to help with public education around the safety benefits and how much they can improve, especially if we're looking at some of the other arterials and of Alameda that they've kind of documented. They want to do a screening and and go through Alameda to find additional places for these roundabouts. If we're going to charge forward with doing more roundabouts, I think getting more education about the benefits of roundabouts and our future amendments would be great. But I'm a big supporter. I think there's been a lot of great work so far and that's basically all my comments. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker, Brian Kennedy. Good evening, Speaker Kennedy. Are you able to. Yourself, Jacob? Can you. Yes. Yes. Good evening. Everybody. Hey, I want to give a shout out and also a a no no to all of you. A good shot I saw on the city valuated Facebook page. A shout out to transgender folks who have been violently assaulted and condemning that. And that's a wonderful thing. So, you know, no one wants to be like that. However, you guys blew it. You blew it. The mayor, the vice chair, all you guys and all of you who I like you did not give a shout out as was requested. To the nationally recognized item of illegal alien. I am going to stop you there. This is not a this this comment is not related to. How kick ass it. Is. Madam illegal alien from. Madam Clerk, I would ask that we move on to the next speaker because this may be oral communication. It is not concerning the amendment of this contract. Do we have any other public speakers? We do not. With that I am closing public comment on item six be and I will open it up to Councilor Bloxwich. Move approval of the item as requested by staff. To have a second. Oh, and that other question. Well, we'll get a check and then we'll do a discussion or decide. That was Vice Mayor Vela, second Councilmember de sa. Yeah. Can you just for purposes of the public identify maybe three or four of the different places that we might want to be evaluating with the additional supplement to the contract? Three. Thanks. Sure. We are the Clement extension as it as it interconnects with Tilden is one of the primary locations we want to look at the we've been looking at Macartney in Harbor Bay and then we have those are the two. And then the other one that we've been looking at is Lincoln Avenue, Marshall and Pacific, sort of that at that and that location. And then of course, we continue to work on and evaluate the opportunities for us. It's a difficult situation at that central Sherman And you know that we've had a hearing or two about that. We're still working that through. This is all about setting us up as a community and the council, putting you in a position to say, yes, that location makes sense. We've seen the visualization. We like the concept staff go get money for that roundabout. I mean, if you're not there as a council, then we're not going to compete well for that. Grant So it's really about. Kittleson, their expertize, their skills, their knowledge, their visualization techniques, putting, having, putting us in a position to be able to communicate and educate. I completely agree with Speaker Beau Dowling Bowling about that. We need to educate so that the community can say, yes, we like that idea about a traffic roundabout at that particular location. You as council can say, yes, we support this, we want to make this happen. Staff, go get that money. If we don't have that kind of community support and council support, there's we're not going to be successful going for that, going for the grants. So that's really that's the goal of this of this contract at the end of the day. Thank you. Anything further Councilmember doesn't know. Okay. Councilmember Herrera Spencer. Thank you. Thank you. Staff and the public comments. I really do like the ideas visualizations and I wanted to and I don't know what these are going to look like, but I'm hoping that they will include very pedestrian. So I know one of at least one is near school proposed and that has a lot of. New drivers, a lot of pedestrians and a lot of bicyclists and trying to, if they can, show where all those people are going to go during drop off and pick up that. Exactly. And where they know where they go and where they stop and how that really what that will look like. And and and also, of course, at the other intersections. But that's something I'm looking forward to seeing. I do have concerns about putting these in, but I see this as an educational element of, you know, helping us try to see and to educate us as well as the community members. So I really am looking forward to the visualization part, and I agree with the Speaker in regards to education. And I would say, you know, including myself and others, have raised questions that's trying to make it clear is honesty for me where everyone goes, because it's my understanding the circle keeps going, the traffic keeps going. But then when you have your bicyclist, where do they go? When you have your pedestrians, where do they go without slowing it down and without honestly having people have to wait and keep hoping that a car is going to stop when there's not a signal or a stop sign. Thank you. Oh, I know. One more. Sorry. The money's. What is the source of the money for this contract? This is a measure B and B money. We have it budgeted. So no general fund moneys. That's. That's correct. Thank you. All right. Now, quickly, we have a roll call vote with. I'm sorry for data. Yes. However, Spencer, I knocked. Right. Hi. Vella. Hi. Next mayor as the Ashcraft High that carries by five. All right. Thank you. And thank you so much to our consultants. Good to hear from you, Mr. Austin. We look forward to this project moving along. All right. Take care. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Thank you. Thank you. Other than Mr. Steyn. Thank you. Okay. And now we are moving on to six B and we're going to try a really fast transition now. No, it is not just B, we just did it. This is now we're getting into the regular agenda. Oh, we found. One more thing. 368 This is what I was thinking of because I would say we need to cue the speakers on six C, please. Yeah, like. Like magic. Okay. Madam Clerk, would you please introduce item six? Thank you. Recommendation to provide direction to staff regarding the installation and use of automated license plate readers, including fixed and mobile equipment on Alameda Police Department vehicles. All right. Well, good evening. I see that we have our police chief, Nishant Joshi, and from the city attorney's office we have Allan Cohen, who represents APD and of course, our city attorney. Even Chen is here. So would I be correct to assume that, Chief Joshi, you're going to lead this discussion, this item? Yes, that's correct. Madam Mayor, let me just put my I'm going to share my screen. Sure. And I just want to confirm you're able to see. That we. Are indeed. Okay. All right. All right. Give me 1/2. Just go to make a comparison. There we go. Okay. Good evening. My name is. And Shawn Joshi. I am the police chief for the Alameda Police Department. Tonight, I will be presenting on automatic automated license plate readers, and I hope to provide some insight on the benefits and the limitations of this technology. I'll start off with a brief overview of what a LPR technology is. In summary, LPR are cameras that read and record photos of license plates of vehicles as they pass in front of the camera. This technology is an investigative tool that assists by automating the current manual process of officers running license plates while they're on duty and in their cars. A highlight of the term investigative tool because I want to emphasize LPR doesn't solve cases. People saw cases. LPR is a tool that helps law enforcement develop, solve and hopefully clear a criminal case. Because this technology works. 24 seven. The data gained improves investigative efficiency. There are many agencies in the region and throughout the country that use LPR. Here's a visual of what a return could look like. The camera is alerted to a passing vehicle and recognizes the characters of the license plate. The system takes a photo and documents the make color, date and time of the vehicle even further. These systems have the ability to take a partial plate, and based on the make model, color, date and time, the system can pass out the vehicle and or similar vehicles. Now, similar vehicles would require additional steps of victim identification. So we would go from something as simple and vague as a victim or witness describing the vehicle as a Ford or grade sedan to every Ford, our great sedan that was in the area at the time of the crime. Those vehicles would then be presented to the victim for further identification. What this does is it reduces the amount of time needed to make an identification. Most importantly, we aren't stopping and investigating every gray vehicle. Instead, we're stopping the gray Toyota with license plates, such and such. Based on the HPR return and victim identification as a new police chief, one of my initiatives includes reducing our policing footprint. By leveraging technology that gives clear direction and focus in our investigative and enforcement actions. I want us to be an agency that's intelligence led and data driven. I don't want us to be a guessing agency. So data is stored in a secure system for a specific retention period. We can and will continue to require documentation of a search reason prior to accessing the system. There would be an audit trail that identifies who accessed the system and what the reasoning was. So the current practice requires inclusion of a police report number and a brief description on why the search is being done. The system isn't run by a human and simply detects objective data. There is end to end encryption. Officers would receive instant feedback on stolen vehicles, Amber Alerts, wanted persons and things of that nature. This technology does support my intelligence led initiatives. There is no facial recognition technology. It isn't used for immigration enforcement, nor would it be shared for that purpose. The system wouldn't be connected with a third party like DMV, nor would it provide personal identifying information or personal data. APD currently uses mobile LPR and these cameras are installed in four patrol vehicles. Of those four, two of those vehicles are not in service. We've had this technology since 2014 and there's existing policy that governs the use of LPR. Although the mobile apps provide some investigative benefits, they only capture data when they are in the field. Fixed al PR would capture data 24 seven. Our city has a very unique geography in specific entry and exit points, and I believe we could address crime by taking advantage of this environmental design. We would strategically placed these aerial powers at all entry and exit points of the city in tandem. Both versions would augment each other. Where fixed al PR would gather photos of vehicles entering and exiting the city and mobile, al PR would gather photos of vehicles in the city. The current policy authorizes a six month retention period. I am actually looking at reducing that retention period to 90 days and I'm even open to a shorter retention period. I do understand the risks and the concerns associated with this type of technology, as I mentioned before. Access and use would be limited to a case follow up and would require supervisory approval. The data would automatically be deleted based on the authorized retention period and it cannot be retrieved. Again, there's no facial recognition software. We would do regular audits to confirm access and use is on a need to access and use basis and that the access were authorized by a supervisor. Violators of the policy would be held accountable and accountability would also include the next level level of supervisor. I've reviewed the use of HPR with our Privacy Resolution 1565 with the city attorney. The resolution prohibits facial recognition and allows limited collection of personal information. Well, this al PR proposal will not have facial recognition technology, nor will it collect personal information. As far as a crime concern, I have watched auto theft consistently increase and it's currently up by about 40%. This trend isn't just an alarming trend. Other cities are seeing the same spikes. However, it's important to recognize some offenders steal cars and use them as a means of transportation to commit other, more serious crimes. I do see benefits in my staff becoming alerted every time a stolen vehicle enters our city. It's difficult to quantify success with Alpers because there aren't very many controlled experiments that have taken place. Solve cases. Don't always document that the case was solved because of LPR. You may recall earlier in my presentation when I said cases are solved by people in LPR as a tool that helps with that. I have received some qualitative input from various agencies that have LPR. All of them say that technology is invaluable and serves as a powerful resource that helps identify the actual vehicle rather than officers looking for and investigating possible or similar vehicles. I did come across a study called The Impacts of Large Scale License Plate Reader Deployment on Criminal Investigations. The study experienced similar challenges in that solve and or clear crimes aren't coded with language or data that says the crime was solved by ale pr. The study looked at clearance rates and salt rates and there's a difference between clearance rates and salt rates for a case. To be clear, there's a much higher standard. And then when a case is cleared cases. I'm sorry. Then when cases are solved, cases that are cleared must include arrest, the case being charged and that the case is prosecuted. Cases that are solved could be something like an officer makes an arrest of a person for auto theft and the registered owner decides against pressing charges after getting their car back. That case would not be cleared, but it would be solved. All in all, the study found that ale peer assisted in solving cases approximately 20% of the time. I can provide additional case studies. There was a kidnap case in Georgia. LPR Help locate the vehicle used and reunited the mother and child in less than 5 hours of the kidnaping. Morgan Hill PD and San Ramon PD saw an efficiency increase by at least five times cases. They said that cases were being solved in less time with LPR as compared to when they did not have LPR. Benicia PD recovered 11 firearms during a stop of a vehicle that was identified by LPR. Fairfield PD reported that they made arrests of two suspects with the use of LPR. San Mateo had a pretty brutal home invasion incident of an elderly victim and that case initially had no leads. But LPR helped identify the persons responsible. San Marino PD and their city counselor attribute their 70% reduction in burglaries to LPR. San Jose PD was able to resolve ten shooting incidents through the use of mobile app here and they were just approved expand their fixed systems. We've had a few recent incidents and I'm going to be vague about them because they're still open investigations. I do expect some follow on search warrants and arrests to be made. But in those cases, although we don't didn't have fixed LPA technology, this may have delayed our case development. We did rely on LPR from other cities to develop our cases without getting into too many details. These are significant cases that we spent a significant amount of time developing them. Knowing what I know about those cases, I'm 100% certain they would have been resolved much sooner if we had fixed ALPERS. In all these cases, the offenders were not from Alameda. Just to recap, a LPR recognizes license plates and vehicles, not people. The system would not provide personal identifying information. The system will delete the information as early as 30 days. We would require reason and supervisor approval to access and we would audit the use to ensure adherence to policy. Alpers do several things. They are one additional tool to help with case investigations. With solid oversight, we can increase investigative efficacy while protecting privacy concerns. Most importantly, we have an opportunity to use technology that doesn't include human bias and reduces our policing footprint by focusing on specific, specific vehicles involved in crimes. Rather than casting a wide net for similar vehicles involved in crimes. I recommend we move forward with the installation of fixed equipment and consider or consider expanding the mobile HPR equipment to all LAPD vehicles assigned to field duties. And that concludes my presentation. Good timing, Chief Joshi, with 12 seconds left over. So thank you for that. I'm sure we have some public comments on this item, but before we go to public comments, let's hear clarifying questions. Council member No sweat. I think I saw your hand. I have two questions, mostly procedural. There's council policy direction that when anything like this comes forward with a a I'm sorry, a personal privacy analysis report needs to be attached with the request. And I didn't see that attached. Is that has that evaluation been done before we consider whether to move forward with this? And Chief Joshi, I apologize. It's not really quite I don't believe it's a question for you. I believe the city manager, the. City attorney or the city manager who would like to meet Mr. Cohen. I see you did. Is that. I mean, I did review the privacy resolution, but I didn't see anything in the privacy resolution that required an analysis. Of course, if if council wanted a written analysis, we certainly could provide one. Sure, I did. I can tell you I can tell the council we did review the resolution with the ALP's policy. And I and it does appear to it does not appear that there are any inconsistencies between the ALP policy and Council's privacy resolution. Thank you. I'd be happy to forward you the email I sent to the same manager two weeks ago about this. There is actual council direction that a personal view and we've used it before. When we approached the Alpers for the ferry terminal parking forward staff did provide that. So I know the staff is aware of it. The other question I had. Was actually, can I just stop you for a moment? Council member Next wait. Since you referenced the city manager, Mr. Levy, did you want to add anything? When that was offered to me, I did for that to the chief as well as to Gerry to look into. And I think that the chief asked Alan to look at it, but look at it further. All right. Back to you. Councilman. Thank you. And then I guess the second question is, when we gave direction to bring this item back last March, part of the direction was to bring back studies that showed that there was an actual effectiveness and not just anecdotal stories. And again, Chief, I know you weren't here saying that these are kind of unfair questions to have to ask in this greater presentation. I appreciate it. But I did want to know I didn't see any studies that actually showed that there was actually an effective or even a drop in crime in cities. We have dozens of cities in the Bay Area, hundreds of cities across the Bay Area. Multiple studies have been done. But is it fair to say we have found no studies to say that they actually have an impact on crime? So those are the studies that we look for. It's I did attach a study from. Yes. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina. Yes, I did attach that. That was a study that became aware of the challenge with there is a there aren't a lot of studies that specifically look at HPR because cases that are solved or that are closed or that are cleared aren't necessary. There's no no coding that says this case was solved or resolved or cleared because of LPR. LPR is a tool that's used. So in this particular study, what the researchers did was they search through all the narratives to look for the word or any association with a LPR, to try to drill down and see if there was if there was some type of connection. It would be similar to if if a video was used from, you know, a convenience store or a robbery and that robbery was solved because of follow up investigative steps that are that are taken. If there wouldn't be an interest and attribution to the video itself, they would be cleared, as you know, based on all the evidence. So so that those are some of the challenges that a lot of researchers have found when looking for, you know, rates or success rates associated with a LPR. So I did go. And so, you know, when I look at this, I look at this from a qualitative and quantitative approach. It was difficult to find quantitative data, but qualitative data, every single agency that I spoke with, they were in support of it. They their, you know, their their agency. A lot of the agencies are expanding the use of it. And so they do find value in the in the equipment. And then also being a, you know, a practitioner of this, I have seen value in in this technology specifically. One of the biggest values that I see is that we're able to identify specific vehicles rather than having a vague description, so that we can truly reduce our policing footprint and focus on specific vehicles. So that's where I see the value. But again, that's that's more qualitative data. So I hope I answered your question as best that I can. And you and other clarifying questions, counsel. Councilmember Harry. Spencer. Thank you. I'd like to direct this to the, I guess the city attorney's office member or not. So I just raise this issue in regards to that council requiring, if I heard correctly, some sort of written analysis of privacy. First of all, I'm not sure when that direction was given. If someone knows when that direction was given from counsel and that if, in fact, they think that the work that the chief has done and other staff members have done, including Attorney Cogan, if that satisfies. But if they if they whatever they think. I actually think it's the prior council and their direction. Who would like to address that? I mean, I can address it. I'm happy to address it. I haven't had an opportunity to review. I did just receive an email from the city manager. Mr. Cohen Excuse me, I mean, to interrupt and just say perhaps you could just give a brief description of what the personal privacy analysis is. For the benefit of counsel, I refer to Spencer, who wasn't on the council when this was established. I have what I have reviewed prior to this meeting was the resolution that the Council adopted in December of 2019, setting forth a number of principles that the Council wanted considered when. Overall, it was the overall overarching privacy principles. And the resolution contained three components. It contained sort of a list of general principles, a, the internal or the administrative rules that the city manager adopted with regard to privacy of information technology, which was deemed not to apply to. Four uses that were consistent with a legitimate law enforcement purpose. And then there was a third component of the resolution related to facial recognition technology. So I reviewed that resolution and discussed it with the chief and with the city attorney, and I did not see anything in the current iteration, the staff report or the policies that appeared inconsistent with Council's general direction, which was which was to allow limited retention of certain materials. So that could impact privacy so long as it was used consistent with a law enforcement purpose. And as the chief said earlier, so long as it didn't employ facial recognition technology. Councilmember Herb Spencer. You saw the floor. If you had something further to say. It, I real quick. Thank you, Mayor. So if I heard correctly that it's the city attorney's opinion that that this is appropriate to proceed. Based upon my review of the resolution. Yes, I know there does not appear to be an inconsistency, but certainly if council would like a more detailed, in-depth, written analysis, our office would be happy to provide that. Kels over her, Spencer. And then to you. All right. Thank you. So I appreciate your attorney, Cohan's offer, however, that really goes beyond. But I'm asking I and it sounds like the attorney's office, city attorney's office is saying that this is consistent with the former counsel's resolution. That is my opinion. That is our opinion, yes. Thank you. And then, Councilman, I could just see your hand go up. Yeah, I guess I'm. I just want to clarify. So when counsel gave direction to use the San Francisco data privacy policy until such time as staff returned to the city council with an Alameda specific policy, and that policy requires the creation. And we have staff, you know, having done this in the past, create the creation of a personal privacy impact evaluation report. I guess I'm confused given that that that report itself is not in this how staff came to the conclusion that there was consistency with staff with with the policy direction of the council. Prior to council member Hunter Spencer survival since you asked about the timing. Okay. And so you are asking that question of Mr. Cullen, are you? I believe so. Is he's saying that it is. I will be candid that that I was not aware of counsel's direction to perform a written analysis. What I reviewed was the December resolution. So it's not here. Which was the question I asked earlier. Thank. Okay. That's for Villa. I guess my concern is we've we've I mean, I was part of that previous council and I was one of the people that had a concern about the privacy analysis and also the privacy having a privacy policy. And that was supposed to be the the kind of the the fix was to to do an analysis as these things came to us. So, you know, is it possible to get an analysis and then have this item come back or certainly. Okay. The so. I think that that's something for the council to decide. Right now, we have six speakers lining up to speak. This is an item that was continued from a previous agenda. I am sorry that this wasn't clarified sooner, but I. It's also not clear to me that council is going to implement anything tonight. I think we might just be giving direction to come back with more information, including the privacy analysis. But I. And either of the. City attorneys who are on screen, if you want to weigh in. But I. Mr. Cohen, I think you're in the hot seat tonight. All I can say is, you know, to reiterate what I said, I was not aware of the direction that. Related to this, providing a written analysis. And now that, you know, I will take a look at the email that was just forwarded to me as we were speaking. And I will review the email and review the requirements, and I would be happy to provide an expeditious written analysis if that's the council's direction. So let me ask this. Okay. I am mindful of time because we have well, all of our items are important. That we. Do. Is so you need. Well, okay I would like it is my desire to move forward with our public speakers at this time and what we decide to do with this item. We can we can decide that is I would like to hear the public speakers unless there is some reason that anyone from staff thinks that that is not. The appropriate way to proceed. But you'll need to meet yourself and speak if you do. City attorney Cheyenne. Yes, Madam Mayor. While the speakers are going forward, may we ask the city clerk to look at the council directions, if possible, electronically, to sort of confirm what directions were given and not given? Because we are seeing some emails, email communications between the councilmember, Councilmember Knox White and the city manager for the first time right now. So it will be helpful for the city clerk to confirm what council tractions were given and not given. That will be helpful. Okay. I have another idea. I think that's a that's a great suggestion. Mr. Chan, I'm just wondering if under the item seven B, I'm thinking of maybe holding this one for a moment and moving forward on item seven. Be a better ARPA funding, but are we going to be needing the same staff involved? Not Chief Joshi, obviously, but I'm just trying to be as efficient with time as possible, noting that it's now past 10:00. This is well. How how long do you think you need a mr. Chen? Because we can certainly call a break. I think that's more of a question for the city clerk. Madam Clerk, where do you think? Can pull it up while you're doing the speakers or if you want to you know stop this item and go to it is different staff for seven be. So if you wanted to pause this item and call seven be it's your prerogative I'm I'm fine with either. I feel like the staff on this item should perhaps also be listening to the public speakers. But I want to keep things moving. There are now ten speakers just to give you an update on speakers. Okay. Mr. Chair. And Madam Chair, I think my understanding is that there is real confusion. I'm just looking at some communications between staff about whether or not a personal privacy policy was actually in the direction from the council or not. So I think it is it would be helpful at some point for the city clerk to confirm what the council direction really is, because that, I think will clarify the council's direction either now it or continue later today, another council meeting. But I think the city clerk's report back on what the council direction is or was will be really important. Agree. Madam, quick, if I were to move ahead on seven BYU for you, work that out with it. Do you have the staffing to do that? Yeah. I can. I can step away and stuff can handle. Yeah. As soon as you call the other item. Yes. Okay, cool. So that's what I'm going to do. I'm going to jump ahead to seven B and let's see if we can get through that and then we'll come back to to succeed. All right. All right. Madam Clerk, I don't know how you do it, but could you please introduce this item? And I'm going to assume that we have waiting in the wings, whoever the appropriate staff are, for this issue. This is the assistant city manager and also Jennifer Tout will be promoted to me is adoption resolution amending the capital budget by increasing appropriations in the 2021 American Rescue Plan Project by 1,911,000 for replacement of three portable and portables and decking at the Midway Shelter Food Bank Facility, repairs and purchase of wireless hotspots for lending. Thank you. And Mr. Chan, do you feel like you need a city attorney on this one? And if so, do you have someone to send us or. I don't need to be searching with the city clerk, so I think I'll be fine then. You just. If you need me. She can text me. She contracts you. Perfect. All right. So good evening, everyone. Welcome. So, Mr. Burden, this tale of who's going to lead us off on this item. Good evening, Mayor. As the abstract. I'll lead off. I'm not sure if city clerk here is going to be able to advance slides for us or not on this. But if not, I'll just flits through. I don't know if are. You able to do a screen. Share? It looks like it started for us. Look at that. Okay. All right. So, so good evening once again, mayor and council. It's great to be with you again. The city council's taking a really thoughtful approach to assessing our priorities relative to the American Rescue Plan Act or ARPA funds that have been provided to the city by the federal government. We are in the process of receiving about $28.6 million in total. We have to fully assign this just a reminder for council and for people who are tuning in for the public side, we do have to assign those funds or allocate those funds to projects by December of 2024 and then the full spend, all the funds has to be has to be completed by December of 2026. So in May of this year, the Council did adopt a set of guiding principles for the use of these funds and directed staff to focus on a relatively short list of topic areas. In July, we discussed again with kind of narrowing a focus down to housing, affordable housing in particular, as well as some technology needs to support people that have been more impacted by COVID, which is really the central purpose of the ARPA relief funding that they came from the federal government in September. We continue to focus on housing and wireless technologies, and I'll say next slide. All right, we got the slide up and then I play straight through with that that slide. But we'll go to slide three now, please. So magic. Yeah. Since since September, there have been a few council discussions related to ARPA funds for specific projects. The projects are listed on this slide just for the sake of time. I won't go through them, but they are worth about $8 million of the ARPA funding and so that will move to the next slide. I mentioned the time limits. And so that to that end, we are continuing to try to keep moving forward with projects and our ARPA spending with respect to the areas that are consistent with the criteria that were set by council. We just want to be moving forward in a timely fashion so that come, come the end of 2026, we've reduced every dollar that has been that's been put towards our community. So at this time, we are recommending these three projects start recommending the Midway Shelter receive $1.8 million. They have decking, that is between all of the different buildings and structures out there that is in need of repair, as well as three fairly essential portable buildings that need to be rebuilt. They're just at the end of their useful life. So that's a $1.8 million project ask at this time. Similarly, the food bank a lot less money, but the food bank facility is in need of some repairs as well. The parking lot and one of the sheds that are used for storage need about $42,000 worth of work. And then the last item is, is another relatively small one, but can be fairly significant. This is the lending hotspot for wireless hotspot lending program. This will put wireless services into the hands of individuals and families that need that service. Up to 30 families or individuals would have better Internet service through a library lending program at no cost to them. So the total cost of those three projects that I just summarized are about $1.9 million. Next slide. Thank you. Based on the funding that's already been appropriated, the items recommended this evening, we're we're really looking at most of the first tranche or a lot of the first tranche of our ARPA funding, which is a little over $14 million. And that work will be underway fairly quickly. Staff will continue to seek direction. This is not your last opportunity to talk about ARPA funding. We'll probably be back on a quarterly basis. Give or take. Budget manager Towle has been instrumental in this effort. She's helping us not just with helping to set up these recommendations, but also in terms of the tracking and reporting that goes with ARPA dollars. So at this time, staff is recommending that the City Council approve the spending plan and budget appropriations to fund the additional projects that have been summarized tonight. And we will be back in in early 2022 to continue discussing ARPA eligible projects. So that concludes our presentation this evening. But your manager, Tal and I and others on staff are available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Thank you. And, Mr. Burton. Nice work. Let's see, do we have any from the clerk's office to tell us if we have public speakers? Let's see if we can tell if. There are there are about four people with their hand up. I did see that. Okay. And so this is a little tricky. I think I need someone from the the city attorney's office, a city attorney, city clerk's office, to to actually call on the people and bring them forward. Let me let me see how to do that. While we're all figuring that one out, are there any clarifying questions for staff? Coke. Hold on, everyone. So it's kind of winging it today, huh? Is it time to do it? Yeah, I think it magically appears. Yeah, basically. I think we have some public speakers. We do. We have five. The first is Carey Thompson. Good evening, Speaker Thompson. I just didn't know how to do that. Welcome. Are you able to knit yourself? Me? Yes, you are. I can hear. You. Oh, good, good. My name is Kerry Thompson. I am a lifelong resident of Alameda, and I am the vice president and branch manager of Poppy Bank here in town. I'm also the president of Alameda Homeless Network. And this hope, this. Nonprofit was started in 1989 by then Mayor Ralph Basato. Can we. Pause? Pause here time, please. If you would, madam. Click. Can you help us? We're getting an echo from Miss Thompson. Is she should do something different. Yeah. Oh, you got it. Is that better? Yeah, that's better. Okay. Are you all. Right? Okay. That's okay. We'll start your time again. The nonprofit was started in 1989 by then Mayor Ralph Esposito in 2008. And began chose building futures to operate Midway Shelter H and continues to raise private funds all year long to keep the. Shelter operating on behalf of aging. I want to thank you for ensuring that the women. And children served at Midway have a safe, welcoming place to call home while they recover and forge positive, positive futures. I really urge you to approve this funding to make sure that the work that HHS and the Building Futures has brought to the community and to help these women and children continue productive. Lives and become. Wonderful citizens of Alameda and give back. You know, I recently met a. Wonderful woman who was a former resident, and she is now. Very happily. Productive citizen has raised her daughter. And now is raising grandchildren, and she is just so thankful for the work that Midway has done for her. So I. Just encourage you to approve. This funding. Thank you. Thank you. Ms.. Thompson, our next speaker. Alec Graber. Good evening. Speaker Graber. Are you able to? Speaker Graber. I never know what to do to help people. I know I hopefully she has the most recent version of the Zoom. There's a way I can ask them to unmute, and sometimes that prompts them, but it looks like she's not able to. We can call the next speaker. Why don't we do that? Okay. Brian Kennedy. Good evening, Speaker Kennedy. Good evening, everybody. Have a shutout and a question for everybody here. Several years ago, then, President Trump declared a day of remembrance. A day of remembrance for victims of illegal aliens. All right. I'm going to stop you there, Mr. Kennedy. This is as far as comments on our expenditure of ARPA funds. So if you'd like to comment on our expenditure of our funds, please do so at. We lost him. Okay, it looks. Like we can. He's. He's back if he wants to speak on our behalf. Okay. And again, this is item six C direction 30 7a7b regarding the appropriations for American rescue plan dollars. Speaker Kennedy. And you're skipping the topic b the feds have buried you. You should be. Okay, that's enough. And with that smirk off your face. All right. We'll go to our next speaker. I see Speaker Graber is possibly needed. Yes. Let's see if we can get her back in table. I know I said that in the mute comes up. Speaker Graber Are you able to mute? Think the gremlins got into the system tonight. Let's try for our next speaker, because we've got two more speakers. Yes. Just keep trying. Yes. Thompson Thomas. Was there. Okay. Good evening. Made it. Now the mayor, city council. Members and staff. Some of you may know me as the newest, I think, retired fire captain from Alameda Fire Department. So I guess I'm used to being up at this hour on calls. This is just a different kind of call. But I'm trying to stay pretty active in Alameda with organizations, so I'm really happy to see a couple of the organizations I support on your list for receiving these funds. But for the past six. Years, I've served on building Futures Board of Directors as Secretary, actually with the main impetus for first joining the Midway Shelter, because it appeared that every organization I was involved with in town had something to do with Midway Shelter, big or small. Everyone likes to support Midway Shelter. So I could not refuse when they asked me to join the board. But the physical structure of Midway really does need some serious help. The portables are old, and more than that, they're really heavily used. They're not like my children's school. Portables, where they're used five days a week. 10 hours a day. They are used 24 seven, and they are really heavily used and they are worn out. So I really do think the city manager for recommending this funding to rehab. Midway and to the city council for hopefully approving these funds. We know the impact that Midway Shelter has. I mean, the women and children there, they get case management, they. Get domestic violence support, they get linkage to housing programs. But there's really also something special that they get there. And I have the opportunity to talk to staff. Now and then. And I once asked them, you know, what makes Midway extra special? What makes it work? And one of the staff members said. It's because they love. On their ladies and children. And that's what they. Said they love on their ladies and. Children. But for them to keep giving the love to their clients, they really need a safe and secure structure to do this in. And so I would really hope that. We consider the funding for this project because their work is truly. So important. So thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker. Jennifer Murkowski. Good evening, Speaker Murkowski. Please be able to mute. Yes. Hello. Thank you for their. This important topic. I strongly support Midway Shelter and the food bank and I apologize because of the lateness of the hour. I have forgotten the third item that you are considering, but the first two are. Really quality. Programs that I value the city investing in. I just asked, this is not the last of the ARPA dollars. There is a lot of incredible needs and I encourage the city to actively engage with its community members of what are additional valued resources to use these dollars for. I think you've identified some excellent choices tonight, but continued community engagement so that we really invest the dollars most. Effectively at this critical time. Thank you. Thank you. Any further speakers? That's right. They're hiring. So with that, we will close public comment on item seven B and we'll take council comment. I see Councilmember Harris, but I'm going to go with Councilmember Desai just because he hasn't spoken by then. Back to you, Councilmember Spencer. Actually, it's just a quick question. Were we able to figure out how to get in touch with Israel Graber? She's still on and she lowered her hand. So I'm not sure if just, you know, is like. Or perhaps wants to speak on a different item because she certainly emailed us on different on some different. Items. But you're. Right. Yeah. Okay. Councilor Spencer. I'd like to move approval of this item in total. I really think all three of these. And I do want to thank all the speakers and everyone that we received letters from emails and staff's work on this. As we've heard, sentiment is very good work that wrote one of the smallest items is the hotspots. And that's one of the things that I've been hoping and I know many people have. And it goes to how do we get Internet service as quickly as possible during a pandemic? And so I'm very happy to have that be included in this. But the other two projects we have going on right now, the food bank work, is actually to address flooding that goes on in their facility and leakage. So I think that's absolutely critical. And of course, Midway Shelter that we heard and this I think congratulations to Gail Thomas on your retirement is great to hear her here speaking and sharing another speaker in support of Medway so that I'm moving that we adopt staff's recommendation. Thanks. Okay, I'm going. Just before I look for a second, I want to just add a little bit of staff direction that I hope that the Council will will also adopt. One of the things and I'm all for the proposals that are before us. I did want to note really quickly that you saw the chart of expenditures and one of them was about $26,000 that we spent of our money on the feed, our immediate program, where we actually paid our meter restaurants to prepare meals that were then taken to homeless shelters, midway, the FEMA trailers, Village of Love, and even to our encampment. And we actually raised another almost equal amount. So we were able to keep that program going, I think nine or ten months and every week a different once or twice a week, a different restaurant got a guaranteed income. We got to provide this money. But I did want to recognize that Alameda residents organizations, including our Police Officers Association and our firefighters Local 689 underwrote some of those costs. So it was, you know, we put in seed money and they matched it. And then the other item that I would like us to consider, and this is part of direction to staff, I would like us to consider the ability to explore, setting aside some of the money from the ARPA funds to provide a match for the A Universal Basic Income Program. And so we've talked about that a little at this body that's come up before. And right now in the governor's budget, Governor Newsom has allocated $35 million for a pilot program that local cities and counties can apply to. And but it will require some some match of some local local funding match. We don't have all the details. We've been in communication with our senator, Nancy Skinner, his office. She also chairs the Senate Budget Committee. And so they're watching for the guidelines to come out. But I'd like our city to have the flexibility to allocate some of our ARPA funding to be matched, to get us started with a a universal basic income program, something to explore in the coming year. So I would love to have the Council's endorsement for including this as a staff direction to explore. And I'd also like to name Councilmember John Max White if he would be willing to work with me on exploring this potential program, because I know we've both both expressed interest in it in the past. Okay. With you, Councilmember, if we get the endorsement of our colleagues. Yeah, okay. And and so and then I guess I have one question I'm all for. This is perhaps for you, Mr. Burton, that on page six of my staff report, it talks about staff as county water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure staff for evaluating the benefit of using our defense to pay for construction of a portion of these items to allow the city to advance projects that are experiencing delays. Would this be funding that would then be reimbursed by a developer, went to developer, came in to those particular items into those particular areas.