Adoption of an Urgency Uncodified Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Alameda (A) Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to Civil Unrest; (B) Ratifying the City Manager’s Decision to Order a Curfew on June 1 and 2, 2020 (Ending at 5 a.m. on June 3); (C) Provide Direction Extending, Modifying, or Discontinuing the Curfew; and (D) Authorize Staff to Take Further Action to Implement This Declaration. (City Manager 2110)
Adoption of an urgency and kind of fide ordinance of the City Council of the City of Alameda, declaring the existence of a local emergency in response to civil unrest. Ratifying the city manager's decision to order curfew on June 1st and second 2020, ending at 5 a.m. on June 3rd. Provide direction extending, modifying or discontinuing the curfew and authorize staff to take further action to implement this declaration. Thank you. And so this item is being presented by let's see. Sorry, it's the city attorney, is that correct? It'll be me, Mayor. This is. Okay. Oh. Assistant City Manager Jerry Bowden. Yeah. Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft. Thank you very much. Members of council. Everyone can hear me. Okay? Yes. Okay. Great. Perfect. So, my name is Jerry Bowden, assistant city manager and staff recommended recommendation tonight as as the mayor just mentioned, is related to civil unrest in Alameda County and locally since the tragic and unfortunate death of Mr. George Floyd in Minnesota on the 25th of May, as we've seen, in addition to the many lawful and peaceful protests, there have been events and gatherings that have turned violent, resulting in injuries, death and significant damage to and loss of property. Tonight's staff recommendation includes four parts. First, to address the unique local public safety and related demands and better position the city for the possibility of recuperating funds associated with our response. Staff is recommending that the City Council declare a local emergency related to civil unrest. This action does require a 4/5 vote and we sincerely hope that the need for this is short lived. Second, consistent with the city, charter staff is recommending that council ratify the city manager's decision to order a curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. on June 1st and second, ending at 5 a.m. tomorrow morning, June 3rd. And third staff is seeking Council's direction regarding extending, modifying or discontinuing the city of Alameda curfew. For context, I'll note that some communities are taking this decision to have a curfew day by day in the area, and others like neighboring San Leandro have a curfew in effect until the morning of June eight unless it's decided that it should be lifted earlier. And as you all know, the county has implemented a curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. until the morning of June 5th if the city's curfew is extended, if that is what council decides to do. We have seen correspondents today asking for a little more flexibility with respect to the allowed activities, including volunteers helping homeless individuals or elder elderly population in the community that needs that help. The request is that they are also exempt from the curfew or given flexibility and council may wish to consider that or provide staff with direction. And should that be the direction the council goes? The fourth and final part of this recommendation is to authorize staff to take further action necessary to implement the declaration related to civil unrest should that become necessary. And an example of that might be if there's a decision to not continue the curfew today and and ultimately in a few days it becomes necessary. Then staff would go ahead and do some take that action if if that was deemed necessary. So that concludes staff's very brief presentation on this topic, and we're available for any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bowden. Council and anybody any other staff, some city attorney or city manager want to weigh in on what was just said. City Manager Eric Levitt. Fat man, mayor and City Council. I'll just add that this is a difficult issue because I think any time you restrict people's rights, it's a very serious issue you need to look at very carefully or even in doing it for the last two days. Yesterday and today, I took very seriously their discussions over the weekend and I felt that it shouldn't happen. But yesterday, especially with neighboring cities doing it, I felt that was the appropriate thing to do. So I would ask that anything we do that we we try to keep it as narrow as possible in a decision and not take it out too long. Thank you, Mr. Levitt. Council comments are city attorney. Mr. Shen, did you want to comment? Sorry. Not at all. Other than to say that I reviewed the legality of the city manager's declaration and find it to be fully compliant with all applicable laws. And I'm happy to answer any questions that the Council has. Thank you. Okay. I see Councilmember Desai with his hand up. Quick question. We had a nice email come in from a resident named Susan Rios who asks how many residents are working from home and can only shop after 8 p.m.? What should we do? Which what would what do we say to Mr. Rios and others who are like her? Well, staff can certainly respond, but my understanding is businesses are covered by this curfew as well. Is that correct, Mr. Shin? Yes, that is correct. And so I don't believe that stores would be open after. Okay. Okay. That's the answer, then. Yeah. And again, the curfew these two nights last night and tonight, 8 p.m. to 5 a.m.. So, um. Okay. Councilmember o.T. Thank you. I mean, I guess my question is just hypothetically, say hours expires at 5 a.m. tomorrow and we're still under the county. I mean, just the interplay of that and what happens or what happens tomorrow night if we don't have a curfew and the county has one? Okay. City. City attorney Mr. Kane, I know you emailed us about this, but do you want to share with the public? Sure. At this moment, unless the county order changes or a judicial decision is issued, altering that order, the county order purports to apply to all incorporated cities and unincorporated county areas. So as of this moment, our understanding is that that order would apply within the city of Alameda. And therefore, based on the text of that order as it exists today, it would apply. So an ATM curfew would still remain in effect even if the council discontinues our local curfew. And then if that happens, I mean, right now, our city manager is, you know, our emergency director, if I remember correctly, going to our emergency plan . And, you know, our police department reports up to him. I mean, would that change at all if we didn't have a curfew and suddenly it was just the county one, which I don't want to get into legal argument here. I still think we have some sovereignty issues. But regardless, I mean, how would that work? I mean, what are we would we be forfeiting our city manager's authority and our police chief's authority? No. The city manager remains the director of emergency services. With respect to the enforcement of the county's order, any California peace officer could enforce it anywhere within the county. And so law enforcement decisions within cities are made by the police chief. And so the police chief would have discretion in how he wants to deploy his resources and undertake enforcement. I believe he may even be in the audience and may be able to answer further questions in this regard. And additionally, obviously, county sheriffs, to the extent that they are operating within the city of Alameda, for example, pursuant to mutual aid, they would also enforce that they would have the authority to enforce the county's order. And do we know is is the police chief on hand to answer any questions? I don't know that. But. Okay. Who else? Council. Is a merely a council member of the Surrey. My question is, and I don't think we're the only city grappling with the two questions raised by Councilmember Odie is if there are other cities that are challenging the authority of the county ordinance. Or. Where does that leave us? That's part one. And part two is. You know. But I understand the law that was was cited or the decision that was cited. But is I guess my concern is the overall enforcement of this and how we would go about actually enforcing a county ordinance. If if, if the word gets out that we don't continue our curfew and people are confused about what's going on. And, you know, like Magic Police Chief Porter Larry just appeared on the screen and have these magical powers. So, Chief, for Larry, if you'd like to meet you, unmute yourself and answer. If you're able to answer the question posed by Councilmember Vela about how does it how does enforcement of a county or two right now we are under both our city's order, but also the counties. And so if the this went on and the city didn't choose to extend until Friday morning, when the county order will be rescinded, if not sooner, how does enforcement work? Chief for Larry. Drew. Thank you for having me on. I. My understanding of the county order is that much like the health department order for the COVID crisis, that the more restrictive order would would rule the day. I was on the phone with the business leaders earlier, and I understand the inconveniences, but we also have a fairly significant public safety concern that's happening right now with not the peaceful protest, but with some of the looting and the burglaries that have been happening, including here in town. So my my stance would be that we would be operating I would be operating the police department under the county order. If the council did not extend the local order, I would I would intend to to follow the county order until its expiration, which I believe is June 5th. 5 a.m. just I think. Yeah. Okay, Counsel. Anyone else want to want to weigh in? So I have a question. I think it was discussed in the staff report that we could delegate to staff. I think the city manager, the police chief, probably conferring with the city attorney and I would include the assistant city manager as to this. Well, what the police chief said, I agree with if the county's order is continuing, the county's order is continuing. But if for some reason, the county says, you know, things are looking pretty good almost everywhere and rescinds the county order, we could still defer to staff to say, okay, what was the situation in Alameda last night ? And, you know, moving forward, what do we think is the best course of action? So is that is that a possible approach? I'm seeing the city attorney nodding. You want to weigh in, Mr. Chan? Sure, Mr. Mayor. The council could give direction tonight to authorize staff to take actions necessary to further the declaration of the local emergency. If the council chooses to do so and give direction for the staff to work together to implement it and to report back to the council, which I believe is consistent with what you've indicated. Councilmember Avella. I wanted to go back to my question about if there are cities within Alameda County don't or challenge the county order. Is that something that our staff is going to be following up on and the implications of that? The case law that was cited was, what, 40 years old or something like that? And so maybe I'll start and I'll turn it over to the chief. To the extent he has additional information, my understanding is that I'm not aware of any city that has that is preparing to file a legal challenge, though any moment could change. I understand that there are certain cities, certain elections, elected officials from certain cities have taken the position that does not apply or it may not apply to certain jurisdictions. And we are certainly following each of that closely. And the city attorney for the city of Alameda, for the county of Alameda have requested an additional conversation with the county council to have continuing dialog on this topic. And we've not received a confirmation that that conversation will happen. So we we at in your city attorney's office will continue to follow this on all fronts. And did I know if another councilmember wants to weigh in now, I would be interested in hearing from the chief. What you were hearing from the business community. But I see the vice mayor's hands went up as I was speaking. Do you want to go next to vice mayor? Sure. Thank you. So I think this is I think we're in an awkward position right now. I so I would like to thank the city manager and the police chief for making the decision you made yesterday. I believe on the information that we had at the time that this decision was made, it was probably the right decision . I have struggled very mightily to figure out what I would do had the question come before. Should we do it again tonight? I think at 45 minutes before it's about to kick in, it's whether we decide it's not a curfew or not, I think is go communications. Why? It's problematic. But I'm not confident that I now that we know where things went yesterday and where things have been today. And, you know, with hindsight, whether or not we would have continued this. I am extremely uncomfortable with the county sheriff implementing something at a county level with very little input for such a long period. And I understand I'm going to guess that it goes through Friday morning, because there are some significant concerns around unrest on Thursday following the memorial service for Mr. Floyd in Minneapolis. If we were to move forward tonight, what I would like is some sort of reporting about any police action in Alameda related to the curfew tomorrow morning . I'm not expecting any. But if there are any, I would like to I would like to have some sort of report back. I feel that this is a very significant act that we have taken on, and I want to treat it as as that. Similarly, I would be willing to support providing. Mr. Vice Mayor, I mean, forgive me, all of you. I quickly texted the city clerk to ask if we had public comment. And we do. And so before we get and this is I guess there are shortcomings to a virtual meeting, because if we were in chambers, she would be hissing or, you know, they'd be sending a note to me. So I will reserve my comments. Thank you, sir. Just hold your thoughts. But unless someone else has clarifying questions about the report, I would request that we hear from the public on public comments. Does anybody have any clarifying questions they wanted to put in first? Councilmember Vella And then if I know we're being asked to adopt the emergency declaration, there's the second question, which is about what we do with the curfew. Could we adopt the emergency declaration and not continue the curfew? And then what would that look like and how long would the emergency declaration be in effect? If you could just clarify that. Yes. That's. Yes, Mr. City attorney, please. Yes. If the council chooses to adopt the emergency declaration, it currently does not contain an end date. The council could either set an end date right now or allow staff to bring you back when staff recommends an end date. With respect to your second question, if you adopt the emergency declaration and direct staff to discontinue the curfew, it would just it would be discontinued. And then the council would have to make a decision on whether to allow staff to reinstitute a curfew in the future if facts warrants or to direct staff to not institute a curfew in all circumstances. Those are decisions that the council could make, either give staff the direction or give clear direction one way or the other. And our city manager, Eric Levitt. And I would recommend that at the longest period for a declaration of emergency for this particular event would be through June 16th would be the absolute longest I would do and I would but I'm not staying for the curfew. I'm just saying. For the declaration of emergency. Okay. And any particular reason why that particular date, Mr. LEVITT? Because that's the next city council meeting had it. All right, then. Okay. Without it, there's no further clarifying questions. Um, the let's. City Clerk, will you please introduce the public comments or call on the public speakers? Yes. So if anybody present via Zoom would like to comment on this item, which is the curfew matter, please raise your hand now. Okay. We have three people who wish to publicly address you. And then I had three comments to read. So everybody will still get 3 minutes. Perfect. All right, who's first ready? She will promote you and you can speak. Good evening. Can you guys hear me? Yeah. Thank you. Hi. My name's Diana. I'm a registered nurse here in L.A.. Is it Mr. Singh or is it Diana? It's both of us. I'm with. I'm with him. Well. You got it. One person got it. Okay. I didn't want your need from me to be so distant. That sends its regards to you guys to arrive late. We're going to. Take. A look inside. I promise. Yeah, I guess we're 8:00, but. But I'm so sorry. Call. We are. I remember the surfers here in the Bay Area, and I'm very concerned about the mental health of our guardians, our police officers during all of this. And. And I have friends that have cuts that are partners and husbands. And, you know, it's really, really tough. But I'm just wondering what is being done to address the mental health with with these officers. And because in the here has actually we've recently featured in the area news we're launching a six week long series about as a police department last year which ran over six weeks and they brought that run the mindfulness and just know you know just. It really it really helped the officers it was like really, really simple easy stuff to do that helped them with their sleep to help them with their. I've been sober for 99. Please forgive me for the interruption. I think you might not have realized that this is specifically to communicate comments about the emergency declaration and issuing a curfew right now. However, I love what you're talking about. And if you could possibly hang on when we finish the special meeting, we are going to move into our regular meeting. And there is an item, oral communications for speakers who want to speak about an item not on the agenda. Okay. We'll get to that shortly. Can can you hold on? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Apologies on. That. No worries. It's a little confusing when we're virtual like this, but thank you so much. All right. Um. Okay, Madam Clerk. Okay, now we have. Elizabeth Douglas. Hi there. Good evening, Miss Douglas. Thank you. In terms of the curfew, I just I don't know if you have enough data to make a decision on the curfew. It seems it seems like what I've heard so far, it says that there's nothing. No concern. From the protesters, but there are concerns about looting and burglaries. But I have no hard numbers to here. I don't know if it's correlated to. Two as a result of the protests that are going on. I just I really don't think that there's enough data. And I would be. Hesitant. To make any decisions or I implore you to be hesitant about making decisions without. Data to back it up. So I'm not in support of extending that curfew. Thank you, Mr. Douglas. Thank you. Our next speaker. Josh, he's being promoted now. Good evening. Oh, he's still muted. Mr. Ryan is. You know. Can you hear me now? Yes, yes, yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening. I'll just read a brief statement I prepared. I'd like to register my disapproval for extending or creating any curfew in Alameda. This measure is a failure of imagination and only supports those that would drive our communities apart. As a new homeowner now, I feel more of a threat to my young family by the powers this gives the police than in the promise of safety. Simply put, there is no basis of fact for any emergency in the city. Furthermore, curfews only create confrontation, not de-escalation. Other local and national police forces have used this crisis as an opportunity to brutalize protesters in feeble attempts to justify their outsized budgets. By adopting curfews, this city effectively endorses that brutalization. This measure is a direct attack on government and police accountability. We should be encouraging our neighbors to come together as a community and heal and be a model for what this town can be. Instead, this motion for mass panic and further drives the already loaded reputation of Alameda as a place where people of color are unwelcome. We can be better. We must be better. We should be. Instead of voting to defund and demilitarize the police department and find better means of preventing crime and keeping our community safe. Thanks very much. Have a good evening. Thank you. And our next speaker. I think that was it for Zoom speakers. And now I will read two comments and take. The first is from Linda Asbury, executive director of West Alameda Business Association. Representing the West telling me to Business Association, please consider the curfew for the city of Alameda to reflect the curfew of Alameda County through June 5th. If necessary, this can be rescinded at any time. Thank you for your consideration. And next we have. Rob's tenacity. Size Kony, size Kony. Hopefully I'm not pitching that too badly. Okay. Council members, not only should you not ratify the decision of the city manager to impose this tinpot faster curfew order, but it should be rescinded immediately. Moreover, you should take any available steps to lodge the city's dissent from the county's curfew. Your colleagues in the city of Santa Clara have already taken those steps. Beyond, no doubt, nothing that has happened on the island this week remotely justifies the extraordinary limitations on citizens freedom of speech and movement. Curfew orders do not keep us safer. They serve as a legal fig leaf. For the police to initiate violent confrontations with unarmed protesters. To impose this curfew is to ratify and stand with the actions of authoritarians like the president and to equate the brutal police violence we have seen all over the nation in the past week with the chanting and marching of protesters calling for an end to brutal police violence. A progressive city like Alameda should be making every effort to oppose police violence, raise up the voices of oppressed communities that are the most frequent victims of police violence, and demonstrate that our city rejects the quasi military weaponization of police forces nationwide and the turning of those weapons against poor, black and brown people. Please do your duty to stand with the George Floyd's of the world and against the Derek. Sherman's up to oppose the curfew. And then the last comment I think was by Josh and he already spoke. So I will not read his since he spoke instead. All right. Okay. And that was the extent of the public comments. Act. Madam Clerk, is that the extent of our public comments on item two? Yes, that's correct. No more. All right. With that, I've closed public comments and we will return to council discussion. Vice Mayor, I think I cut you off. Excuse me. When I realized we had public speakers said, Do you want to resume? Sure, I'd be happy to. Thank you very much. And I will also acknowledge my clock hasn't moved yet, but I will not use the full 9 minutes that I still have. So thank you. Yeah, I as I was saying, I appreciate knowing knowing what we know about what happened on Sunday. The reasoning behind making the declaration that we have today. I was going to ask the police chief if he would be comfortable talking a little bit about what happened with our local law enforcement resources on Sunday, the day before the curfew that helped to inform why why we decided to move forward. Is that something that would be. Appropriate to speak about it at the council meeting? Certainly. I guess I'll ask that through the city manager. Yes. Well, actually, you you ask. Oh, well and I'll sit through the chair, but, um. Yes, Chief. Hilary, can you, can you comment about what we knew on Sunday or, you know, leading up to this probably Friday, Saturday and Sunday? Because I don't think the decision was made just in one day. But tell us if you can for sure. Thank you for the opportunity. I mean, I'll tell you that we you know, we really didn't know if there was going to be any violence or any crime or looting in the city. We were obviously concerned about it. I received several emails, some phone calls and texts from concerned residents, from concerned business owners, from the business districts, specifically on Webster Street. And we had information that there was possibly going to be a plan to shoot the target at Alameda Landing, which fortunately did not occur and has not occurred yet. Sunday night into Monday morning, between around 9 p.m. in the evening and about four or 5 a.m. on Monday morning, we had about a dozen incidents of either straight up looting or smash window smash burglaries, which is highly unusual for the city of Alameda, has not been happening in anywhere near those numbers so far this year. So we did not make arrests in all those cases. So I don't know what the motivation was for all of them. We did arrest three people for breaking into the Walgreens at South Shore. Three adults and then four juveniles for attempting to break in with a window smashed into the CVS in Santa Clara. I don't have the final numbers in front of me, but I believe we were somewhere between 12 and 14 ish. Either burglaries or windows smashes the CVS at Harvard Bay, IL, the Bedford Express on Blanding, the AT&T store at Alameda Landing and several others. So we it was a super busy night. We had 25 officers on the street, which is double more than double what we normally have. And that's what we continue to do right now in order to keep the city safe and hopefully deter additional stuff. Last night was much better. I believe we had one or possibly two incidents overnight compared to what we had on Sunday night. It was much quieter. We had. It was nice to have more police officers than we needed last night, which was not the case in some of the surrounding jurisdictions. And it's my understanding, even today and tonight, Oakland and Fremont have been very active again. San Leandro and Hayward were hit probably the hardest on Sunday night. So there's been a lot going on. Great. Thank you. And could you also if you're if you're able just talk a little bit about mutual aid and what was available on Sunday? Sure. So typically what happens on mutual aid is that the city the city in need, which in this case was the city of Oakland, they know that they've got this unplanned event. And so they make a request through the Office of Emergency Services at Alameda County. Sheriff Ahearn, as the emergency services official for the county, is the person who makes the decision whether or not to authorize the deployment of mutual aid resources. The sheriff, based on the Oakland request, the number of reports of people that were going to be down there protesting and demonstrating, he ordered or granted the request and then outreach was made to all the various agencies within the county. Alameda being one of them on on Sunday night, Saturday night and Sunday night, I'm sorry, Friday night and Saturday night, we sent about a dozen officers, I think it was 12 on Friday night, 14 on Friday night and 12 on Saturday night. Sunday night. We were not there because we needed to be here because of everything that was going on in Alameda. We are not in Oakland. Glad to get back. We were going to send somebody to Oakland earlier today, but we we wound up not having to do that. So anyway, the mechanism is that the city in need, Oakland asks for the county's help. The county makes the assessment, authorizes the mutual aid. And then all of the individual jurisdictions, if they can provide, people do. And we did. Great. Thank you. And my understanding is on Sunday, not only did we not were we not able to on to Oakland, but we were not able to ask anybody for help when it seemed like we might need it as well, because everybody was basically staying home because this was so widespread. Is that correct? In general? In general, it was partially correct. I was I did ask for and request for some mutual aid. I called over to the EOC and I was able to get and briefly and it turned out we didn't need them for very long. But I did briefly have a squad from the Berkeley Police Department that arrived. I think they got here about 1030 or 11:00 in the evening. I don't think they were here for more than an hour. And then we were able to kind of get our arms wrapped around everything and they returned to Oakland. Okay. I guess for clarification, Chief, when you reached out to the EOC, would that be the Alameda County Emergency Operations Center? Actually, no mayor on that particular case. I had somebody inside the EOC and the city of Oakland. Oh. Oh, okay. So I went, okay. I just called somebody over there directly and said that we needed help fast. And they sent me they sent me the 12 officers. Okay. So thank you for all that. I just I wanted to kind of explain some of my while. I heard a lot of comments that I certainly understand and at a gut level agree with. Again, I think that, uh, curfews are extremely, um, there are a significant event and they're not something that we should take lightly. I really do. Again, my comments about why I support what happened yesterday is based on the fact that from what we saw Sunday, we were stretched. And not only where we were stretched, but all of our neighbors were not only stretched, but really hit very hard. And it was, I think, a rational and reasonable response as we move forward in considering this curfew. I would certainly agree with the city manager's recommendation that we declare the city the state of emergency through the 16th, and I would be more than happy to give some direction to the city manager that would allow him to declare a curfew on a day by day basis based on information that's coming up, knowing that there are probably a couple of dates in the next week in which we should at least be alert to the fact that that, you know, we may need to join our neighbors in setting a curfew just to to to keep our region a little safer. Again, as if if we do so, I will request that we get a report early in the morning of any action that is taken related to the curfew and that all discretion and be be used in reporting out of when that decision is going to be made. You know, my hope is that we don't have to do it. I would also hope that if this council does not extend the current curfew to match the county, that that be at least a signal that we're not looking to overly enforce the curfew of the county. I do not really believe that. I do not stand in support of that decision. I think it was made far too quickly with very little input. And I think we're going to you know, if our county sheriff is going to act like this, there needs to be a lot more input and verification before just announcing it. Thank you. Done. Okay. Next, Councilmember. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thanks to the city staff that put this together. One suggestion I would have said murder instead of death of Mr. Floyd. But that that word is important. And I'd like to thank our chief for everything he's doing to keep us safe. You know, when I read about this, I was, like, super queasy. And it is the first thing that pops in my head is that 250 year old Benjamin Franklin quote that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. And watching the news yesterday, I think New York was under a curfew for the first time since 1943. New York City. And to show how things haven't changed, you know, that was when a white police officer murdered a African-American service member during World War Two. So these decisions are not things we take lightly and. I read the Supreme Court decision that came out over the weekend about Governor Newsome's limitation on churches. And there was a line in there that says our Constitution principally entrusts, quote, the safety and the health of the people, end quote, to the politically accountable officials of the states to guard and protect. And to me, you know, when it comes to public health, we don't have a public health department like Berkeley has or, you know, San Francisco as a county. We have ceded that authority to the county. So when they make orders on public health, then, you know, we've we've pretty much subjected ourselves in their jurisdiction, but on public safety. We have not on public safety. That jurisdiction remains with the five of us here today and through our manager come to form a government, the city manager and his direct reporting to the police chief and the police department. So I am extremely concerned about the sheriff exerting his authority over the city of Alameda. I believe we are a sovereign city. Um, my colleague, Mr. De SA brings up often that we are charter city and charter cities have certain rights. And to me one of those rights is that, you know, we are not going to be subjected to the county. So I am loathe to give up any decision making authority to the county sheriff. And, you know, we all know the reputation of the county sheriff. And this, taken in in isolation, you know, may be a great thing. But when you consider that the sheriff, with his history of heavy handedness and his treatment of people of color, is now asserting his authority. And the occupant of the White House is threatening to unleash the power of the American military on our citizens who are peacefully protesting. Then I can't consider it in its totality, and I think it's in isolation that's considered in its totality. So this is where I stand on this. I think we need to be in charge of our own destiny. And I completely trust our city manager. I completely trust our police chief. I do not trust anyone else. So I am comfortable giving them temporary authority to keep our our city safe. But if I my fear is if we decide we are going to let this die today or tomorrow morning at 5 a.m., then we we fall under the jurisdiction of the county. And I know this hasn't been litigated, but it's entirely possible it could be litigated tomorrow. And a judge could say, you know, cities, you have responsibility and the county can't control a sovereign city. And then where are we left? We're left with kind of a patchwork where these these perpetrators know who's going to be open and who's not going to be open. And the one advantage we have, and I hate to say this because it just but my my colleague from the NRA called me and they have the most porous borders, you know, around and they're just inundated. We don't have that. We only have five ways in and off. So I think I'd much rather trust our folks, our city manager, our city council, our police chief, our police department to enforce these things. So that's what I was saying. I can envision a situation where, you know, other cities have a curfew and the county, one is overrule four charter cities and then we're stuck, you know, having porous borders because we don't have the ability to control. And our city managers stuck with our direction saying we don't believe there's a city or a state of emergency and we don't believe and we're not giving the authority to extend a curfew. I'm a little uncomfortable with, you know, two weeks, but, you know, that's the consensus of my colleagues. I'm fine with that. I mean, it might be interesting to get back here in a week and have a special meeting, but I understand the request for two weeks. I understand the extension or the request to go out to Thursday, because historically, when we have had unarmed people of color murdered by white folks, whether they be law enforcement or not, law enforcement has said a lot of these things happen from non-law enforcement, the funeral and the memorials, our days of protest and unrest and the weekends are our days of protests and unrest. So I can understand the rationale for, you know, going out to Sunday morning. So I guess I say that I don't if I've given any direction, but I mean, I, I will agree with the staff recommendation. But, you know, this is a very short leash and I completely trust our local officials and I don't want to do anything that would see any control over Alameda. And I'm going to get very provincial, appropriate, whatever you say. But, you know, last night when I saw what the occupant of the White House did and I read the county thing, I went outside, I put my Alameda flag up because I'm in Alameda. And if anyone's going to be in charge of Alameda, it's all meetings. And I'm perfectly comfortable with Alameda as being in charge of Alameda. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Eddie Councilmember Vela. So I do know in a number of other cities are considering various curfews tonight. And some of those cities include cities that have spoken out about whether or not they believe the county has the jurisdiction over their individual city. Berkeley being one of them. I guess where I'm coming from on this is I think it's a very and I had this conversation with the city manager to very fast slide into what I feel are very kind of fascist type. Uh, scenarios, and I feel like it's been a conflation of a number of different things that have led us to where we are. So I actually I will stand by the city manager's decision to implement the curfew. But I also am very much opposed to curfews, and I'm going to get into that right now. So first, we've heard a lot about curfews, but we haven't really heard about why we think they're effective. What we know is and I and again, when I say there's a completion of a number of different issues that I think are lending itself. One of those is the shelter order. There are fewer people out. A lot of the places hit have been large shopping centers where there have been no one, no nobody, no customers, no employees at these sites for almost a couple of months now. So they're filled with inventory, but no one's there. They can't really operate. And all of the things that make those spaces safe, namely the people utilizing the space, are absent from it. The other thing is that the shopping centers are not anchored by things like grocery stores where like Alameda, where we have people coming in and out and still using these. Or other. Types of shopping malls. I know the Walmart was the exception to that as well as a couple of the targets that were hit. But I haven't really heard about how this curfew is going to make us safer. My concern is also that we have a number of exemptions under the curfews. One includes people going to and from work. And I, you know, in my day job, represent a lot of workers. Many of them are people of color. They're traveling to and from work. And they are terrified of being pulled over. And they're they're worried about what that interaction is going to be like. I think things are already heightened. We have high tensions because of what's going on throughout the country. And I'm just worried that having a curfew is going to give cause to pull people over, specifically people of color. And I'm not saying that that's necessarily happened here in Alameda, but I also know that the curfew itself gives the cause to pull people over for being out on the roads. And then people have to explain why they're there. And that gives me concern. The other thing is I think that we are lending to some of these rumors and fears. I heard from a number of business owners who were talking about they had heard chatter, they had heard rumors. I think it's definitely important to take steps to secure your business and to be safe. But I'm wondering how much this is actually lending itself to that fear that something could happen or will happen. I think that we need to move from a place of data. And I think curfew, certainly if we are going to impose a curfew, it needs to be a database. It can't just be that we heard a chatter. I want to see what probable what what real what actual information we have. I can understand a curfew. If we have credible evidence that there is going to be major violence or harm in many ways, I'm actually very frustrated that we're talking about taking extreme steps to protect property when a lot of the conversation should be about the sign that is behind my colleague Mr. Odey, which is that Black Lives Matter and that a lot of the unrest that's going on is the result of government, local government, governments like ours, the city of Alameda, failing to hold people accountable for police brutality, for actions that I think we should all be able to agree are not just and not from a place of what, you know, law enforcement should be doing. And our chief said that yesterday. So I think that, you know. I'm willing to support the declaration of emergency. I am not in support of further curfews or granting that authority. I think we need to give some more direction and guidance before I would be willing to do that. I again, I'm hearing about potential. What would be the trigger in order for the city manager to actually call for another curfew? I'd want to know what factors he would look at, certainly for me. And again, I would like to hear more information about how the curfew actually is going to be helpful in deterring crime. I think that, again, I haven't heard I've heard about reason, again, mainly based off of threats to property and merchandise. And while I don't condone vandalism or looting, my number one concern is the safety of human life and protecting human life. And so I would like to know how this curfew is is. Going to achieve the goals that are stated, which I fear would be to me protecting the safety of individuals that would be first and foremost. And then I would want to know also, for those of you who are concerned about merchandise and buildings, how the curfew is going to protect against that. And then finally, I would just say that I know that our city manager didn't take this decision lightly. And I very much appreciate the thought that he put into this. I personally do not want to be spending our forces of our police officers enforcing the sheriff's curfew order. And that's why I asked that question earlier about how are we going to go about enforcing it? Because if we're going to be going around giving citations to people, I'd like to know about that and I would like to know what that citation would involve and how much resources, how many of our resources are going to be spent doing that. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember DeSantis, you want to weigh in? Well, sure. First of all, let me say thank you very much, you know, to all of us council members, the mayor, city manager and city attorney, chief of police, everyone who is here tonight, as well as the assistant city manager. I think we can all agree that these are historic times. To say nothing about COVID 19. But certainly, you know what's going on throughout our nation, start having started in Minneapolis and perhaps, you know, it's gotten steam. And as a result of things going on in Washington, D.C., and I think, you know, the looting and the mayhem that we saw occur in neighborhoods, cities like San Leandro indicate that we need to play it safe in these historic times. And so I think for that reason, I certainly support the the emergency declaration and the length that we're looking at the declaration until June 16, so or so. I also support the curfew. And my my take on it is that I think we have an opportunity to look at the curfew on a case by case basis on a day to day basis. So that would be my druthers. But as I walk up and down Webster Street, because, as you all know, I live close to Webster Street and I talk to business owners, many of whom themselves have single handedly beautified Webster Street, not just by one store's that they opened, not just by two stores that they opened, not just by three stores that they opened , but by four beautiful stores that they opened. You know, shop owners on Webster Street certainly have concerns about what's going on. And they know that situations can be incredibly volatile so that something that happens, say, in San Leandro could, for whatever reason, spill over into the city of Alameda. And so for that reason, I think we do need to have the flexibility to have our public safety, whether it's the police or the fire, be able to respond on a moment's notice. And if it means one of the prophylactics that we would employ is a curfew, then then I think that has to be one of the arrows in the quiver, so to speak. It's tragic what had happened in Minneapolis. It's tragic that that has been going on for for generations and for centuries. But it certainly has been picking up steam for whatever reason since 2000. But I think, you know, we here in the city of Alameda, you know, we have the police force in place that can understand how to respond to these kind of situations and as culturally appropriate manner as possible. We've grown so much since the early 1990s and we all know what I'm talking about. And ah, but you know, the progress that we've made notwithstanding I think we owe it to the residents and we also owe it especially to the shop, small shopkeepers to be proactive by allowing us to have the curfew as as at least one of the areas in our quiver. So I certainly support that. I really wish everyone to be safe, not just in Alameda, but in San Leandro and in the city of Oakland. But I also want to say to the men and women who. Who serves in the police force and often the fire departments. I want them to be safe as well. So I think one of one way to achieve that in this very, very difficult time is by having a curfew as one of and done on a case by case basis. By the way, I'm not sure I want to have a six day curfew, 8 to 5. But I think I have full confidence that the police department, as well as the city manager's office, can, can on a moment's notice, pull a curfew. For the right reasons. I have faith that they would do so. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Desai. So I will go last. And I want to say that we balance a lot of competing interests always, and this is particularly true in this particular instance. So we're balancing personal liberties. On the other hand, I have zero interest in protecting looters. We are not talking about peaceful protests or even protests that get noisy and messy. I will support those. Every day of the week. But what we have seen in other cities and right next door in San Leandro is not only looting, but also gunfire being shot and not by not by police. And at some point, someone's going to get hurt. There have been some pretty outrageous burglaries at cannabis dispensaries in the area, and one of them involved an armed carjacking. I understand. And at some point, someone, some citizen is going to get hurt. And we also need to look at the the personal safety, certainly, of our residents and our businesses. And these are businesses I mean, we never prioritize, prioritize public safety or, you know, businesses and merchandise over personal safety. But what we're talking about is allowing our businesses to open up again. And so these are folks who are employers. These are small businesses. We're helping them with a community fund because some of them are close to going under. And we we want to make sure that this is a safe city for people who live here, for people who come to visit, for people who work here, who have their businesses here. And I did get some emails this morning asking me as well as mayor, are you going to. Are you following, you know, the president's directives about getting tough? And, you know, I can't even use the sort of language I would like to in public. But, no, I absolutely am not. And in fact, what I've told more than one person who inquired is that I, as a mayor, one of many mayors across this city, know how hard we have all been working, along with our governors, to keep our residents safe during the COVID crisis. And we have implored the federal government for help from our for our cities. We haven't gotten it. All we have gotten is trash talk from the the current occupant of the White House. So, no, that is that is not my motivation whatsoever. And so I don't want to conflate those incidents, you know, last night in Lafayette Park and using tear gas to disperse peaceful demonstrators so the president could have a photo opportunity in front of Saint John's Church. This is not what we're talking about. And I can assure you that our police department, our police chief and working with our city manager and city attorney, they did not take lightly the decision to impose a curfew. And certainly, you know, working within the structure that we find ourselves in, in Alameda County, this is not a decision that is taken lightly. I, too, would like to see it be as brief as possible, but I am willing to cede that authority to our city manager who is in charge in an emergency informed by our police chiefs, and they'll run it by the city attorney. The city attorney has already advised us that, well, maybe I won't go into it. The city attorney has advised us, come to think of it. But but we we followed the city attorney's advice as well. So I am I think the vice mayor summed it up pretty concisely the way I would. And I, I think I've heard more than one of my colleagues say this as well, that you would like to see a curfew declared maybe on a day to day basis. People have. I've made suggestions about what I think is very valid about some upcoming events that could lead to, again, protests, demonstrations, outpouring of emotion. Those are all protected by the First Amendment. Violence and looting is not. And so on. And I do believe that our city manager wants to weigh in, since we're all talking about what we'd like to give him authority to do so. And Councilmember, a councilmember would welcome to the council, the city manager, Mr. Levitt. So I appreciate all the comments. And I think I'm I think I'm out. No, you're good. Okay. I've heard all the comments. And and I do want to explain a couple of things, because the public comments came after my initial discussion and after the assistance they meijer's presentation. There were factors that were looked at some of the factors, and I want to just for public purpose, talk about them for the two days. One was I knew the councilmember was councilman was coming in two days, so I wasn't going to do it for more than two days because I wanted to give the council the opportunity. The second was the vandalism and damage that occurred on Sunday night and surrounding communities was a factor in the decision. And rumors of potential targets in Alameda coming Monday night was a factor also. And then when many of the cities around us started doing it, that became a factor also. Those were some of the factors that led to it. On Monday I was talked about, it was brought to me as an option. During the weekend I did not see those same factors during the weekend. That and that's why I waited till Monday. And even on Monday was a difficult decision because I agree with many of the council members when you talk about the liberties and that being the foundation of our country. And and so I think that this is a concerning issue when you look at all of that. So one option I do have the declaration of emergency in my in my view, is different than the the then the curfew and the declaration of emergency is because we may have to have more . And I do see this happening probably over the next week or two where we'll have to have more public safety resources, either fire or police or a combination of the two. And the declaration of emergency allows us to document that if we were to get reimbursement from the federal government through the county. And so that's where I see that through the 16th. One option on the curfew, as are two options I would give, is either not provide me with the authority to do the curfew or provide authority through maybe the 10th. But if I am going to do more than one day or more than two days in a row, it has to come back for council action to go further than that. Those would be the two options I would recommend. So to just restate that, so separate the declaration of authority, declaration of emergency from issuing a curfew. And if you issue a curfew, it would not be for more than two days without going back to the Council for authority. That would be correct. That would be my recommendation. Or not give me authority for the curfew at all. Either of those. Okay. All right. I see the vice mayor had to say, oh, I think council member Ella had her hand up sooner. So. Councilmember Vela, vice mayor. Not quite in that order, please. Thank you. So really quick. I think, you know, I have a couple questions again, how well the curfew is that? Could you explain how that how having the curfew will make it safer in those events that the city manager listed? I think the answer to that would be helpful is, is that we think clearing off the streets will make it safer. And then for individuals who are traveling under the exemption, what do our police officers, what do they need to do to make sure that it's a safe encounter? Because there are people that have to go to and from work and our police chief, our police officers are just going to be pulling people over. I would like to put out there what people need to do to ensure that they're not going to get hassled or detained or anything or cited unnecessarily. The other thing the other thing that I want to put out there is, you know, I think these are this is a major decision to cede authority to three people who are unelected. And so, you know, I feel very strongly about that. My question is, could we have a special city council meeting in a week, for instance, to see about extending the declaration of emergency? So could we do it for a week and then have another special meeting in a week to decide if we need to have it extended a week? You know, it's interesting. I just. My thoughts. We have a council referral later this same meeting about special meetings and how much notice needs to be given. So, you know, maybe we'll have to weigh all that at the time. I'm not sure what the answer would be, but could we hear from Chief O'Leary as to Councilmember Vella's questions about how there's a curfew make us safer? And what sorts of advice would you give to someone who might be pulled over? And maybe just let's start with a threshold question of who who is likely to be pulled over in a curfew in Alameda. Okay. So I'll try to answer answer this on the fly as best as I can. I'm going to make a make a quick comparison. Just like a couple of months ago, the thought of a county health order and a shelter in place for a pandemic was kind of, you know, off the radar for all of us. And when we jumped into it, what happened was we found that we were we everything that we've done for the last couple of months has been uncharted territory. This is uncharted territory. I've been a police officer for 31 years. This is the first time this has happened. So we're so everybody is trying to still figure it out. Electeds, police departments, the sheriff's office, everybody. You had civil unrest before. We've never in my career gotten to this point. So the only you had a call earlier that asked about data, the how do we know it's successful? I guess my honest answer is the only the only data I can give you is that on Saturday and Sunday night, we had lots of activity on when the when the shelter or the curfew went into effect. Everything dropped. And it wasn't just here. San Leandro, Hayward, Fremont, every everybody that had problems, big problems the night before, they all reduced last night. Maybe it was a coincidence. I'm trying to be as honest with you as I can. I don't know. My my role as an unelected but appointed police chief is to try to take care of public safety in Alameda. That is both protecting people and property. I'm trying to do that. We are trying to do that the best we can. I think we've done a good job. I will continue to try to do that with or without a curfew. The the reassurances that I could give the council and the public are the same as I would for any other law enforcement interaction. We try all the time to do the right thing, the right way in practice, constitutionally sound policing. Not to profile. Not to violate people's civil rights. We have not written any tickets on since the curfew was issued. We have only written a couple of citations on the county health order. We are primarily trying to educate people and get them to just be in compliance with the order so that we can, in the case of COVID, stop the spread of the virus. In the case of the the curfew that the sheriff imposed is to try to keep the city safe. Having fewer cars and fewer people on the road helps us with our response times. There's fewer cars on the road. There's fewer obstructions we are able to get from point A to point B more quickly. Does it guarantee prevention of crime? Absolutely not. Nothing does. Boarding up a business doesn't. Having 50 police officers on the street doesn't guarantee that we will stop crime. So if the notion is, well, we stop crime by having a curfew, the answer is no, we won't. And do we have a shot at maybe reducing it or helping our chances of catching people who are who are committing crimes? Yes, I believe it does. But we are still in the first couple of days of this, and it's uncharted territory. Thank you to you for Larry. Okay. With that counsel, do we have a vice mayor? Yes. I'm so sorry. You were. You were next. Sorry. Sorry. That's okay. It's just procedural question. With an emergency urgency meeting. Is that a 24 hour notice? Is it possible for us to do it on any shorter? A I'm sorry, I'm looking at even, but of course you can't tell me. I'm the city attorney. Okay. Mr. said. Yes. So the under state law, there are two ways to do an emergency ordinance. You could do it with a 24 hour notice. And if there are severe enough emergencies, we could even do it with a one hour notice. If it's just totally necessary. We have to make the finding under both that there are serious public public health and safety concerns that require the Council to meet under those circumstances. But it's either 24 hours or one hour of absolutely necessary. Thank you very much. So I would be interested in considering whether we could put a couple of special meetings on the books for later this week, possibly for Thursday afternoon and Friday afternoon, just to have a space where people know we may be we can always cancel them, but that we would have the House in our reserve so that if it looks like things are, you know, a curfew is going to be needed, we can have, you know, I believe Thursday is probably the next likely place where if something was going to happen, where where a curfew was probably going to be necessary for the city to respond to. I know I know the county has declared this. I really don't you know, I'm not confident they have the authority to do that. I'm not I would prefer our council, actually our city, take that decision. And if there is a general feeling this is coming, I don't know why it would we wouldn't just put that on the put that on the books and cancel it. If it look if if if that feels comfortable in that way, we could have the conversation before that before the curfew is called. And I just I hear. Right. A couple of my colleagues having some some big concerns. And I do think we can just proactively solve those concerns. Um, masks the city attorney. I, I guess I don't understand. Or maybe I need the vice mayor to clarify if the county's order is in effect until 5 p.m. Friday morning. And if you believe that we are. Bound by that order. I do. Not. I'm sorry. I was asking the city attorney. And so, Mr. Shin, if if you believe that we are bound by the the county's order, what would be accomplished by a special meeting and what sir just explained what emergency we would be moving forward under. Right. And so so that relates to a recommendation I was going to make to the council, which is that the council could call an emergency meeting with 24 hours or one hour notice. At this moment, if the council wants to schedule a meeting, let's say, two days out based on certain emergencies. It would be helpful for staff to provide you with some emergency basis as to what imminent threat to health, safety and welfare that would justify the the calling of the meeting. The police chief could probably do that and you may want to call on him. Alternatively, you could just reserve time if you wish, so that at least you are available to the extent that staff believes that there's need for you to to to convene without actually calling for the emergency meeting. If you believe that there's not enough factual basis at this moment to call an emergency meeting within 48 hours. I hope that helps answer the question. Sure. So I. Yes, Vice Mayor. Sorry, this pertains to the question I was asking. So could we also continue the discussion of the curfew to a time certain two days from now? You see Mr. Sandia? Yes. My apologies, sir. Yes. You could continue this item to a time. Certain? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. All right. So what's the. So, Councilmember Vela, you are out of time. I would need a motion for you to speak again. And I will just remind people that it's 830. So how much time do you think you need? 20 seconds. I had a question. Okay. Do I have a we'll give you a move. To give the city councilmember an extra minute. All right. And it's been seconded. All in favor, a roll call vote, please. People shouting, Madam Clerk. Councilmember Daza. Yes. Knox Light. Yes. Odie. Yes, Bella. Yes. Mayor has the. Yes. Okay. Go ahead, Councilmember. Thank you, Madam Clerk. There were there was a question, I thought, by the vice mayor that if we don't agree with the assessment that the county has authority over us, what can we do about the curfew if we don't believe that the sheriff has jurisdiction? What, if anything, can we do? Okay. So for the city attorney, correct? Yes. Okay. Yes. Councilmember, if you're if your question is whether or not about whether the city could implement a curfew, I think you have complete discretion whether to continue, modify, extend or terminate the curfew. That's the city's curfew. I have I hope that the question that you're asking. You know, if we if we don't have a curfew and we disagree with the authority of Sheriff Ahern to implement a curfew, like if we're saying we don't want a curfew, and then the county has said, no, we have a curfew. What, if anything, can the council do? Do you want to challenge that authority? The council could. So I would suggest that we agenda this as soon as possible for the council to direct our office to take legal action. And then it's about a curfew that has to last until Friday morning or if it goes beyond that or what Councilmember Bell helped help me understand. If we do not vote to extend the curfew tonight, then, but we don't want to recognize the existing curfew for this week. Understanding that he could extend it. And so came city attorneys. And you were you were starting to say we would need to. Get the council to take a vote to direct a to convene. My recommendation will be in closed session to discuss the potential initiation of litigation, and we'd be happy to have that conversation with you. All right. I think I saw Councilmember Otis hand up. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'd be interested in having that discussion. I appreciated the chief's response about constitutional policing. And through no fault of your own or any of your officers. There's still a fear among people of color doing day to day things that people that look like me can do without any any fear. So you know what? What can we tell that? I don't and I'm not expecting you to answer this. Maybe the city manager I mean, what can we tell? But people of color that live in town, you know what they can do? Well, what can we tell them to help with that fear that when they get pulled over, you know, something untoward is going to happen? Because like I said, it's not anything you had done or your officers have done, but it's just institutionalized in their in their brains. That's what I wanted here. I'm sorry, Councilmember. I understood you to say you did not need me to answer that question or you want me to. I mean, you could, but, you know, it doesn't matter. I don't I don't care who answers it. It's just something I'm struggling with and. I don't. I don't drive or walk. I don't run. But if I did, I wouldn't run with that fear. You know, so I think people's emotions are heightened now. And, you know, we're basically taking a day implementing a very strong law enforcement policy at a time when emotions and feelings are pretty highly wrought and tight. So how do we what do we tell people that are people of color that are driving to our city after 8:00? To help him, you know, navigate, pull over. Or, you know, a neighbor calling the cops on them. I'm just. I don't know. So I'll take a stab at this. And I think we're going to be coming around and talking about this more a little bit later in the meeting. I'll tell you what I told the people that were demonstrating in front of the police department yesterday afternoon, what I've told people in emails and other statements that I've made over the past week. We can all talk. Police chiefs. Elected officials. We cannot talk about things that are broken and wrong in this country. In this country, and and specifically with policing in the United States. And the history and the. The absolute valid concerns that people have about what happened to George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and to Eric Garner and to a number of people around the country. We've all seen those stories. That's real stuff. And I understand it and I get it. It doesn't matter what I say. It matters what we do. It's words and deeds. You all need a police department. Knock on wood has not been involved in a shooting in 15 years. We have 64,000 calls for service and about 3500 or 4000 arrests per year. We have about 30 uses of force per year on average. At 64,000 public interactions, it's very low, less than 1%. I can say whatever I want. I'm a white male police officer. Police chief. I'm asking people to consider the fact that despite things that have happened in the past, that this police department being run by me today. That you are safe in this community. We're going to talk about an incident later tonight where people might beg to differ. But all the facts aren't out yet, and I'm going to fix that. 30 uses of force per year on average for the last five or six years running without the stats in front of me. I'm pretty confident that's the right number. Less than 1%. Very few personal complaints. And not a shooting in 15 years. We're doing things right. We're doing something right. Are we perfect? No. Well, we make mistakes. Yes, we will. Absolutely. And it's my job. My job as the chief to own up to those when we do and to fix what's wrong. That's what I would tell people if they gave us the time when we stop them. If we stop somebody now in the middle of curfew, it's going to be please go home. It's not safe. Go home, be with your family. And as a and as a double bonus, help stop the spread of the COVID virus. That's what I would tell them. Okay. MORODER Thank you for that. And I guess I would say. To those of us who are not police officers. Stop calling the police. When? People of color are doing things that you get to enjoy freely, whether it's exercising, whether it's jogging, whether it's birdwatching, shopping. Having a picnic in the park. You know, it's just got to stop. And I wanted to see. Well said. Thank you, Councilmember Brody. Um, Counsel, do we want to. Call a special meeting to possibly bring litigation? Or do we want to give our city manager narrow directions, possibly following up on his own suggestions? We've we've heard it said this evening that Thursday, maybe even Friday might be pivotal days. And the county order extends until 5 p.m. this Friday morning. Do we want to initiate or have some limitation of if that curfew were extended beyond 5 a.m. on June 5th, then we might call a special meeting. What do we think counts on everybody? Yes. The city manager can hurt me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the curfew was for five days. But there was discretion to go to seven, right? I read in I read the order this morning and it said it was in effect until 5 a.m. June 5th, unless rescinded earlier, unless there has been an update today. But I, I went on the website this morning. Am I missing something? I thought there was a two day. I thought there was a two day. Maybe someone can help me on that. Okay. And I'm actually going to ask the city attorney or the city manager have it have information specifically about the order. And I'll get to you in just a minute. Vice Mayor. Mr. Levitt? LEVITT Let me look at that. I had the same understanding and understanding as the mayor that it ended on Friday. There are other cities that are through the eight, but let me double check if I can find anything more other on the county order. Maybe I should have asked. Assistant Manager. City. Assistant City Manager. Mr. Bowden, since this is your item. Yeah. Just put everybody on the staff on the spot. We have the version that was available publicly yesterday attached to the staff report. And the it the exact language of the order shall remain in effect until June 5th at 5 a.m., or unless rescinded earlier due to restoration of public order and safety. That's the that was the guiding language that we use to draft the staff report, and that's what's attached. I read that same language this morning. Vice Mayor, you had your hand up. Do you have a more current version or something? No. I was going to point out that the sheriff took the authority and used it. Whether it says it ends on the fifth or not on the fifth, he could say it goes to the 10th one. And precisely the distinction I was trying to make was, could we have something that said we would call a special meeting if there didn't appear, you know, without any indication of necessity, the county order was extended that. But again, I'm just going by what a couple of my colleagues have pointed out about events to be anticipated this week. So if I were to make a motion and I'll make it an offer, I will I will offer a couple of possible alternatives. But I would I would move that we declare this the state of emergency for the next two weeks. The state of emergency allows us to collect the funds that we need to if there are any costs that come up and does not give, I think undo. We already have a state of emergency in place that gives the city staff the authority to do a lot. So I think that's insane to me. That is mostly about about that. I would I would grant if it were me, I would grant our staff the ability to identify two days for curfews and if we were going to engage in more than two more days and I have two specific days and I'm thinking possibly could come up that there would be an emergency council meeting to discuss further, and that I would suggest that we'd prioritize enforcement of the counties. I don't want to get into a legal fight with the with the county in the middle of this, in the middle of this emergency. I think that that's just not a that's not where we are at this point in time, although I do think we need to kind of address this ongoing issue, given that this is coming up at some point in time in the future. But I would ask that we prioritize enforcement of the curfew unless the city has declared there's a curfew in our city, and that would be the way we would do it. And if people are acting badly, that doesn't mean we can't fight them if we're acting badly. But we would not pull people over because they're out after curfew. Mr. Knotts. Mr. Vice Mayor, may I ask you to tell us what the additional two days are would be that you referenced? Well, in my mind, it would be the memorial service on Thursday and then possible and then the the funeral in Houston on June 9th. I think those are the two most likely times. And then if they decide not to charge the officer, I mean, things are going to come up. So I think I have two ideas where I think it's probably likely that, you know, we could see. For me, this is about the stretched resources of our of our officers and the region's officers and keeping people safe and much. I think the chief was correct. At the end of the day, we are talking about you were never going to be able to prove it worked, but we're certainly going to prove it. Did you know, we should have done something? And, you know, I personally believe that our chief and the city manager will make or will take the series the decision very seriously. Thank you. Is not going to be made lightly. Thank you for your comments. I see the city manager is indicating he'd like to speak. Mr. Levitt, please. I just had a clarification. My clarification is if within your motion that it would be no more than two days cumulatively. Yes. Okay. Correct. Okay. Without getting special counsel permission. Right. Right. Okay. Got it. Okay. We have had a motion. Do we have a second? I think I see. I see misdirection. Okay, counselor. Everyday. Third question, then I'll go to you, Councilman Brody. So I guess I just need to understand the practical effect of this. So what does this mean? Does this mean that. Let's see. Our current curfew ends tomorrow morning at five. Right. Is that right? Friday morning at five. Friday morning at five. So does that mean that if we want to extend it for two more day. Hours in the city? Uh huh. So. So I guess I just need to know, what does the two day cumulative mean? What's the practical effect of that? If we can explain it not just to me, but to the residents. Yeah. Mr. Levitt, back to you. Well, the way I understand it, so just so I'm clear and it helps me to and just explain it, we understand it as our curfew ends tomorrow morning, Wednesday morning at 8 a.m. and at 5 a.m.. And so then if I were to let's say, just for example, to declare a Thursday and a Friday, let's say Thursday , let's say let's even say the next two days, Wednesday and Thursday, which that's not my intent. I'm just using as an example, Wednesday and Thursday, 5 to 8 or 8 to 5 and then 8 to 5. Then I would not again have any more authority until it came back to council. Okay. That was Wednesday. And then it just wouldn't have any more authority. Just needed to have that spoken out loud. Thank you. I think it's a good idea. Okay. Councilor Brody. Thank you. Also get the motion, but. I think at least until Thursday. In the county on Friday morning when the county order expires. I would give the city manager discretion. And after that, I'd want to weigh in like. Whether it's Friday or Saturday to extend it over the weekend. You know, Monday. I'm sure you would give the city manager discretion to extend the curfew until. Until the county one is set to expire now. And then if we want to if he feels we need to go further, then we can meet on a Friday and have that discussion. I see. Okay. I mean, I guess so. I mean, what I worry about is that county shut down and that we're technically not shut down. And then, you know, it's open season on Alameda. Right. I mean, no. Way to be covered again. Mr.. I think you're out of time. And I believe Madam Kirk, you might have added the extra minute. Yes. Already. Dickie has already said that. Okay, um, let's see if we're getting close to wrapping it up as you've made the second call. That has already made the second. Okay. Any further discussion? Yes. Councilmember Vella. Quickly. Could it be could the motion be separated out? Because there's some parts of it that I would be willing to support, but I'm not willing to support granting additional authority for a curfew without counsel weighing in. I support Dee Dee prioritizing stops when we don't have a priority, when we don't have a curfew in alameda and I support the emergency declaration. The maker of the motion vice mayor. Happy to bifurcate that. And can I maybe even the city attorney can clarify better than me. But the urgency ordinance you are adopting both declares the emergency and has curfew language. So, you know, whatever curfew language you decide will be imposed in that ordinance. And so that will be one motion on that ordinance. Just to clarify and then any other direction on prioritization would be the separate motion. So just so everybody's clear, what's in the ordinance is being okay. Okay. All right. And then the separate about deprioritized enforcement. If the curfew goes more than. Now. Correct. That's. For now, prioritizing, prioritizing enforcement if it's only a curfew and there is no city curfew. Got it. Okay. All right. So, Councilmember Dessa. Just quickly, I think I understand the energy behind the position of the prioritizing a county curfew when it does not coincide with the city of Alamitos curfew. I think I understand the energy behind it. But I'm concerned, though, that that we as a city, we still have to coordinate with the county on a variety of things that are public safety related. And I don't I'm concerned that things are not as easy as they might seem. So my my encouragement would be to phrase it in the positive. But having said that, I understand I think I understand the energy behind, you know. Where that. Language is coming from. And I'll just leave it at that. Thank you. All right. So. And, Madam, quick, are you clear on the motion we're about to vote on? I believe the will take two votes. The first vote will be on the ordinance itself, and then the second vote will be on the direction item. So we'll have two votes. All right. Maybe we have a roll call vote, please. On the first I. Wait, wait. Um, I can't. I mean, city manager. Mr. Leavitt. Mr.. Lemieux The first motion I understand the declaration of emergency. I don't I I'm not sure if it's to. To. I'm not sure if it's. No. Um. No curfew. Days to curfew a few days cumulatively. Or curfew days only through the end of the county order. I'm not sure which of the three that motion is that at this point. Mr. Vice Mayor, as make of the motion, you want to clarify. That that's too cumulative. To me, it's it's we are we're in Section four. We're ratifying the city manager's June 1st. Curfew order is ratified. The council extends the curfew until June 3rd, 5 a.m. five. That that's tonight. We would I guess here's my question, because I know that Councilmember Vela is concerned about the curfew language. That is the piece that she is would like to vote separately on. Is there a way for us to vote on the giving authority as a second to ordinance? And I guess that the question for the city city attorney. Mr. Shin. You're muted still, Mr. Sheen. My apologies. My suggestion to actually vote on the curfew language first. So that will be clear whether or not there are four votes for any amount of curfew and what it is. And then you take an overall vote on the ordinance. The ordinance is one ordinance, but take the vote on the curfew language first. If it doesn't garner four votes, then you take a vote on the ordinance and essentially just take out the curfew language if it's if they're not four votes to move forward. Sounds like the curfew is the one that will have a split of votes. So my suggestion that you whatever curfew direction you want to give you vote on that first, then you vote on the ordinance recognizing that you have four votes to do something about curfews. And if not, then you just strike it. Okay. So we've got to or we've got the curfew regulations. We have to ratify those, don't we? So I suggest you do all of that last. So I think the first vote might suggest that the first vote you take relates to the curfew language, and then you either find four votes to agree on curfew language or if not, then we'll know that there is no agreement on curfew language which must be struck from the ordinance. And then you vote on the rest. And when you say curfew language, are you referring to the language in the curfew regulations, which are exhibit one? No, no. Talking about curfews going forward. Choose to live day. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So a suggestion would be that that that the motion that was made, whatever motion about going forward gets made, whether it's two days, two days cumulatively or no curfew, and see if you can achieve a four vote on something about curfews going forward. And if you're unable to then work a strike that's actually completely from the ordinance, because you if you could not achieve for both going forward on the curfew, then, you know, you can vote on the rest. Sounds like there is unanimity on the rest. All right. And so the city manager's had his hand up. Did you want to address this to. I think, though, what the two council members are asking for, is there a way to split split it where you could, let's say, not to the curfew, take the curfew out of the ordinance, vote on that, and then vote to amend the ordinance that way. Kashmir Valley could vote on the ordinance without the curfew language, and then they could have a second vote on adding the curfew language. I think that's what the question is, that I've heard both from Councilmember Bhalla and Vice Mayor. Not quite. Hey, Council Vice Mayor, you're smiling. Did you. Say that? Wasn't my question, but it was a really good idea. Yes, that's what I would like to do. Okay. Um, okay. So. So my proposal would be to amend the amended motion to approve the the emergency declaration as written, allowing the current curfew to extend through 5 a.m. tomorrow. And then we will take a second to talk about whether or not we give additional to amend to amend the ordinance, to give additional authority for future curfews. If that. Information. Mr. Councilor BRODY. So then Section four, we'll just have a period at the end of city council. Right. No and extends the curfew order until June 3rd, 5 a.m.. So it extends it through tonight? Well, I think it's Section four is ratified with the saying the city manager's June 1st order is ratified. Okay. Put a period there that would that would suffice. Great. Perfect. Brilliant. Even better then. Okay. Okay. Okay. Was that a second, Mr. Rudy? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Maybe we have a roll call vote, please. Madam Clerk. Councilmember Desai. Okay. Not quite. I. I. I may or as the Ashcroft. I. That carries by five eyes. Okay next I move that we that the city council amend the order. The ordinance we just passed to provide the city manager with the authority to institute two curfews. No more than two nights of curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m.. During the extent of the of the current state of emergency. All second. And is that consecutive or any two days? Any two days. All right. Executive or. All right. So we've had a motion by the vice mayor who seconded that councilmember. They say, in fact, make us one riverside discussion. Councilmember Odie. Quickly can we add on there without. Unless there's further authorization from the council. Sure. Okay. Yeah. Uh. Uh. Okay. Yes, exactly. Yep. Okay. As the make of the motion, I accept. All right. Okay. So. Okay. Okay. So the modified motion has been remade or remade as modified. Seconded a motion by the vice mayor, seconded by councilmember. Suddenly we have a roll call vote with. Councilmember de sag. Night. Not quite. I. Hi, Vella. No merit craft. I. That carries 41. Okay. And then was there one more mission? Or have we taking care of it all? I believe we want to do it. Yeah. Okay. So who wants to make that motion? Castmember Vela. So my motion would be that where there is no city of Alameda curfew in place that our police enforce spend their resources prioritizing and enforcing non curfew related incidences and reports. Is that. I'm trying to get here second that motion. So I. I have a I have a technical question maybe for the city attorney. Is is that within the authority of the council to direct police enforcement activities? I just, you know, love tossing hard balls. So, yeah, I think so. Yeah. I think I. Can reword it. Um, well, let's hear from the city attorney. And what, you know, how this might work or not is. You know. I think if the council provides overall policy direction, then the police chief undertakes its enforcement duties consistent with its obligations under state and local law. So I think they have stated policy preference. Okay. Any. Any language modifications you want to make? Councilmember fellas. Okay. Could we. Could we hear that motion restated, please, madam, quick. So I have that. There. The police would not be involved in any curfew related incidents when the city is not under a curfew. That they said. I don't think that's you know, I don't think. Okay, wait, wait. Let's let's wait. Let's wait in here. Speak one at a time. I'll call on you if you want to raise your hand that you want to speak. And then I think let's hear from the city attorney first. So so I think the motion with it, the council's policy preference would be that the city prioritize its use of resources to enforce laws other than the county's curfew order, to the extent reasonable use of resources would allow for that, consistent with the police chief law enforcement discretion. Councilman Avila, as maker of the motion, sends out. Okay. All right. Do and and that a matter of ice monoxide would be a second, correct? Yes, that would be confirmation of my second. Great. Oh, you've signaled already. Okay. So I wasn't sure what we were voting on, but I'm glad you were. So let's have a roll call. This. Oh, this guy. Sorry, sorry, sorry. So, Councilmember Dave. I think the one change that I would suggest is unless there was a call for mutual aid where our our police are going to go outside of Alameda, because I think the literal interpretation of this is they can't join in mutual aid activity if we don't have I mean, that's my that's my literal interpretation of what what's before us. And that's get back to what I was getting at earlier when I mentioned that there might be some wrinkles to this that we're not really. Go ahead. Let's go back to the Make or the Motion Council regardless. In my opinion, if there was a call for mutual aid, they could still respond to a call for mutual aid. It's just that I would want them to prioritize non curfew related calls that we're getting here in Alameda. What I heard was that the reason for the curfew in the city of Alameda is that we have a concern about overstretching our resources. And to that end, I would want to make sure that our resources are spent on responding to other reports. So if there's a report of a 459 or something like that, I would want us to be responding to that, not just pulling people over for curfew related things in town. So just to clearly you wouldn't be referring to a request for mutual aid? No. Okay. Does that satisfy your inquiry? Councilmember Garza. Actually, whether it does or not. We need to vote people. Okay. And this one also takes a does it take for affirmative votes? It's a 3 to 4 policy. It's direction. Okay. It is the council expressing its policy preference. Okay. Okay. And Madam Mayor, you are not a man. I am the mayor. Madam City Clerk. You got the the the clarification from the maker of the motion. Yes. Correct. Yes. All right, then. May we have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember de SAG. Yeah. I'm satisfied to be delayed. Yes. Next time. I. O.D.. Yes. Bella. I may or has as Ashcraft. High. That carries by five vice. All right, I want to motion. Sorry. Oh, one motion. Yes. To schedule a special closed session to discuss legal issues regarding the sheriff's order. A second. Okay. A motion to schedule a special meeting. Okay. Okay. Closed session. The potential litigation. All right. Um, okay. And city attorney, I'm trying to read your expression. Do you want to? I'm not a mind reader. All right. Let's hear from the city attorney, then the vice mayor. City attorney. If the council wants to schedule a initiation of litigation, the council can certainly direct us to do so, though, given that as soon as we would be able to do it, it's probably tomorrow and the order expires on Friday. Timing wise, it's not clear to me when you'd like to have it. We certainly could do it as soon as tomorrow. If you would like. And so I think, you know, obviously, we want to understand when you're what your timing looks like and whether or not it's tomorrow or your next regular meeting or a special meeting next week. And I'm happy to you know, we're obviously happy to take your direction however you like to proceed. Councilmember Ody. I hope it's moot by next week, but. I don't know. I don't know what he's going to do. I don't know if we would be interested in joining or some other city challenges. Maybe we're not. I don't know. That's why we would have the meeting. If I might comment, I. These are certainly important, serious issues. I'm also trying to be mindful of the amount of work our city staff is juggling right now with all the things that are before us. And so this is not to diminish the significance of what you're suggesting. I just wonder if if it has to be as soon as tomorrow, that makes people jump through a lot of hoops to get to pull together some sort of preparation. But I'm wondering if you had a, you know, some sort of. A how about we do it on Thursday? Because I think. I think we could give a different direction based on different possible outcomes. On Thursday or not, I mean, I don't know. And now pre-judging what decision we're going to make. All right. We do need to keep moving, people. That's past 9:00. So I guess if you want to make a motion, I not I guess you have every right to make a motion. So let me. Get a motion in a second on this. I think I think it was modified, actually. Because yesterday. It's Thursday. It's not tomorrow. Right. Okay, second, I second the modification. I mean. A comment. Can somebody say. Well, thank you. I do have 2 minutes, though. Um, I will say this much, you know, with the looting and mayhem that are going on in places like, uh, San Leandro and Fremont, I think now is not the time to go after the sheriff's department. We need to work with them. Um, through the mutual aid approach. Um, and I think this goes counter to that. In fact, we might need the help through that process. So you pursuing litigation now, I think is, is not the right time. If there are concerns about the way in which the sheriff's departments operate. I think there are better times than that now to deal with those policy issues in as clean a manner as possible. But right now, we're in a whirlwind of sorts. And so we're just trying to hang on on behalf of our residents, in terms of keeping them safe and our small businesses and keeping them safe as well. So I don't support litigation against the sheriff's department. Um, and my, my preference would be to wait and see what happens in the, in the days that you've noted that some very significant events are going to take place. And then, you know, I have I have concern, too, with with blanket orders. But I was also very alarmed over the weekend, not quite knowing where this was all going to end. But I, I think this week might be a little too soon, especially given the fact that Thursday is a day that was out, is, I believe, said the memorial service. But we. Did anyone want to comment? Anyone else? One comment. Okay. Vice Mayor. I. Struggling. Sorry, I am unmuted. I am struggling on this. I am Thursdays. I mean, the problem is, is that right now the thing ends on Friday, 5 a.m. at 5 a.m. If we wanted to schedule something for Thursday because it got extended beyond Friday, I would be able be willing to do that with the idea that we would cancel it if it had not been if it had not been extended. I just I it feels a little odd. I agree with councilmember deciding if things are really going crazy on Thursday. I don't really want to be pulling our staff resources into a into a conversation at that time to talk about something that's going to end before we could do anything about it. And so I would be willing to support them if we could have that kind of qualifier that will move forward. If not. If so, if not, we can I would say let's see if there's a way for us to figure out how to schedule this conversation in closed session for potential litigation moving forward at our next session meeting, I would be supportive of having it in two weeks. Make sure of the motion, Mr. Cody. Real briefly. I mean, I think I hope it will be moot by then, but I'm willing to agree to scheduling it Thursday if the sheriffs order is extended. Because if it ever dies, then it's going to be moot, in my opinion. Okay. And if it's extended for any length of time, even 24 hours. Well, yeah, because that's what gives us an opportunity to do something on Friday. But personally, I think this is a constitutional issue and I feel like our our sovereignty is being infringed on. I could be wrong. But as a discussion, it would be good to have. So I'll call the question. Now you've got a motion on the floor. You need to call the question. And I. I believe it's been modified. So anything more? I mean. Okay. I mean, let's have a let's have a roll call. The Madam. Quick. Council member said. No, not quite. I just want to ask to clarify. It has to take the soccer ball. It has the modifier that if it is extended, is a part of the motion. Okay. And I. Odie. Hi. Vella. I may or as the Ashcroft. Oh. Well. Hi. Or we can just. Yeah, I, we can discuss it, but, um. This like Kerry scored to one. Okay. All right. Um. Thank you, everyone. So with that, we adjourn this special meeting of the city council, and we move into our regular meeting. Anybody want a quick break? Okay. Okay. We are. And apologies to the audience, but we are going to take a what time is it? It is 911. Okay, everyone, can we be back in our seats by nine 2020? Yeah. Okay. See you. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thank you to for Larry. We are now starting the regular city council meeting. And could we please have the roll call? Madam, quick. Roll call has been noted. Five present. Thank you. Do we have any agenda changes? Hearing. And then we're going to move to proclamations and special orders of the day. Well, there are two proclamations that are entered into the record. They won't be presented today because when we do our remote meetings, we try to condense things a little bit. And that is a proclamation declaring the month of June 2020 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Pride Month, and also a proclamation declaring the month of June 2020 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month. And there is, however, one exception I'm making, and we are presenting a proclamation on behalf of someone that I think everyone on this council