Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee's proposed funding recommendations, as amended, to the FY 19 Proposed Budget.  (A-12)
Weight. Thank you very much. We're now going on to the next item, which is the the the larger of our discussions. But that's okay. And that's item 1.12. If we can please have the concreted. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committees, propose funding recommendations as amended to the FY19 proposed budget. Thank you. I'm going to turn this over first to I know we're going to discuss this. So what I'd like is I think Councilman Mongo is going to go through her the narrative, right. That's different. You want to do it that way? We just go to the narrative. Yes, we read the motion in the record. She can say or make whatever amendments she'd like to the B or C recommendation. If it's accepted by the floor, then we can have a vote on that. Okay. I know that there's some conversation that folks want to have, so let me let Councilman Mongo bring that forward. Okay. So a couple of amendments. One is an amendment to the city manager fund to. In partnership with a recommendation from Council Member Austin to request a friendly amendment to supplement the 200,001 time funds for youth with 100,000 contingent appropriation for senior programing. I do want to make a comment on the totality, and while I appreciate Councilmember Richardson's comments about the community and their organized efforts, there is a lot to be said for the members of our community that are on the Youth and Children's Support Commission. And our commissions are another component of community input, along with for the Seniors Share the Senior Citizen Advisory Commission. The mayor asked me to kind of provide some context for where we received our ideas based on the information we had for getting the Parks and Recreation Director to make along with the work force director to make recommendations . But that does not limit what the commissions would be able to come out with. More for the point to acknowledge that one many afterschool programs had been cut and the Parks and Rec director had managed those and knows and understands where those were, what those attendances were, where the community need has been requested. I know that Councilwoman Gonzalez on many occasions has activated some of her parks through some funding. That was not in any budget this year. And he has the ability to bring that forward along with Councilmember Austin's requests. And when I say Councilmember Gonzalez or Councilmember Austin, I don't mean them as people. I mean them in their communities they serve who have had considerable input, along with the communities that used to be served by programing that has been cut, and for that as a whole to be in the context of programing proposed. But at the end of the day, the. Commissioners would make those recommendations back to the BRC for consideration. And the reason that is, is because we believe that as important as the very well-organized youth participation is, there is also another arm of our city government, which is a formalized process for citizen engagement and community engagement and resident engagement and visitor engagement. And it is important to continue to provide opportunities for those individuals to use the information they've learned over several years on these commissions to bring recommendations forward. It does not mean they would be adopted any more or less than any other recommendation. So that's one. The next one, I believe, would be. Sorry to interrupt. Yes, sir. On this recommendation, this is an amendment to your motion to expand the purpose of the 200,000. One time in, you're adding the $100,000 contingent appropriation. Is that. Correct? Correct. The the sentence then continues. That said, the funds are proposed and managed by Parks and Recreation and Marine Department within workforce and receiving input to the citywide programing. Is it still correct? Is that still in motion? Yes. So what we foresee again and this is through a lot of community input and again, I'm open to still having a discussion, but acknowledging it comes with that. I understand that. I'm fine with that. My question is the use to indicate that the Senior Advisory Commission to be forwarded for approval by the B or C, as you know, the B or C wouldn't approve anything they could hear and make a recommendation to the city council for approval so it could come to the B or C first their recommendations, but it wouldn't in there will be approved there. It would be something would be approved or recommended out of the council. Right. It would have to come to the full council back to allocate that funding or to approve that funding. Understood. Okay. Next would be in light of the projected shortfall and the fiscal policies proposed by the B or C, have staff bring back a list of positions that were general fund enhancement recommended recommended for structural funding within the last five years. This mirrors a request of the Budget Oversight Committee last year that didn't materialize, and so we will again request it. And this time I would actually add in that it should be brought back to the BRC by March, because last year I know we asked for a list of the positions that were structurally funded out of grants and it just never materialized. And I recognize we're very busy and we've also had staff changes, so we're understanding of that. And Councilmember, I believe this was also already added to 1.10, which had to do with financial policy. So I don't have to say it again, that one is perfect and I remove that and then use the remaining. 185 of year end estimate, along with a fiscal year 19 contingent appropriation to fund the following in priority order, the 215 for the elimination of the St Trump tree stump from the removal backlog. 70,000 for the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan and 50,000 of one time funding to be used to support efforts around affordable housing and homelessness. So. So these are all things that were either discussed at the full council or the Bossi or the CHP discussions over the last several weeks. And so those were. Does a have any others that I'm missing? Because I'm trying to make sure that everything was the one. I believe that you had started to read into the record before, had to do with the Reserve Police Officer program. And if we could also get some clarity on that motion, if that's. Still part of it. It was just that in our discussions with PD, there were lots of mandatory order ins on police officers. We recognized that we're recruiting as quickly as we can and that we are doing our best to fill our positions on a full time basis, but as available to us to put a little effort behind allowing our full time police officers to to retire and come in as a reserve so that they could fill some of that special event and other overtime, which we're having such a hard time filling. And we kind of talked a little bit about how it's not good for anyone, for a police officer to to roll an 18 hour shift and to be on orders. And so we just hope that though it has come up in several previous budget discussions this year that it would. Get some attention. So as we understand it, is using existing internal resources rather than creating a new program or using existing internal resources to promote reserves, to try to get it more people interested in the program and to help them where we can to lower some of our costs. And we recognize that we kind of talked about this and it was in one of the memos back to the council that the Reserve program already has 20 something officers in it and that training new officers can be expensive. However, accepting reserves as a retiree requires is an option that could could possibly help with that. And we're open to all things. We're just hoping that it materializes this year. That's helpful to clarify that, that it's not a new program but rather expanding our our recruit. And thank you. Expanding the program as reported by the chief. Did I miss anything else? Just one point of clarification. Hundred thousand contingent appropriation for senior programing? Yes, ma'am. Later, you also have some other additional contingent appropriation. Yes, ma'am. You said in the following order. Yep. Should that 100,000 for? It's at the top of the list. It's at the top of the list. Okay. After the tree stump. Before. Before the tree stump removal. Correct. Okay. Thank you. It's pretty much after that in cascading order of cost. Thank you. Remember Price, did you have a comment on the recommendations? I do. Is the friendly amendment a yes or no? I'm a seconder. Right. And so I'm friendly in myself. Are you accepting of my friendly? Yes. Yes. To myself? Yes, absolutely. I do have some questions, though, regarding some clarifications. So for staff, I know staff had talked about the $50,000 as being kind of seed money to start the discussion on affordable housing. Is that affordable housing and homelessness? Is it affordable housing or homelessness? And what's the plan for that 50,000 and what approvals will be sought before that's spent? So for $50,000, we would expect to bring on kind of a consulting firm that will help us do some of the research and some of the outreach dealing with additional resources for both homelessness and affordable housing. So the presentation that we made, we'd be looking at at both, we'd be engaging a number of stakeholders within the $50,000 limit that we could. Some of these efforts, if you look at other cities, have gone much larger. You can go up to 200, 300, $400,000. It depends on how active you want to engage, but we would take the $50,000. That would be our initial funding amount and we would do what we could within those dollars. So that would be under the city manager's threshold. So that would be something that would come, you know, that would be go through the normal procurement process under the city manager, the authority and. Okay. So do we not have any state one time dollars available to do outreach on homelessness? So we looked at first and foremost the weather, the heat funding, the 1.3 money could. 2.3 funding from the state could do this. There's a prohibition on that funding for anything dealing with planning. So anything that has to do with with planning, administration, future, allocate your future allocation of resources, we are prohibited from using it. Okay. So thank you for that clarification. That's very helpful. And then the consultant we're going to hire, do we expect that consultant to cost $50,000 or do we expect that a portion of that $50,000 would be used for the consultant? And then the remaining portion of it would be to implement an outreach process like community meetings. Yeah. So I think that primarily we would be asking for community meetings and a facilitator for a process. So staff don't have a lot of resources right now. Given everything we're doing, we would need someone to help us facilitate those. So with 50,000, I think in this case we would say this is our budget. And how how many interactions can we get for that amount of dollars? And then if we needed to go beyond that, we'd come back to the council and say, Here's where we are. Do we need to go further and are there additional dollars? And I think I know the answer to this question, but I'm assuming this is going to be a citywide outreach. So even if we're combining multiple districts kind of like what we've done with short term rentals where we have multiple districts that can attend a single meeting, is that what you're envisioning? Correct. Probably for this amount, we wouldn't have one in every district, but we would look at geographic balance. We'll make sure everyone had the ability to get to a meeting. They wouldn't be district centric. They would be you know, we're trying to reach a number of different populations with the dollars that we can, like short term rentals. Might I venture to say also like the bluey meetings where they're a never mind. Sorry, sorry. I'm not going to comment on that. The other question that I had was, once we we. So will there. Will we come back? I'm assuming will come you'll come back to council and talk about what the plan, the outreach plan is before that money. It we're setting it aside, but we'll have a specific plan. And yeah, we'd like to communicate to the council what the plan is. We'd like you all to be a part of that. This is going to be something that is a community wide engagement. So we're going to be engaging number of stakeholders and the Council would be helpful in identifying who we should be talking to. Okay. And I'm just and I think I know the answer to this question as well, but none of that $50,000 should be. Used for. Literature advocating in favor of, against or educating anyone on what a future policy could look like. We would use it for education on, you know, what the various options would be, but nothing will be decided until the council decides to put something on the ballot, and then that would be a separate discussion. So we would go through a process and education process. Talk a little bit about the various measures that are out there, what the need is. So some of that but not, you know, here is what we're doing and and making any advocacy on that. That would not happen at all until the council decides what what you would want to do. So if I'm understanding you correctly, this $50,000 would be for us to figure out what our options are and how we want to move forward. Yeah, but I think it's also education on what the current need is and what we believe the issues are and and getting some of that informational material out. So I don't want to I don't want to get anyone astray. There will be in dollars for educational and from educational information, but not specifically leading towards one conclusion or the other. Okay. So what I would like to request is a friendly is that any. Educational materials that are printed in connection with this $50,000 come to council for approval before they're distributed. Open to it? Sure. Great. I mean, we can talk about it, but that's my friendly because I would I don't want anything going out since this is just an exploratory dialog process. I completely understand and recognize that the amount of information and communication and understanding of this has been a little bit confusing for the community, at least in the comments I've received back. So I can completely understand. And I think it's funny that as the second day you're also friendly and ourselves. Let me move on to Councilman Austin and let's clarify, I think. Are we clear on where the motion is right now, Mr. City Attorney. Yes, sir. I believe that the there's two amendments to the Velshi recommendation. One is to request a friendly amendment to supplement $100,000 contingent appropriation for the senior programing. And the second was to the program, 185,000 a year. And to create fiscal year 19 contingent appropriation in the following order, the $100,000 for the senior programing first 215,000 for the elimination of the tree stump removal backlog, 70,000 for Parks and Rec strategic plan, and 50,000 for the one time funding to support homeless and housing. And that had a friendly that any fliers or mailers have to be presented to the City Council for approval. And can I ask for some clarification on the friendly? Are we talking about meeting invite fliers or are we talking about like because there's going to be a lot of things that staff will have to produce to have this effort. So if you can provide some clarity on what you'd like to see. I'll try my best to do that. No, I'm not referencing meeting invitations or meeting notices. I'm referencing information because we may not all have agreement on what we think the need is. We may not have all have agreement on what we think the options are. So I want to make sure that the community has an opportunity to weigh in. Before. We establish any sort of consistent messaging on behalf of the city, especially since we're talking about affordable housing and homelessness. So we're talking about two very broad categories. And if we're going to be doing any informational materials outlining a situation, I may think the biggest issue facing us with homelessness is one thing and a colleague may think it's another. So I think it's just a very broad category. I would say $50,000 isn't a lot of money. And if staff felt comfortable saying, we're going to use this money to reach out to as many people as we can in the city, we're going to use this money to hire a consultant to help us do that . And we're not going to use this money to advocate any particular position. We're just trying to get feedback and have dialog. I think to me that seems like a very reasonable place if we're starting a discussion. And that's where we're starting. So we don't imagine doing any informational advocacy. This would just be reaching out and holding meetings and doing the discussion and basically showing some of the presentation that we had shown you to begin with. So that's kind of where that was our approach. Sure, that sounds fine. I'm okay with that. I just thought that there was going to be some informational materials that were going to go out. So I think I think I understand where you're going. You're talking about doing mailers to houses and, you know, no, that is not what we're talking about. That's part of that $50,000. Right. Perfect. Then I'll withdraw the friendly. Thank you. Let me go. And and to that point, too, I think it's it's good for clarification. I know that for the $50,000, I mean, that's an initial amount to get started and to actually if we were actually going to move forward beyond that, there'd be some there would need to be some significant conversations at the council about funding anything beyond that, because that's really just going to get us started. Is that correct? Yes, that's. Correct. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Marker. Thank you. To come to In Price, Councilmember Austin. Okay. Thank you very much. And thank you, Councilmember Price for for clarifying and withdraw in a friendly I had a little bit of concerns about the friendly amendment in terms of just process, but I think we're going to be just fine. I do appreciate the the amendments brought forth by by the B or C chair Miss Mango specific to you know, leaving you find it 200,000 but also funding senior programing at $100,000. And I strongly support the engagement of our youth newly structured youth commission, commission on Youth as well as our Seniors Commission, because I think they can give us some, some some great direction. And this is why we we have the mayor has appointed and the city council has approved the appointments of those commissions. We we seek to engage those those commissioners in the process. And it would be, I think, really shortsighted of us to to to bypass them on on these particular items. I know. And our conversations and the intent of both of these funds, at least, yes. Was to engage our commissioners more. And those who are advocating on how those funds be, be be allocated and spent can, can, can go and present before those commissioners. And so we can have a more more engaged, appropriate, biased process. And I'm thrilled that we are we're putting together some some seed money to to study our, I think, most pressing issue of homelessness and affordable housing. Both are extremely important. We've heard from residents, I think, in every all nine districts that those issues are priority issues. And so for us to put forth resources this evening and this fy19 budget, I think is very responsible moving forward. And so I'd like to at this point offered a friendly amendment that I that I tried to get in in the last item, and that is taking this back to funding this African-American cultural and art center. And I don't think it will cost that much for us to to get some some initial study money for, like I mentioned earlier, outreach, civic engagement and establishing establishing a stakeholder taskforce with the city manager's office to to get that done. And I like the motion or amend your motion to have that fund come from the SAP. One. I think that is the most appropriate fund for it to come from. And if there's. And I think there's room in there to do that. I think that some of the things that you'd mentioned in some previous community forums might have aligned with the ACP funds more directly than what you just stated. So perhaps we could get an overview from John GROSS really quickly in a sentence or two on what SAP funds can be used for. I know you and I discussed this when we heard some things in the community earlier. We we recommend based on the. The vote of the people and with regard to ACP that the ACP funds, they can be used for advertising and promotion directly for advertising and promotion. We do not recommend that they be used for capital items, not directly related, very directly related to promotion, so that Wayfaring Signs, for example, would be a capital item that would be appropriate for ACP. We do not recommend that capital items that are indirect be used for ACP so that we do not have potential audit issues or compliance issues. Okay. So does it sound like ACP is the best option? Thank you. Mr.. There are some ways where ACP might be viable. I think that it just depends on the context of which the cultural center you're requesting. Would. Gather that information and support. And so I just think that the way it was phrased tonight was a little bit different than the way I'd heard it phrased maybe two weeks ago in the community. And so if it's promoting and supporting the advancement of African-American culture in the community and that as a citywide effort, that would qualify . Was that what your intent was? Well, that's the ten year ago. That was Mr. Market. That in. Wording. I want to make sure because I think I think we all support this effort, but I want to make sure we're pulling it from the appropriate place so that we have the ability to be flexible and how we this is an important process. So we want to be sure that we're not overly stubborn. Yeah. And hampered by, by where we're getting the money funds. So is SFP a possibility for us to do this? And if not, what would be? So can I ask another just a another description of what the effort would be? Is this for, you know, for planning, for, you know, funding, you know, site location? Is it for the ongoing operation? Is it giving it to an entity? If you can just describe I. Know this would be this would be planning and outreach efforts to to to envisioning for for and site selection. All of the all of the above. All right, Mr.. Mr. Jackson has been working on this with with with me, and maybe he can provide a little bit more clarity. But specifically, this this this will go toward, I think, more of a planning vision process, community engagement. Councilmember did it was I didn't hear a dollar amount that you were discussing. We wanted initial seed money of $25,000 would be a drop in the bucket. Mr. Modica, can we respond to that? Yeah, that's given us a little a little hard time to find that as a as a direct connection to SRP. So just historically, what we've spent SRP for really is for promotion and marketing in the city and its natural assets. That's really the definition that was voted on by voters over the years. We've extended that to some of the very public art kind of institutions as part of the promotion of our natural efforts at Ford for $25,000. We'd like to try to find another funding source rather than ACP and and we'll try to find something, you know , that we could come up with. And make a recommendation. Yes, please. For the outreach and promotional efforts of the African-American culture, up to $25,000 should the need be in the outreach and promotional category. If it is not an additional 25,000 for planning at the list of contingencies. They would go. I think that would make us much more comfortable for making more marketing. I know the way to canning it was a new word for me. And so and the planning effort needs to be a general fund. Thank you for that. Okay. No problem. It's I've it's taken me four years to finally get to where John GROSS says yes to when I say SRP. And so it's a very technical area with Mr. GROSS. And I appreciate his prudence. Thank you. I'll move it back to Councilman Austin. And for the contingent, is that where does that fall on the list of the order? Well, I. Don't have my list in front of me, but can we just. Add it? We will just add it to the way that. We were added to the list. Thank you. So let me go back to Councilman Austin. I mean, that that that I think would complete my my interest and I would just encourage my my colleagues to support these amendments as proposed. It's been a long night. Looking forward to getting home. Could I put it right after the strategic plan? That would be great. After the strategic plan. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. A great item to add to the budget cuts and repairs. Okay. I was going to say that the African-American community is part of our natural things, that we should be celebrating people, that we should be celebrating in the city. So it seems to make sense for SJP, for me. That's just my $0.02. Just to put that out there. Just putting it in there. So I'm going to start with Health and Human Services, because I had to organize my thoughts a little bit. I know that some of the conversation that we already had previously was around language access. It was my understanding from the report that we heard from staff is that it's about 3334 K. To make that a full time position. What was that like? And so that would be my my request. And I know that other council members were likely speak to that. I wanted to talk about development services and be clear on this. I know that we need to have a time line to hear back on the code enforcement technology piece. And I know that that's a difficult time line to put our hands around. So just knowing that this motion moving forward with the mayor's recommendations does support us getting to the place where we need to be with Prep. And so I feel like we are at that solid place there with Parks and Rec. I know that we brought up Bixby Park in Parcel One and I know, Mayor, you and I have had conversations around this. For my community members that were so excited about this. I don't know if it's with Tom or with our new parks director. If we could talk through kind of the plan for getting parts of one to be funded, at least in the phase one. And so I Pursell one of of what. Makes me part of. This makes me part. Yeah I think that's something that we'd have to have her out to come down and address. We talked about it during the budget conversation before and I know that we had toyed around with Measure A, but just give us a timeline on on when we think we can present that to the next Funding Options Council. I believe we have a meeting scheduled with your office, yourself and the friends of Bixby Park in order to walk parcel one of Bixby Park into space to conceptualize a phased in program or approach for for improving that parcel. There was a cost estimate already that we had shared with your office that was a little over half a million dollars. And so the idea was to see if we can find a plan that would phase it in perhaps phase one being 100,000. If there's something that is that makes sense with regards to like an 88. I mean, a path that is ADA accessible and other possible elements for improvement of parcel, one that would be in potentially phase one. That's what I would call was the great location. Great. And for folks, I just I know that I have my friends at Bixby Park that care deeply about this. It's a project that's been under work since I was in office and that just wanted to make sure that those folks that watch diligently at home on Tuesday nights know that this is still a priority of ours . So thank you for that. The other part that I wanted to talk about is Health and Human Services. I guess this is sorry I mixed up all my notes and things just got so easy afterwards. I want to ask our staff if we could, as Kelly Colby does. She is I know that in the last budget presentation, we talked a lot about our STDs, the rates going up, but our funding decreasing. I wanted to to hear if we've had any changes in the proposed budget that's in front of us as it relates to as kids and funding those positions that we needed to see and believe. There was a 15 K for community outreach and a 15 K for our mobile unit that no longer was being funded. So if we could get a report from you so we can understand what we might need to add. See how I talked all the way till you get down there. I just did. That for you. Good evening. So the funding that we currently have is about 120,000 total. Most of that funding will go away, will be the 47,000 total. Starting in the middle of this next year. That funding is for HIV testing and treatment. So as we have looked at what we could use additionally to try to start to address needs in the community. We have not had a lot of funding for our mobile clinics. So to be able to do testing and treatment or at least testing on the mobile clinic and then to provide it for treatment, 15,000 would be a start. And then also just doing outreach and really engaging communities and working with folks so that they're willing to come in for testing also takes quite a bit of time. So I and at approximately $30,000 that's a starting space and moves us. Sort of takes it sort of enhances from the 47,000 that we'll have but. Won't take us back to the full amount. And that 30 cases for that outreach. I know that when you and I had some some back and forth, there was a number that was around two staff. Right. So that is. The disease investigation specialist. So they actually go out and work to track down folks and to help bring them in for treatments. What we really find with folks who have syphilis. And gonorrhea, that is there's a lot of. Partner services needed. So those folks are out really trying to engage people and working closely. Once someone has been. Identified to be positive, to be able to. Work with their partners, to bring them in as well, so that we start to slow the. Trends. Great. Thank you for that. And then since you're here, just to be clear on the language access, it's a 35 number to fully fund that position. Yeah, I believe the exact number is 30, 32,007 something. It's just below 35,000. Yes. And that would take us to a full time full time employee. Great. Okay. So my I guess the only comments I have now is to make a hopefully a friendly motion, I guess to include the $30,000 needed for our STD outreach. And that we if there's contingency funds, I guess is where we're going with we add this to the list for the staffing for STDs. We know that in Long Beach, this is a number that's going up dramatically and might not be the funnest item to to bring up in Champion. But it is one that is really critical to our community. So and that third we fully fund our language access with the 35 K. Whereas the two items are three items. Or. Three items. So one is the 30,000 for outreach and mobile services for our city. The second one is she had two staff members to do this the first work, and that it would cost about 160, which is not a number that I'm comfortable with asking for tonight because I haven't had the conversations with all the council members or with the boss. So it's 164 contingency funds for those two staff positions. And then the third one is to move forward with the 35,000 to make the language access staff person full time. And I do want to point out that those would be all three of those appear to be structural funding, and the contingency appropriation is a one time amount that we would have available to us. Yeah. Thank you. I just I just need clarification so that I understand the motion as well. I'm sorry. I got the 30,000 for some of the city work and the health department outreach. Is that right? Yeah. There's 35,000 language access policy from fully paid to fully funded staff position. And and was there there wasn't an additional 160,000 or. There was. So it's 160,000 is what Kelly has said that they need for for two people to specifically work on some of the syphilis outreach and and case management that they are missing. But that's different than the 30 K. Yes. So you're so you're it's so it's 160. You're asking for 162 staff, two people in the health department. Four. Okay. 30 K for additional to the outreach. Right. It's like, you know, outreach. Material 30 and then 35 for language access. Yes, sir. And the 35 is on top of the current was currently funded or is that or you're taking money from that. It's on. Top of. Yeah. I think you. If we're going to keep it. Let me let me keep going through that, I guess. Pierce. Okay. So Councilmember Richardson. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Mayors. Late. I'm going to apologize right now if I'm a little all over the place, but I'm trying to keep up, so on. So the first thing when talk about the Beach Street's recommendation for the ride from one beach streets to two. Councilwoman Mongo, did you have locations in mind for those two or what? Where did you get the idea for two? So I read your recommendation to go two more and then I made some outreach to the Special Events Department and talked with them about what opportunities they had. And they felt like activations were most effective with multiple council officers and using and relying on prior data. So I wrote that into the motion that they use those things in consideration and then they thought that it would be very, very difficult to do too much less more. And so I tried to adopt as much of that as possible. I also received some input from the community and other constituency groups that they thought perhaps beach streets had. Exhausted its time frame that the most recent beach streets actually didn't have a councilmember attendant in attendance and had some particularly low attendance overall, and that there's some very high communities that really have great participation and others that don't . And so there was some discussion on how that could be done. And so I was hoping that a soft landing point would be to activations. That would be stretching special events, though, and they wanted us to know that. Let's elaborate on the stretching a little bit. So the initial idea for me was that I kind of agree that Beach Street's great idea, but it's not something we want to do one or two times a year. I think it's a great program, but I think for a lot less money and a lot less logistics on special event side. We can do smaller activations. When I say smaller activations. You may not cross into another district, right? We're talking a quarter mile, half mile where you can give more attention to those small businesses and the models. I think the two models I think of activate uptown. You know, Robert Earl still says today that was the best day he's ever had in business. A lot of those storefronts on our Teachable Boulevard, that was the best day that they had in business. And it was small enough to where, frankly, most of my staff did a lot of the logistics. Right. In terms of like booking vendors, things like that. We would need half of a beach street to put that on. We wouldn't need 120 K and we probably wouldn't take up as much special events time. So I would say and then the second piece, so I'm a little landlocked, right? So Border Bellflower, Lakewood, Compton, Paramount, Rancho Dominguez, you and me. I got gardens like quickly. So those opportunities to partner with other districts, I guess you only allow Atlantic Avenue for me, right? But Artesia Boulevard's been an important stretch. But I border six cities. No other council districts. And to be very clear, I envision I mean, we did activate uptown on Artesia was successful. I want to continue to do that. So I'm going to ask you I'm going to make a friendly that we change it from to we don't go all the way to five, like I said, but we take it up, kind of meet in the middle, we go to three. And so if we do three, we break it three ways and we and we remove the contingency that one contingency about cooperation, we can encourage it. Right. I love it. I ask council members that co-sponsoring partner with things all the time, but it may be limited in certain cases with certain corridor. So I say we don't do that. And and finally, I was unclear. Is there a matching component on this? Because I would support that people putting skin in the game to go after this funding. So the original intent was that there would have been. However, there's not a lot of. Programing funding available this year. As everyone is very aware, we're going into a deficit year with very, very little availability. Private, private fundraising. Or private fundraising and things. Okay. I mean, I think. I was just worried about a restriction for that. When we talk about divide by nine, that gets really crazy. Yeah, I'm not saying divide by nines. If there support in the community for the event, there's active mobility grants, things like that. Skaggs partnered on different things. Mobile Source Reduction Committee is in most of our cities, funded the city multiple times for these things. So and then we get sponsorships. So there's an opportunity for that. So you're you're okay with that. So I'm happy to add in giving that also some weight in their decision making process. Good. And going from 2 to 3. So that means that each one would be under 100,000. That's fine. Okay. You're not talking about spending a bunch of tax dollars. I'm just saying that in discussions with some of the community and stuff we recognize, I mean. Our are you saying that we did streets. Like that? There's just a lot of consideration given certainly in terms of last year, a lot of city wide events got structural a.S.A.P on an ongoing basis and not all council officers can prioritize that allocating the amount of stuff. And I know that when we did beat Streets, that went from the third all the way through the fourth and into the fifth. I mean, it was considerable stuff, resources for my team. I completely understand and agree and many of you have all commented, we're literally down to three staff each. Yeah, we all started with four. And so our council officers have also all taken cuts. Certainly I only say council. That's why I think the event scope of the event should go down some and not closing the door to a beat street got beat street started off grant funding. I think we need to do it. Well, I also agree with that and I know that part of our report back from our original budget was when grants come to us in the future, they should say, and when this money evaporates, we will discontinue them, or we will plan to look for general fund backfill. And I think those are very important decisions that we as a council make. Okay. So, yeah. So we're good, I understand. Accepted friendlies on those. Yes. If we can clarify, we're going from 2 to 3. We're removing the part that says collaboration of multiple districts. I think it's just we're we're still encouraging it. So we're just adding another component. None of these are mandatory. These are all components that are encouraged. And then we're adding to Metro grants and funding and or other funding. Correct. Okay. Understood. Other matching funding and that's them is accepted. Great. Thank you. Can I ask a quick just clarifying question on this one issue before we leave it? I support the efforts happening. I think that's fine. I just want to also make sure that this is inclusive, obviously, because I'm through through metro will be able to really supplement a lot of these dollars, which we're working on already . So that's already in the works. I just wanted this. This isn't essentially eliminating beach streets. No, I mean, beach streets there. We're still going to have beach streets. It's just that we're changing the way the funding works and the event. So that gives us more flexibility to have smaller events. But we could also it does not eliminate the possibility of us having a larger beach street if we wanted to as well. And we'll work with Metro to get additional funding as well, because. It also doesn't. Mean that the money would be shaved proportionately. And I get that. Absolutely. So I do want to clarify, I know there's a lot of beach rights fans out there. So a lot of this is not an elimination of beach rates. Off Beach Street. Absolutely. And that was one of the best events we ever had. And so it's just looking at funding differently and we'll continue to get more grants. So I appreciate that conversation. Thank you. Thank you. So so next so I want to talk about and and I'll put this up a certain way. So I want to talk about the youth development stuff. I think there's a lot of conversation there, and I know that everybody's not on the same page. I'm going to try to get folks on the same page. But if not, I want to hear from the council. You guys want to divide the question on this and do this separately? Because because what I don't want to do is get in a situation where people you know, where people are threatening to not support the whole thing or not in a position to support the whole thing, because this is a difficult, difficult issue. Is there any interest in like let. Me help with a little bit of context. So the intent is at this point that that. Is just great. I know the city attorney's saying that Councilmember Richardson has the floor. So I want to make sure that. Are you are do you want to continue? Yeah, I want to talk about the in the question if it's necessary or not. Well, I think I mean. It's or maybe to determine that what motion to divide the question is it has a support will divide the question. If not, then we'll just continue discussion. So I want to at this moment move to the divide, the question on the Youth Development Fund and handle that separately. Okay. So there's a motion divide. The question this is just to divide the question, not to actually vote yes on that. Okay. Give a little more flexibility, I. Think, because this is something that is something new related to the budget that we have the public comment on that or we've done public comment all of the budget. I think we're fine, right? Yeah. Okay, then members, please go ahead and. Get in here a second and I get a second question. If there's a second thing, I'd like to speak against it. Okay. Is there good. I see a few seconds. Okay. I think there's a second. Okay. Okay. There's the motion in a second. Divide the question. I think you've already spoken to your first councilor. The two divide in the question. Divide the question. Again, this is just a divide. The question of Councilman Andrew's. Any comment or vice mayor, any comments? Okay, Councilman Mongo. So I would just say that the block does a significant amount of work in trying to create a package that is representative of the whole city. And I appreciate that. Dividing the question on items can be helpful for individuals getting more or less support for their items. But I just don't feel that it's very respectful of the processes that we've already set up. And so I would ask that. I would ask that we hear your options of what you want to make a recommendation on and colleagues can comment on whether or not they support it. And then the maker of the motion can choose to accept or not. But what I hope we don't do is take 35 items and start separating out the question, because if we're going to vote on every item, I think that the total package becomes very different. And so that would be my proposal. I already feel like. The process that has gone on today has been very it won't happen again next year because this has not been what has standardly happened. And I give a lot of credit to the condensed timeline that we've encountered, but I just don't feel like the way that it's gone about has been equitable. So there's a motion to divide the question on the floor by Councilman Richardson and Vice Mayor Andrews. Can we can we get it up on the screen? Madam Clerk. So just a divide, this. Divide the question. It's my understanding the divide the question would take out on the box recommendation under a subsection E on the funding for the child and youth support. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Members, just go and cast your votes. Motion carries question is divided. So control Richardson continue. All right. So on the Youth Development Fund conversation so I don't think we're that far away. I just think we have different understandings on sort of the intent here. So number one. Just real quick, should we should we have that conversation? We discuss it next. When we actually discuss the discuss. Discussion next, that's fine. So. City Attorney, are we fighting question? Yes, we've divided the question in the I think the motion was to divide the question and handled this separately at this time and then go back. Okay. I thought it was I thought. It was to handle it after this. So I was doing it. This is knock it out. Okay. So okay, so on this fund, so to say that after the community has advocated and organized, to say that the official channel is a commission, a commission that hasn't you know, that is just being restructured to say that that's the official process went through the through that entire process. We know that that commission hasn't had quorum that issues and is just being presenting that actually says it's entirely vacant on city on the city website right now to say that and then to imply that today after not having provided that opportunity through the budget process, after we've presented that, hey, we acknowledge the concern of the community and we want to hear from the communities, the proponents of this about how to spend it when they organize and present it. We should on principle respect that. Now to say we want to include include the commission. I think that absolutely makes sense to me. We have a commission. We should include the commission, but a lot of commissions do engage in strategic planning work. For example, the Veterans Affairs Commission at this point is no strategic plan work. The Sustainability Commission has a strategic plan. There's money in the budget tonight for Parks and Recreation, the Marine strategic plan that their commission will engage in. And so the proposal from the community is that if we're going to establish a youth development fund, this is not a lot of money. So it rather be used as a strategic planning process. Now that strategic planning process, if driven by the Youth Commission, if driven by the Health Department, could be and I would envision that that process should be inclusive of all youth across the city. I don't think anyone has said it's going to be exclusive, any particular, particular subset of youth. And so that said, I'm not comfortable tonight moving forward and sort of not acknowledging the really sort of dynamic engagement that we've received. If you notice the people's budget and the Invest in Youth Commission, Invest in Youth Coalition, they ask to be in the process on all of those items were large and they've paid attention to every one of our meetings. They've met with this and they've tailored, tailored to what they think is feasible and and would be accommodated by this council. And I think we should acknowledge that. So so I would like to see and I would like to see that that $200,000 be allocated to a strategic planning process anyway, inclusive of everyone, including the new commission , inclusive of everyone. But with our proponents that proposed it at the table, a strategic planning process over a two year period, it may come back that you may not need all $200,000 to conduct the strategic planning. It may be $100,000. It may be less. Who knows? But that's the intent of this. Secondly, the proposal on seniors, I support that. I just think we need to be very clear that that's very distinct and different. So I wouldn't want to see those two linked up together. A youth commission and a senior youth development fund and a senior fund merged together may be a bit unclear. It may be hard to target that fund. So I support the 100 K for seniors and looping in the senior citizen commission. That makes sense, but that should be separate that in my opinion, that should be separate from the youth fund. So you got. Well, it was unclear to me if if is that is that the case? I believe it is present. Believe get it together. I believe they're separate. I'm good with that. I'm good with that. So that's my friendly councilwoman to the youth fund. I'd like to hear your response, though. Friendly. So it would be a separate motion. You two. Separate motion. Okay, I'm doing I move that we allocate the 200 K, we allocate the 200 K for a strategic youth development strategic planning process in concert with our Youth Commission as well as youth citywide and in partnership with the Investing Youth Coalition. Right. And that and I just want to clarify, and that doesn't preclude any other youth from the city or it doesn't, including in any book that just allows us to get started. And that's what clarify what he heard from you. Absolutely. And and there is I don't mind any particular department engaging in this. I think Parks and Rec should be at the table for talking talking those things. But almost every one of our strategic plans we mentioned the health department's engaged in, not necessarily off the equity has been different, you know, different bureaus within the health department . And so that's built up a lot of community respect and credibility, I think some that we count on. So I think that department should play some lead role in this. Other departments could totally be at the table, engage, but I think that is respective of what the communities proposed, I think is consistent with and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Mayor, but, you know, it's consistent with how you presented it. And that's my motion. That that that's consistent with what I'm hearing. Just to clarify, I'm hearing that the money essentially would go to a strategic planning process. Strategic Points has been. Discussed at the council and by the community. The youth commission would be involved. Absolutely. The youth groups that have been that brought it to the table would be involved. And of course, a citywide, citywide input and process from youth. From across all nine across. The city. And that staff has the flexibility to guide that process through our departments. We have multi departments that we're I. Think it's you're also city manager, but. You're also you're also asking of course that in that process there consider all departments, including our health department. Our you're not saying specifically is going somewhere but staff's going to guide. Yeah, the funding itself is going to go to a consultant. I know departments. I get that through. You're not directing it to, but we. Want to specifically call out help. I get that. But we're not. Excluding anyone else. I get it. And you also call that Parks and Rec and others. Okay. I'm good with that. All right. That is that is the that is a motion that's on the floor. There's the motion. And a second to that. I'm assuming those that are cued up are on the other. That was for the other debate. No. Okay. So any why don't you raise your hand really quick if you want to speak to the current motion as it as it's presented? Let me go to Mr.. Go down this way. Okay, so let's turn this and go down. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I think I understand the motion. I just want to just just I've been doing a little bit of research here and I've found some some interesting, interesting information that, you know, we're not actually re-inventing, reinventing the wheel this evening. The youth fun it was was created or existed many, many years ago, many years ago, and was probably cut. And, you know, I think our efforts tonight are restored. But, you know, looking at the old website, this was a National Gold Medal Award winner program through our Parks Recreation and Marine Department. The Youth Fund was created to provide funding for local, local youth to create and develop projects that address this community. Issues and challenges. The fund would offer grants led by and projects led to be planned out and led by the Youth and the Commission on Youth and Children currently oversee. Sees the Long Beach Youth Fund Youth Commissioners selected by an adult commissioners will review the projects that are submitted. So the point is I don't think we're reinventing the wheel this evening. And the idea that came to us through the people's budget was was something that was already in place. And so I think everybody here supports funding youth programs and funding our youth to be more engaged, you know, in our city. I mentioned earlier that we do commit a lot of resources already to our youth through our libraries, to our parks and recreation departments, developing improving new parks, developing new parks and improving existing parks through our workforce development. There's a lot of a lot of efforts and a lot of focus on youth. And this is this this fund will increase that or just add to what we are already doing. And but I wanted to to point that out. I feel pretty, pretty strongly that that the commission needs to be continued to be involved in this process. And I'm glad that that you're finding some flexibility to to to engage other departments. And so. I'll support. Thank you, Councilman. Vice Mayor Andrews? Yes. Also, not to be repetitive, I just want to follow through with our councilman Rex, you know, friendly. I definitely think that we should make sure that our youth continue to receive whatever. But the mayor's put into his budget and and I'm looking forward to really supporting this 100%. Thank you. Vice Mayor, let me just get going down the road. If people want to speak, just raise your hand. Councilman Pierce. Oh, there you said it. Well, Cosmo Pierce, you're up next. Anyway, so. Yes, thank you. I just want to echo my support for this, and I think I know that we tend to have a group of of community members that come out and speak from one part of the neighborhood. But I do think putting it with with the full city process, with the multiple departments and using the commission is a great way to ensure that everybody and it is true that every part of our city, the youth in the West Side, need something different than youth on the East Side, but that this fund is geared towards youth and our entire city. I think that that's. No one has said otherwise. So I fully support this, and I hope that all the colleagues here can support this. And I also want to I know that we're doing the youth here, but we also have the part about 100 K, which I think is a separate motion. But I like where we're going as well. I'm saying I like that that we are looking holistically at our city. So thank you and thank you for all the youth that are still here and for all those watching at home. Thank you. Thank you. Let me let me add anything we got to Councilman Price also. I think it's it's and it's certainly my intention as a as a new youth commission reforms the youth and children that it's reflective of the entire city. And so you're going to have everyone at the table, I think, as well, to work. We'll work really hard at that. Councilman Price. Okay, so thank you. So just so I'm supporting what I'm hearing, I'm just don't have a lot of clarity on. A lot of words have been spoken. So is there are a request that it be housed in a particular department or is everyone just kind of going to work together on it? Is that a question for me? Yes, I guess. Okay. The city manager's office. So. So the money's not going to be housed anywhere if I guess it's multiple departments. City manager I'm hearing over here can run point. The community is requested that a health lens health equity lens whatever it is is applied to it and that the health department being a lead role. I think that's naturally going to happen if we sort of give that direction that that's the way you want it to happen. I think other departments will obviously play a role. Parks and Recreation obviously needs play a role. I think workforce will play a role if it's a really holistic, comprehensive, strategic plan. There's a number of departments that touch our PD can play a role. Know and a staff would suggest you just assign this to the city manager and we'll figure out who needs to be at the table. So we definitely here the health should be at the table, Parks and Rec, all the partners that were mentioned. So we'll make sure with that happens. Good. I'm good with that. Great. And if I could request from staff and I'm assuming this is included, it's implied, but I want to explicitly stated that every council district will be engaged with the process so that we can make sure to advertise and involve our youth because they may not be as organized as in some of the other districts and may not be an advocacy group associated with them. So we want to make sure we get them to the table. So as long as we're all engaged, I think that would be great. And in terms of a strategic plan, and I guess I will ask this for clarity from Councilman Richardson, what do you envision that. The strategic plan would do? Like what? What would it have recommendations for what? So the strategic planning processes that I've seen happen in the city, they come and help articulate a vision and a strategy to get there. And a lot of cities that have doubled down on youth development, they've established youth development strategies like how do you take the status quo, address the issues related to our youth, the current issues , the programs, and have a strategy to drive it proactively. We've done a lot of work around youth from youth violence prevention my brother's keeper, my sister's keeper, all that thing. I believe this just allows us an opportunity to have a more holistic look at youth development. I personally, I love this proposal because the youth, you know, have talked about it. They've engaged in it, they've bought into it. There's operated they're willing to work with others. They're optimistic about the future. They can go off to college or whatever they're doing and look back at the implementation of this. When our council, the next council, does it and say, I helped shape the future of these youth. So I think this is as I'll still quote from Pat, I think this is as apples, motherhood, apple pie as we can as we can make it. But ultimately, that that could create a roadmap to be more intentional about youth development. We could envision youth development departments. We could envision, you know, taking another look at teen centers. How does this work with the. Parks and Rec strategic plan. I think now is just the perfect time to do it. Mm hmm. No, and I agree with you on the vision. I couldn't agree with you more on what the potential of it is. I just wanted to kind of get an idea of. So I would hope that the strategic plan, although. Yes, absolutely. We want to get a holistic view. We also want to get a plan that's very targeted to the diverse needs of the population throughout the city, because there may be different stressors in one part of the city as others, that we might need to augment support for our youth on. Mm hmm. And so I would hope that that engagement and this is really for for our city manager's office in terms of developing a strategic plan that I would hope that the focus would be on having recommendations that are targeted towards specific needs in different areas, whatever those limiting factors are for for the youth to strive in that particular area. But I think it's a great program. I love that the youth are involved and that they brought it forward. I couldn't agree with you on all of that, gives them a real sense of pride in their city. So I think it's great and I'm I'm glad that the city manager's office is going to be overseeing it, because I think it does touch upon multiple departments. So thank you for that recommendation. Sure. And we'd like to request that it be up to 200,000 for a strategic plan. If we're able to do the strategic planning for less than we'd like to reserve some of that funding for implementation of that plan. Sure. I'm good with that. Thank you. Next up is Councilman Mongo. So I appreciate the dialog, but I would also say that while I appreciate the one recommendation in requests that came from one group, there were also dialogs with both that group and other council officers, including, but not limited to another motion which was already approved, I think, which talks a lot about the teen centers and the opportunities and the funding and the derivative of giving the strategic planning money to Parks and Rec. Was that part of knowing and understanding what Parks and Rec has is that those student fighters, 25, 15 years old and so. I'll I'll just say that I appreciate the opportunity to continue to put that into. The city manager's office. But that, I think, also needs to be a bit of respect for the dialog that actual council members have had with the community group that you're stating their position. Because I've actually sat with and had those conversations and at no time did they request a strategic plan. And when I met with them and listened and talked through some of the the youth opportunities across multiple departments, just like we're talking about now, whether it's libraries, parks and Rec, afterschool programs, teen center, all of that. I also then went into those communities including but not limited to McBride and MacArthur and some of the other areas . And we kind of talked through where could a pilot program be? I then researched and talked with department heads who were open to housing those pilot programs, and then went back to specific council members who are willing to use the their community centers as a pilot program. And that's kind of where the recommendation for Vice Mayor Andrews Teen Center to be a pilot program in that process. And so I appreciate and respect all the work that you've done on this. And I only wish that you would have given me that same respect to keep it as a part of the original motion coming out of the BSA. Thank you. I think back to Councilmember Tauranga. Actually first time coming on this. But we're saying. Sorry. It's getting it's getting late. My wife would just text me. She's going to bed. So I guess she stopped seeing, which I guess a good thing for me is stop texting me in this conversation. I got lost in terms of I thought this was about not only youth programs but also senior services. And it got sort of bifurcated. And we start talking about the youth programs or whatever to senior seniors, a component. That's a separate motion. So it's going to be a vibrant motion. Okay, then I can support this back. Get back to Katherine Richardson. Okay. Just quickly, just two things. So, one, the Invest and Youth Coalition gave us a flier today with the position has evolved over time. Initially they're asking for half a million dollars. Right. Obviously, through the conversation, it was infeasible. But today it says include the proposed 200 K in seed funding for the Long Beach Children Youth Fund to develop a community driven, youth led strategic plan. So just so we're clear, this is the same coalition, the same original proponent. So I'm not speaking for them. I'm literally lifting this from the request that is developed. So that's one. And then secondly, that the goal wasn't to pull this aside, but I heard that there was contention in the the first time we touched on it. So we wanted to just have a pure conversation here. But, you know, I have seen it since has come up. I've seen that I think there's some misunderstanding about the role of the Budget Oversight Committee. Frankly, the Budget Oversight Committee is not the dog and the councilors tails the other way around. The council is the dog and the Budget Oversight Committee is the tail. So we're not at the kiddy table because we're not on the Budget Oversight Committee. This is the big table and this is where we have an opportunity to weigh in on things. So I just want to be crystal clear. I respect your role as the Budget Committee, but I have a job to do as a member of the full body of the city council. Thanks, and I appreciate that. At the end here, Councilwoman Mongo got to me, Margo. I appreciate that. And I also hope that. But there's a part of recognizing that a conversation evolves over time. And at a council there's an EP or an up or down vote on a lot of things, and that there's a considerable amount of time that goes into reading a 500 page report, meeting with each constituency group, each of those things. And so I appreciate that the people's budget has evolved because I think that part of the reason it has evolved is through discussions with council members and recognizing that there is just point in time options of what can be done in a six week budget process, and that typically they're not a six week budget process, but that. But I'll leave it at that for now. Thank you. There's a there's a motion and a second. Members, please cast your votes on the motion. Councilwoman Pryce. Emotion carries. With. Emotion carries. That's the that's his care of the question that was that was split up so that we're going back to the rest of the BFC recommended. That's correct. And if I could get a point of clarification on the there was a motion by Councilmember Pearce for to add three items. I didn't have a so that. That hasn't been that that's not an official motion yet. It was not a friendly but it was never came to light. So what's on the table now? So I think now we're back. Now we're back. And so I for. And councilor and so let me so let me go back so we're back to the original conversation of the PSC recommendations. I think Councilman Richardson, who's put the question, we're back to Councilman Richardson on the PSC recommendations. Correct. And so what I if the friendly was accepted by CD two or not, there would be part of the conversation that I. Think it's part of the conversation. But there was not an official, a friendly that was asked. I think they recognize that this list is about to get long and so I'm going to put them all down. We've accepted some well, with all my friends, I know all of them have been accepted except for the member Councilmember Pearce's. So I need to know whether it's accepted or not so that that's what's on the floor. I don't know what's on the floor. So I would only say that the only thing that's been accepted from General Fund at this time would be the African American Fund. There was the beach streets. There was beach streets. But there wasn't any funding changes. No, no funding things without cause. I'm not sure I'm going to pull the funding from or put it from yet based on all the requests, if that makes sense. Mango Because there wasn't a revenue source associated with the request, right? And he has three items for the $222,000 that the councilmember from the second District has on there. And so that's the question. You've accepted one and on another. Yeah, I. Mean, listen, it's my impression that that hasn't been accepted yet. I can't accept any recommendation that doesn't come with the funding that. Has not been accepted. Right. And but it's still part of the conversation. It is still available for potential funding should one be proposed? Okay. Let me go back to let me go back to Governor Richardson. I have I don't have much more. So just want to touch on the the 50,000 dedicated for the revenue outreach conversation related to homelessness and housing. So just to be clear, this was the this was the same 50 K that was outlined in staff presentation two weeks ago on housing revenue options. Is that everybody's understanding? This is city attorney Mr. Modica Yes. Okay. Just wanted to be clear, that's that funding to conduct this process, that's all it is. And then and I just wanted to say that I do support of Councilwoman Pearce's a few things. The one that I'm familiar with is the 35 K, but it sounded like you said you wanted to make it structural. I thought the proposal was to take one times to add it to that structural part time and make it full time. But on a one time basis, right, you still have that permanent structural part time. So just to be clear, that's what that's what you're proposing one time. Okay. All right. That piece I support I support that. Not familiar with the other stuff. And I support that. Thanks. Taking a turn. This now comes from Birmingham. Thank you, Mayor. Obviously, there's a lot of moving parts. We talk about a lot of different parts of this of this budget, as we discussed earlier. Couple of things that, you know, are related to my district that I think I need to to address. One of them is the Beat Street, and I'm glad the mayor brought it up because it wasn't funded at one time, totally and completely by Metro. And it came in as a part of a of a grant that they offered to have these streets in Long Beach based on another program that they had somewhere else going in Los Angeles. If I'm not if I'm not mistaken, on the history of a B streets here in Long Beach, I don't think the intent was to institutionalize it within a long we can have. Allow me to pick it up as a as a as a as an ongoing budget expense for Beach Street. And the only reason I say that is because certain districts in the city are able to have, because of their corridors, are able to have a beach street event that goes multi districts. I don't have that. In fact, the last district that the last beaches we had that covered eight, nine and seven, I only had like two blocks. I mean, and there was it was two blocks. It had very little impact in terms of business opportunities for those vendors to have any kind of significant financial impact for them. So I'm I'm liking the discussion that we might break it down to, to break it down, downsize it a little bit and go from 2 to 3. But I also want to make sure that at least I have a corridor in my district that would be able to sustain a beach street like event. I have two major corridors. I have actually three but two major corridors in the seventh District that I would like to see having a beach street like event. I have Wardlow and I have Santa Fe as two business corridors in my district, not as developed or as as expansive as maybe Atlantic or Anaheim or those kinds of street are covered multi, multi district. But I would like to have at some time an opportunity to sponsor a, b streets like that in the seventh District that would be beneficial to my communities in those areas. So I'm throwing that out there as a as a as a friendly amendment that we include corridors that that our business corridors in districts that may not be able to in corridors and may not be as extensive or lengthy that covered multi multidistrict areas. So I want to make sure that the seventh District is included in that discussion and we have that that type of and we believe that language about corridors is in there already. Okay, wonderful. The other other issue they're talking about, Councilmember Pearce has already brought these up. As a former member of the health department, I saw the the the the detriments that the the defunding of the vehicle license fees did on a lot of programs in the health department, mainly that were talking about STDs testing and community outreach. And I want to support and second Councilmember Pierce's motion or friendly to include those in in this budget because it's important I mean we lost a major funding source when it came to the bike to the vehicle license fees that funded these at a very high level. At one time, we had full time staff providing those kinds of services and that went away. So and obviously the disease hasn't gone away or the need for it to address STDs has not gone away. So I certainly can support that that friendly for that as well. And also, you beat me to the gun and the 35,000 for the language access program and make it a full time. I certainly support that because it's been a it's been an ongoing discussion now for a number of years, and it's time that we address it and get it fully funded. And those are my only comments at this point. Thank you. Thank you, Constable Pearce. I yes. Thank you. So it is late. So I'm going to clarify what my comments were earlier and hopefully we can have that conversation. So one is the 3541 time funding for language access, as Councilmember Gallagher just mentioned, to make that a full time position to after having some conversations, I think what would be a great way . In for our health of our community is $30,000 one time funding. For the. Mobile center and the community outreach, and that our health department can work with the county to try to leverage some other funds to get those other two positions that the Kelley and I have been talking about. So that those are my that is my family, I guess, that I am asking for support on. What leads into the structural is that. Yeah, it's exactly what I said earlier with the the funding to be able to make it a full time position but that the 35 K adds on to what is already there to make it a full time position. So just to to clarify. There is only so much contingency, and it would be disingenuous for me to just say yes and put it at the bottom of the list without any likelihood that it would be funded. So what I would ask of you is that we are already beyond stretched of what is available, and so of your requests, what I would propose is to place the 30,000 of STD outreach and testing. You would only say that outreach, he said outreach and testing. Outreach, testing, mobile center. I mean, it's okay. There's a description that I think there is a little bit of room. There's not 240. I mean, we're already the city staff's current recommendation is that there's 500,000 available. We've already programed over 775,000. And so what I would ask is if we're if we're really trying to fit in, what's realistic that we have some consensus behind the city outreach and mobile testing unit? I do understand the significant VLF funding that it used to be and where we are today and the. Specific need to address Long Beach's unique position on this, unfortunately unique position in the growth versus the reduction over regions, and I would probably place it somewhere on either side of the African-American fund. Okay. So, I mean, I'll make my last pitch on. It's been a couple of weeks since we've heard, you know, the stats on where we are with STDs. We know that it's not only the LGBT community, but the African-American community, and that the numbers are increasing and that this is one of those times where you can actually put money somewhere and see an automatic decrease. And it's not necessarily on a values piece. And so I fully support the African-American Cultural Center, don't want to pit us against other items. But in a situation where we have our health department saying that we are at a crisis mode with STDs going up and $30,000 can help make a difference. You know, and I'm not sure if that's 15. Okay. Now that we can do. I know that shows that they have equal priority as the funding comes at the beginning. So if it came in at ten, they'd get five, each of it comes in at 60, they get 30 each or whatever. Is that fair? Does that work? I mean, it does work viably in terms of, well, I understand and you're giving out the budget. But I mean, does that work in terms of reaching the goal that it's intending to work? So are you saying that the funding has to be in step levels? Like if it was 10,000, it wouldn't work at all? It has to be. My question for for like two. And eight to do with that, I get it here. So. So each increment, I mean, it's not incremental base. It's it's just the ability to have increased access and testing out in the community. So when we the original conversation was 15,000 for testing and. 15,000. For outreach. So the testing is very important. As is the outreach. So we could combine that in whatever, whatever that is possible. 30 would be a. Good start and of course we need a lot more than that. 30 would be a starting place. But if were 20, we take 20. And then for a language access plan that's a non-career position and we would just be adding hours so it wouldn't be a. Know that the. Language text, the language access program, the language access. Program is currently non. Career. But it you can't go past they're already topped out at 1600 hours so we'd have to make a full time. And there at. The one because then. That one would have to be $35,000. It has to be 35,000. It can't be less. And so so my thought was that we are already funding it at 160 this year and that any other incremental would have to be supported by potentially an additional staff member so that it's not at a rate that's so much higher, if that makes sense. And so at this time, what I would ask is for us to wait for the report to come back, because one of the things that we talked about with the community and their budget priorities was there's currently over $800,000 of language programing in the city that's really not accounted for. And so before we talk through what those priorities are, to get that report back from the H.R. staff and then kind of walk through it again when we have that and that should be coming back in the next few weeks. So that's I would just say that we'll actually no closer to what year end we are in. Money will look like we'll know a bunch more things. And so at this time what I'd like to do is accept the friendly for the $30,000 contingency STD outreach. And testing to be prioritized at the same level as the African-American cultural support. And then for the 30. The hours. You don't in doing the specific request of Councilmember Austin with the 35,000 request of LAPD to come back as a part of the full picture that we've already motion. For comment until 8 p.m.. Sure. Thank you. Look, let me add something, because I understand what what we're trying to get to. So I think first, I do appreciate I think that that's a good addition to the budget. So thank you, Councilmember. I think that those those needs are really important. I think what what I have heard from Councilmember Pearce and others on the council is that as we as we're looking at the language access program, the real need might not just be adding a bunch of money to translate documents, but the need is actually to to ensure that there's a person actually doing the work that's consistent within a language access policy and that's actually doing work, going out and actually implementing some of this work, not just money from translation services. Now, that's what I've heard of from, you know, from, from folks. And so I think and Mr. Modica, correct me if I'm wrong, but with this new money coming in, I think you guys are going to be reviewing the dollars that are coming in from language access and looking at if this is actually a possibility and what that could look like in the future and kind of assessing how we expand now that we have more dollars, how we expand what we're actually doing. And I know that you're going to come back to the council to give an update on that. So hopefully, if that's what we're going tonight, that those we can have that conversation about where we're going when this comes back to the councils. Is that a correct assessment? Yes. So we were we were asked to come back with some information on a current bilingual pay and how we're currently allocating that money. Then and then Bossi was recommending that the LPI money first be used to kind of make that do that review and then come back. That is, as we understand Bossi motion. And. From considerable community meetings and community outreach and input related to some of the frustration we're hearing in the community with not seeing the results that they had hoped for with the amount of money that's been allocated to date. So, yes, absolutely. Okay. So I think I think I know where we're at with the conversation. So I think that's where we're going. But we're still doing some some research on on the issue as well. So let me let me go back to the. And then Councilmember. I'm sorry, Mary, can we get some clarification on where this falls in the priority order having it equal with the African-American Museum? Well, we haven't. We have that. We haven't. Made it. We just need some direction. Where does it. Go? There is we're still having the conversation, but there is not yet any additional funding that's been set aside on language access besides the 160. That's I believe it's one 6180. I'm sorry. I was referring to the mobile phone or the mobile that is. Being that is right where the African-American museum is. So then it is said, okay, so it is seniors then, right? We try to trace them right below. It is right below. I think it needs to be above or below. It's right below. Thank you. Okay. Just yes. Okay. So let's go back now to. Yeah, nothing is nothing the above. Another thing, they're all important. They're all going to get funded. So, Councilor Pierce. I'm like, I don't even know. No, I'm I don't want to be right out. And I and I know that Councilmember Austin has been working for a long time on his project. So I want to respectfully, for the group, say that I am happy to go after the African-American Cultural Center knowing that we were all going to get to where we we need to get, and that I know that this is a priority for the whole community. So I just want to put that out there. Thank you. Well, we have a motion and a second for these recommendations, so please go ahead and cast your votes. Motion case.