Recommendation to direct City Attorney to prepare a resolution, and any related documents, for the November 3, 2020 ballot for voters to consider a $298 million housing bond at $25 per $100,000 assessed valuation for the creation of affordable housing in Long Beach, with funds available for extremely low, very low, low, moderate, and workforce housing, crisis shelters and homeless services facilities, motel conversion programs, and other solutions to address the housing and homelessness crisis in Long Beach. Direct City Manager to prepare a report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach, strategies to address housing affordability and homelessness, potential types of projects that could be funded with a housing bond, estimates on the number of units that could be constructed with a revenue source dedicated to affordable housing, and report back to the City Council within 90 days.
District four I, district five I, District six, District seven, District eight. Ney and District nine. Thank you very much. Motion carries. And then with that, we will move to item 22. Communication from Councilmember Richardson. Councilwoman Zendaya's recommendation to direct city attorney to prepare a resolution for the November 3rd, 2020 ballot for voters to consider a 298 million housing bond at $25 per 100,000 assessed valuation for the creation of affordable housing in Long Beach and Direct City Manager to prepare a report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach and report back to the City Council within 90 days. Thank you. This is an agenda item from Councilman Richardson as the lead author. So I'm going to turn this over to him for the presentation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Happy New Year to everyone. And I think it's appropriate that we start the year off right by taking an opportunity to weigh in on one of the biggest issues impacting our city and our region. Housing and the homelessness crisis. Is this easy? Thank you. Thank you. We are on a limit here with our presentation is easy. No, it is not. Housing has never come without its own controversy when we discuss this topic. If you think of almost anything related to housing and that's okay, I think the proposal here that we're going to discuss tonight takes a lot of that into account. My hope is that the presentation will provide context and clearly outline a proposal to identify a revenue source to both support the production of affordable housing, housing it's affordable and to expand our capacity to address homelessness in our city. Tonight's proposal is a culmination of nearly three years of studies discussions before our council with community members, staff and stakeholders. Before we begin, I want to thank a number of key organizations have taken steps to bring us to this point. The Long Beach, Everyone Home Task Force, a coalition of stakeholders, education leaders, nonprofit leaders who work together to meet to put together a plan to address both of these critical issues in our city. The United Way, everyone in campaign who's done an amazing job helping to spread the word that it is possible for us to make a real, meaningful impact on the lives of thousands of residents in our city. The Housing Justice Coalition that is always at the table speaking up for justice in our city. The Long Beach Interfaith Community Organization and ministers all across town have been in communication with us from the last year to lift up Long Beach Families Coalition, who's taken a lot of work to conduct research over the past year to put us in this position. The Long Beach Homeless Coalition in Long Beach, the Long Beach Gray Panthers, and I see a number of individuals, the L.A., O.C. Building Trades Council, who are with us this evening, as well as the hundreds of residents who are engaged in this process. Thank you all for engaging tonight's proposal. Ask the city attorney to draft language for City Council Review and consideration for placing a $298 million housing bond on on the November 2020 citywide general election ballot for the purpose of boosting affordable housing production and creating affordable and creating additional homeless shelter capacity with our city. The recommendation also requests that the city manager present a study and analysis that includes the total cost breakdown ways the measure could work. Housing need in the city. Projects eligible for funding with the housing bond. And to present a plan to ensure that we're making the greatest impact with these dollars. To be clear, this is not a vote to place the measure on the ballot tonight. It's a vote to advance the conversation beyond studies and provide the public and the city council the language and the facts to take action within the next 90 days. We are not voting to put this on the ballot tonight. Tonight, we're voting to give directions to city staff after we've collected information over the past three years on what we'd like to see come back to put us in a position to move forward with a ballot measure. And I just want to be clear on that. Next, we we all know the California's in the midst of a housing crisis, which, you know, I want to provide a little context, context which significantly impacts housing affordability and homelessness here in Long Beach. We're we know that addressing this issue has been a top priority of our city council. And since 2016, we've reviewed and asked staff to report to prepare reports on ways to increase affordable and workforce housing, provide pathways into housing for those experiencing homelessness, and furthermore prevent individuals from falling into homelessness. This is not a new proposal. Recommendations to create housing and to create a housing bond have been brought before this council five times in the past three years, which you'll see on the next slide. Affordable housing and homelessness remains an ongoing conversation for the City Council, which first began in 2016 when the Affordable Housing Workforce Study Group assembled by Mayor Garcia and chaired by former Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal. Since then, the following actions have taken place by the City Council and city staff. In May 22, in May 2017, the City Council adopted a plan called the Revenue Tools and Incentives for Production of Affordable and Workforce Housing. This report included 29 recommendations, one of which was the creation of a local bond measure for affordable housing production to replace the missing, the lack of funding or the gap caused by the loss of redevelopment. We used to invest $23 million a year into affordable housing production. Next, four months later, on September 2017, city staff reported back to the City Council on Costs and Benefits of a local housing bond to capitalize our housing trust fund and support affordable housing production. Two months later, in December 2017, we launched Everyone in Economic Inclusion Initiative, recognizing housing as a fundamental component to economic success for all Long Beach families, and highlighting the barriers to homeownership for an entire generation of families in our city. Five months later, the mayor appointed to everyone home task force, made up of dozens of stakeholders from business, the education community, the health care community, the affordable housing community, and multiple multidisciplinary city departments, and many more to to explore. Creating a comprehensive plan to address our housing homelessness crisis. In July. 2018, the city council voted unanimously to request the city manager to report on the gaps in services, in housing and precariously housing, those experiencing homelessness, as well as funding strategies and an implementation timeline for a local dedicated revenue source. A month later, August 2018, not only did the City Council consider several options for potentially funding a local revenue source, the council also took an additional step by unanimously providing a budget allocation of $50,000 to continue researching funding solutions for affordable housing. And four months later, the City Council unanimously adopted the Everyone Home Long Beach Report, an evaluation of existing services, funding streams, needs and recommendations to address, affordable address homelessness and housing affordability. The first goal of the Everyone at Home Long Beach Report is to secure local, sustainable funding. All of this brings us to tonight. And with the city council's approval, we can move forward with a request for resolution and a report on potential on a potential housing measure to address the gaps identified over the past over the past three years. This timeline shows seven steps over the last three years that the city council has taken to help bring us to arrive at this point. Each blue step indicates when a housing bond was either recommended, recommended or discussed. The point here, it's not a new idea. The Everyone Home report is comprehensive. Indeed, it does a great job of analyzing the city's current homeless services, projecting a need for homeless prevention housing. The items in Orange are the numbers that we know. Roughly 4000 people experience housing, experience homelessness each year in Long Beach. And during the 2019 point in time homeless count, almost 1900 people were counted homeless in a single day in our city. 1275 of those people are living unsheltered on our streets. 52% of those people were experiencing homelessness for the first time. 60% of those individuals are likely to experience homelessness for more than a year. Over half of Long Beach residents, over half of Long Beach residents are rent burdened, paying more than 30% of their income on housing. 58,000 people in Long Beach are categorized as precariously housed and on any given night could slip into homelessness. The items in great our home, our housing and shelter needs identified locally and by the state. We required to build 202,893 affordable units, and we have 817 in the pipeline. We have a need for 500 shelter beds and I am glad and thankful to the North Long Beach residents into the Long Beach City Council that we have taken steps by building a 125 bed Atlantic Avenue Avenue Bridge facility in North Long Beach. But we still have a 375 bed gap. 125 beds is not going to solve this problem for our city. Improve Everyone Home report. We need roughly 350 permanent supportive housing units and 450 rapid rehousing units to expand housing opportunity. The amount in red is the capital needed to build 2000 low income units and facilities for shelter capacity. It's clear that we know what the issues we're facing. We know which solutions will help address the problem. The funding in tonight's proposal is adequate to help us meet the needs and close the gap. The Everyone Home report identifies existing funding in the state is helping, but the amount of dollars provided by the state is slim compared to our need. The state provided $275 million to large cities to share on a one time basis. It's not going to close that gap. Our total our total need is greater than the entire amount that the state allocated to major cities. Let's put that in perspective. Now a bond can be used on various infrastructure projects across the city, such as shelters, facilities for mental health and construction, loans to build affordable housing. Bond funding can be used for the acquisition of nuisance motels for conversion. Expanding shelter capacity to make our community safer and more stable. And homebuyer down payment and second mortgage assistance programs to assist Long Beach families achieve the goal of home ownership in a bond will help Long Beach residents across various income levels, including students, two working families, teachers and seniors on a fixed income. Let's compare this bond to other local measures within our city. Here's a chart that shows the Long Beach Unified School District and Long Beach Community College bond measures in recent history. They'll be USD measures K, K and E were in the amounts of 1.2 million and 1.5 billion respectfully, respectively. And the Long Beach Community College District bond was in the amount of $850 million. The proposal tonight is $300 million. It's saying it will not only address this critical issue, but does so at a fraction of the of the cost of previously approved measures in Long Beach. And to be clear, I know there's a lot of numbers floating around, but the the the 2019 median assessed value on a single family resident in Long Beach is $346,000. That's the median in 2019. Assessed value for single family residents that would turn into the average dollar would be 86. The average, should this proceed, would be $86 per year on an average single family residence. To break that down, that is $7 a month for every single family residence. I know that folks are overburdened. I completely understand. But we're talking to put this in perspective, the proposals allow the residents to vote on $7 less than your next Netflix bill. Listing your Disney plus bill. I've got a coffee, I've got a soda. I drink plenty of those once a month. This is significantly less. And we're we're not imposing this. We're asking voters to consider this. Here's more information on the proposal. There are a number of accountability measures and enhancements to make this to address. Some of the concerns have been raised. The proposal includes the establishment of a citizen bond oversight committee, along with mandatory audits to ensure transparency and accountability. That is, that the funding is used accountably and effectively. The proposal includes an opt out process for seniors over 65 years old, as well as individuals disabilities, to ensure that this assessment does not overburdened vulnerable populations. The proposal includes a recommendation to negotiate local hiring on construction through a project labor agreement with the Building Trades Council to ensure that any construction activity creates local jobs and economic opportunity for Long Beach families. And finally, the proposal includes a recommendation for performance accountability, measures to improve upon housing, bond efforts in other communities and make sure that we are actually accomplishing our stated goals. We have an opportunity tonight to take a take a first vote, a first vote for you in the step toward letting voters in Long Beach decide on how we as a city address Long Beach address homelessness. This effort has been researched and discussed by our City Council. For more than three and a half years. We've studied the housing crisis. We've identified solutions that can help address housing affordability and homelessness in our city. Now's the time to consider this option and let the voters decide. The longer we go without considering this action, the more costly it will become for homeowners, renters and and those experiencing homelessness. They are reflect respectfully submit this proposal to the city council. Thank you. Thank you. Public comment first. And with that, we have three we have 70 speakers. 70 speakers. So with that, that's 2 hours. Okay, just hold up. So what we're going to do is for the first 30, you will get 90 seconds. And after that, you will get one minute. We will start the first 30. I'll call of you maybe eight or nine or ten at a time. Mr.. Mr. Vice Mayor, what is the protocol of meeting? Is that the protocol? Yes. 90. And then. And in one. Minute. Yes. 90 seconds. In one minute. Okay. I have no idea. Okay. The first I got two words from Matthew Taylor. Know that he is just one. Great time. You did. Yes. Thank you very. Much. By Matthew Taylor Stevens. 90 seconds. Excuse me. If you will have your turn, please. Listen, I want to say this, Bobby. I'm sure the mayor is listening. He's here. Yes. So I fully support the the bill to to have the bond for the homeless. But I'd like for us to spend our thinking. It is not only homelessness that is causing the problems and a lack of homes. It's the lack of a broken spirit that we have of people who are unemployed, who are also in the streets . And some will be most do not only have home providing and places to provide homes for people. We're going to have to do some things are providing employment, some spiritual uplift, some family assistance. We have to take the whole person and give them some love that we have not given them a long time. And so I think that this is going to be a fantastic start, but we must take the total human being into consideration and make sure that we don't leave anything out. And that's including their total person. We must love them, care for them, and really do something to make everyone have a place to live and to be respected and to have a home. Thank you, Dr. Watson. Okay, I'm going to call a five more people. You guys can just line up in this order. MATTHEWS, Stevens, Tommy, you guys and Ivan and Milt, you guys please line up in that order. Matthew Stevens, Tommy, Ivan and Mel. I guess I'll jump the line. You just go. Okay. Go ahead. Counsel Tommy five. I represent IBEW Local 11. I'm here with the IBEW folks that's here tonight to support this proposal moving forward. We feel that, you know, just having a tool in place when it comes to affordable housing and homelessness, you know, it just barely scratches the surface. You know, and we understand that, you know, we understand that bond measures like this helps, you know, help cities, you know, to be more aware of homelessness and, you know, housing. We we understand that, too, when it comes to building an infrastructure. And hopefully when this comes to comes to light, that we're there to help these folks get into a good career and help uplift them at the same time. When it comes to this bond measure. But we urge the city council to move this forward and then to bring it back 90 days. I think that's what Councilman Rick's Richardson mentioned. But I just wanted to thank Rex Richardson's office. And then of all the community, you know, groups that, you know, that come together and, you know, to bring this forward to to you tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And Matthew Taylor. And Matthew Taylor statements update you guys, please line up. And Ivan Jamerson, it doesn't make any difference. Just whoever steps up, you can go ahead. Okay. I respect your offer. You speak. Okay. Thank you, sir. Your name is you. Steve Updike. Here for affordable housing for gay people. LGBTQ people. A lot of senior housing is owned by religious groups, and they discriminate against gays, as you know. And there's these rich real estate people. They are they're running low and middle income people out of the Long Beach area. They want psychiatrists to label people as mentally ill just because. They can not afford to pay rents. How crazy is that? We know that they are up to we know what they're doing. The Christian law enforcement people still discriminate against gays and pushes them into psychiatry. To stop them from being gay. Is like a gay conversion therapy and we know it and you know. It too. The city has in bed with big real estate investors. They should be building gay senior housing to make up for the crimes they have committed against gays. But it allows over 100 years don't make the taxpayers pay for it. Make these people. Let me name off a few people. There's Steve Bogey. Bagel your back. Okay. Big, rich Armenian man down here at Marcus and Millichap. Get these people to put their fair share and they're making $1,000,000,000 off you people. And when Mayor Garcia. Is old, he's going to need a place. Where he can live. And we think that we should name the gay senior citizen Robert Garcia, LGBTQ senior home. Now, that's fine. Thank you. Time for your next. A remarkable. Improvement. You state your name, sir. Matthew Taylor. Okay. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ballot proposal. I'm in District three with my wife. We are not homeowners, so it would not affect us. Nonetheless, we have significant concerns on this proposal. I have no doubt that this proposal is a well-intentioned move to make Long Beach a more equitable city. But this catch all proposal would spend $300 million and increase the bureaucracy to fight windmills without providing any services to address root causes of much homelessness and makes the goal of homeownership all the more difficult. We've all grown accustomed to hearing homelessness described as a housing crisis. Yet my wife and I have gone handed out dozens of lunches on numerous occasions to the homeless in and around Bixby Park. We sat on the grass and listened to their stories. And though anecdotes don't make statistics excuse me, with the exception of four individuals, every person we have met where substance abusers and a number of those likely having mental illnesses, everybody home study stated 21% of homeless self-reported having a substance abuse issue. If that is a self-reported percentage, I'm left wondering how much higher the actual figure is. There are serious mental health and drug issues plaguing Southern California and the root of much homelessness, and this would do nothing to address those needs. These are difficult issues. Thank you. Please, please. Could you show some respect for the speaker, please? That. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. City Council of Long. Beach, please. State your name, sir, please. My name is Mel DeLuca, and I would like to answer that privileged white person who spoke before me. Giving out sandwiches in a park doesn't give you the knowledge to understand what homelessness is. I have I have given out many sandwiches, which I'm only stating to answer him. And for all the people I have met, some have substance abuse issues. Most cannot afford housing, and that is why we are here. We can't wait until we are like the city of Los Angeles, where they just approved the first open, their first housing project. From a bond measure they started in 2016. We need the help now. Thank you, Council President Richardson, for proposing this. We need to push this through. There are studies. What is needed to solve homelessness? It doesn't take a study. It's homes. It's affordable housing. It's workforce housing. Let's get this done right now. Thank you. Thank you very much. Ivan Jemison. Good evening. My name is Ian Jamieson. In response to the moronic remarks made by the gentleman before last. Going to a homeless encampment and talking with a dozen people does not make you an expert on the issue. Far from it. Around 40% of the homeless people experiencing homelessness in L.A. County are doing so because they cannot afford rent. They do not have substance abuse issues. This goes to the very complex root of the homelessness problem, which is that people are simply being priced out of the housing market. As to the 60% of L.A. County homeless people who do suffer from substance abuse issues. The Housing First modality has been universally shown to be the only effective way at addressing substance abuse. You get a person and this is not counterintuitive stuff. I do not have to be Albert Einstein to see the logic of this getting somebody to get off meth when they have to worry about being raped or burgled or even killed on the streets is way more difficult than when they're doing it in the comfort of a warm apartment. So in conclusion, sir, you are an idiot. Okay, well, these people line up here. Well, Akerman, flat. You real? You present an to call your name. Ackman. That's your real. Alice Stegman. Joe, why don't you do? And Mr. Hoover. Okay. Could you please type in that order or whichever? Doesn't make any difference. Go ahead. Councilmember. Please state your name. Second County office. My name is Linnea. Okay. And I am a resident of Long Beach 90803. I am a doctor of public health and an educator as well as a health care provider. And after 40 years of experience, I. Can say in the CDC and the. National Institutes of Health support this that shelter and housing are the way to take care of many of the ills of society, including homelessness, illness. And, yes, many of the homeless are mentally ill. But if you were put out on the street for a year, you might be mentally ill as well as a health care provider. I assumed that the women that I took care of had been raped because. That is the. Reality of many women that are living on the street. So if we want to take care of many of our social ills, we need to look to the social determinants of health and housing our residents. Thank you. Thank you. That's how you cancel. My name is Rio. I just moved to Long Beach and it's pretty cool. Anyway, homeless people who are addicts and mentally ill are people and also deserve a right to live in Long Beach. And. Period. I myself have dealt with mental illness and being like put in an institution for it. And the only reason why I am so well put together now is because I had a home and I had a supportive family and I had the resources to do all these things to address this issue throughout my life. So I don't understand how people wouldn't have severe trauma. And. Like being homeless and it only really gets worse. Like the longer that you're out on the streets, like you're more likely to die. But why should you have to like all of the like homeless people who have who have the like. Basically if you have your resources, you can. Become the better version of yourself that you were meant to be. When people talk about people's potential. Maybe the next person to cure cancer is actually homeless, but they ended up dying on the street. So maybe we should do something about it. Not maybe we should. Thank you. Thank you. Actually, the. Okay. My name is Alberts Demarche and I'm a resident. Long Beach. You know, on my way up here, I access in a912. Look, I know two. 190216. Here you go. I'm away up here. Just like when I went to Boulevard and Sixth Street in between Seventh Street, right in front of Walgreens and CVS. There are people that sleep outside of CVS and Walgreens every night, and I see more tents popping up because people can't afford to actually pay rent. And of course, they they actually they're drug addicts, people who do actually have substance abuse problems. But there are a lot of people like people who go to City College, people that no, they go to obviously the college they actually are students, but they can't afford to pay rent. So they actually sleep in their cars. They live in like homeless shelters. And they also look to continue coming to school. But, you know, I think it is really important to do something about the homeless situation right away because the homeless population is growing like this, larger than it was last year, larger than it was six months ago. And I really would like to see you guys do something about it right away. Don't wait to six months from now. Next year, live. Do something this week. No, thank you. All right. Thank you. What was your name, sir? Excuse me. What? Your name? My name is Albert. Thank you, sir. Okay, Mr. Weinstein. No, thank you. There are good things and. Not quite so good things about this proposal. The sensible thing about this proposal is it asks. For a. Look at what can we do? The weird thing about this proposal is that the one definite thing it puts in front is a tax. This is a. Simply a tax proposal. No guarantee. As to which specifics this tax revenue would be spent. On. And absent the study, apparently there is a need for study to just. See that the problems allegedly addressed would be addressed. It gets the impression that we started out with how much can. We done. The property owners of the city for. And then maybe spend that? Well, you know, it's true that 300 million pales in comparison with some other bond issues, and that's a plus. And it's also true that you're. Going you would go to the voters. To approve that. But on the other hand, if you really want to solve. Homeless problems. Fast, this won't do it. Another thing, too, is that. There is a quicker. Solution to housing people. A lot of people in that is. To take this building, which has. Lots of room in it. And tell the people thank you, said miracle people. Thank you. To go ahead and thank. You. What I do namely do. Most of. My working business. Excuse me person on the internet next. Which is what I've been doing as a state proxy. For 15. Years. Yes. Yes. And okay. We have Michelle. We have Nadia. Andy Hollis. Christina. Jo Jo Nicholson. Just come on up. You guys just come right on it. Just. Just mention your name when you get a second. Write it up. Kristina. Roy. Hi. Today I will be sorry. You. Please give us your name, please. Yes. Good evening, City Council. My name is Andy and I will be representing on behalf of link housing. I'm a resident at Linc Housing, which I've been visiting for a year. I previously was homeless and in foster care. The rate of the rate of homelessness in the community is rising, especially for young adults between the ages of 18 to 25, like myself and older adults as well. There is a high demand of housing for homeless youth and adults, but a lack of resources, which is a major problem in the community. I feel having stable, affordable housing for young adults, transitioning to adulthood and having additional resources for adults who are chronically homeless as essential. I believe housing should be a basic human necessity, which is why I'm speaking today to shed light on a very serious issue that is affecting our community. I was able to receive affordable housing and which helped me alleviate the trauma I experienced while being homeless. Thank you very much. Next. Ah, yes. My name is Hollis Stewart. I live in the first district downtown. I have a condominium there and my wife and I wanted to speak to the tax thing because I am someone who pays taxes right now. I am building that, you know, here in the city and I would be glad to pay some more tax in order to provide housing for people who need it. Because that's the way that's the way we build families. That's what we have. Children grow up with some confidence by living in a place and being able to be part of a community. And this is so important in terms of how you end up being when even when you go to school and universities and all that. So we do need this. We need it now. And as a matter of. Well, it's not a mental discharge thing I keep hearing about. Yes, there are drug users out there, but there's also a lot of people who drink alcohol every Saturday night downtown in all of our nice bars and nobody talks about them. It's like outrage in the street or something. No, we the people we are fighting for here who are homeless are people who need to have a decent place to live. And I pay the tax for it and I hope a lot of others will do. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Want to show you my side since I made it. My name is Christina Cervantes. My husband and I are District five residents, and before that we lived downtown. My sign says Long Beach. Thank you for housing veterans. Now let's get safe homes for everyone. I've had many interactions with our homeless residents and most of them have left me feeling helpless. I provided them things they've asked me for a heavy blanket for an older gentleman, my favorite picnic blanket from my car and directions to the multi-service center and bus fare for a young man and some warm homemade food. And a couple of times a little bit of money toward a hotel. Stay for a young couple and other young men and always a smile and a listening ear. But the main thing I know they need is the one thing I can't provide them safe housing. There's a senior at my church that just lost her housing. There are people beginning to camp on our church's property. How can I give them hope in finding safe housing when I know the city is so short on affordable housing? It makes me feel helpless. I can't do this by myself. I'm one person. I simply ask that you give caring residents like me the chance to make a real difference for our neighbors and now become before we become more like L.A., I have hope we can house more people because I know we've done it for our veterans . Let's provide safe housing for everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Next. My name's Nadir Tushnet, and I live in the third district. The benefit of the bond to the community is clear. It provides funding. For a path. To security for those. Who are experiencing houseless. Ms.. As we know. The longer people are on the street, the worst. Their lives are in many dimensions and the worst it is for their children. There are children on the. Street as well. We have to remember that. I am a homeowner. I am retired. That makes me a person of privilege. I know that I need to use my privilege not to benefit me, but to benefit the community. In my tradition, Rabbi Hillel said, If I am not for myself. Who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? If not now, when? Thank you very much. Okay with the next group of interviews lined up this Sunday, Christina Christian, Jo Nicholson, Christina Oak. Every entry and the idea that Donald. Downfield. So I know I might have backed those names up and is close to it. So you come up with now your name and we'll just scratch off with that. So do what have you got? Segway. That's good. I mean. Okay. Christina Petit. Jo Nicholson. Christina. Attorney, Joe Nicholson. Okay. Hi, everyone. I am Dr. Christine Pettit, executive director of Long Beach Forward and a sixth District resident. As a member of the Everyone Home Long Beach Task Force, I stand in strong support of this item that will realize one of our task force's top recommendations of establishing a dedicated source of local funding for homelessness solutions. As we all know, Long Beach is in a severe housing and homelessness crisis. The time is now for our city to proactively tackle. This crisis actually was yesterday, and we need these proven solutions, including a local bond measure, to be approved by voters. We are not asking the council to pass a bond measure tonight. We are simply asking the council to take the first step to give voters the opportunity to vote on it in November. This item is about opportunity, an opportunity to transform and save lives, especially our most vulnerable residents living on the street, experiencing chronic homelessness and cost burden. Families who live on the brink of homelessness. This is an opportunity to end homelessness with homes permanently and cost effectively and humanely. And we saw the statistics about how effective it is, how cost effective is. It's also humane. And this is an opportunity for Long Beach to get its fair share of available resources to unlock county, state and federal dollars that we have not had access to. Tonight is an opportunity to let Long Beach voters decide in November. Please vote yes tonight to make this first step. Thank you. Yes. Hello. My name is Zoe Nicholson. I live in the second district. I'm asking you to take a moment with me and the. I know this to understand this. Each of you have one of these in your pocket. Imagine going home tonight and saying, Well, honey. I'm sorry, but I couldn't afford it. So you're leaving your toys, you're leaving your spouse. You live in the fridge, you live in the stove, you live in the sheets because you couldn't afford this. You'd be crazy, too, in no time. Imagine how you'd be in a year. Imagine in the eyes of your partner staring back at you. But I'm here to tell you. Lucky you. You get to do what I would do anything. Anything to do to sit on that side of the circle. And to vote yes. We're going to study this. We're going to conquer this. We're going to make sure that everybody has a key. Thank you. Next. That evening, everyone my name is Leonardo. How your I live now at the stroke with elastin I used to live in the square with. Lena Gonzalez. I was homeless 16 years ago. My daughter was one year old. She says 17 hours just going to school for exiting high school this year and going to the Marines. She experienced that homelessness when she was one year old. She still remembers it up to this time. And I don't understand. Before the rent control ordinance was passed, effective this year, on January last year. Most of the landlords in District eight rent increase was 50%. For my case, it was to raise 600 soon. I'm beginning to be out there as of being homeless again. So hopefully we get some more help. Funding for better housing. Affordable and supportive housing for elderly, low income and homeless people. Thank you. Thank you very much. Tonight is tonight here in Europe. Delia. Christina? Christina, you. Ever. So I apologize. And Sandy lives here. I was inability to come right up. Heather. Sandy Lane. Rebecca Moran. Those individuals, please come right up. Okay. You can start. Thank you, Councilman. And I can be president. Sixth District. Uh, I'm in support of the. The housing bond. My question in regards to, um, the study that comes along with it to the sponsor, to Councilman Richardson, is what are the guarantees that we have that we're going to house, uh, people who are in precarious living situations, who currently live in the city of Long Beach and that people who live in the city of L.A.. Because as it stands, I live in the sixth district, and there's no district in the city that rivals the amount of affordable housing units that are currently being built in the sixth District. However, that being said, a majority of the district's affordable housing units that are being built are primarily housing people in the city of L.A. or County of Los Angeles housing lists, which are people who live in the city of L.A.. So I'm curious to see how we can push this narrative to house people who currently live in and in Long Beach or who currently are homeless in the city of Long Beach. Uh, because I figure, you know, I don't mind paying the money. And I figure, you know, if, if, if the burden of this is on the taxpayers, maybe we can also get some kind of tlt, uh, quid pro quo thing that we did for like Molina and friends down the street with the hotels. Maybe we can get some, some of that burden alleviated, not just on us, but also like, you know, some of the businesses as well. Thank you. Thank you. Mm hmm. Good evening. My name is Suni Lee Chang. I'm the chief operating officer for Link Housing. I was also a member of the Everyone Home Task Force and a member and a resident of the eighth District. We saw the numbers that showed that, relatively speaking, this is a small bond. But I'd like to offer you the practitioner's perspective that that explains it shows that while it is a relatively small number, it packs a mighty punch. And the reason for that is that when we locally are able to commit dollars, that attracts other dollars from the county and from the state. So I'll give you an example. Councilwoman Andrews, you were gracious enough to advocate for. The spark at Midtown, which is 95 units of. Affordable housing in your district. The city put in $3 million for that site. We are. An affordable housing developer and. Any of our colleagues would be able to take that. We took that $3 million. We got 18 times as much money from the state and from the county, and we were able to build a 50 plus million dollar project there. We're doing the same thing at PCH and Magnolia in the first District said, you put in $2 million. We're able to build a $24 million project there. What you're proving tonight has the ability to have a much greater impact. And also to put this all in perspective, we spend all of this money on our educational system. We have a first rate nationally award winning school district. We have this wonderful thing called the college promise. We invest all this money and these kids go through school and they can't afford a place to live. Let's fix that by putting. This bond. Before the current. He's I am to do a thrash and took a resident of the eighth district and a homeowner. I'm also the executive director of a regional nonprofit that leads work around economic development and housing policy strategies in local cities. As a housing expert. I sit on the board of Directors of Housing California, and I'm vice chair of Proposition eight, the Citizens Oversight Commission. My housing policy experience brings me before you today. You see, first we have a problem. It's been noted here today that our crisis is pushing people out of our city and in some cases certainly onto the streets, sidewalks, churches, storefronts, cars, trailers and even on railroad tracks. This creates a safety hazard as well as a financial hazard. It's the cost of not housing people that we should all be concerned about. This is complicated, trying to figure out how do we create the policy that is nuanced and necessary in order to house people? But that means that we must have courage. We have the chance to answer the call. You see, proactive leaders dissect policy options and look for solutions. More than 65% of. The voters. Here in Long Beach have said they are interested in this housing solution. Let's get moving. I've had conversations with many people in my community and many of them feel that they are one rent hike from displacement. That's not how people should feel if they're living here in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. That's. Good evening. I'm Rebecca Clarke. I lead link housing, nonprofit housing, affordable housing developer here in Long Beach. And I wanted to speak and speak in support tonight. This housing crisis that we've all been talking about is affecting. I actually live in Bixby Knolls, and I'm starting to see more and more homeless in this neighborhood, which previously didn't see a homeless problem. So it is everywhere. And Long Beach's diverse with a broad spectrum of people. And we love that. We want to see all incomes be able to afford to live in Long Beach. And that is changing. We're losing people that are being gentrified out and who are going to be left with a sort of a one dimensional population. The cost of land in development make it impossible. To build housing that is. Affordable, let alone providing housing for our homeless. And I know I've heard complaints from a few taxpayers saying we already pay enough taxes. We pay taxes into. The VA for. Affordable housing on the County of Los Angeles. Measure H. But in fact, that is for services, not for building affordable housing, not for permanent supportive housing. So, as Suni said, every dollar that is put in leverages a great number of dollars more and. Also money for services. So responsive. Well, communities all across California are really stepping up at the local level and realizing that they can make a difference. So Long Beach, move forward. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Hi. My name is Heather Pentecost and my families are fortunate enough. To own property in. District eight. And we love the city of Long Beach. I believe it. Is our responsibility. And our honor to assist those in our city who are rent burdened. And I urge my city council member to vote yes to explore this opportunity to fund more of this vital housing. Thank you. Thank you very much. That's. Good evening. Councilmembers. My name is Lauren Elam. I work with Link Housing, nonprofit organization, District seven. I have also been a resident here in Long Beach going on 13 years now, District two and I stand before you here this evening. Council members, in closing with a community that has not only humbly awaited for opportunity for stability that is well deserved, however more so earned, let's envision this vision. A previous study found that it would cost taxpayers 10,000 per homeless person to give them a. Permanent place to live. And services like job trainings and health care. That figure is 68% less than what the public currently spends by allowing homeless people to remain on the streets. What are we what are what are we as human beings if we ignore the suffering of others? Let the voters vote and the community thrive. Thank you. Thank you very. Much. And as Sandy lay here, Sandy Lay. Actor Stephen Richardson. Jordan Wayne. Any of those individuals who. Okay. This is going to go down to the next level, go down to one minute. So it's only late here. And come. We're not. Yeah. Welcome. Yeah. Come right up and state your name. So we got 70 names on here, so please just get in line. My name is Jordan Wynn. I am a second district resident member of the Continuum of Care Board and a part of everyone in Long Beach. I want to start by thanking everyone who is in this room for turning out, and I'd ask if you're in support to stand up if you can, and raise your sign. Stand up. Raise it. High. Council members, Long Beach is ready to end homelessness. The voters are here and they are ready. As you can see, I'm speaking. Up in support of item 22 and I urge City Council to vote yes and take this important first step towards funding for neighbors experiencing homelessness. I want to thank council members Rex Richardson. Mary is in the House and Dee Andrews for initially bringing this forward. This modest bond will go directly towards comprehensive housing solutions that help fill the gaps in our continuum of care. No matter how someone. Falls into homelessness. Supportive housing makes social and medical services work more effective. Costing half of what it would do. Administrate on the streets and in Long Beach, we've seen great success with this century. Villages like Cambria. One of our biggest and most state of the art supportive housing developments in the country, has a 96%. Success rate at helping recover formerly homeless individuals. And keeping them housed. Over 50,000 people are experiencing housing instability with 90% or there were more of their income going towards their rents. And we need to be clear, we can afford this. The median homeowner in Long Beach would pay $87 a year or $1.66 per week. And we want to make sure that's clear. And I urge council to vote to approve item 22 and take the first steps toward a safer and healthier Long Beach when we bring everyone in. Thank you. Comment off. Steve, members of the Council and Dr. Robert Garcia. My name is Pastor Steve Richardson. I pastor a church in District one today. One seven 2020. We mourn the death of 57 individuals who died from simply being homeless last year in the city of Long Beach. That is 3% of the counted population of people that are homeless. We have been working with the homeless population for the last nine years from Good News Church. We've given out over 15,000 meals and at this time, homelessness continues to be a bigger problem than it was just yesterday. We're living in a time when the average worker can barely afford to live in the city that we love. We're also experiencing the daily manifestation of movement of people from their apartments into cars and on the streets, because they cannot pay the high rents. For those that have been experiencing homelessness, the most innovative, cost effective way to provide permanent housing is permanent housing with social services. Inside of the building. This bond will help restore the lives of thousands of seniors, emancipated youth, low income and homeless people that have been displaced in our beloved city. 2500 units would make a huge difference throughout our city to combat the lack of affordable housing and those which are experiencing homelessness in our city. Long Beach has been extremely agile when it comes to commercial development and capital raising for infrastructure. This bond would go a long way to make sure that our city remains cutting edge. If it costs $86 per year. Thank you very much. Yes. Thank you. Yes. Next. Good evening, City Council. My name is Deidre Fulcher. I'm part of the downtown Long Beach and I urge the city. Council to proceed forward with this. And then put the ban on for the November ballot. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Now we're going to go into the one minute situation. So the individuals coming up, neither colors. Well, yes. Stephen Smith and a Christian in Baraka can recite and. Is that Dutch? Yossi. Okay. Hi, I'm Kim BROSH. And my concern is because my son, who has schizophrenia, isn't able to live independently because. He can't afford to live. Anywhere in the city. He has to live with me or be hospitalized when he lives with me. He has no activities. I'm going to work all day. He doesn't have anything to do. He's not responsible for anything. It would be much better for him to live in his own place and take responsibility to the extent that he can for his own life. One part of this measure that I'd like to suggest is that people like me who don't own a home in Long Beach could contribute to this fund on a monthly basis. I would be more than happy to contribute $10 a month to this project. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mexico. Good evening. Council. My name's Steven Smith. I've been homeless for 20 years long under the seventh street in one more district. I came to the council several times. I spoke to council members about projects and stuff like that. The officers taking out property, throwing in trash trucks. Something's going to happen. I'm in. I hope the council's in. And I could speak to Rick Harrison on the side. He's having ideas. I'm taking them to the mayor's office. And I also challenged mayor during Grand Prix to put up his money for one person, one person concerned and one person take him off the street for one night. I got $10 in my pocket right now. Out of it. Anybody else want to put in? I got a thank you very much. That's the one person of the street. I got $10 on it. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to acknowledge the. Eloquence and power of the community tonight coming forward. You know, we really don't know each other very well. And this is one way we get to understand that we really have a lot of really heartfelt and powerful voices, really articulate. And it's just really humbling. Thank you, neighbors. I just want to say that increasingly I wrote this down. Increasingly, our community members are becoming homeless as a consequence of systemic failings, not personal ones. Oh. This is an attempt to make a decision as a community to acknowledge that we have failed to make the right the right decisions regarding the people who live here. Now, as that gentleman said, you know, we have. Thank you very much, residents. That's it. I just want to make one more final point. I'm sorry, I had 3 minutes. The connection between private for profit development and I higher number of what constitute affordability and and no rent control and low wages , you know, is is our responsibility. Just to thank you very much. Thank you. Karen retired, representing the Long Beach Gray Panthers tonight. We're a strong advocate for moving this initiative forward. I have been homeless. I was homeless for three months because my boyfriend broke up with me on a Saturday night. And when you can have no access to services after midnight. I don't want anybody to have to experience and go through that. We've seen a number of women come up here and talk about homelessness. One of the fastest growing segments of the homeless population are women. I worked hard all my life. I've had a job since the time I was 20. I make 1430 $2 a month in Social Security. I'm one of the lucky ones. I have subsidized affordable housing. Very few people in our community have that advantage with my little salary. If people would give up to two Starbucks trips a month, I can afford $7 a month and I'm willing to put more than that in. I think the community is willing to step up. The council should be, too. Thank you very much. That's. Okay. Could could I have these names come up with Dooley, Lee Smith, Christian? Those individuals, please come up. Julie Lee Smith and Christian. All of those individuals spoke. Duly. Lee Smith and Christiansen. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I can't do that. Good evening, Council. I'm Nina Dooley. I work at Linc Housing and I'm also a board member at SCAMP Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing. We know it's more expensive to pay for city and health services for people who are living on the street. Having local. Dollars invested in affordable housing allows builders. Like link to score points to leverage the larger sources of money from the county, the state and also federal sources. We need to show that our. Own city. Is willing to invest. Please use your common sense. Have compassion. Move this forward and put the housing bond on the ballot and let the people of Long Beach decide. Thank you. Good evening. My name is James. I'm not signed up to speak, but I have a solution for the problem. James. Excuse me, sir. Yes? If you haven't said no to speak, you will not be able to speak. Know this. And that's. That's just to give you an end. Like you have to sign up to speak. Yes. But you're turning the solution down. Okay, well, thank you. Okay. Larson. Larson here. 3000. Excuse me. Yeah, go ahead, sir. Good evening, counsel. Happy New Year's. My name's Ray Lawson of the Carpenters Union Local 562. We believe we live here. We work here like my carpenter, brothers and sisters. Stand up. We support the passing of this bar. I just want to tell you the story of one of our apprentices, Kevin Smith. He lives right here in Long Beach. He's apprentice. He got out of prison. He went to the Brother's Keeper program. He was able to get training and get placed. He worked in Long Beach Community College on a renovation project there. He also worked on building this beautiful building here with some of our subcontractors. And we believe that if he lived here, you should you should be able to work here. And a new project is coming up. Apprentices should be able to work on these new housing projects that are coming up, and they will be able to afford to live in those projects once completed. So that's what we believe in training a workforce, a local workforce here that can work for the future and building up Long Beach. Thank you very much. Oh. It's Christmas in here. Was she okay? Excuse me. She's already spoken to Matthew. And Lee Smith. Closely. And Stephen Smith. Either one of those individuals. So how carelessly here? I don't have any objections. To the idea of integrating some affordable housing into our neighborhoods. It does matter to me how it's done. We need to have community meetings. People care about zoning and it's important to get this right to practice transparency and inclusiveness. The city has much homework to do before putting out a bond measure. Please delay this item and require that a study be conducted with those that work with the homeless, asking them to make recommendations and outline a plan that has some. Chance of helping helping those in need. Well, homelessness and affordable housing are key issues in the city. The suggestion to combine the two topics under one bond. Measure with the goal of treating. Both as if they are driven by the same forces. Doesn't work. We interviewed some people that run homeless facilities and also a social worker. And one of the things they said. None of them, none of the three we interviewed believed the homeless problem was driven by a housing issue or that I. Don't blame you guys later. Or that it would be solved or that it would. Be solved. Improving housing. Thank you so much. Okay. All right. My name is Arthur Jordan. I've been homeless most of my life since I was young. You know, honestly, I believe that, you know, there's always a way out. There's plenty of opportunities. I think mostly it's just right now it's a lot of overpopulation going on. There's not a lot of buildings people can live in. So honestly, I feel like maybe if we could, um, you know, just fund some more programs that would, uh, you know, help the people that I would say not really in a, in a major difficulty, but just mostly in a, in a situation to where, you know, they could make a better life. And that's, you know, I think it's a lot it's a difference of some people right now. They don't really want somewhere to live. They rather live with family members or some would rather live on the street. You know, it really just depends, uh, mentally. So, you know, I don't really think that people should just discourage the homeless, but I feel like we should just all encourage them to. To want to be better. That's all. Thank you so much. Okay. I'm just. Please, that. Okay. Michael Maslin, new Milton Gonzalez. Oh, okay. Wayne has always spoken whenever he spoke. Sharlene. Wayne, please come up. As the Stefano. Venezuela's. Janette. Barbara, please come up. Gregory Moore. And now you. You can go extra. Good evening, Mr. Vice Mayor. Council members. My name is Michael Massey. I'm the chief development officer for Jamboree Housing Corporation, a statewide nonprofit, affordable housing developer. Congratulations to the council for considering this and voting yes on this. By voting yes on this year, recognizing that economic development depends on having housing for workers across the economic strata. That homelessness costs society $100,000 per person per year. And for the most profoundly troubled of the of the homeless population. The top 10%, if you will. It's the cost is $400,000 per person per year. By taking a measure like this. You're recognizing that the city of Long Beach cares about those people and is willing to make the effort to provide the appropriate housing and to compete for the leveraging of the other sources of funding that are needed to be gathered in order to make an affordable housing development possible. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next. Good evening, council members. I want to thank Rex. Richardson for bringing. This proposal. You pronounce. Your name. Please. My name is Charlene when I live in District seven. I'm here tonight representing the League of Women Voters of the Long Beach area. The league supports the use of private and public funds for facilities to provide. Housing to people who. Are experiencing homelessness. In Long Beach. We recognize that all levels of government must address the underlying causes of homelessness and the means of preventing it. We are here today to advocate for affordable housing, for those capable of independent living and supportive housing for those that need job. Services. And psychological counseling on site. We need all individuals to be in housing, seniors, students, low income homes and homelessness. Thank you. Hi. My name's Stephanie and I'm from District four. I'm here to talk about young people right now. Young people. It's almost a joke that none of us can afford housing and we have to live with our parents. And I'm lucky enough to be able to live with my parent. But a lot of LGBTQ youth are not welcome in their homes and are thrown out on the street, don't have any mental health resources and fall into addiction. They deserve homes, respect and care. So please consider supporting LGBTQ youth in your vote. Thank you. Bismillah Rahim. In the name of God, the most merciful and most compassionate. I am engineer Mohammed Banat. I used to live in Long Beach here. I am here on behalf of all the people who are poor and needy and homeless people instead of Long Beach to support this resolution. I believe deep in my heart that $298 million is not good enough to tackle this big challenge. Heads on to end homelessness in cities as great as Long Beach, but it's as good as a start, and we need to start at some point. We really need to find enough courage to help families. They are homeless now and prevent more families falling victims to join the long line of homelessness due to the fact of higher. And lower minimum wage. Don't. Good evening. Mayor Garcia, council members. My name is Jeanette Barrera, and I'm a candidate here for the second district for city council. I have been practicing mental health and social work for the past four years in education for ten here in the city servicing primary. Mary, send us your district and Rex Richardson's district. Thousands of hours of me working on the streets have been designated in those districts. Specifically, you cannot treat mental health if you cannot have your basic needs met, and that is housing. It is this working experience that I have had working here in the city of Long Beach and is why I'm standing before you as a candidate. So I encourage all of you to vote on this bill because it is crucial for us to move forward. And I'd like to thank the young woman who shared her story, mentioning that she was from foster youth and how difficult it was for her to find housing, because that is specifically the group that I work closely with. And how do you expect people who are transitioning from housing, who are young to afford 1690 dollars for a one bedroom apartment? Thank you. Thank you. Before before Mr. Moore speaks. Let me just get the next group of folks to come up. Danielle Curtis, Brian Russell, Marla Roach, Melody Ozuna and Ron Miller. In that order. Danielle Curtis. Brian Russell. Marla Roach. Melody Ozuna and Ron Miller could please line up. And then we'll have Mr. Moore speak. Okay. Before I begin my time, is Councilmember Andrews around? Because actually my remarks are specifically to him. You know, I think he may have just stepped out for. Okay, can I can I let some other people go and then come back and play when he comes back? Thank you. I guess the milkman. Good evening. My name is Daniel Curtis. I am a lifelong city resident. I have personally faced homelessness. I am not mentally ill or drug addicted, but I have a loved. One who is. And I'm not here for me. I'm here for. Him. I wish to voice my support for. I don't care if it's bonds or taxes, whatever it takes, whatever it takes, because he deserves. A home, just like you and I do. I think we need. To establish in order to make this supportive housing measure work, we need to establish year round supportive services. Not just building construction. Those services should include intervention for addiction and serious mental illness. I also. Believe we need to increase our Long Beach Police Department Quality of life team and our Lombard. Fire Department heart team to be able to provide response, intervention and services around the. Clock because homelessness doesn't just happen during regular business hours. I think that would free up our civil services to. Focus on the most serious calls that we have. I ask that the city address co-occurring issues of addiction and serious mental illness when considering homelessness and how to help them. I ask that we set up our most vulnerable residents for success and not failure. Thank you very much. The next speaker, please. Brian Russell. Right here? Nope. Mala. Mala. No melody. Okay. Please come forward. Good evening. My name is Melody Osuna. I am privileged to be a homeowner in Councilmember Austin's district. I'm also an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. I run a medical legal partnership here in Long Beach. It's a county run facility over on 14th and Chestnut. As legal aid attorney, many of my clients would benefit from this housing. Regularly, I meet with folks who are on the verge of homelessness because I'm at a health health care facility. Many of my clients are often injured, and because of the injury, they lose out on work that results in a loss of income. And for those who are rent burdened, that means that that loss of paycheck means they can't afford rent. This type of housing could be the difference between keeping these folks housed or having them fall into homelessness. Supportive housing services are 43% cheaper than keeping someone outside. Thank you. If you. I know it was. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. I'm Ron Miller, executive secretary of the L.A. Orange County Building Trades. Ron, I got to say that I work downtown L.A. every morning, and as I'm going down first Street at six in the morning, there's two blocks of tents right on the sidewalk. And I can tell you that the building trades affiliates and the Carpenters, we stood up on Triple H and Measure H for the county. We're starting to see the fruits of our labor there. They're cutting ribbons on new affordable housing units in the city of L.A. but it's too late. You guys have an opportunity to get ahead of this? I think you've got a couple thousand on the street. You got 6% of your community college population that are homeless. This thing should be looked at just like a school bond. It's going to reduce crime. It's going to maintain your property values. It's going to help clean your community up. And you guys need to get ahead of it. So let's let's take the step. Let's not wait another five years and continue to make the sausage. Let's do something. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Moore, if. You want, I'll just. I'll call you. I'll just call you at the end. Okay? Okay. Speakers will be Alex Flores, Linda moran, Martin Gravelle, James Shepherd, Rene Castro and Alan Greenly. In that order. Alex Flores. Linda moran. Martin Gravelle James. Or. Or maybe it's. Hi, Ms.. I'm sorry if I don't correct René Castro and Alan Greenly. Thank you. Good evening, counsel. My name is Alex Flores, and I'm an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of L.A. The Legal Aid Foundation helps low income tenants and a variety of clients all throughout L.A. County, especially in our office here in Long Beach. While a variety of clients come through our doors with many different issues, all of them have the same problem. And that is affordable housing or lack of affordable housing. The problem is that most of these of these tenants are just one paycheck, illness, rent, increase or emergency away from facing homelessness. The problem isn't that there actually isn't the apartment out there. The problem is that they're not affordable. So actually allowing the residents of the city to look at the opportunity to fund affordable housing will help our clients in Long Beach greatly. Thank you. Thank you so much. Get it. Mr. Mayor, my name is Rene Castro. Nice to see everyone. I'm a resident of the third district and I work first century housing. We run the villages at Cambria. As you all know, we provide housing. We're located in the seventh District for 1500 formerly homeless residents, including 800 veterans, 400 children and the rest families. I'm very pleased and honored tonight to introduce one of our residents, Thomas Bias. Thomas is a veteran Army veteran. He served in Vietnam, Vietnam era Special Forces, and he's one of our residents. He's going to be housed in anchor place. I just want to echo what Sunni Lee Cheng said a little bit earlier. The anchor place is a $54 million project. The capital stack on that was 12 different sources. And that that takes our developers a lot of time to find all that capital with this kind of investment the city is doing. We can make a huge difference in terms of homelessness in the city. So thank you so much for your time. Thank you so much. Thank you to. Thank you. Let me just make sure I know we had some is is Linda Brandt here? Is. Martin You're. MARTIN okay, James? James SEVERANCE Yes. And then is that Alan behind James before Mr. Chairman, before you go, then I'll have the next few speakers also line up. That'll be Maria Lopez, Molina, Flores, Sullivan, Lewis and Mike Murchison in that order. So we'll have James Shefford, Alan Greenlee, Maria Lopez Molina, Flores, Sullivan Lewis and then Mike Murchison. Thank you, please. Hi. Good evening. City Council and the mayor. First of all, I'm a product of affordable housing. I was on the streets down in Skid Row. I slept in those dens for many years and got the opportunity to move to Long Beach when the century villages of Cabrillo housing units opened up. That was for the Family comes 2008th December 2008. And one thing I did I have learned about homelessness. Is this. That if you get someone else, they can be able to think and be. Able to. Do things for. Others. And I'm a firm believer of paying it forward. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, and members of the City Council. My name is Alan Greenspan, the executive executive director of the Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing, a regional housing advocacy organization that represents developers like Linc and Century and Jamboree, who you've heard from tonight. I'd like to express my appreciation for the leadership, Mayor Garcia and Councilmember Richardson, on this issue. And I thought tonight that I would try to invite some. Additional voters and constituents in. The room by way of sharing my way of sharing with you some information from a recent poll that we conducted at the end of the year last year. Homelessness is the number one issue in the front of the minds of voters today across the state of California. And housing affordability is number three. 89% of those that we polled considered homelessness to be an extremely important issue in our state and in fact felt that local and state governments should do something about it. I hope that you guys will consider these findings as you think about this important vote. And I request that you approve them. Thank you very much. And thank you. Yes. Good evening. My name is Maria Lopez. I'm a proud one day resident. And also, thank you for supporting the item, Mary and Rex. Also my thank you to you. My name. My name is Maria, obviously. I live in two blocks, probably away from here. And wow, has this area developed? D one has developed its fair share of affordable housing, to say the least. Right. And so we are here in support for not just affordable housing in certain areas, but throughout all the city. Right. We want to make sure that folks are not just included in certain areas of our city, but in all parts of our city inclusively. Throughout this whole past year, we talked about random protection as rent control. And the first thing that always came up, what's build more, build more, build more. So congratulations. Let's build more. Make sure this passes tonight. Thank you. Thank you. I might have Mr.. Mr. Moore speak. I know that he couldn't speak earlier, and so I'll let him come up. Yeah. Thank you, Vice Mayor Andrews, I'm going to direct my comments directly to you. Originally, you were a co-sponsor of this measure, and I gather you took your name off of it because you heard from some of your constituents who were against paying the extra, again, the median $7 a month or whatever it is to fund to help the most vulnerable people in our society. I think you're where you were coming from in co-sponsor this bill. You were in the right place. And I just want to emphasize that, again, tonight's vote is not about putting this on the ballot. It's about having the city attorney prepare the possibility of putting on the ballot. And I think that the right thing to do at this point is to let it go forward. I'd like to see us on the ballot and let your constituents decide directly. The citizens of long. We decide directly whether we want to pay that $7 a month median to help these vulnerable people. So I please urge and I urge all of you to vote in favor of this at this juncture. Very easy call. Thank you. Thank you. And then just give me 1/2. Just I'm caught up here on the speaker. So I is is this so is this is is Melina Flores here? I called. Okay. No. Okay. So then. Well, so then before before Mr. Lewis speaks. So we have Sullivan. Lewis, Michael Jackson. Believe it, says Muhammad, but not. And Phil Hawkins. I'm sorry. Okay. MUHAMMAD But not okay. So we'll have Sullivan, Lewis, Michael Jackson, Phil Hopkins and then Carina Rodriguez will be the next speakers. If you can, please line up. Yes. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and council members. I just want to say add a little bit of clarity. You know. Homelessness is a huge issue, obviously, and it's a no brainer that we should. Support this measure. But what I want. To what I want to say is let's not spend a whole lot. Of time meeting about it and doing surveys and research, because there are hundreds of organizations out. Here that have already done that work. Right. So in an effort to get things done faster, can we agree to. Work with those organizations closely and and bring more residents to the table? Because homelessness is a community problem. And while there are. A lot of credentials and accolades up here, I don't think you. All alone. Can solve this problem alone. And I don't expect you to. And so can you include us, the community. In in a more in-depth way throughout this process? Thank you very much. That's very good. Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Mike Murchison. I'm here on behalf of the small property owners of Long Beach, on behalf of the apartment association, on behalf of thousands of rental property owners. We want to see this item received and filed for the following reasons. We're concerned that 38% of the residents that have single family homes or owned rental properties wound up having to pay for this tax. When it gets on the ballot, assuming it passes, there's 38% on the backs of these. 38% will be paying this versus the 62% that don't pay for this. Secondly, the other thing that occurs to us is there's no guarantee and vice mayor, I've spoken to you about this before. When you're building low income housing, there's no guarantee that it's going to benefit only Long Beach residents, no guarantee of that. So there's a possibility that people from outside Long Beach that are homeless could benefit with low income housing. Finally, whether it while there's, you know, probably 200 plus people here tonight that are very passionate about the issue, I'd like to remind everybody that much like local elections here in Long Beach, that doesn't represent the Maine electorate. Thank you. Thank you, Nancy Baker. Hi. My name's Phil Hawkins. I'm with the Pacific Association of Realtors. And I want to talk to you about three items. A lot's been covered here tonight, but when I look at this item, I keep reading the agenda item and you know, this is going for affordable housing. But do you realize you're increasing the cost of housing to support affordable housing? So every house that has already been built here in the city of Long Beach is going to cost more to purchase or live in. Let that sink in a second, because, again, we're asking that current people that live in Long Beach pay more to help affordable housing. So you're pricing out the affordability of your current stock already. The other thing I want to mention is I don't like to do suggestions without a solution. I Googled today and I did some research. There's a program called No Place Like Home Program that the state of California has. They have over $2 billion ready for for applications. The city of Long Beach, to my knowledge, and I did some research, has not applied for any money. Thank you very much. Next ask. So I'm. Next. It's is. Kevin, Mike and Williamson. Are those individuals here? Arena Cavern, Mike Williams and Muhammad. Hi. My name is Kevin A and I'm here to support the bond on housing. So a lot of people are going to throw statistics out, but I'm going to stick with the heart of the issue. So to the councilman here and the councilwoman. I want to ask a rhetorical when you walk into a grocery store and you see a homeless person right. By the. Entrance or the type of person that looks him in the eye and recognizes their struggle, or the type of person just walks inside. Tackling the symptoms and not enough. We know the symptoms are and we treat them on the daily. There's a lot of people who run organizations here that tackle the symptoms with the little funds that they have. But this bond will go a long way in making sure that we tackle the catalysts of the problem. In closing, I want to end with a quote from our very own Rex Richardson. All the solutions to the housing crisis we've all talked about boil down to we need more capacity. This bond will help fund all of it. It's something we have to give the voters a shot at passing. Thank you very much. Next. Hi. My name's Mike Bowers. I'm a constituent of the first. Um, I'd like to thank Rex for introducing this bill. I know you endorsed Elizabeth Warren. I think she'd be proud of you for this. Wealth tax. Wealth tax. I think the deck was also great that you prepared. I think it really highlighted the struggle the city has been going through recently, as well as the the potential ballot initiative. It noted that five times this has been discussed by city council. Right. And since May 2017. I just want to say how many more homeless since May of 2017? Right. How many more have been raped on the streets? How many more have been assaulted on the streets since May of 2017? And most importantly, what will that DEC say in two years? Right. What will that say about your voting record and what you guys are doing here tonight? Okay. This is about community. This is about allowing the community to vote. This is about building a stronger and more equitable community for all. Just tonight in this room, you see support from renters, homeowners, union members, homeless community members, all standing in solidarity and support for this. Thank you. Thank you. It's clear and your voting record will be clear on this as well. Thank you. Hello. My name is William Hernandez, and I've been born and living here in Long Beach. I met Vice President Andrews a couple of days ago. A few days ago, actually. I actually mentioned to him about the homelessness situation. That we've had. For a very long time. And I saw this look in his eye, and it definitely, definitely felt like he he wanted to do something about it. And he stuck to his word, something he told me. And I told him that. I'm stick to my. Word as well. And I'm here today to show them. Um. Here. To the people here. They want a change about homelessness, say I. I mean, come on. This is only the room. You've got the whole city. Thank you. As Muhammadu. Very is. Okay. Or is there anyone who hasn't spoke, you know, that that's queued up to spoke. I mean, you speak. Okay. You signed up to speak. Okay. If you if you have, you can come up to my daughter and. Good evening. Your name? Frank Zambrano. My name is Frank Zambrano. I represent the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters. And I want to thank all of you for your for your hard work. And Councilman Richardson, great presentation. It was a great sense of understanding with all the numbers of the need for this. I don't have all the answers from the fixes or anything like that. But I can tell you to be able to to to attack what is what is here right now, which is homelessness. What we can't do is create jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. This project right here is going to create the opportunities for this homelessness, to be able to give them training, to give be able to train them with something that's going to carry them much above and beyond getting off the street. So I stand here in front of you in support of pushing this forward and and creating these opportunities for these homeless individuals. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hi. Barnaby Valderrama. Excuse me. The individual's going to come up now. Have you signed up to speak? Okay, fine. Come forward. So I am a resident of Lambie's fourth district and an employee of Link Housing, and I'm here to support this bond measure. I'm to tell you guys something you already know. Affordable housing and languages are very important to the well-being of the city. Affordable housing will give the homeless individuals access to improve their mental and physical health. And have access to jobs. And this will allow us to allow them to contribute significantly to the dynamic. Growth of this city. Housing is a human right. Thank you. So I just I know that I want to make sure that we have every one of the speakers list. But what I'll since I know we've have a few folks that have that weren't here. Let me just make sure. Is everyone here signed up on this on this list? Okay. So I think I have the other person in there at the end leading the that will be the last speaker. And then just please announce who you are at the start of this other. My name is. Ida Norbert. And I am a resident. Of District three. I'm super fortunate. I retired from. I was a building inspector in the city of. L.A. and I could figure out why people weren't. Building housing and in my methods, a little different. I work with private builders. We've we've built like 1100 units, and I'm actually building on my property in Long Beach. I drew my research and found out that I can put four units in the back of my house and they will be. Affordable units using the density bonus. And and. So it's. Going to take everything to. Tackle this problem. Okay. And I and I was homeless back in the nineties, and I, I am a. Product of those services that have to get to those people. I'm I'm a I'm the product. Of the services. And, and I was. Able to to become gainfully. Employed and become the kind of citizen I wanted to be. Thank you. Thank you. That's Nicholas. My name is Mohammed Hassan. I'm a citizen of District Two for about seven years now. I'm a homeowner. District two More than willing to pay high taxes for this cause. I support preparing the resolution because residents should have the opportunity to vote on whether they're willing to pay 20/5000 of a percent on the increasing value of their properties to invest in this city by giving back part of the gains they made to ensure hundreds of those priced out of their house housing due to rising rents temporarily without housing due to job loss or emergency expense. Students without sufficient financial aid and parental support. Youth in the LGBT community no longer welcome in their parents homes, individuals with mental and addiction related illnesses, and many others relegated to the streets through no fault of their own. Where a significant percent are likely to die can have a roof over their heads and services that help them back on their feet into work so that they can pay taxes and spend money to sell to stimulate the local economy and support the city. A yes vote would be a vote to invest in the city likely to save lives. Thank you very much. It's a significant return for the city. Thank you. It's good to be. Good evening. My name is Marlin Goodell. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, council members. I am a student of social work at Cal State Long Beach. I'm also a owner and I live in the District three and I've been privileged to live in this city for five years. I'm more than willing to pay my fair share of our our property to be able to give affordable housing just at the beginning of the year. My neighbor lost her home because she didn't have affordable housing after 15 years. Her rent a one bedroom, three, maybe 300 square feet in District three went up to $600. And I said, where are you going? And she said, I can't afford to live here anymore. So I'm hoping that you guys can support this because you guys have done so much already for the city. But we need a little more. And we need we need you guys to support us and let us the residents, the owners make that decision. As well. Thank you. Thank you. And and our last speaker, please. Hey, my name is McKayla, and I am a resident of the eighth district here in Long Beach. And I'm here with everyone. And I'm also a friend of as the venue in the back. She mentioned that a lot of people our age who have gone to school and no longer and cannot afford to live outside of our homes with our parents. Ah, I was actually just sent a meme while I was sitting there about a private hallway space for rent $650 a month. And that's just kind of the joke is $600 a month to live in a hallway. So that's kind of the situation that a lot of young people are living in right now. And I'm really glad that we're starting a conversation about how the city can provide affordable housing for people experiencing homelessness. But it would also be great. We could also start a conversation about how the Long Beach Police Department also treats people experiencing homelessness, because that's also a huge issue as well. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. That concludes public comment. We do have everyone queued up on the speakers. Just let me. I know, Councilor Richardson, did you want to Cuba any you were. There with your. Presentation and items. Obviously. Thank you to everyone to your comments. I encourage the city council to have a robust dialog and let's try to try to find a pathway forward tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is the second year of the motion councilwoman sunday has. I just want to say thank you to Councilmember Rex Richardson for inviting me to be on this and this item. As you know, I'm very, very excited to hopefully turn this over to our city staff so that they can bring our recommendation over. We have been looking for solutions to this crisis that we're in. We're in a homeless and affordable housing crisis, and we have been in it. And really what this is, is it could be a potential solution. And I think that just because of that, we owe it not only to ourselves here out on the dais, but we owe it to our community to at least look into it. So thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Sun has a Councilmember Turanga. Thank you. And I want to thank everybody who came out tonight on both sides of the issue. But mostly I will be voting for this. To say it upfront, direct. That's the way I like it. But you know, when we talk about what are the issues here, and the issue is basically letting the voter decide what they want. This is not an item tonight that we're going to vote on to say we're going to go forward with a bond. It's not to be very clear, and I think Councilman or Councilmember Richardson said that very clearly. And his presentation, by the way, was a great presentation. But the point is, is that it let the voter decide if they want to be taxed on a ban on a bond and an amount that's going to be very, very much affordable. Mr. Richardson mentioned about, you know, you can go out and buy one less latte that's seven bucks. There it is. There's your monthly contribution towards ending homelessness. So when we come to to how we're going to deal with this, this ban will also provide us with with a holistic approach on dealing with homelessness because it's been brought up. Homeless people are not only those who are addicted to drugs or who are alcoholics or who are mentally ill. We also have students, we have families, we have renters. We have people who are normal people like you and me, who, through some quirk in fate, become homeless. And we need to address that. And the issue is that we don't have enough housing stock in Long Beach to be able to deal with that. And we know that it's not only a language problem, it's a regional problem. We're dealing with it in L.A. as well. And I could tell you, you know, I'm proud of Long Beach. We've we've been able to deal with the homelessness issue here in Long Beach very well up to this point. But if we don't do something about it, we're going to be bad and it's going to get worse. And we want to avoid that. And not only that, if we don't go forward with it with this item to look into, get the research, get the financing back explained to us to help, to organize how we can move forward with this. It's going to be imposed on us. And we did this before with with the cannabis issue. As an example, we brought this to the city council. The citizens want to present a plan that was going to be very workable. It was voted down. What happened? It went out and we got people signatures and they put it on the ballot. And what presented on the ballot and it passed, by the way, came up a lot more severe than what the city council was proposing. Is that what we want? I don't think so. We want to get ahead of the curve on this. We need to get ahead of curve as a city council where we are the ones to determine what type of bond we want to put on the ballot and not have the county not have the state of California impose on us to tell us what we need to do in order to create affordable housing. So as I mentioned that right from the start, I'm going to be I'm going to be supporting this tonight. Well. Thank you. Next up, I have. Next up, I have Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Okay. Well, I want to thank my colleagues, Councilman Richardson and Councilwoman Van de House, for bringing this item. So. And I want to thank all the people that came out to support. And I know that in our office, we received, I think it was 168 emails from residents on this topic. So I'm grateful that everyone is engaged, and I think we all agree that both housing and homelessness are major issues of import for the city, each separately and absolutely deserve additional attention. Long Beach has recently. Undergone a major, very difficult process to update our land use land use element with the goal of creating more opportunities for housing development and incentives to do so. And in my opinion, in order for us to continue to develop housing and to incentivize affordable housing, we need to be looking very creatively as a city of how we how we work with developers to incentivize these new buildings and these new units. As we see throughout much of the city, new construction and new units being created. We know that more housing is needed as our residents and families grow and Long Beach continues to be an attractive place for people to live for the many reasons we highlight regularly. I believe we need to continue focusing on getting more housing built here in Long Beach, but I have major concerns, as do the residents in my district, about using property taxes to do so. We also all agree that homelessness is a pressing issue for Long Beach and for our residents. But I do not believe that a housing bond alone can solve the issue of homelessness, because the issue of homelessness is best addressed for a multifaceted approach that encompasses services and programs for the homeless population. Time and time again, we've seen that the best way to get help to those suffering from homelessness is through services and programs that address sometimes the root cause of the issues that may not be economic in nature. A bond like this would be strictly ineligible to be used for programs or services and would simply be only available for land and development related costs. And although the city of Long Beach continues to work to address homelessness, and Councilman Ranga mentioned very poignantly that we are doing a great deal in this effort and we are, in fact one of the leading cities in successfully addressing this issue. We know that we have so much more to do. We know that the residents of the city of L.A. passed a housing bond in 2016, and three years later it was announced. And many of you have mentioned that the first units were built, and that's 40 something units. Three years later, if we are looking to rapidly create housing, too many segments of our population ranging from extremely low income all the way to moderate income workforce housing. Then a bond would seem to be a very slow way of approaching this goal and it would be an uncertain way of approaching it, since we do not have a sense of what development costs or the housing market may look like four or five years from now. Housing and homelessness are both important topics, but they are separate topics. But we should be careful not to make residents think those problems can be solved with a single new car based upon property owners alone. I'm going to be making a substitute motion at this time to ask city staff to research the alternative funding sources that are available to the city through state and federal dollars that can mitigate the housing costs that we have anticipated needing. I think before we go to the property tax option, before we ask property owners to pay more, we should find out what is available to us and whether what is available to us will mitigate what property owners would have to pay. My office and I have been involved for the last week and researching different state and federal funding options. We have identified 12 different state funds, which my office is happy to work with city staff on, that we can tap into to at least mitigate the total need before we ask the city attorney to put in place language that would be voted on or a ballot measure, which is what we're doing today. So we can say over and over again that we're not going to put this on the ballot tonight. It's just misleading. What we would be asking the city attorney to do is to prepare language for submission as a ballot proposal. So I think putting in that process into motion without knowing exactly how much money we have access to and how much money we're still short on is really unfair to property owners. Let's find out how much we actually need before we start asking people to buy less. Because I got it, guys. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman. By running out of time, I don't have a. Yeah, no, no. Your guys. I got the timer. Thank you very much. Councilman, your time's up. If you want to recue, please, please do so. Okay. But I believe, just to clarify, there was a substitute motion that was made. And, Councilman, just if I can clarify, the substitute motion was to have city staff look at state and federal options, at options to look at funding, housing affordability and and affordable housing as it relates to all the all the categories and bring that back to council before looking at any property tax bond that I get to that I get it. Okay, guys, I'm just I've got to. Guys, thank you very much, people. Folks, I have to get the meeting going. So that was the that was the most substantive motion that was made. There is a second on the substitute motion councilmember super now councilor Supernanny comments. Yes. Thank you. First, just a point of order. We sat here and listened very patiently day everyone since 7 p.m. so I just asked that that respect be returned. Thank you. I agree with Councilwoman Price's point, and my job is to represent the residents of the Fourth Council District. And it's not that they oppose this, that they it's that they oppose this in overwhelming numbers. And I'm we were at like 97, 98% opposition. We have one person here standing up now. So let's drop it down to 95%. Still, we haven't had anything with with that type of opposition that I can remember in the four and a half years on council. I think the goals are noble. I think we're all on board for the goals. But I agree with Councilman Price that this item as written, it's you can see it right up there on the wall. It says a ballot for voters to consider. So with that, I'm happy to second the motion. And thank you so that there's a there's a substitute motion on the floor. Everyone, please. I got we got to have the council discussion now. So please, it's got I have a long list of folks that want to speak their so councilman price councilman to point out the motions on the floor. Next up is Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I want to first state that in building on what Councilwoman Pryce said, there are people in my district today whose housing cost associated with their property taxes would go up 17%. And these are seniors who live on a fixed income. And I know that that doesn't mitigate the discussion that you had, that they've built wealth in the equity of their home, but they're not trying to use that equity. There are seniors who bought their homes long time ago. Their property taxes are at a certain amount, and an additional $250 a year on their current assessed value would be a 17% increase for individuals whose current Social Security check is $662 a month. And so we don't want to push them out of their home. I want to I want to talk a little bit about who the true heroes are. I hope that those of you who respect Justin and Megan Kerr and Andy and the others know that I've taken meetings, I've provided feedback. And I think it's important that the feedback of the Fifth District that I receive is considered, because in my election we had a 40% voter turnout. And I think that it's important that we talk about not just an exciting thing that we can all get behind, but what could pass, and are we at a point where we know? Second, I want to talk about a real hero, Indi Andrews, and a lot of the talks I've had over the last week, a lot of people tell me where does D stand? Because he's the one who gives out the turkeys at Thanksgiving. He's the one that brings toys to the poor. He's the one who protected us and takes the. Portable housing, and DE is the one who knows better than most that the people who live in his district are really, really strapped with rental costs, and that a lot of times property owners will pass that cost on to them and they cannot afford that. So when he came to me in July and asked for a $50,000 budget item to do a study, it was put in the budget and the champions that voted on that were Al Austin and Suzy Price. They're the Budget Oversight Committee that put aside the 50,000 for the study that you're kind of asking for. The study that you're asking for does not include the robustness of the original 20th August 2018 item, and someone commented on how this is similar to marijuana. We really need to follow the course that we already started in August 2018. Changing direction now is not the answer. And for those reasons, I hope that my colleagues, especially on the Bossie and those who have done more for homeless than anyone else. I hope that each and every one of you respect us enough to keep the dialog honest and support, receive and file and maintain the course. We started thinking. Substitute. Substitute motion. Okay. Hold on a sec. So there's a substitute substitute motion. I just want to clarify is. The substitute substitute is to receive and file the report, the agenda item. Okay. So just to clarify, we have a substitute substitute, which is to receive and file the agenda item, which is just to basically receive the report today. Then there's a substitute motion, which is Councilman Price's motion, which is to do a study on federal and on state opportunities to look at funding. And then there's the original motion which Smith made by Councilmember Richardson, which has been read into the record. Mr. City Attorney. That's correct. Okay. Just want to make sure that the council is clear on where we're at. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. I'm going to try to speak quickly because I have a lot to say, especially after hearing from my colleagues. First of all, thank you, everybody, for coming out. I personally have been coming to counsel for over ten years with many of you in this room asking for the city to put aside funding for housing. This city, we have done a lot. We have three heart teams. We have quality of life officers, a multi-service center, clean teams. We are building we are opening a winter shelter. We are building a year round shelter. We provide vouchers and other services, which is wonderful, but we have not once put any money significant enough to put into building housing. Homelessness is the one issue. Homelessness is the one issue where the answer to the problem is in the name. They are homeless. They need homes. When we sit here and act like that's not the issue, we are doing something that is either hiding the ball. It's acting like we don't know what the left hand is doing different from the right, or it's simply a simple word called hypocritical that says that we want to do one thing, but we're going to do something else. But this vote, again, is not about how much money and how many houses in all of those questions. This vote is about democracy. This vote is about saying that the voters deserve the opportunity to vote on this. And if they vote it down, then that's fine. But right now, I know that the polls I've done in my district, it's 80 and 90% of people that want housing and they want services for seniors. Our arena numbers right now are close to 3000 units that need to be developed in Long Beach alone, 3000. We heard from developers that were here today that said that they sometimes have to put together 12 different funding sources to build something. We've heard from developers here, we've heard from our our health department that when Long Beach puts money up, we get more money. We've also heard that it could cost upwards to $100,000 a year for one person to be on the street. So we know that $7 a month is not too much because those people that call my office and send me photos of people that are homeless in my community. They don't want to spend any more money. But the news is you're spending more money today than you would if we had a bond measure. So I have a couple of. I have a couple of questions that I'm sure I'll have to queue up again because I normally run out of time. You know, I tell my colleagues, I know that sometimes we get on different sides and cannabis was mentioned. Hotels can be mentioned. We consistently drop the ball and waste a lot of money and a lot of energy dealing with politics instead of doing what we know is right. I've taken a vote before. I've taken a vote before. That didn't let me sleep at night. And so I hope that as we go through the process tonight, that you think about going home and being able to put your head on a pillow, being able to actually sleep because you did the right thing. So allowing this to go to the voters is absolutely the right thing. Couple comments. There was a comment mentioned by merchants and that said that there was no way that we could guarantee that this bond money would be used for Long Beach residents. Someone on staff able to answer that question for me. So, Councilmember, we understand the proposal that Councilmember Richardson has would be a dedicated funding source for affordable housing. So under California law, that would be all housing bonds need two thirds. That would be dedicated. It would go into only affordable housing. And there's only certain uses that it could be that it could fund couldn't fund services, it would fund housing, construction, the things that are listed in the item. It's my understanding that it could fund development, but there were certain types of wraparound services that it could fund as well, that it wasn't only development. That's something that we've heard. We don't we haven't reached that point yet where we know exactly what services could or could not do. Our initial scan is that it really is for the construction and the land acquisition. But if you're asking us tonight, what you would be doing is asking us to bring those answers back of exactly specificity, how much we could spend, what we could spend it on, what we couldn't. We've got a high level overview at this point. We would be doing additional deep dove. And it's also my understanding that we could put in there that the suggested conversation was that seniors would be able to go down to the registrar's office and they would be able to do an opt out. That's the request in the item right now. We would take that and research that and bring back, you know, how that would work and what the what that would be. And we need to know the answer to that question. Yes. That's my understanding from the research that I've done as well. I think that I look forward to hearing the rest of the conversations. I want to remind folks that our health department also reminds us that Housing First is a model that we as a city say that we support. And while we've done everything else, we haven't done a Housing First model to the fullest extent because we haven't built housing. Ow! Ow, ow, ow. Thank you, guys. We're going to think. I'm going to. I'm going to. So, Councilmember, you want to. You're going to just cue back up. Okay. So customer appearances queued back up. Let me move on to Councilmember Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank my council member for starting the New Year. All right. We are certainly talking about the most important issue in front of our city. And I'm going to just say that that while I support affordable housing and building supportable housing, more affordable housing in the city, I'm not sure that this is the only solution. And I think looking at alternatives to to to to to to building and getting revenue that that may be available to us is something that we need to look at first. I have talked to many of my constituents over the last couple of weeks about this particular matter. And many folks are very, very overburdened. They feel overburdened with taxes. I'm going to run down a list of of actions that we have taken as a city, as a county, as voters over the last four years. Right now, measure a L.A. County parks, which is a parcel tax measure M L.A. County Transportation, which is a sales tax measure. WW was the L.A. County Water Tax, which is a partial tax measure. A local here, Long Beach was a public safety and infrastructure sales tax measure. E of Columbus Unified School District was a property tax measure k. Let me see if I school district was also a property tax. And these are ongoing revenue sources that we are dealing with right now, a measure elbphilharmonie city college. These are all bond measures that have been passed within the last four years. And I would just say most of these these measures are are still underway. They're still generating revenue. They're still creating jobs. And we have not yet met our obligations completely to the voters on these particular measures. In 2017th December 2017, the Trump tax plan was also passed, which capped what a homeowner can write off of their home at $10,000. For a lot of folks who may not understand that, but for many of the homeowners in my district who I represent, that created an additional tax burden on them. Right. And so this is not as simple as, you know, I don't know if it was $0.84 or, you know, $7 a month. This is compounded on a lot of other issues. And from what I'm hearing from a lot of our our our our my constituents is that, you know, they want to help. They want to do more. I think there's opportunities for us to do more. I like to look at those options a little further. And so I'm not completely comfortable moving forward with the with proposed here this evening, the $50,000. I do want to ask staff we did create a fund in the appropriation and if we're 19 to initiate work on housing related homeless services list in early 2019. And I'm Mister City Manager. What specifically has been accomplished with that $50,000 from 2019 and how much remains? Yes. So that $50,000, we had a list of next steps when we talked about this issue last at the council in August of 2018. And it was kind of a large you know, if you wanted to move forward, we there were some recommendations on how to how to do that. The council at that time gave us about $50,000. So what we used a portion of it for was to do some additional analysis with our bond counsel to understand some of the mechanisms, to understand how a bond would work and how, you know, could be could be used. So we have some of that good data that we would use if you want to move forward tonight. And we have about we use about 15,000 of that. So we have about $35,000 left. But to me, that that the direction was already given when we made that appropriation to study this and understand what could be done. As it stands today, we we don't have a plan. Is that correct? I'm not sure I'm following the question. So when we appropriated the $50,000 that was given to staff to study this issue. Correct. So the next steps that were talked about on April or in August were a couple of things. I'll just read them for the record. Review measures passed and proposed in other cities, which we've done. We've used structures for broad based outreach to partners in the community, tie in strategies with the Everyone Home Task Force recommendations, develop a list of potential funding categories in highest need based on outreach. Educate the community on need, on what can be accomplished, and set aside resources. And then so the $50,000 is what was set aside. That is a pretty big work plan. And so we started with what we could, which is the understanding other cities. We frankly needed kind of this discussion for to really jump into this and really go and do all the rest of that for you to tell us, like get going and actually do this. So that's really what the direction is tonight. So we've started. We've got a good sense, but what you're asking us to do in the agenda item tonight is bring back resolution language, but also then really understand and do a deeper dove on all of the recommendations, how much would be funded in each category and bring that back to you as well as some of the other questions about debt burden and what this would mean for for the city. Thank you. I think it counts. I know that time's up, but when you back up, you're welcome to as well. Our councilwoman and the house. Hi. I'm. Again, one of the things that we're asking tonight is to just, you know, bring back a plan, a solution. I think that we've been trying to find solutions for affordable housing and homelessness for a very long time. One of the things that was excluded from from the downtown plan was the inclusionary housing. Another thing that we've been trying to find solution for is is that like, for example, we brought forward the tenant relocation was which was repealed. So I think that we need to really move forward on this item, with all due respect to what my colleagues are saying. I think that, you know, this is the way to find those solutions and to really lay out a plan on how we address affordable housing and homelessness in our city. And the reason that I'm the most passionate about these two items is because I represent the first District and the first District. It is so impacted by one. We have the most affordable units in the district right now. And then any other district, I would say. But not only that, we also have even the greatest need for affordable housing in the First District. And so that's why I'm so passionate about this, because we need this in the first District, but not only in the first District. We need to be fair and bring all that to all our districts. And if we don't go forward with this plan, I think that we are leading our not only our our community down, but our city down. And as a city officials, as elected city officials, we really, really need to to move forward and really find some positive solutions that will help us move this plan forward. And I think that that's what this this issue is doing. If we pass this. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Mango. Thank you. I want to be very respectful of Mary. I know that you weren't here. A part of the dialog in August. The motion being brought forward by Councilmember Richardson is actually stating what we decided in August. To look at all types of solutions is not the direction we want to go anymore. We now want to go with a housing bond. It's it's refocusing from a all solutions approach to a this is the solution. Furthermore, I feel as though as enumerated by acting city manager Modica the current direction, if everyone votes yes with what is on the floor right now, will bring back and study those funding categories, as was outlined in the original motion made in August. And furthermore. I'm sorry. I've been sick. So just give me 1/2. And furthermore. There are alternatives and other solutions that may have greater support, because one of the things we don't want to do is put forward an item that does not pass. And so for that reason, I hope that my colleagues will support the item on the floor to continue down the path of looking for the most solutions and bring back the funding categories and see all alternatives that are that are possible. And there was. Mr. Monica, you said we needed more direction. And I feel that that's not a great statement, because there was a memo that came out from Mr. Gross's office that outlined the 50,000 and the direction. And so I felt as though I feel as though if there was a concern from staff that they did not have enough information, perhaps that should have come to us before today. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So. Yeah, I want to just. You know, in listening to my colleagues, I completely you know, I get it. You get you got concerns. And, you know, the thing about my presentation, I started off by saying, let's have a conversation. There's been two motions before we were able to have some exchange. So I want to have a little bit of exchange. So the first point is there's no way to sneak this by the city council. The first vote needs a majority of city council to give direction to explore this. Craft language. Crafting language is key because it allows us to test the language in test. Your last point Council about viability. The initial two polls were conducted. A number of things were you know, the city conducted a poll two years ago on this and the ban was the most popular. You know, we conducted a number of other polls. This had enough support to have this question. The next step is to test language and actually evaluate real impact. That's the next step to make a real decision. The second step requires two thirds of the city council to put this on, and it's six votes. There is no way to sneak this in. If we somehow get one more council member to support this, it will need a supermajority of this council. There is no threat with doing the research on this motion because at the end of the day you will need a plurality major. You will need. A majority of a two thirds majority of the council members to adopt this and send it to the voters. So there's no there's no sneaking this by you. I didn't make I got my time. There's no sneaking by by the council. That's what we're doing. And so, you know, so I get it. You know, we want to you know, what's in front of us actually does make sense. The other thing is not a lot of conversation in the public and, you know, one side and the other and I get it is, you know, it's 2020. This is a decision point. This is why we should put it in front of the public to make the decision. That's our responsibility, not to make decision for people, especially in an election year, on something that is controversial. We should put it forward for consideration or at least take the step to do so. You know, there were there was a there was a constant question about no specifics, false bonds or more specific than any other measure. Bonds have to specifically outline the use of these funds in the next step should this motion move forward, is to actually take the next step on further specifying the details of the bond so you get more specificity. There was a statement about whether this fund, these funds can be used for Long Beach residents. Our current approach of asking the county in the state to you to be our solution, the county, the state has more strings. They have limitations on how those dollars can be used. I toured the shelter in Anaheim. It was funded by the city of Anaheim, their local tax dollars, and therefore that shelter is for the Anaheim homeless population. And if another city wants their homeless population to come in, they have to pay. They have to pay for their own homeless. What I'm saying is our current strategy of taking drawing down dollars from other communities exposes us to taking on other communities homeless. That's what people are actually saying. We have to pay to have the additional protection that all people want to protect their neighborhoods. That's that's smart. We have to consider that for our own public safety needs and to be able to have a manageable homeless population, that just makes sense. Someone said we already pay for these two major AIDS. Two points measure AIDS funds, services. People said this is only infrastructure. Yes, because we have a funding source on services, we need to build the capacity, heart infrastructure capacity. Here's the bonus, too, that other communities that have passed the local measure have leverage that to bring down other measure additional measure dollars and leverage. I think Sonny made a made a strong point a point about this small amount packs a major punch. Additionally, we don't even pay into measure H, we pay in them. It's a sales tax, not a property tax. And we don't pay it because we have our sales tax cap in Long Beach. So we receive millions of dollars annually. We have not paid into Measure H. Mr. MODICA, can you confirm this? So people know that this is the truth. Mr. Mogaji. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that question? Measure H, L.A. County, major, east of the city of Long Beach. Our sales tax include a contribution to measure H. So currently we do not pay into measure H. So we are currently at our cap for sales tax and so that money then is collected by the city. But we do not currently pay into measure. H now under. Now we will pay into it a little bit for a couple of years given whatever the outcome of the vote on Measure A's, that's that's different. But currently we receive the funding we don't contributing. Right now Mommy's doesn't pay any money into the into homelessness and affordable housing production of local dollars. We don't do that. So that's a myth. Councilman Durango, you mentioned one lottery per person. I just want to be clear and I kind of don't like when people do the latte thing. I said it. You said it is not one per person is one per household per month, meaning just one person in a household, not one . Councilwoman Price, I understand your concerns. I understand the social cost of of, you know, doing something that maybe your district is not is not exciting. Your district. I completely understand that. I serve on SCAD, where we have to work with people from Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County to figure out a way to come together. I completely understand my hope. My hope was that we can have a dialog. I've reached out for dialog. I know there's concerns on how many people we can talk to do the Brown act, but my hope was to really have that conversation tonight. Before jumping to a conclusion, I placed a proposal on the table that was vetted. It's been in the public and press for over a year. When my swearing in speech, I said that we were going to pursue this. That was going on two years ago. We publicly talked about this in the prerelease polling. Everyone's known we're talking about there's plenty of opportunity to talk and there's still opportunity to talk. So so that's the conversation about need, a multifaceted approach. We have a multifaceted approach where we're lacking is the actual infrastructure of shelter beds. We had a discussion on council about Martin v Boise, about our limited our limited ability to enforce encampments and keep communities safe. It is a direct connection and it's all continue to evolve. But it's clear that there is a direct connection on how much capacity we have to serve our homeless in order to enforce our local camping laws. We had a debate about a debate about it a little while back. Now it's coming back in front of us. This is what we debated about before. Now it's now it's here. The Supreme Court sided with, you know, the appellate court. And here we are today discussing that we need to have capacity. Our Congressman, Alan Lowenthal, issued an op ed last week specifically telling Long Beach, hey, the writing is on the wall. You need to do this. In addition. Hang on. Hang on. Just just real quick. I'm glad I only said so. Just just just remember. Hold on. I'm not. I'm not sure. Finish up, but just chance. Councilman, your time is up. So I'm going to have you finish up this one question or thought and then I got to go. Have you read? Okay. I'll just recue and finish up this last statement then. Recue, please. All right. I'll just I'll just continue. I wanted to sort of talk to the different councilman, but I'll start with that Councilman Price. But I wanted to give the councilman councilman anything and read some good points. And let's talk about those. But I'll get I'll get to that. I'll come back to that. So, so again, where was I? So. Really? I got lost. Girls, have you with you. Oh, the expert the in the motion to explore the state in other dollars we we've explored that so we've explored that everyone home has explored that city staff has full time staff that our health department is like 97% grant funded. Like all we do is explore these funding sources. It's consistent and these are experts. All they do, they do. They're better at my council staff and probably all of our council staff are doing that research. What we know is that much of that funding is unavailable to us because we don't have a local revenue source. It's matching dollars, much of that is matching dollars. So we have to have a local funding source. Come and what. Have you. So that's about to knock you back up, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Count Councilwoman in Dallas. Hold on. Thank you. We so we have we have a lot of we have a lot of folks queued up. So I'm just trying my best to get through everybody. So please, councilman Sunday House. Thank you. Just a quick question to Tom Modica. Can you clarify for me? I know that there's a possibility to see if people with, you know, seniors to opt out of of such tax. Is there a possibility for just in general people who are going through, you know, who are low income or going through financial difficulties, who can really not afford the $7 tax a month? So I don't know if we know today exactly how that would work. So part of what we would ask you to do in a motion is tell us what kind of exemptions that you're interested in. And so the ones on the table right now that we're supposed to be looking at is seniors and disabled. If you know, you're asking us to look at other exemptions for low income and others, we would need to take a look at that. Okay. Thank you. So with that being said, I just feel that, you know, I know that this is a controversial issue up here on the dais. But one of the things that I feel we need to do is make sure that we present it to our voters. And I think that's the right thing to do, because if your constituents like mine, if they vote against this and they're very passionate against this measure, then it won't pass. You know, but I think we actually need to give them the opportunity to vote on this. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. Now that I've blown off some steam, I'm going to try to be quick and just ask a couple of questions and with a little bit of a brief history lesson, we both we mentioned two times that that we had people go to the voters for ballot measures. And one thing that I just want to remind everybody is that when we don't do it ourselves, those other parties that are interested, they craft the language. So there were things in Claudia's law that I didn't love, but because we didn't put it on the ballot, we didn't get to craft that language. There were things in cannabis the same thing. So I want to hear from my colleagues. I see that some of you guys are queued up. I'd like to hear from you. You know, in addition to seeing how robust we are, we are trying to tackle this issue with all these different tools. What is it about putting this to the voters? That is your hesitation. And I know that we have different constituencies, but really just understanding, it seems to me like the most responsible thing an elected body can do to make sure that we design something that's right for Long Beach. So I'd like to hear from you guys on that. Okay. So let me let me continue. Councilman Austin. Okay. So I wanted to just just follow up on some of my comments as well. I mentioned a number of the existing measures that, by the way, I've supported most, if not all of them. And I think many of them are delivering and doing good work for them that they intended to do, particularly when our school district , community college district measure A for the city of Long Beach has been doing phenomenal and I continue to support those. The issue that I have is, again, adding something else to the to the voters, to the taxpayers in Long Beach. I've heard from many of my constituents that they have been hit hard and it's starting to impact them. I just want to, with all due respect, clarify that point. I also want to just say that I've been watching the state of California for some time now, and I do know that we do have a $20 billion rainy day fund in the state budget. Right. I will re-emphasize that. $20 billion if the the governor today, who is very much committed to affordable housing and if the legislature is very much committed to affordable housing, we're able to put $2.5 billion to a statewide housing crisis and give the city of Long Beach the money that we are requesting. We can get that and the taxpayers don't have to be taxed twice. And so I would just say that there are options out there. If we are creative, if we work together, we can get there. Again, I think we are all on the same page in terms of resolving the issue of building more affordable housing in Long Beach. It's how we get there. And so I will propose looking at other options. I know that that's an item for us or under consideration under one or two motions to actually allow us to to study and ask staff to look at that. But I also think staff is doing that anyway. Right. Our staff is looking at creative solutions anyway, because this council has shown its commitment to to to dealing with this issue. And so, again, I want to just clarify where I was on that issue, but also throw out some some alternatives for us to think about in terms of money that may be available. It's already there for us to deal with this important crisis facing us. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you very much. I'll be brief here. So. I want to thank Councilman Austin because he actually articulated just a moment ago what I wanted to say, and I'm sure I can't do it justice. But, you know, and I and I appreciate. The guidance from some of my colleagues and what leadership and representing residents means to them and what it should mean to me. But I do represent the residents of my district and I represent the residents of the city as a whole. And what I can tell you is that we have no idea sitting here right now what specifically we've explored in terms of available funding options and how much we can tap into. If we had a good estimate on that, then maybe we could lower the amount that we want to tax property owners. Maybe the figures that you're putting out there, maybe it's a dollar or $2 plus a month. And I know we're talking about these things in the context of coffee. I'm not sure why that is, but when property owners look at their tax bills, they have multiple bonds, hundreds and thousands of dollars that are being paid into different bond measures. And like Councilman Austin, I supported many of those and I think they're doing excellent work. The Long Beach Unified School District Bond, for example, has benefited schools throughout our entire city. And I think they've put that money to good use. And I have no problem as a property owner paying that bond every single year or twice a year. But I think we need to have an understanding of how much we actually need based on what's available to us and what may be available to us with this administration that's made this a priority. Before we start to think about taxing our property owners, I have a real issue with taxing just property owners. I personally think that that will result in higher rents because I think they'll pass through those increases. But I think there's a fundamental fairness issue and that's my opinion and it's my opinion based on my conversations with my district who overwhelmingly oppose this proposal. Now, Councilman Richardson made a point about let's get the language in there so that we can test the language. Well, you know, I appreciate that. I understand what that means for a political sense. But, you know, our job isn't to craft language that we test the residents like guinea pigs to see what they'll vote for and what they won't vote for. For example, I bet you 90% of the people that you poll will tell you they have no idea what a general obligation bond means. Many people don't realize what they're being asked to do in support of affordable housing with a lot of these pollings. So I think that we need to be very cognizant that when we're putting ballot measures out there, I mean, let's not I mean, Councilman Pearce, I understand what you're trying to say about the other ballot initiatives. I really wish we wouldn't go there because, frankly, there was a lot of false advertising and some of those measures. And we can't expect voters to dig deep into these issues like you and I and the other members of the council are expected to do as part of our jobs. So our job is to educate people. What we're trying to do is tax property owners to pay for something that we don't know yet, how much will actually need because we don't know what state funding sources and federal funding sources are available to us at this moment. So I'm not in favor of moving forward on this at all. And so I think that it's important for us to, you know, take a step back and think about our options. And so with that, I will have. Hey, guys. Hey, everyone. We got no, no, guys. This is time for the deliberation and everyone needs to speak. So I'm going to continue down this list. Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I was. So a few more here. I have a list of things. So, Councilman Price, before I move on down the line, I agree that we need to have an understanding on need. The number 300 $298 million was based on the need established in our Everyone Home report. This was conducted by by our our experts in our communities that are already doing this work as well as our city staff, our health department, our development services department, economic. They were involved in establishing the number. So this was connected to that. But secondly, the numbers flex. Let me just say, if that's the reason that people are want to support this, I'm going to say it very clear to the council members the number is flexible. If I want staff and I had a conversation with Mr. Modica that the idea is the number should meet the need. If we find that what's in the proposal is off by a dollar higher or lower or whatever it is, that's what we want to know. We want to pick it out the right number. It's not about what sounds good, $25 or whatever it is. And we've given that flexibility. I reiterate that. Now bring back the correct number to meet the need as identified. That's in the recommendation. Secondly, we don't need that. Hang on. Secondly, the second part of the most so the first part in motion is important because it allows us to do we've already done a lot of research on that top level research. The first part of the motion allows us to take that second step. And language is key because that's how we figure out more specifically, the general debt, the general. So the debt obligation for this, how long it will have to stay on all those details that we really need in order to make a full decision we need. And that's encompassed in the first part of the motion. The second part, the motion asks for all the other things we talked about. What specifics can we do that what's what is the plan? We did this on measure A. When Measure eight came, we sat we created a plan on how specifically we would invest that we can actually do that. But if there are other things I want to throw into that study, we can do that tonight. Let's put that if we say let's do tracking. I also want to explore options that don't raise taxes. I'm always going to say no to that. I'm a property owner to let's see if we can do it to the magnitude to close the gap. That's that's the purpose here. So we need to be able to include that into this recommendation. Councilman Austin, you made a number of great points. I know how our districts are very different. I know that a number of our districts in our city are very different. I understand social cut, social cost, the cost of taking certain positions. So I completely understand that. And my hope is that we can create space to find a motion that you can support. Frankly, there's we need to ultimately need six people on this council tonight is five. But we're ultimately you need six members of the council. We can't do this, frankly, without two additional members of the council. If certain members have already indicated that they are closed minded to a property tax option whatsoever, that limits the field. So I frankly don't know a way to do this without you. So I'm going to just try to create a narrative or dialog that allows you to address the concern. And I understand that concern. So opening open to explore additional options, we explored 29 options. This was one of them. But I'm okay with saying, Hey staff, if there are others we think might be viable to the same amount, including that in that I'm okay with doing that. Secondly, the reason Bond is in front of us because there are some natural sort of advantages. We've taken all every step except the specific step. We've never done a bond in Long Beach. Never. So the city attorney needs to actually get bond counsel and all of these folks and do that research. If we do something allows them to do that research, I'm okay tonight. Secondly, I think the part of the there's two parts of this motion. The first part I think that folks that I'm hearing have a trouble with is the part that says bring it back to council for consideration. The next vote is the vote to consider it. I'm okay if that if if you know, we're in if that creates a tough spot for people, let's do that. But the. Formation encompassed in the first part. Just bring it back as a part of the study. I do want to see. I want to take the next step on the bond, but other things. But we have to make sure that those actions that city staff would do under the first recommendation, short of bringing it back for consideration, we would have to take that action to do that. I want them to spend these next couple of months, two, three months actually doing that research. And I get 2 to 3 months because that's what the city attorney said would be required. I don't want to waste I don't want to waste three months when they could do that research. Now, engage bond counsel, do that research now. So in order for us to even have that conversation, we need in order for us to have that conversation, we're going to have to procedurally figure out some space to get to a place to compromise. I understand that the first two comments out the gate were substitute motions. I've done those games before. I understand what that is. We're going to have to we're going to have to create space for that. So in order to do that, the motion to receive and file. I don't think that's a reasonable motion. I think we should vote down the motion to receive and file and create space. I'll make a motion in place of that that simply says we will move forward with the second part of this motion. And in the first part we will take the meat of it, the actual context and details we need, and include that in the second part. And we're going to move anything about bringing it back to council for consideration so that if people want to know that we vote, is there anything about this? Is voting to pass a ban? No, we took a step. Absolutely. Explore this and other things. We certainly do. We have we have moved the ball and put us in a better position to do this. And ultimately, if by the time we're going to give you into this plan and as much as you want to want to be engaged in, it's not where it needs to be. We can't move forward without six votes. I think that's that is. Reasonable, a reasonable request and it is open. And, you know, these other things that Councilman Price mentioned about whether the number is higher or lower. There's flexibility within that proposal as well. So that is my respectful offer to you. I'd love to hear if you're open to this, because procedurally, either the substitute motion we need to be removed, our council would have to substitute motion would have to be removed or our city council have to vote that down in order to create space to make this happen. That's where we are. From a supernova. Thank you. I'm kind of digesting what was just said. I heard the word close minded and I was in the capital games. Our Democratic classes here referred to as games, and I couldn't differ more from that assessment. The councilwoman from the second District asked a question and I'll paraphrase it. I don't think it is rhetorical. I think he really wanted an answer. What's wrong with just placing this on the ballot? And earlier, you invoked the word democracy in describing that this would be a democratic process to put it on the ballot. And I'll just tell you what the constituents in the fourth District have told me. They've asked the question, what is Democratic about asking 38% of the people to foot the bill for this? And they've further stated that, you know, if this is that important an issue, shouldn't we have everyone in, to borrow a phrase? Shouldn't everyone be in to pay for this? So that's an answer to your question. So I seconded the substitute motion, and I'm ready to call for the question. Okay. The question the question has been called and so concerned. Richardson has queued up to speak. So I think we're going to take a vote on the question. QUESTION Correct. That's Renee. I think there's a second on the question. I think constantly comes on the second question. But you said second. That you would need to vote on a call for the question. Right. So so I. Need a two thirds you need a two thirds vote to end debate. Okay. So just to be clear, I'm not sure if the clerk. Are you able to. We'll probably have to do roll call because of Councilman Price. So so just to clarify what's happening for everyone up. So Councilman Super nine has made a motion to end debate essentially. And so that motion has to be voted on by the council before we can continue having any more any more debate. And so that is the motion that's on the floor. And for it to pass, I believe, Mr. City Attorney, two thirds of the council has to vote to end debate. Six votes. Yes, six votes. Okay. So the motion is on the floor to end the debate and then do a roll call vote. So when a voter I wasn't clear, it required six votes to end debate. Mr. City Attorney. That's correct. You need a two thirds vote to them to be. One queued up. I just had something to say. If it's important enough to get six voters. Let's go ahead and vote the other six votes for that, because I think there's only one more person to go ahead. Let's do it. It's not debatable. It's the conflict question, right? No. Okay. So you're saying that we're just going to end debate and vote? Correct. There is no debate on the call for the question. The vote on the call for the question that fails. So we're doing you go back and. That's exactly right. And you say something. When I made that motion, there was no one cued up. And so just to be clear, there's a call for the question, and that's what we're voting on to end debate. So an I vote ends debate and never, of course, allows that debate to continue. So I do a roll call vote. District one. Name. District two. District three. I. District four. I. District five i. District six. At the. District seven. District eight. And District nine. Hey. Yeah. So the motion fails. So the debate continues. Whoever you up next. Debate continues. And so let's go back to the conversation. So next up is Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Of course, it's an important debate. We respect our council rules. But at some point you have to say that some of this is silly. We you know, you get a few minutes and you got to come back. Some of it is silly. I think we need to explore occasionally looking at suspending those rules. I just have a few more thoughts here. So the attempt there was to open up a discussion. There was no response to that. It's sincere. I will make it again if by the end of my comments are there. I am open to that. But I put that offer on the table. It was not acknowledged. So here's what what the way that where I see this, I think this there's been a lot of like conversation that like dividing us and we shouldn't let this conversation divide. I'm sorry. Point of order to have the floor working people chime in. Are we able to meet the minimum? I'm. I'm sorry, Rex. I just didn't have you on mute. It was a mistake. I'm sorry. It's just really loud in here. I'm sorry, Suzy. It comes out everywhere. Okay, so. All right. So I know that this is controversial. I know that we need to it's my opinion that particularly in 2020, in a presidential election year, where people are already paying attention and we're getting a larger sample of voters than we typically get . We typically have low turnout elections. We have a high turnout election and get two thirds vote in an election of, you know, probably 60, 70% turnout is already a heavy lift. I feel like we need to take that step. It's clear to me, based on the comments that we don't have the support for that tonight. We just don't. And, you know, to put it in perspective, we've all had difficult votes. We've all seen us air on the side of, you know, we're going to take you know, we're going to look at the facts. We have a debate. We'll get there. We had we've seen our counsel and our staff prioritize incredible projects and get there. And we were fortunate to sit in a in a community in a civic center today. Today, a civic center has placed our our city incumbent for the next 40 years on that service. And we got there on every single vote. The majority of this council got there. We got there even though we had concerns about the Belmont pool, $80 million pool investment. We had concerns. We made the case. We made it stronger. We got good union jobs there. We got there. We got there. We had the debate. We got there. Yet tonight, we don't have the political will to simply let the voters have a choice. I think that I think that is shameful. And this council is not a great moment. There is not a lot of risk on a two thirds vote. Not a lot of risk on asking the voters of Long Beach to weigh in. Not a lot of risk here. If there's as much uproar about this, then the voters will tell us that at the ballot box. And it's not it's not on us. It's on the voters. You know, so, you know, that's that's you know, it's a point there, I think, that we're sort of undercutting the democratic process here rather than give people a chance to vote. We're forcing residents, nonprofits and all of us to find a different option. We're going to have to go back, go to, you know, nonprofits and these individuals and tell them the city council will not would not give you a chance to vote. You're going to have to go collect signatures and get this done yourself. That's what we're telling them. Just to be clear, that's about a half a million dollar effort. We're going to say, rather than save you the people money. Working families money. We're going to force you to go out and get signatures just to have an opportunity to vote. It's unfair. It's completely unfair when there's plenty of opportunities to compromise and all of that. The conversation will continue to do research. We've done amazing reports that have been lauded, and we're open to doing more, more reports. But this is simply kicking the can down the road. And frankly, inaction does harm and is more expensive. We pay more and more money. We have our clean team and all of these resources that we invest that are frankly counting dollars, all of this that we do to clean up an encampment. What happens a week later is right back. It's right back. It's not an upstream long term solution without building housing. It is more expensive to not house. This is a reasonable thing and we have a responsibility to have an honest, open debate about this, which is not what is taking place tonight. Most recently I mentioned this before Martin V Boise. Our ability to simply say, you can't be in our parks and our streets and our right away all rights of way that's being challenged. Our ability to do that has been challenged. We cannot sweep the homeless issue into the seams of life, into our riverbeds, into our river freeway on ramps, into North Long Beach, in the shelter. You can't do that. We have to actually build capacity. We've been playing we've been playing nice. But I got to I got to tell you, the count the rest of the council of these people are not playing nice and they're not playing fair. They're looking out for them. That's the reality here. I'm proud of our residents for stepping up and building that shelter. If that didn't give, opening up and building that shelter didn't give us an opportunity to give the voters a chance. What the hell are these people doing? We're not playing nice on this. We're not playing nice on these anymore. Okay. Look, I'm gonna say one more thing, Mr. Mayor. This, you know, this is about this vote today was about simply having a discussion moving forward in the discussion. Clearly, folks are voting and to protect their interests and maintain the status quo. That is what people are doing. And we were sent here to find solutions and to fight for those solutions and have courage. And that's not what the city council is doing. So I move that we end debate. I mean, I move that. We close debate. It's not debatable. Okay. So I think that there's a it's a motion, same motion as you know. I'll let it go. Go ahead, Councilman Pearce. Customer Pearce. Thank you. Um, there was some back and forth. Darrell, Thank you for, for answering my question. I think that your answer was a reason to vote no on the ballot measure, but not a reason not to give it to the voters to decide. While that number might be accurate, it might not be, I'm not sure, 38%. But we have to. Today we're just supposed to focus on do we get some research back and do we give it to the voters? And so I obviously, the we kind of see the lay of the land after all these votes. Every time we have one of these votes where we are not talking and having a dialog, but we're talking at each other, it creates more tension. It creates more problems. And every time after one of these nights like tonight. There's tension between all of us, and it's really hard to get work done. And I think that, Councilmember Richardson, I applaud you for the ability to really you take an issue and you run with it. And you built a community coalition of people that put a lot of. Money behind it, that. Took, you know, the housing issue and really said, what can we strategically do? You tried to be smart about it. You listen to all of the research that went out. The mayor put together his task force. We had all of these initiatives come forward and none of us were able to lead on the issue to really provide us with something big that we could do. And honestly, this bond measure is pretty small. You know, it's the smallest one of its kind. And so it's sometimes I worry that because you lead with such a great vision on those pieces, that people are inclined to vote no. And I think it's really unfortunate because the city, a half a million people, we should be able to work together better. And so I you know, there's no debate. But I have to take the moment to say that I respect all of my colleagues for stepping up and being a council member and leading. I really wish that we could figure out how to get away from the politics, because that's why people don't trust local government. That is exactly why they don't. And so, Daryl, thank you for answering my question. I wish that the other council colleagues would have answered it and had a real dialog with us about how we can come to a solution. But here we are. Thank you, Councilmember Gringo. You know, I normally don't recue on these types of discussions because I like to be straightforward. What I said, as I said, and I stand by it. But you have to. Some of this dialog that we've had here, it's. It's it's. I'm feeling bad, I'm feeling sad because, you know, we really don't have to go there in regards to on occasion being disrespectful when I want one another's opinions. But let's face it, homelessness is a wedge issue of the 2020s. We're going to be dealing with this issue not only 2020, but a 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30. If we don't do anything about it now. I participate in the California League of Cities. And this is a very heavy issue in an elitist city. You're talking about all of the cities in state of California. We all meet together. We all talk about what are the important issues of the moment. And homelessness is the number one top issue. And it always comes down to one thing and it's consistent across the state and it's called NIMBYism. Not in my backyard. And that's what I have heard and that's what I keep hearing. And every time we bring an issue, we bring in whether it's a bond or it's a grant or an application for more funding. It's you know, I don't want to pay for it, but yet why don't you clear up that river or there's all kinds of camp camping going on in a river. There's people camping out in our parks or my doorway to our business is being blocked because there's a homeless person there. Why don't you clean that up? I get tons of calls to my office about the homeless situation. And what are you going to do about it? What? What are we going to do about it? I can do about it without your help. And what we're doing here, or what this proposal is proposing to do is to get precisely that. To get your help. Vote the help of the voters. You without your help. Homelessness will continue until we get more. Until everybody. Everybody's homeless. What's that going to look like? Your budget. Bunch of campgrounds all over the place. We don't want that. What we want is people to be able to be housed, to be bathed, to take care of their children, to educate their children, to educate themselves, and to live the American dream. And without getting addressing the homeowners, the situation, we're not going to get there. So I'm going to leave it with that, is that this tonight is not putting it on the ballot. It's to do the research is to do the backup that 25 cent per $100,000 might be different. And I'm pretty sure it would be a lot lower than that. Probably would be 18, maybe 1750. But it's not going to be 25. I'm pretty sure of that. So I'm going to be voting down the substitute substitute vote. I motion. Okay. Let me I want to just we're going to go ahead and start doing some procedural votes. I want to just clarify, there's a substitute substitute motion that Councilman Mongo that receives and filed the report. There is a I'll. Before I go. Continue. Councilman, you cued up. Thank you. I just want to say that. I'm really disappointed that the conversation went to a place where people are making false accusations, that someone's trying to be sneaky or name call or any of those things. That's not who we are. And what I hope that I will hear right now is a vote that passes the substitute substitute motion to continue to support the direction that this council unanimously voted on in August. And I hope that we can continue to look at all solutions, not just the one that Rex has determined to be the best one. And I'm open to hearing alternatives. I've had those conversations. I hope we together can decide and hear best which one has the best chance of helping All Long Beach residents? Okay, guys, we have we still have more more comments of pure counsel of Richardson, and then we're going to go to the votes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. More people queuing up, so we'll continue to queue up. Richardson. I just wanted I just wanted to just just state that there is there is hope, folks. And this is not the end of the conversation. Okay. The you know, we can continue to work together, continue to try to we have to continue to try to work together on this council to find solutions. I'm committed to that. I apologize if I got a little passionate on this and I apologize to the public. It's important. I apologize for that. And I commit to work with my colleagues on finding pathway forward because it's not really about me, it's about the people. And that's I honestly like deep in my faith, believe that that's what we should be we should be doing. And to be clear, just the state is there's there's no plan for revenue for affordable housing, so to say. So this vote should be clear. The receipt and final vote is simply to do nothing. That's what this vote is not we're not referring reverting back to some of the plan. There is no plan. We've been exploring options. I didn't come up with this idea. Council has given direction on this idea. What, six or seven times we've heard this. So be clear. This motion is do nothing. But we're going to continue to work together to do something. We will do that. You have my commitment, a number of council members here. I do feel this is this was just not right for them. And I understand the social cost there. And if it wasn't there, I hoped for a dialog to get to a place where we could find something that's not today. We will revisit this together. We will try to get to a place where city council members can agree on this. And it doesn't stop you, the public, from continue to push and advocate. Do what you need to do. 2020 is an incredible opportunity. If the Council won't give you a voice in 2020, then you need to go collect signatures and do it. I commit to help you. If you do that, that's what you should do in November 2020. If not, we're going to try it in 2021. I just don't think that we should wait. So thank you again. Hope is not lost. We will work together. Thank you. And councilwoman. And they have. Yes. As one of your newest members to the council, one of the things that I do look forward to is working together on tough issues like this. And I commend you, Councilmember Richardson, for acknowledging that that the best way to move forward is for all of us to collectively work together. And with that being said, be new to the council and becoming from the community and being big on affordable housing. We've been waiting for a solution, any solution for years and years and years. And so I think that, you know, every day we get closer. But the only way that we're going to really accomplish this is to work together. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Diaz. So let me let me just review the procedural vote. So we have a substitute substitute motion by Councilman Mongo to receive and file. Then we have a substitute motion by Councilwoman Price to look at, to study and look at other federal and state solutions as it relates to affordable housing and homelessness. And as a report to come back to council. And then we have the the original motion, which is the motion is read and submitted by Councilman Richardson. So, members, please. It'll be a roll call vote on each one. So the first is thus is councilman mango substitute substitute of the the roll call vote. District one. Ne. District two, district three I. District four i. District five i. District six. District seven, District eight. And District nine. Okay. So that motion fails. The second the second motion. The second version is the Councilman Price's substitute motion. Out of order, Mr. Mayor. Named district two, District three. A point of order, Mr. Mayor. So now that it's freed up, I'd like to put a motion on table. Mr. City Attorney. I think that. Under under the rules, there is room at this point for a substitute substitute motion that can be made that would be go back to the first vote. So the answer is yes. And I would like to exercise that right. Okay. Well, all right. Just just just to be clear, so another motion can be made now that the substitute, the first half substitute was defeated, correct? Correct. That's correct. Now there's room. On the floor. I want to just to be clear, there's still the councilwoman price motion is still on the floor, as is the original Richardson motion, correct? That's correct. If another motion is made and seconded, it becomes the substitute substitute again and again. Okay. So, Councilman Richardson. I would like to make a motion to include in the second part of my original motion, which is frankly very similar to Councilwoman Price's motion. It's to prepare a report on needs of. The Board of Energy. One of order. Mr. City. Attorney. There was a vote in process. I call a point of order prior to the vote being called. Check the records. Correct. He did call the point of order before the vote was completed. Usually you're doing a roll call vote, so only two votes were cast. We did call a point of order and the vote stopped. You can make another motion to end debate, which ends all discussion and all motions, and then you have to vote on all of your motions in order. But that motion in debate needs two thirds. Two thirds? That's correct. Zero. The motion. Now, that's fine. So, I mean, yeah. So we're going to just follow the the rules as laid out by the city attorney. So, Councilman Richardson, thank you. You know, I've been you know, you never know when you're a I encourage young people to join students organizations because you learn order really well. I learned that back and somebody by our members that, look, I have a motion. My motion is to include the second part of my motion, which is to direct, prepare a report on affordable housing need strategies that address affordable housing and homelessness, potential types of projects to be funded with a bond estimates on a number of units that could be constructed revenue source, dedicated affordable housing and report back within 90 days . So the second part of that motion I want to include I also want to include the additional options that Councilman Austin referenced. I want to include those into this and the research into the proposal on the floor. The research short of bringing it back for consideration for consideration of a vote. So just do the research. Do the research on the bonds, present it and all the other options and all the affordable housing needs. That that's the motion so as not to move forward tonight if people are concerned that this is not the option. You don't have to be concerned about that. This is literally to get information very similar. Councilwoman Price's motion, except mine says we've done a lot of work on this one. I understand. I hear you. If you say this isn't the right one, but, you know, it's pretty close, right? I feel like we're pretty close and we can figure it out. So I don't think we should just abandon it with all the work that's there. We should include that as well as others. So the research needed in order to move forward is what I want to conduct. Is that understandable? Mr. Parking. Part. Part of it was you prepare the report, come back in 90 days. I get that. The second was to conduct the research on a possible bond measure. In addition to what I believe you were saying, the alternative funding from state and federal sources to mitigate the housing issues? Absolutely. And then you wanted to include Councilman Austin. I don't know what Councilmember Austin's ad was to that. We will. But additional resources. And additional options, I think it's very similar to what Councilmember Price had actually proposed as well, looking at federal dollars options there, looking at the state options. But I would also mention that Councilmember Richardson is the chair of our state large committee. This would be very much part of our state ledger agenda in terms of going after budget dollars in Sacramento to to to address affordable housing. And we'll do our best on the federal ledger side as well to make sure that that our voice is being heard. Because I know we have a very supportive congressman here in Long Beach who can be a voice for that as well. Absolutely. And you have my full commitment. Commitment on that. That will be the top priority of our state legislative agenda. And we're going to work on that. I'll become I'll become President Skog in May. That will also be our priority there to address housing and bring down local dollars. So to be clear, it's all those things you mentioned what we're doing. We're going to take the part out in the first part that says bring it to, you know, bring it to the city council, bring it to the city council for consideration. So don't bring it back with a recommendation to pass it. We're clear that the council doesn't want to do that right now, but I want you to do that research, the Bond Council, all the questions you couldn't answer yet until we gave you a target. You have a target. Try that. And the conversation about how does it relate to other resources? Let's just assume Everyone Home report is a year old and there are new resources on the table and that may bring down the amount of the bond from $25 to $20, right. From, you know, seven bucks a month on the average house to $5 a month. I just want it to make sense. So if there's additional resources we can leverage to bring this cost down. Absolutely. We want to do that, but we want to be in position to it's a not for the next two months, three months, not do anything. We'll start working on this, put us in a better position to maybe come together on this. That's what this is. You clear on that? Thank you. That is my motion. Thank you. I have a councilperson. And then I have Councilwoman Pryce. Okay. So now we have a new motion on the floor, and I think it merits a little bit of conversation as well, because in the staff report, Mr. City Manager, I think it mentions that moving forward with this would would require a shifting of priorities from other affordable housing recommendations previously approved by the City Council and potentially away from other bond projects already in progress and intended to save money. Can you please elaborate on that and and help us understand what priorities will be shifting? Should we move forward with this recommendation or this this motion by Councilmember Richardson? Yes. So when the council passed its fiscal policies last year, they updated the way that you want us to look at kind of fiscal impact and look in terms of staff resources. The item that was proposed by Councilmember Richardson, this is this is a big deal. We talked about this a lot tonight. This is really big stuff. So we are expecting that this will take some staff resources to do these reports. We actually believe it's going to be longer than 90 days. So with the additional time, we're able to just spread that out. So we're probably looking at 90 to 120 days. We don't have a list of exactly what would be impacted, but we we would move things around. The team does believe that we can get back reports. We'll take whatever you've asked us to do and we'll put it in the workflow. I will ask John GROSS to look at that. But in terms of the the bond financing, but we were assuming you were moving forward with the bond and actually bringing it back, which then, you know, that affects the Treasury staff. So, John, if you could add a little bit about the Treasury impact, if there is any from the recommendation. And this the current motion as as the manager said, it does not call for Bond to come back, but it does call for information on bond funding. So there's still would be some research and actually probably some significant research. But on the other hand, with the kind of timeframe that the manager's talking about, 90 to 120 days, my my guess is that we can fit that in the bond projects that we were talking about, but I think are not going to be impacted with that kind of timeframe. Are things like the port bonds, the airport refunding bonds. Those are at least two that are being worked on and are scheduled in Carnival Cruise Line, all of which are in the pipeline and could be impacted. My best guess is at this point that it won't be. Okay. Also, I know one of the priorities that has been discussed and I know the council is looking forward as well as the community is looking forward to coming back. That could impact the conversation regarding housing and affordability. Is the inclusionary zoning where we at with that and where when do you expect that to come back? And is that one of the priorities that would be shifted as a result of this? I ask Lynda Tatum to respond to the timeline. Yes, our staff has our consultant. We are expecting by the end of this week to have some reassessment by our consultant to respond to some issues that that came up. So we think that or right now we're anticipating that this would hit the Planning Commission for Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in February and back to the City Council approximately March. All right. Thank you. That's all my questions for now. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I'm a little bit confused as to how this motion is different than my motion. So, Mr. City Attorney, can you clarify that for me? Mr. Parking? Yes, Mayor. Members of the council. The difference that I see in the substitute substitute motion versus the motion for or the council member from the third district is this requests the report back. That was in the original motion from the city manager to come back and then adds what is essentially the substitute motion to study alternative funding for state and federal sources to mitigate the housing issue? So it is basically the substitute motion. In addition to asking the city manager to prepare the report and then the third possible portion of that substitute substitute motion is to request city attorney to do the research on the bond issue, but not to prepare the resolution and related documents to bring back for council consideration to place anything on the ballot at this time. Okay. So I'm not I really don't see a substantial difference between my substitute motion and the substitute substitute. So I know I'm not as much of an expert in Robert's rules as some on the council, but so it sounds like it's a modification of the first motion, but it's not going to be coming back to council with a proposed resolution. My understanding is that is correct, that whatever there will be a report that comes back, it sounds like between 90 and 120 days to the council with the information that was requested in the original motion. But what will not come back at that time is a resolution prepared by my office and the related documents for the Council's consideration to place a ballot measure on the November 3rd, 2020 ballot. Okay. So if I'm understanding this correctly, that I may not be the substitute substitute motion that directs the city manager's office. And to some extent, I guess, the city attorney's office to explore a bond measure for property owners. Is that correct? That's my understanding is. That's correct. We will be doing taking this time during this nine or 90, 120 days. We were directed to continue the research on what related documents and resolution we would need to prepare in the event the Council wanted to consider placing something on the agenda. But we wouldn't finalize that or bring that back until sometime after the report is presented to council and we received direction to do that. Okay. So this is, you know, one of my concerns when we talk about we're just putting it on the ballot for the voters to vote on it, even if you're against it. We're just it's democracy. The problem is this incredible amount of staff resources being utilized for this. And my substitute motion basically says before we start to think about taxing property owners, let's find out what additional sources of revenue are available, see how that changes our calculations, and then explore how we're going to meet that funding gap. Because in my opinion, we've put the cart before the horse. We're saying we have a funding gap. We don't know how much we'll be able to offset the funding gap with outside assistance from the state or federal authorities or departments. So let's just figure out the map what we need and tax property owners with it. I cannot support additional taxes on property owners, and especially when I know that the central funding out there that we have not yet explored. To its fullest. So I would encourage my colleagues to first get the report on what funding options are available, then determine what the needs are, and then determine whether we want to go after that funding gap through property owners or through some other sort of assessment that perhaps more than just property owners are paying into. So I ask council to please support my substitute. I think it's asking for the same thing that Councilor Richardson is. I appreciate his willingness to compromise and ask for that additional information. I think it's crucial. But I do think asking property or even exploring the concept of property owners having to pay more taxes, well, we don't exactly know how much we need is irresponsible. Thank you. Thank you. And what I'm going to do before I turn to Councilman Richardson is who's cued up next is I'm going to clarify who I make sure that I understand what the two motions are. And Councilman Price and Councilman Richardson can clarify for me if I don't get it correct, because I have a couple of councilmembers asking asking exactly the motion. So the substitute substitute motion by Councilmember Richardson is essentially to take the the portion that does the city study on the bond as outlined in that in that motion. And maybe he can clarify and not do any of the bond preparation work or any of the preparing of any types of resolution. And also add to that the piece of Councilman Price's substitute motion, which is to have to go out and look at state and federal funding opportunities of on a funding of affordable housing and or housing for folks experiencing homelessness. So that is Council Richardson's motion. And Council Councilmember Price's motion is to just go and ask staff to begin doing research on funding from state and federal sources on on affordable housing that were that we're discussing today. And then the main motion is, again, the original motion as presented. So that's how I've read it. Councilman Price, to have your your motion correct. Councilman. I know that your Councilman Price. Councilman Richardson, do I have your substitute correct? I'm not sure. I'm going to restate right now. So whatever the city attorney. Okay. Well well, do we do I have it correct up to this point? And if you want to clarify, you can be here. There are three motions ahead of us. One was my original motion. Correct? The second motion is Councilwoman Price's motion. Correct. I'd appreciate if we can only speak on the one that's on the floor. It gets confusing if we don't. Well, I appreciate that. But I also need to clarify the motions that are on the floor. And so you have the floor. I think we will make it make it a lot more clear. Okay. I understand that. I'm just getting other questions about what's being voted on. So I just want to clarify. So you have the floor so you can clarify. But I think as of where we are today, I'm sure city attorney, I have it correct as to what the motions are there on the floor. Correct. That's correct. There's actually only one motion on the floor, but. There are three that are brought up. So, Councilman Richardson, thank you so. For the sake of just process, in order for this vote to move forward, it only needs a simple majority. I understand Councilwoman Price's concerns. And for the sake of this, if they are closed off to any exploration of any revenue source, that's not the university we're talking to right now, talking to the council members who say there is some wiggle room here to move forward. That's that's who we're talking to right now. And so the motion is the second part of my original motion direct city manager to Prepare Report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach. Strategies to address housing affordability, homelessness. Potential types of projects that could be funded with a housing bond. Estimates on the number of units that can be constructed with a revenue source dedicated to affordable housing and report back to the City Council within 90 days. It adds Explore additional revenue sources and options that are not tax related as well as other revenue sources. Explore them all. That's what it is. It additionally takes, hey, take the next step of exploration or research into the impacts of the bond. We need to know that even if the citizens were to do signatures when it comes to the city council, they ask go do a report on what the impact would be on this bond. It's something we do all the time. Do that. On this, you have an amount of resources already identified in the fiscal report. That's why I the fiscal impact report already outlines and there's resources and what would need to be had to happen to do that. City staff has said we need to amend from 90 days to 120 days. I'm fine with that. We need. But what I'm saying is, short of preparing the motion for city council to vote on whatever the resolution for city council short of preparing that. You know that part, to put us in a position to do it, we'd have to take that extra step of then affirmatively asking staff to bring that back, if that or whatever it is. The option. I think this makes sense because some good ideas did come up tonight, particularly is there a way to adjust the number, make it lower by looking at other strategy? I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that. So this is frankly a compromise motion inclusive of feedback from council members who have been open minded on this issue. That's what this is. That's what the motion is. Okay. We have. That was concludes public comment. I'm sorry, counsel comment. So I think that the motions as I had clarified them earlier, stand. And so we right now have we can take a vote on the substitute substitute motion by Councilmember Richardson. So I'm going to begin again. We'll be doing the roll call vote and we'll go down. District one. Yes. District two. District three? No. District four. No. District five. No. District six. District seven eight. District eight. No. District nine? Yes. I believe motion fails. Motion failed five. Okay. So now we're going to the substitute motion, which is Councilwoman Price's motion. So let me can do the roll call vote. Councilman Price's motion district one name. District two. No. District three. Yes. District four. Yes. District five. Yes. District six. Yes. District seven. Hey. District eight. Yes. District nine. Okay. That motion carries. Is that correct, Mr. Attorney. For motion commencing passes five four. That motion carries five four. So that's the motion. That's the motion that carries and passes. Okay. So we're moving on to the next item. So let me go ahead with so we're going to go ahead and take a one minute recess and then we're going to go right back into item 19. We're. I'm. Do you? Kill the children. Have. Actually the. The NSA is coming. He were coming back from recess, if I. The clerk will call the roll, please. Councilwoman in the house. Councilman. And Councilwoman Pryce. Councilmember. Super. Now. I'm sorry. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrew's Council member. Your anger presented. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia. Thank you. Is, is is. Do not twit here. Steve Updike or Tsuyoshi. Party. Are any of those folks here?