Good afternoon and welcome to the Community
and Economic Development Committee meeting.
For today, Tuesday, December 9th,
the time is now 1.30 and this meeting has come to order.
Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit
a speaker's card for items on this agenda.
If you are here with us in chambers and you would like to submit a speaker's card,
please fill one out and turn it to a clerk representative
before the item is read into record.
With that we are now ready to
take roll.
Councilmember five?
Present.
Councilmember Ramachandran?
Present.
Thank you.
Councilmember Unger?
Here.
And you are now in the meeting.
You are now in the meeting.
You are now in the meeting.
Okay.
Councilmember Unger?
Present.
Councilmember Tong?
Present.
Present.
I think it's just a second here.
And chair brown present we have
four members present and before
you begin chair brown do you
have any announcements for us
this afternoon.
Yes thank you so much well good
afternoon everyone and welcome
to our last community and
economic development committee
meeting of twenty twenty five.
It's truly been a pleasure
working alongside all of the
amazing departments that
present to this committee so
building as well as the amazing partnership of our city administration
Betsy Lake and team
as well as the city attorney's office and so as a first-year councilmember your partnership and
professionalism has really made this first year both productive and impactful and so as we're looking to
2026 I'm excited for the work that we'll be able to do around
anti-displacement
presentation the city's economic action plan as well as continued exploration on
How we use Oakland spaces and land for public good
And then lastly I did want to make the announcement that in order to ensure that we complete
Conclude our meeting on time today. We will be limiting public comment to one minute per speaker
And so thank you all so much members of the public for being here. And so we can go ahead and get started
Thank you chair Brown for your announcements and noting one minute for all public speakers for every item including open forum
moving to item one approval of
The draft minutes from the committee meetings held on October 28 2025 in the special meeting on November 18th
2025 and you do have one speaker for this item
We can hear from the public speakers
I'll move into our public speaker.
If you're here with some chambers,
please approach the podium.
If you're participating via Zoom,
please raise your hands here easily identified.
Blair Beekman, as I don't see Blair,
that concludes your public speakers.
Excellent, and I'll entertain a motion.
Council Member Unger.
So moved.
Second.
We have a motion made by Council Member Unger,
seconded by Council Member Five
to accept the draft minutes for the committee meetings
on October 28th, 2025 and a special meeting
on November 18th, 2025 as is on roll.
Council Member Fife?
Aye.
Council Member Ramachandran?
Aye.
Thank you.
Council Member Onger?
Aye.
And Chair Brown?
Aye.
Motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes
of the committee meetings held on October 28th
and November 18th, 2025.
Moving to item two,
determination and schedule outstanding committee items.
And this is also known as your pending list
and you do have one speaker for this item as well.
Okay, excellent.
And so to the administration,
any items for our consideration?
I'll do the chair and then I decide.
Excellent, thank you so much.
And so I'll make the motion to move this item.
And is there a second?
Second. Second.
Excellent, and we can hear from the public speakers.
Thank you, Ms. Asada.
So the upcoming World Cup is supposed to be an opportunity
for us to benefit economically.
But as I said in the finance committee meeting,
we as public members were not given correct information
related to how we would share with the other cities
and county members the responsibility
for the $700,000 that was submitted
to implement the facility needs
and hosting the team.
On a meeting in July, the city of Alameda
agreed to come up with $150,000.
The responsibility for this project
is totally with Oakland roots.
we should have gotten some commitment
from the city of Berkeley, the county of Alameda,
the city of, I'm sorry.
Thank you for your comment Mrs. Sada.
We do have a motion made by council member Brown,
seconded by council member Five to accept determination
and schedule outstanding committee items,
also known as your pending list as is on the roll.
Council member Five.
Aye.
Council member Rama Chondrin.
Aye.
Council member Unger.
Aye.
And chair Brown.
Aye.
The motion passes with four ayes
to accept the termination
and schedule outstanding committee items
as is moving to item three.
Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator
to enter into a memorandum of understanding
with the city of San Leandro
establishing that the city of San Leandro
will process planning and building entitlements
for improvements on the existing structure
and parking lot at 1 East 14th Street,
107-01 International Boulevard,
A property located within both jurisdictions
and act as a lead agency for the purposes
overview under the California Environmental Quality Act.
And you do have one speaker.
Excellent, thank you so much.
And so I believe for this item,
we can put five minutes on the clock
and then we'll hear from planning and building.
Good afternoon, council members.
My name is Jana Wismer.
I am a consultant for the Planning Department
and I've been working with the city of San Leandro
and our city attorney's office to bring this to fruition.
And could we have the PowerPoint, please?
As was mentioned, this is a memorandum of understanding
between the city of Oakland and the city of San Leandro.
The project location is located right
on the border of San Leandro and Oakland.
This is a map showing the parcelization.
And to the lower side of your screen,
That is the portion that was within the city of San Leandro.
The three parcels to the north of that border
are all within the city of Oakland.
And here's an aerial view.
The building that is on site is entirely
within the city of San Leandro.
All of the area that is within the city of Oakland
is just a bare parking lot.
There are no structures currently on the Oakland site.
As I mentioned, it's comprised of four Alameda County
assessor's parcels and straddles the border between the cities
of San Leandro and Oakland.
Again, there are three on the Oakland side, one
on the San Leandro side.
And the majority of the properties of the parking lot
is within the city of Oakland, 58%.
42% of the property is located in San Leandro.
And there is an existing structure
on site, a little over 28,000 square feet, again,
located entirely on the portion within the city of San Leandro.
that building is vacant, and I believe in former years
it was used as a towing company.
The Greater Grace Temple is wishing to make improvements
to the building and the parking lots
and other site improvements, and the project will not
include the construction of any structures
on the existing parking lot.
So there will be no structures proposed
within the city of Oakland limits.
The project would be required to apply
for a conditional use permit through the city
San Leandro. However, if this were going to be the opposite way, if Oakland were to retain
jurisdiction over both properties, it would also be a conditional use permit. And through
the conditional use permit process with San Leandro, the City of Oakland would have the
opportunity to comment and make suggestions. And with this memorandum of understanding,
San Leandro will be the lead agency for all land use approvals, including building permits
plan check, certificates of occupancy, building inspections, and all the fees to be paid
for the city of San Leandro. And emergency services to the site will also be provided
to the city of San Leandro portion and also the area located within Oakland.
And with that, we recommend that the city council adopt a resolution authorizing the city
administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city of San Leandro,
Establishing that the city of San Leander will process planning and building entitlements for improvements to an existing structure and parking lot at one
East 14th Street and 107 oh one International Boulevard a property located within both jurisdictions and
Act as lead agency for the purpose of review under the California Environmental Quality Act
That concludes my presentation. I can answer any questions you may have
Excellent. Thank you so much. Any questions or comments colleagues and then council member Rama Shondra
Okay.
Excellent.
Thank you so much.
We can hear from the, if there's any public comment.
Thank you.
Mrs. Sada.
So with the majority of the property being in Oakland, why is San Leandro taking the
lead on the property?
And with a property like this, do the owners of the property pay any assessments to the
of Oakland or do all of it go, does it all go to the city of San Leandro, is it split,
how does that work?
So do they pay partial taxes or where do you vote with the city of San Leandro, the city
of Oakland?
And it just leads me to my final comment.
You have the need to have a contract with the city of Piedmont as it relates to the
city of Piedmont being able to use Oakland libraries. That has been without a contract
for over 20 years. And they have had access to our libraries. They give us money, but
they give us the amount of money they want to give us every year for that. You have to
have a contract. And you don't. And I brought this to your attention several times. It also
. . .
All right, thank you so much for your comments.
I do think that the report was very clear,
given that this property is a parking lot,
a part of the parking lot.
And so, colleagues, I'll entertain a motion on this.
Council Member Unger.
So moved.
And Council Member Fife.
Second.
We do have a motion made by Council Member Unger,
seconded by Council Member Fife,
to approve the recommendations of staff.
this to before to the December 16th 2025 city council agenda and that is on
consent. On roll councilmember five. Aye. Councilmember Ramachandran. Aye. Councilmember
Unger. Aye. And chair Brown. Aye. This motion passes with four ayes to approve the
recommendations of staff and the forward this item to the December 16th city
council agenda on consent moving to item four. Through the chair to the public
speaker it is past the time to sign up for public comment yeah just reading an
item for adopt the resolution one authorizing the city administrator to
negotiate terms for the exclusive negotiating agreement with Costco
wholesale corporate and DECA companies to develop a Costco wholesale and
retail general merchandise facility in the North Gateway development area of
the former Oakland army base into declaring the property exempt surplus land and you do
have 19 speakers for this item.
Excellent.
Thank you so much.
So I believe for item four councilmember five you will be presenting on that and then for
my colleagues also available to answer any questions on this item would be Brendan from
EWD as well as administrator Johnson.
you know I have a question
for you I think I'm going to
go through the council member
five does eight minutes work
for the presentation.
That is fine is staff here is
is Brendan here.
I see him and if there's not an
opportunity I know we're well I
I just want to articulate to
the public and to mister kid
who came to speak just on time
I will definitely make space
for you to have those comments
that you wanted to share.
our our greater community meeting so I want you to understand that your voice
will be heard on this topic. That said I do want to share a little bit about this
opportunity so you can start my time. To explore the possibility of developing a
Costco warehouse in the city of Oakland. Today's resolution is preliminary step
that will allow the city administrator to begin discussions with Costco
Wholesale Corporation and DECA Companies LLC around terms for an exclusive
negotiating agreement to develop a Costco facility in the North Gateway
Development Area of the former Oakland Army Base. This large parcel has remained
undeveloped for far too long, which is a loss for the city of Oakland on many
fronts. The city must explore all avenues of opportunity and bringing a warehouse
has a potential to generate significant tax revenue, jobs, and easier access to
goods for residents. Additionally, the resolution also makes findings that the
property is exempt surplus land because a property is subject to a valid legal
restriction not imposed by the city which prohibits any residential housing
there and there's a feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the
prohibition on the site. And I want my colleagues and the community to
understand that this item opens the door for discussions but it is not a binding
agreement with any party to any project.
An actual ENA, if terms are agreed upon, will have to come back to the full council for
a vote and there will be extensive community engagement before a formal agreement is established.
So people are asking why Costco?
And I want to give a couple of facts.
Costco is the third largest retailer in the world with over 800 warehouses and over 300,000
employees worldwide.
new sources of annual tax revenue will be available to the city. There will be hundreds
of jobs with competitive wages in West Oakland. There will be localized spending as residents
will be more likely to shop in Oakland. A membership warehouse with a diverse selection
of goods and competitive prices is something that hundreds of Oakland residents have asked
for. And this opportunity has the potential to fill the gap for affordable groceries and
essentials for our impacted communities. Why this particular parcel? This large undeveloped
parcel is situated at a location that will have minimal impact to residential communities
close to freeways, and any mitigation that comes with transportation impacts will be
done as a part of this process, if approved. Who is DECA? DECA is a real estate investment
and development firm with a proven track record of major development projects across California,
as noted in the agenda report.
DECA currently has 15 active projects with a total development value of $10.15 billion.
DECA has approached the D3 council office expressing an interest in developing their
experience, leveraging their development experience to help bring a Costco to Oakland.
And there are several individuals in the exact community in the neighborhood where Costco
would come that have expressed concerns about other uses and I want those to be on the table
for discussion.
As noted in the agenda report, two recyclers were meant to be relocated to the North Gateway
parcel within the city entering multiple agreements with the parties as far back as 2012.
However, these recyclers have not met the requirements needed to move their operations
to this site and currently there is no agreement in place with the two entities.
There's also been a concerted effort led by my office to use this parcel for the purpose
of addressing our very real crisis of homelessness.
Unfortunately due to legal restrictions around residential use of the site, the resources
required to get a waiver from the Department of Toxic Substance Control and the extensive
environmental remediation needed, not to mention the funds needed to actually pull something
like that together, is neither feasible nor timely.
And it is also important to mention that this location has been discussed within the City
of Oakland for over 20 years.
And the issues that were a problem for moving forward 20 years ago have been rectified over
time in the City of Oakland.
So I want to reiterate that this resolution will only allow for discussion of terms and
is not binding.
Additionally, I'm committed to ensuring community engagement at every level is central to any
any formal agreement that comes before the City Council should discussion lead to an
ENA. In fact, our first community meeting will be on December 18th and I encourage everyone
interested to come. It will be 6 p.m. right here in the Council chambers. So please join
us. We'll have information on my social media for the details. And with that, understanding
we have public comment, I'll entertain a motion on this item.
Excellent. Thank you so much, Councilmember Fife. I would like to hear from the public
speakers first, and then we can open up questions to my colleagues.
Thank you.
When I call your name, please approach the podium, state your name for the record, and
as reiterated, you do have one minute.
If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.
We will take public speakers in person before Zoom.
Sanford Forte, Kevin Dolly, Stephanie Tran, Petra Brady, Raymond Gallagher, Kathleen
Tribe, Philip Tran, Sean Granberry, if I'm mispronouncing your first or your last name,
Christina Tostada, Alex Ishiron, Derek Barnes, Rodolfo Baccrizio, Travis Duncan, Tony Bethley,
Steven Labonge, Isaac Kesrod, Mrs. Asada, David Boatwright, and Prescott Chair.
lastly Derrick Barnes twice you can sign up no particular you can approach
the podium thank you the ena will weaken any leverage with two major polluters
polluters in West through the chair the public speaker please state your name
for the record Sanford for today thank you the ena will weaken any leverage
with two major polluters in West Oakland who have prior indicated strong
interest in the North Gateway location claims that those polluters are no
longer interested in the North Gateway are unfounded. How do I know? I've asked.
Costco will bring tens of thousands of additional car trips through West Oakland
every week. Consider the human cost of increasing microplastic and air pollution
caused by Costco traffic. Tens of thousands of trips a week. Microplastics
from tires are the major source of urban microplastic pollution. Already we see
care for community spreading the lie that this is an environmentally neutral
development. Projected tax revenues and employment from Costco do not take into
consideration loss of tax revenue and local jobs when consumers shift their
purchase patterns from currently existing West Oakland businesses to
Costco. How many local jobs will be lost versus gained? How much tax revenue lost
versus gained? I've spoken with Costco's real estate division. East Oakland
citizens use the San Leandro location. North Oakland drivers are a mere 12
minutes away. Thank you for your comment. Hi council members my name is Stephanie
Tran. As an Oakland resident and small business owner I am in support of
bringing a Costco to Oakland. I want to see our city invest in projects that
deliver real value. Projects that create long-term economic activity, drives
revenue, provides stable job opportunities, and serve everyday families
and small businesses. As a small business owner I also rely on Costco for basic
supplies. Having a reliable, affordable, and efficient place to purchase goods and
bolts help entrepreneurs like me stay competitive, keep costs stable, and
continue serving our customers. Costco also has a track record of contracting
with local suppliers. I hope this project will create opportunities for Oakland
businesses like myself to become part of the supply chain. So thank you Council
Member Fyfe for bringing this forward. Let's keep moving this along so that we
We can negotiate a strong community benefit that will strengthen all of Oakland.
Thank you.
Good afternoon council members.
I'm Petra Brady.
I'm here representing the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce.
I wanted to say thank you council member fight for presenting this idea to bring Costco to
Oakland.
I think it's a wonderful thing.
Personally, I think it's a wonderful thing for our businesses.
I want to do whatever I can as myself and as an organization to support this because
it is another way to improve the narrative around Oakland.
We support it wholeheartedly.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Ray Kidd, thanks to Mrs. Otter for seeding me her time.
I live in the Causton Mclima's neighborhood of West Oakland, which is the same neighborhood
that Cass Metals is in.
Cassmetals is one of the entities that was going to be moved,
should be moved, and hopefully will be moved to the North Gateway.
It is a very polluting industry.
It will have, at the North Gateway, it will have very updated all
to the current regulations, environmental requirements met,
and it will be a much less environmental impact on the community.
Currently, it's the pollution that comes out of that, the air pollution,
the particles, the fumes, all of their operations are open or are unsheltered or have no roof
on them, this will be remedied. To leave them there now would be a situation of environmental
injustice. And if Costco in the North Gateway preempts cash from moving there, we will be
living with that pollution forever.
Thank you.
Hello, I'm Travis Duncan and I have three people who are ceding their time to me, Rodolfo
Baccarrizzo, Tony Beatty, and Steven Lavongue.
Are they in the chambers?
They are.
Please identify yourself.
Thank you.
Great.
Again, so thank you.
I'm Travis Duncan.
I'm here representing DECA, the proposed developer of this potential project.
I want to say first off, thank you, Member, to Councilmember Fyfe for your leadership
and your commitment to your constituents.
It's very noble.
We really appreciate it.
And thank you for all of you for taking the time to chat here today.
A little bit about us, Decca, we're based in San Francisco,
we're a California-focused mixed-use master plan developer.
This is exactly what we do.
We search for opportunities that are steeped in complexity,
and then we work with leaders like you all,
with the community, to try and craft solutions
that ultimately result in win-win solutions.
Councilmember did a phenomenally good job
sort of outlining where we are in the process here.
It's early in the stage.
This is an opportunity to have a discussion
about a maybe deal, we're really excited about that potentiality and we think
this is an amazing location to do something that could be transformational.
Opportunities for cheap groceries in a food desert is an opportunity that we're
really excited about and we think that the jobs and the tax revenue associated
with that are very interesting, exciting, particularly at this moment in a
challenging economic climate. We have other projects that we're working on
then it would be helpful background. One of them in Southern California the
redevelopment of a Phillips 66 refinery. We're in active negotiations with Costco
and that opportunity involves industrial and retail in a similar configuration of
what we're talking about here. We have other mixed-use master plans in the city
of Paris and the city of Bakersfield that are conceptually similar, you know,
industrial type districts but retail components and how do we balance those
competing priorities in a very similar way to this. This is what we do and we're
really excited to do it here.
One of the things that you hear from people in our industry
is time kills all deals.
And we really appreciate you all considering this item today
to move forward with the discussion
and see if we can craft a project that has broad-based
community support that folks from all parts of Oakland
and walks of life can comment on and participate
in the process.
We're really looking forward to the meeting
in a couple weeks with the council member.
That's just the start of a very long process
to maybe get to an agreement
and then bring forward a project that we can all support.
I'm here to answer any questions if there are any.
I would love to answer them.
This site has been vacant and unused for a long time
and is amazingly well connected to regional transportation
in a way that is very hard to replicate.
I appreciate the gentleman's comments about additional trips.
Trips means people are coming.
That's a good thing.
Parking lots are full, people are spending money.
That's a good thing.
This location allows for those people to get in and out
of a very heavily trafficked transportation corridor
and spend money in Oakland,
which is a phenomenal opportunity.
I'll just conclude with saying thank you again
for taking the time to review this, to talk about it,
and to hopefully give us the opportunity to talk formally
with the city administrator and staff about this.
We think it's transformational and thank you all.
I'll be here for questions.
If I called your name and you still wish to speak,
please approach the podium.
If you're participating via Zoom, once again,
raise your hands, you're easily identified.
David Boatwright, District Four,
some rhetorical questions here.
Who has indicated current interest in this site?
If Costco indicated interest in this site
in the early 2000s, what happened then?
Was San Leandro Costco built after Costco
indicated interest in this site previously?
Sean Granberry, Oakland resident.
I'm just following up on something we've been working on
for us born and raised in Oakland
about showing up and stepping up.
So I'm here today, thank you Council Member Fife.
We know Oakland needs this.
I mean, we could argue about pollution
and all this kind of stuff,
but we need jobs in Oakland.
We need a Costco in Oakland.
I was there on some of these negotiations
with IKEA and with Costco when it went to San Leandro.
So I'm old enough to have been a part
of some of those talks back then.
So I support this 100% in our rally on my crew
to support this 100% and I just wanna say thank you.
Let's keep moving Oakland in the right direction.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
I'm gonna be using Isaac Kha's time as well to be added.
Isaac, can you please raise your hand?
Thank you.
I'm shorty.
Good afternoon, my name is Christina Tostado,
but most people know me as Tina from the town.
I'm a proud daughter of the city of Oakland,
born and raised in East Oakland.
I am currently an Oakland Library Commissioner,
a mentor for Life Goes On,
where we're trying to end senseless gun violence,
a board member for Reading Partners,
for the Oakland Ed Advisory Board.
I was a former board member of the Oakland Latino Chamber
and volunteer liaison for Mayor Livy Schaff.
I pour so much time and energy into this city,
Most people actually think I work for the City of Oakland.
But I am actually a supervisor for Costco wholesale.
I have been working for Costco for almost 20 years.
I started at the Costco San Leandro in May 2006
as a part-time employee while attending Cal State East Bay.
The company works for the employees
with their school schedules.
And because they supported my goals,
I was able to earn my bachelor's degree in communications
and advertising.
Costco also, they have strong wages,
meaningful benefits above minimum wage.
We have a 401K with company match,
Costco stock and twice a year bonuses,
time and a half pay on Sundays,
paid sick leave, paid holidays,
paid bonding time for new parents,
comprehensive medical, dental, vision coverage,
including $150 a year for glasses and contacts.
We have access to SmartDollar,
a financial literacy program,
Because of the financial literacy my father taught me,
combined with Costco's strong wages,
I was able to purchase my own home in the Bay Area
over 13 years by myself.
This is economic stability.
This stability changed my life,
and every family in Oakland deserves that same chance.
I love this city with my whole heart.
I love the people in it.
Costco every year donates this year.
Last year they donated three million dollars
to our town babies in North Oakland.
I just want to say that I would love to see Costco
in the greatest city in the world.
Hello, my name is Kathleen Uribe
and I am Oakland resident district five.
I have a background of being a chef
for production companies and I have currently transitioned
into being a wealth management professional
for seven years now.
And I want to say that, oh, I'm also a Rotarian
and I love being on the Oakland Rotary Club.
And what I would like to say is I love Costco's ethics,
politics, policies, everything this wonderful woman
just said before me went into detail
of what I thought I knew but I did not know.
I just think this company offers amazing jobs
and resources to the community.
And like I said, I love their politics.
I love shopping there, my sister and other parts of my family live up in Seattle where
Costco is like their corner store, and I would love to see that happening here in the Bay
Area because I love everything Costco provides.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, committee members, Derek Barnes, D3 resident, and a property owner.
I'm here to support moving forward with the resolution authorizing the negotiation for
potential Costco in West Oakland.
Let's be clear about what this vote is this is not an approval for project as councilmember five said is a decision to finally
explore a viable use for a long neglected site that has sat dormant for two decades as the councilmember said through multiple failed
proposals scandals and missed
opportunities in Oakland West Oakland has lived with the consequences of
Disinvestment environmental burden for generations while also being asked to wait patiently
That time is over. It's time to move
The proposal offers a realistic path forward hundreds of permanent jobs as we heard construction job site
Significant tax revenue for the city that is needed desperately saying yes does not lock us in it is just the beginning
Thank You councilmember fight for bringing this to our attention
Moving to our zoom speakers
Marcus Johnson, please identify what name you signed under to speak
PNC chair. Please identify what name you signed under to speak.
The Prescott chair PNC chair. OK, thank you.
Please begin your one minute comment. Yes, Costco is great,
but I'm not reading any language that suggests Costco has committed
any interest in this site, therefore an absence of that.
And since we're in a discussion only phase, I respectfully request
such resolution for the non-binding ENA with DECA, COSCO be amended to instead authorize
a request for proposals that would allow other real estate investment firms including DECA
to submit competitive proposals that must be robust and transparent in their process.
GWS and Cass medals would also be able to re-engage.
Thank you.
That concludes your public speakers for item four.
Excellent.
Well, thank you so much for the members of the public
that were able to come and speak on this item.
And I think that it's been presented very clearly
that we're really, this resolution is, you know,
to begin those conversations, and so I think also at the same time the feedback
that we've received as a body both via email and even today from the public
speakers kind of voice a couple things and so I think it is you know to
councilmember Fife you know I just want to uplift a couple of the things that I
I heard that as we begin these if we are successful in passing this through
the committee as we begin to have those discussions you know what will be the
impacts to the West Oakland community around the traffic of the trucks kind of
coming in and out of West Oakland that's kind of a concern so just overall
environmental impacts and then a couple questions that I did have is around I
I think you answered that the first community engagement
on this item will be taking place December 16th.
I am curious if there will be any other larger discussions
outside of just this one that's in December,
given that it is the holiday season
and people may not be available.
And then my other question is,
I am curious if there is a projected timeline
for this,
you know, bringing this to fruition.
I just want to point out, I will get to your questions.
I was at McCliman's High School last week meeting with a group of young people who were
continuing their credits to graduate, it was juniors and seniors.
And there was a great deal of depression with that group.
But they came alive when they talked about opportunities for employment.
And they were even looking for opportunities to do paid internships.
And they were like, if we could just make $16 an hour, that would make a difference
between kids who are out here robbing and bipping and kids who are trying to do something
positive because they don't see any opportunities.
And I'm raising that because we don't have enough opportunities in West Oakland for our
young people.
And I see this as a potential.
And this is just a conversation to start a conversation.
is no elected official in the city of Oakland that has done the type of community work and
outreach that I've done. So to even entertain a possibility that I would not have community
engagement on this process, I want to just put that to bed because that is what I do
and that is who I am. This is one of many conversations I'm having with the public that
will continue throughout this process. I'm also deeply engaged with environmental justice
groups to the point where I'm classified as just incorrigible because I'm supporting clean
air and water in my district.
So that is also something I want to put to rest.
It's something that I'm working with our real estate department and our city attorney's
office to address the polluters that have been in West Oakland for decades.
We're going to address that too.
So I want to be clear to those who are my juniors in this work that I'm going to continue
being carol fire in my district to support what the majority of my district needs, not
a vocal minority.
That said, the timeline will depend on the city administrator's office and city administrator
Johnson I welcome you to weigh in with your perspective because you've been integral to
to moving this forward and supporting my office
with this work and conversations with DECA.
But it will depend on the city administrator's office
and how discussions pan out from there.
But I will continue to include my residents,
my constituents in this process as we move forward.
Through the chair, Council Member Pfeiffen,
thank you so much for your comments and feedback.
And our staff, me personally, and the team,
we are very supportive of your legislation
and the Costco item that's being brought forward,
significant tax benefits to the city
as well as high quality jobs.
And quite candidly, I know one of the things
that we consistently talk about is the need
to be aggressive when it comes to economic development.
And if we have opportunities that present themselves,
well, we're gonna take advantage of it
and we're gonna push hard in ways
that we haven't in the past.
And so I certainly wanna welcome the opportunity
for our staff to come up if there are any
technical questions that may come up.
I know one of them is sort of a timeline.
I think it's probably mid Q1, end of Q1,
but if Mr. Moriarty is here, he can certainly color,
give me a little bit more context with some more specificity.
But I really appreciate the fact that we're here
and we're having the public discussion and debate
and also the community engagement aspects
of what's being presented.
And again, to have a conversation is where we are.
And we look at competitive communities around us
that we aspire to.
Well, quite frankly, this is what they do.
and we have to move forward as an organization
because like you, we get the same cause
about employment opportunities
and the fact that many of our residents
are spending their money in other communities
are taking advantage of the tax dollars
that could be coming into Oakland.
So I appreciate the opportunity for us to do the work,
present all the facts so that you all can collectively
make an informed decision.
And so I'll defer to Ms. Moriarty
who can certainly provide a little bit more context
with respect to the question that you asked, thank you.
to the chair, Brendan Moriarty, director of real estate.
And just on the question of timing,
can't make total total commitments
because there's two parties involved, obviously,
but that we're not negotiating the deal
as a result of this were to pass.
We would simply be negotiating the elements
of an exclusive negotiation agreement,
which then that's really the time to negotiate the deal.
So there's not that much is my point
that needs to be negotiated as a result of the resolution.
I don't imagine will take that much time
You know, I think what the city administrator said about q1 is probably the right time frame to have in mind
Excellent. Thank you so much colleagues councilmember Unger
So I I support this idea of bringing a Costco to West Oakland
I think it's the kind of jobs and retail that we need and and I appreciate councilmember five for her
Hard work and trying to make something good happen at that spot that has been fallow for so long. My only question is
if somebody could make the case for me about why
We should be exclusively with Deca at this point rather than doing an RFP for somebody else to
perform this work
And I don't know if that's for for council member five or for mr. Moriarty or
You through the joke
Through the chair. I can take one stab at that and in addition others if they want to
I mean, I think you know, the OMC does
Generally require a competitive process for the disposition of property for development
However, you know, it's also I think mindful of the fact that the the market is what it is
And you have to seize opportunities at times
So there's a process described in the OMC for waiving the competitive process if it's in the best interests of the city
That does require
analysis enough in a finding by the city administrator and so as part of the process
You know responding to this resolution and coming back with terms for an ENA
We would do that analysis and be able to provide that at that time for City Council to consider
Is it in the best interest of the city?
What are the considerations you would want to have in mind at that point in time?
So you're still undergoing the process of figuring out the elements of why we don't need an RFP
That's right
If this passes we would then do that analysis to give you the information so you could see as the decision-making body
Is it in the best interest of the city to accept these the proceed with the ENA is now presented or?
Actually are the other considerations should we pump the brakes should we do something else at this point in time?
We don't have that analysis done, but we do it as a result of this. So you could come back
with a
Desire to broaden the field. Yeah, I think we were to do that analysis and find that
Oh, actually, this is maybe not in the best interest or some compelling things that need to be considered
We would we would raise those considerations for you. Okay, that makes sense to me. Thank you
We're going to take a moment to
present the request.
Excellent thank you so much
councilmember hunger for the
question councilmember
ramachandran any questions.
Not at the moment.
Okay excellent and councilmember
five did you want to make the
motion on this.
I made the motion earlier but I
do want to just comment briefly
on the retail and estimated
economic loss that the city of
Oakland experiences from.
Retail dollars going to other
It's been a year and two thousand and eight to do a study on and I will bring more of this information to the public once we.
Go through this process but-
Conley estimated that Oakland or should be spending one point five billion dollars in the city of Oakland one point five billion dollars and this was in two thousand and eight.
And with all of the legislation that's moving forward next year from a ballot initiative to several other things that have recently passed through C. E. D. If we are going to be aggressive about holding those dollars in the city of Oakland I think this is a first step towards that process and in terms of the the issues that are faced by West Oakland residents and what we need this is something that is desperately needed has been has been as we've been working on this for a long time.
been communicated to me by several individuals,
and we will do our due diligence as a city of Oakland,
comparing the different proposals that have come forward.
But I want to state, for the public, no other organization,
no other company, no one has reached out to me outside
of DECA for Costco.
There have been no phone calls, no complaints,
until recently, people talking about truck traffic or car
I think this is something that
I think that the city does have
traffic which will be mitigated
in any analysis that the city
does so I wanted to state that
for the record and reiterate
that I personally believe that
this is in the best interest of
my district and in the best
interest of the city of Oakland
to have a Costco warehouse
inside of our city limits and I
will reiterate my motion to move
this item forward.
We have a motion made by councilmember Frey seconded by councilmember Unger to
approve the recommendations of staff and before this item to the December 16th
City Councilor June and that is on consent. Well I am suggesting that it be
on consent but that is up to the body. On roll councilmember five. Aye. Councilmember
Councilmember Rama Chandran?
Aye.
Councilmember Unger?
Aye.
And Chair Brown?
Aye.
This motion passes with four ayes
to approve the recommendations of staff
and afford this item to the December 16th
City Council Agenda on Consent.
Moving to item five.
Receive information report
on the City of Oakland's Cannabis Equity Program.
And you do have two speakers for this item.
Okay, thank you so much.
And so on this next item,
We will hear from Cat Torrio, and then also online
to answer any questions is also Darlene Flynn
from the Department of Race and Equity, excellent.
And will eight minutes be good?
Yeah, it might be less than that.
Okay, excellent, thank you.
So hello, thank you so much for taking the time.
I'm Cat Torrio, I'm managing the Special Activity
Permitting Division, which houses our cannabis program.
this is a report, an informational report
on the city's cannabis equity program,
which was asked that we would bring this forward
to before we start spending any of GO-Biz six.
So I do have a short presentation
that we'll just work through.
Can move it forward to the next one, thank you.
So on March 18th, city council accepted
the 2,074,369 of the GO-Biz grant funding from the state
support the city's cannabis equity program. As part of that there was a provision added to the
resolution that requested that we come with, should return to City Council with an informational
report on the status of the equity program. This report serves to to honor that request.
A little history, we'll go to the next slide. The equity program has to be, we started the
The City of Oakland established it and this is the nation's first cannabis equity program in the spring of 2017.
Our pioneering efforts and equity analysis that was done by the Department of Race and
Equity here at Oakland created the Cannabis Equity Program.
It also inspired jurisdictions across the country to pursue and support similar programs.
In 2019, the state of California set aside annual grant funding to support local jurisdictions' cannabis equity programs.
and as of December 2025 we have 211 equity cannabis businesses in Oakland next slide
just a little bit of history for what we've been awarded thank you darling um since uh 2019
we have come in first and second um we there is a matching requirement for these funds so
coming in third in the 2526 year which is the um just over two million that we are awarded for
for GO BIS 6, and that is due mostly because we have matching requirements, those matching
requirements were put into place starting with that grant. So we are really hoping that
we can get this money out the door quickly and we can move to the next slide.
We do an annual survey for our equity program. We got 52 responses in 2024 and just wanted
to go through some of the points that we asked on that survey.
So there's 41 currently operating businesses.
11 are pending, working through the permitting process.
34 identify lack of capital as a barrier for operating.
And we know this.
We know it's very difficult to do business in general.
It's even more of a disadvantage to do cannabis business
as there are many barriers, banking and a few other things.
And it's federal.
We're not able to write off taxes, so we're asking operators to act as regular businesses and they are truly at a disadvantage.
There are 45 prior recipients to either a grant or a loan from the city, so we are actively getting this money out into people's hands.
32 stated that funding made it possible for the business to continue operating.
These grants cover a lot of expenses, and we'll go over that a little bit later in some of the slides.
But first, I wanted to just talk about who the program serves.
Next slide.
We, one of the program, one of the application survey
questions for applicants is, has any owner, partner,
board member, or your business, or any immediate family
members, parent, sibling, spouse, child, been convicted
or incarcerated for any cannabis related charges?
This is one of the key elements of the equity program.
We wanted to target and make sure that people
who had been put through the system before
because of cannabis violations of some sort,
that they had an opportunity to have a business.
And so you can see here, it's 25.48%.
Yes, they have experienced this in their time
and now are able to participate in the legal market.
Next slide.
As far as the demographics, we do ask that.
Of course, it's optional.
But you can see most of, about 38 of our applicants
on the, again, 51 that responded are African-American,
nine Hispanic, Latino, nine white,
eight Asian, and declined to state six,
and so on, so on.
Native American three, Hawaiian one and others not listed.
So we have diversity as Oakland is very diverse
and we're very happy that we are targeting
and getting new people in every year.
We're hoping to continue to grow this program.
I just wanna shout out, I'm not sure if everybody's
gonna be able to speak, but we do have two operators
that have been very successful stories here.
We have Josh Chase from Okana here
and we also have Ricky McCollan from Rudin and the 510 here
and they are equity operators doing their work here
Oakland and have great businesses and very much are very proud of the work
that they've been able to do here and the people they've kept employed in the
businesses that they have. So I just wanted to make that point. Next slide. We
are expanding some of the uses of the grant funding. We've listened. We
recognize that cannabis is a difficult business in general. It needs every year
to be kind of looked at to see what is changing in the industry and how we can
meet those needs. So we have listened and we have set aside some money for
start-up grants to encourage some new applicants to come to the table. We're
giving out 15,000 for new equity businesses and this would go to
applicants who haven't received any grants in the past. So truly we want, you
know, some grassroots new businesses to come to the table and we hope this will
help them. We also have grants to support conversions or creation of cannabis
cafes. We so far do not have one. There is models that we can copy that are in
San Francisco. We're hoping that we can encourage with some of this funding to
have dispensaries that have on-site consumption lounges if they can convert
into a cannabis cafe which allows food and entertainment. We think that
will really help our industry and kind of help lessen the stigma that cannabis
has. We also have grants to support cannabis special events. We've heard from
a lot of operators that they just don't have enough opportunities to sell to the
public to be public facing and so we're hoping that these special events that
will of course be in conjunction with the state as far as following their
rules and their regulations for that and the local jurisdictions that we can have
more events happening in different locations throughout the city and
encourage those types of sales. The rest of the items that are listed on here are
items that historically we have supported with grant funding and we will continue
with GO-BIS-6. The last slide we have supporting equity ownership we have
also heard that it's difficult in for folks to stay in business a lot of times
they take on partners of course the city can't monitor always what those
agreements are with partners but we do have technical assistance and we also
have legal assistance that are eligible expenses for grantees. So what we have
changed and what we can offer to kind of help with this is that if
application is a hundred percent equity owned a hundred percent of the City
permit fees will be waived that's something we've had ongoing we'll
continue to do that serves for our matching portion which we're able to
submit to go biz and and get those matching funds as far as how much we can
get for the grants applicants what we're moving to forward to do is to require
Prior annually, the applicants must provide a copy of the business agreement reflecting the current percentage structure of the partnership.
So we want to see that on an annual basis, make sure that it's not changing and that we haven't been notified.
Applicants will maintain correspondence with city of Oakland through the equity applicant.
This is really important, we want to make sure that we're having conversations with the equity applicant on a regular basis,
that they are actively involved in the business and that there's plenty of opportunity for
to tell us any changes to the business
and report any things like that.
So if there are reported changes in the business,
we ask that our department is notified within 30 days.
We do have a transfer process for any equity business
to sell to a general or any transfer of any business
in general.
They do have to go through that entire process
through our department before it's finalized.
And we also notify the state of that.
So that is all I have for this presentation.
Happy to take any questions.
Excellent, thank you so much.
We can go to the public speakers first
and then I have a couple questions.
Thank you, wanna call your name,
please approach the podium.
Mrs. Sada and Ricky McCullough.
And please state your name for the record.
Absolutely, Ricky McCullough, how you guys doing today?
I'm here to speak on behalf of the Equity Grant Program.
I'm one of the first equity lottery recipients of 2018.
And my experience with the process has been very undaunting.
They made it very easy for all equity applicants
to be able to receive these funds.
Very easy process.
I'll explain my process here really quickly.
They sent out emails notifying all applicants
that there's funding available coming from the state.
After that, there's some subsequent emails come out,
sending out surveys to all equity applicants
to get feedback.
Once the data is received,
then they will then send out another email
notifying what funding is available
along with the application process.
During the application process,
there's a grant schedule that notifies our obligations
as an applicant to be able to, sorry, can I get?
you can continue.
Okay, thank you.
Notifying our obligations and responsibilities
for that grant.
Application is really easy as I mentioned before.
It's meant for an applicant like myself
or owner operator to be able to process this application
without any professional counsel.
We have a wonderful department here
that also supports us, all equity applicants.
Nancy really does a great job with helping us
with this getting through this process.
Once there's multi-tiered process as well for the grants.
So you don't have to be fully operational
to be able to access these funds,
which is a really great thing.
It's multi-tiered that coincides with multi-tiered funding.
So it allows for multi-intra points.
Once you complete the process,
the city will notify you if there's any things
that you need to submit, but it's pretty easy.
Submit your documents and they'll notify you,
get your check, and you're on.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Unfortunately, we have a lengthy agenda,
so I gave you an extra minute.
Thank you.
I remember very vividly when this process started,
the room was full with opportunity, anticipation,
And something says, oh, I got a chance now.
And then little by little, as the process was being reviewed,
people were commenting and saying,
it's not working for them.
It's not working.
The struggles, the competitiveness
of the bigger cannabis groups, they were being pushed out.
And they needed help.
And they weren't getting it.
So I don't know how this is considered successful
when I need to see the evidence and the data that says
how many people started and were able to maintain
over a substantial period of time being in business.
And I don't think it's that many.
And I've seen people come here and say,
oh, we really want this and I'm gonna...
That concludes your public comment for five.
Excellent, thank you so much.
So thank you so much for the presentation
and the information report.
I know that when this item came before us earlier in the year,
oh, is there still another public comment?
Were you able to sign up to speak?
All right, that's fine.
And to the public speaker, please
state your name for the record.
Joshua Chase.
So my name is Joshua Chase.
I went to Oakland Public School District my whole entire life.
I've been in the city for most of my life.
And I just want to say, just for the record,
that this grant program has been great
for most operators in the city.
I would not be where I am today
without the city of Oakland,
without Nancy Marcus, and without this grant program.
Life is full of optimistic and pessimistic.
You can see opportunities
of half being full or half being empty.
Anything given to an entrepreneur
that is not earned by himself particularly,
or herself particularly, is a positive.
And without this program,
I wouldn't be where I am.
I'm an operator, owner.
I own 100% of my business.
I do not have partners.
I do not have anything like that, and I'm able to do that.
I employ 20 local people.
People that are, one third of our staff is LGBTQ.
Half of them speak Spanish, and we are Oakland operators.
I just wanna say the city of Oakland
has the best program in the nation.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Very nice feedback.
And so kind of, as I was mentioning,
I know that this item is before us today because when you all came and I believe presented
the grant to us earlier in the year, I think some of my colleagues have requested that
we do a report back.
So some of the specific questions that I had, I think maybe one of the, maybe the easiest
one here is do you know offhand how much of the grant funding will be going to support
the cannabis cafes?
well it's tied in with operator grants so anybody there's only a few that
actually have to have a cannabis cafe you have to have an on-site consumption
so you have to be dispensary so I think we have four total that are equity
owned so if any of those wanted to transition we would move them we would
move funding to support that but it's really up to them so if there's a new
do you think that's a possibility if there's a
new dispensary that wants to open up? I don't think
we have that process open right now, but we are
talking about looking into how we can open up to
have more dispensaries and seeing if that's a
possibility. We have to work with planning and
building and figure out zoning if that's, you know,
even feasible and how quickly that could be. So
there isn't a specific amount, but any, any
quality, any eligible dispensary that wanted to
turn into that was equity would be eligible for
Thank you.
And so, on page eight of the report, it outlines just some of the goals of staff around implement
implementing to, you know, help prevent some of the predatory partnerships that were occurring.
Do you know offhand which one, you know, staff is, you know, I guess focused on implementing
right away?
Both, we only have two technicians that are focused on cannabis and both of them will
be involved in that process.
Of course, Nancy Marcus Leeds, that section of the division.
Every situation is different.
Every owner agreement, operator agreement is different.
So we really have to get into the weeds and kind of case manage a little bit on this,
which we're willing to do, but it does take time.
So right now the state has changed some of their rules.
They're eliminating provisional licenses.
So anybody who hasn't transitioned to an annual license, their provisional will go away.
So they will really have to work with local jurisdiction to get, they have to get to their
annual license in order to stay within our permitting division.
So we might have less folks, folks who are deciding to leave the table.
They're not going to continue to pursue trying to open up.
And so we're hoping that as we see how these changes at the state affect how many applicants
we are dealing with on a daily basis, we're hoping we can do more case management for
the ones that are staying on.
Excellent.
Thank you.
And then maybe last question would be, are you all collecting geographic data as to understand
where in Oakland applicants live so that we're ensuring that we're actually reaching some
of these priority, like, neighborhoods and communities.
Yeah.
Darlene, I don't know.
Did you want to talk about the zip codes
and any of that portion of it?
Sure.
Darlene's group really put together
how they worked on the different zip codes
and what qualifies as eligible for equity.
And I think that we are tracking those,
and we definitely have an idea.
So from the beginning, eligibility
to participate in the equity programming required geographic connection to Oakland and proof.
And this was one of the barriers in the beginning, as well, for some people who couldn't necessarily
document their history of residency and, you know, people move around, they come in.
We made it as broad as we could so that people could get in.
It was, like, 10 years out of the last 20 or something like that, but we required documentation.
And Nancy, as far as I know, we're still doing that.
It's still the same guidelines to qualify for these supports.
And so, yes, we do have those records, because it's part of the application process.
And so I guess maybe when we come and present in the future, maybe we can have a graph that
outlines where we're hitting in some of those zip codes.
Where people came from.
necessarily where they are now but where they came from sure I think that's
probably possible if you'd like to have that kind of data displayed it could be
done because it is part of the process and that's just mostly you know really
being interested in you know how this program how we're reaching you know some
of these keys it zip codes across the city and if we're you know how we're
doing with that yeah can I just add one thing about the program itself and how
it's developed what you see now is a program that is built out at an
an extensively higher level than it was originally.
When we began this program, we had zero dollars.
And we knew that capital was critical.
It's critical to any new small business.
And so a lot of creativity went into how
to create opportunity for marginalized entrepreneurs
to get into the business before it got absorbed
by more dominant groups.
And it was a very creative approach.
You can read about it.
It was very cool.
It was temporary.
And eventually, we were able to phase it out
because we knew that as cannabis revenue came in,
that we would be able to fund some of the kinds of programming
that we have now through cannabis revenue,
through new revenue, basically.
And fortunately, the state of California followed our suit
and started their own program, where they pushed revenue
down from the state, and they're still doing it,
as you saw in the report.
We were already established as an equity program,
so we got the bulk of those first grants
because we were the only city at that time set up to get them.
Now, we compete for them with other cities.
But I just wanted to highlight what an incredible leading edge
thing this was for Oakland to do, for the council at the time
to do.
And it was the first project I got
to work on when I got here nine years ago.
So I'm particularly proud of it that it's still going
and that it has had the impact it's had.
That being said, starting a small business is no small thing.
50% of all small businesses fail.
And so the idea that we would have had the audacity to say,
we're going to make a pathway for people who are least
likely to succeed because they don't have the community
resources.
And basically, you can't go to the bank
to get a loan for a cannabis business, for obvious reasons.
So if you don't have community resources
to draw and to start a dispensary or a cannabis
business, then you're kind of out of the market
and out of the competition.
So we didn't eliminate all competition.
There's plenty of competition out there.
It's not all equity businesses.
but we know that we created a meaningful on-ramp
and the program continues to improve.
So it has changed greatly over the years.
It's been expanded.
We do listen to the feedback from the businesses,
whether they succeed or not.
We take that in and have been able to fill more
and more gaps as time has gone on.
I don't expect that that will stop.
Excellent, well thank you both for your leadership
on this item and then I also, in Nancy,
and then I also believe that one of the trailblazers
in this space was Greg Miner, right?
I could not have done it without Greg Miner.
I was brand new here.
Greg Miner had been working here for quite some time.
He'd been working in the cannabis space.
And when it was medical cannabis before it was recreational.
And we formed a great partnership.
He had that sort of cannabis awareness.
And then we were able to put the equity analysis on it, which
untangled some problems that the legislation had run into.
We were able to fix it and get it passed
and get it rolling with no dollars in the beginning.
So, yeah, thank you for bringing up Greg's name.
He's, you know, he's gone on to another city,
but without him, I don't know.
But between he and Nancy,
I don't think this would have happened.
Excellent, thank you.
Thank you.
Council Member Fife?
I just have a couple questions,
and thank you, Director Flynn,
for bringing up the origin of this program.
And thanks, Kat, for just all your work.
I know you really want this to be a successful program,
And I think pointing out some of the challenges
doesn't mean we don't understand how this program
is moving forward, but there are still some things
that we need to address.
And I can't talk about cannabis equity
without talking about the pioneer
in Oakland's Cannabis Equity,
and that's Councilmember Desley Brooks
for creating this program in the first place.
So shout out to her.
But I wanna understand the staffing needs
for the department to effectively manage this program.
and I wanna understand what interdepartmental coordination
looks like to support cannabis equity in Oakland.
Yeah, okay, well, one thing that we're doing
that's gonna help a lot, especially with record keeping
and being able to spit out really clean reports quickly
is Acela, moving this all into Acela.
This has been a huge lift because cannabis
is so complicated and it's got fingers
in every single department.
So we've been working with Acela for almost two years straight
to get this up and we are in the last phases of testing it
before it can completely,
we can migrate all the applicants over to it.
And again, with the changes in the state law scene,
who's really on board and who's really moving forward
and then we can look and see if we can grow
and open it back up for dispensaries and other businesses
to have opportunities in cannabis.
So that's one thing.
We're hoping that that's really gonna be in full effect
by spring migrating folks over
And in the fall, we're hoping that we've vetted and tested all the hands that go into the other departments as far as fire, and planning and building, and making sure that those systems all correctly work.
The other thing we're doing is we've proposed that we want to get a program analyst for
the cannabis, strictly for the cannabis program, to really help us with the grants.
At one point, we had three grants running at the same time, and poor Nancy was doing it all, and it's a nightmare.
if you're trying to keep track of that many things,
that many reports, each grant has its own eligibility
and criteria and things that the budget allows.
So we really need one person, one staff member
focused on that.
It's also a lot of case management.
You don't just, it's not just a couple emails.
You're talking with applicants constantly
getting other information, letting them know
that what you submitted isn't correct.
need this instead. There is a lot of interaction. A lot of the equity applicants aren't necessarily
so business savvy. They haven't had businesses before. This might be their first venture.
So there is a lot of hand holding as far as like what documents are required and what
types of insurance are required, what levels of insurance. So those types of things we're
hoping if we have one person focused on this, then it will make it much easier to track,
So I think it's much easier to to get the reporting done effectively and it will allow us to look and and ask for more money.
So those are some of the changes that we're looking to implement in this next year.
Thank you.
My last question is earlier I believe it was earlier this year I worked with council member Kaplan to bring forward onsite consumption permits and you you said that there were four I believe in your presentation you said that there were four equity ones.
that are equity.
There's other consumption dispensaries
that are non-equity that are general.
But yeah, four that are equity.
That was my question.
Were they equity or just overall?
And so there are four that have applied
for this particular license and are?
They haven't applied.
They are dispensaries with onsite consumption,
so they are eligible to become a cannabis cafe if they choose
to.
Understood.
Thank you.
Excellent.
Thank you so much.
councilmember Ramachandran any questions on this item no I'm just really glad to
see the program success continue and knowing that we are one of the
strongest in the state and continue to get funding for this you know just
excited to see it grow and for other cities to take our lead on something
like this excellent thank you so much and so for this item I believe that we
So, thank you so much.
I believe that we would just, I'll make the motion to receive and file this in committee,
unless staff wants this item forwarded to the council meeting.
I'm sorry.
So, we can either just receive and file this report, or does staff want this item forwarded
to the city council?
Just receive and file this file.
Excellent.
Thank you so much.
a second on that motion. I'll second that. Thank you. Thank you. We have a motion made by Councilmember
Chair Brown seconded by Councilmember Unger to receive and file this in the CED Community
Economic Development Committee on roll. Councilmember Brown. Councilmember Five.
Aye. Councilmember Ramachandran. Aye. Councilmember Unger. Aye. And Chair Brown. Aye. The motion passes
this is with four ayes to receive and file this
in the CED committee.
Moving to item six.
This item requires an urgency vote
as this item was placed on a three-day agenda.
I would just say the motion.
And at the presence of council member Wong.
Give me one second.
So I believe for this item we would hear,
we can hear from council member Wong,
but then also on hand is the sustainability team, right?
Yes.
Excellent.
The slide also requires an urgency vote.
Okay, excellent.
So we just need a motion.
At the presence of Council Member Wong,
we just need, we would need to convene.
Yeah, the urgency finding on this one was made in rules,
but we need to adjourn into a special meeting.
Council Member Unger.
So move that we adjourn into a special meeting, please.
Second.
thank you we have a motion made by councilmember under seconded by chair
brown to adjourn the community economic development committee meeting and to
convene into a special meeting of the full council at 250 p.m. on roll
councilmember councilmember five thank you councilmember Ramachandran hi
councilmember under I in chair Brown I this motion passes with four eyes we're
And now we are now into a special meeting
of the full council, and I will also need a motion
for the urgency finding.
It's my understanding that the urgency finding
was made at rules.
And it's I, can I make a comment around the urgency?
One second, I'll go ahead and make that motion.
Second.
Thank you.
Thank you, we have a motion made by Chair Brown,
seconded by Council Member Fyfe,
to approve the urgency finding on roll.
Council Member Fyfe.
motion to approve the motion.
for.
Yes.
Yes thank you so much.
Excellent thank you so much and so now we'll hear from councilmember Wong and I guess the
team at in sustainability as well.
If you need if needed.
Sounds good yes Nick is a court is just here to answer any questions the subject matter
expert but today I am bringing forward a resolution in support of the Bay Area air districts timely
implementation of rules nine four nine six the rules that establish zero emission building
appliance standards with the appropriate flexibility to ensure equity and protect our residents
and small businesses.
So let me begin why this matters.
Across the Bay Area, gas burning appliances, the water heaters and furnaces inside our
homes and apartments are a major source of harmful air pollution.
They emit nitrogen oxides, fine particulates, carbon monoxide, even benzene.
These pollutants contribute to asthma, cardiovascular disease, and they shorten lives.
Every year in our region this pollution causes an estimated 85 premature deaths and 15,000
asthma attacks and nearly 890 million dollars in related health care costs.
And we know who bears the brunt of this harm.
It's black immigrant and low income communities who already face disproportionate pollution
sources.
It's the appliances burning inside these buildings that threaten our commitments to public health
and environmental justice.
And we know that climate change is not abstract.
Buying fossil fuels in homes accounts for roughly 11% of our statewide climate emissions.
Heat pumps, which are clean, safe, and far more efficient, reduce lifetime emissions
by up to 93% compared to gas systems.
And this is also about basic public safety and fire risk.
Gas lines are prone to rupture during earthquakes.
I don't know if you've all noticed, we've had a couple of earthquakes in the last couple
of months.
Fires often follow earthquakes when gas infrastructure breaks, and we need to be preparing for the
worst. So that's why in 2023 the Bay Area Air District adopted groundbreaking
standards to gradually phase out the sale of gas water heaters starting in
2027 under Rule 9-6 and gas furnaces starting in 2029 under Rule 9-4. These
standards only apply when appliances already broken or being replaced, no one
is being forced to remove working equipment. This timeline is deliberate.
It gives our residents time to plan. It gives the trades and industry time to
train workers, expand supply chains, and build capacity.
Immediately after adoption, the Air District,
in recognition of the practical challenges
associated with this transition,
began working on 2026 flexibility amendments
to ensure that these rules account for individuals
like low income homeowners, including convening
an implementation working group that includes cities,
environmental justice working groups,
environmental justice groups, and economic justice partners
to ensure that this transition is fair and practical
and takes into account exemptions
for low income homeowners, small businesses,
and homes that would need major upgrades
to accommodate the transition.
So tomorrow, and this is why this was urgent,
the Air District is achieving a major milestone
in this rulemaking process with the December 10th hearing
regarding these so-called flexibility amendments.
The rulemaking, while slated to continue,
we have the fossil fuel industry and its allies
exerting enormous pressure on this regulatory process to go back on its 2023 decision.
And so it's important for Oakland to join cities like San Francisco and Berkeley to
make clear our stance at this critical milestone early in the rulemaking process before it
reverses.
Passing this resolution ensures that Oakland makes clear that we support timely implementation
and not only the original standards adopted in 2023, but we support the process to adopt
amendments that ensure that this transition avoids undue burden on low-income homeowners
and renters, small businesses and building professionals, and includes flexibilities
that really prevents unintended harm while also advancing clean air, climate and safety
goals.
This is exactly why with our equitable climate action plan, the ECAP adopted unanimously
in 2020, which sets a target for all existing buildings to be efficient and all-electric
by 2040, Rules 9-4 and 9-6 are the policy tools that make that possible. We provide
the market certainty that contractors, manufacturers, and workforce partners need to prepare for
this transition. And as for Oakland residents, this is an opportunity. Heat pumps save energy.
They lower utility bills over time, and when paired with solar and weatherization, they
make homes safer, healthier, and more comfortable, especially during extreme heat, wildlife smoke
the region.
We have had a lot of public
events and also as I mentioned
earthquakes so today we are not
simply endorsing a regional
policy we're advocating for
Oakland's public health climate
safety and economic future.
So with that let's show that
Oakland stands with science
clean air equity and with our
regional partners I respectfully
ask for your support.
Excellent thank you so much
councilmember Wong and for your
I guess technical question, I know you mentioned
that there's the meeting on December the 10th.
But do you have more insights into the Bay Area
Air District's timeline for implementation?
I believe that maybe the meeting on the 10th
is more as a, like maybe an informational
and there will be a series of meetings
before actual implementation.
Yeah, it's a major milestone.
It's kicking off this process.
There is the risk, as I said, given some of the pushback
and which is why we should weigh in now
that rulemaking could be reversed, things like that.
And so we wanna make sure that doesn't happen.
Nick, do you wanna comment on more on the timeline
that's ahead of us?
Sure.
Nick Cordesch from the Sustainability and Resilience Division
of the City Administrator's Office.
The timeline we're looking at starts in 2023
When the district first passed the this this legislation and then they're looking at the first bit of implementation in
January 2027 so between now and then it's a rule making process where we as staff will provide letters
Comments to that committee excellent. Thank you so much
Councilmember five I just want to say through the chair to councilmember Wong. I really appreciate your thorough
Laying out of the information here and we're appreciate your expertise with your background in the EPA and all your other
Environmental work, I'd be happy to support and champion this
I know it was discussed in rules about the urgency and how it was moving forward with the air district and I wanted to know if
Through you if there will be any other requirements from the council other than a vote in order for you
well I want to know how you plan on representing the city on this item if
at all when it comes forward there and I'd be happy to make a motion to accept
I just wanted a couple answers to those questions. Yeah no I that's a great
question so assuming that we pass this today and then goes before the council I
think with that I noticed there's a number of cities who've submitted
comments and that we could use that to then submit a letter of support where
the rulemaking is collecting comments from the city so you'll notice a number
of letters of support submitted by I think it was the city of San Francisco
Berkeley and probably and some others that I'm missing I made the motion so we
can go ahead thank you thank you for your responses excellent and I'll second
it and councilmember Unger or Ramachandran any questions just a quick
comment. Thank you for bringing this forward. I did already send a letter of
support on this item from my district for office and happy to move this and
signed a petition as well and happy to move to that it's it is moving forward.
Thank you counsel. You notice your letter in the comments as I was as I was
reviewing that today. Excellent thank you and then we can hear from the public
commenters. Thank you want to call your name please approach the podium. If you
your participating museum, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.
Derek Barnes and Ms. Asada and Sam Fishman.
Almost sure this is a noteworthy pursuit.
But it frustrates me as it relates to environmental issues in this city.
How you keep identifying things, but you never complete anything.
So you have lead paint that's been spoken about
over and over again, and how Oakland has the highest risk
for children being exposed to lead paint,
and we haven't worked through that issue.
We have the police administration building,
and we have several buildings that are seismically unfit.
That building has got to be demolished.
You haven't done anything.
I'm sure you're going through the same thing,
let in the water in these pipes or usd has exposed that problem you haven't
even brought that problem up my point is you're bringing up so much stuff even
like with over at the army base there's so much pollution over there and you
having a free discussion and eliminating you're not Siri thank you for your
comment mr. Sada if I called your name you can approach the podium state your
name for the record you do have one minute thank you okay council members my
My name is Sam Fishman.
I'm a sustainability and resilience policy manager with SPUR, the local public policy
organization in the Bay Area.
We've been working on the air district rules for many years now.
We were part of the implementation working group on these rules, and I just want to emphasize
how broad the engagement and how deep the process that the air district is going through
to ensure that these rules are equitable and affordable for Bay Area residents.
A number of exceptions to these rules are being proposed right now to ensure that folks
are able to adopt clean equipment and that folks who struggle have additional time.
And we're really just thrilled to see support from cities at this moment.
We really are seeing last minute actors jumping in and threatening to undo these rules that
are really historic and are putting the Bay Area in a position to really influence the
rest of the country to adopt similar standards so it's really a critical time
for cities to jump in and show that they're support these thank you for your
comment right well thank you so much last but not least Derek Barnes good
afternoon City Council members again I just wanted to say most support Oakland's
climate and clean air goals I think they're great the support transition to
zero emission buildings, fantastic reducing air pollution,
saves lives as we know.
But I want to offer a note of caution.
I think some of these items were brought up before
from a housing and community development perspective.
Most of Oakland's naturally affordable housing is old.
Multi-family buildings on average in Oakland
are like over 70 years old.
And so just know that there's significant retrofitting
that has to happen in those environments.
And so when there's a failure of an appliance,
it's usually an emergency.
And sometimes that takes time to resolve itself.
So I think we're all supporting, most of us support this,
but we want to make sure that there are guardrails
that allow owners that may not have the resources
at the time so that there's a level of flexibility
so they can work through the issues that are going.
Thank you.
I conclude your public speakers for item six.
We have a motion made by council member five
seconded by council member Chair Brown.
To approve the recommendation of staff
and to forward this item to the December 16th
city council agenda and that is on consent.
On roll council member five.
Aye.
Council member Ramachandran.
Aye.
Council member Unger.
Aye.
And Chair Brown.
Aye.
This motion passes with four ayes.
To approve the recommendations of staff
and to forward this item to the December 16th
City of the Council agenda and that is on consent.
Moving to item S-7.
As this item needs an urgency vote,
as this item was added at the three-day agenda as well.
I just need a motion.
I'll make that motion.
Second.
Thank you.
We have a motion made by Council Member Chair Brown,
seconded by Council Member Ramachandran
to approve the urgency finding for this item on roll.
Council Member Fife.
Aye.
Council Member Ramachandran.
Council member Ramachandran.
Aye.
Council member Unger.
Aye.
And chair Brown.
Aye.
This motion passes with four ayes.
I will now read the item into record.
Adopt emergency ordinance one,
repealing current Oakland municipal code chapter 1512,
the Oakland fire code,
to adopting and making local amendments
to the 2025 addition of the California model building code,
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 9,
also referred to as the California Fire Code.
Three, recoding said code
as the Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 1512,
and four, adopting California Environmental Quality Act
finding, and you do have three speakers for this item.
Excellent, thank you so much.
So I believe on this item we'll be hearing
from our Fire Marshal White,
as well as Assistant Fire Marshal Smith,
and then Michael Hunt is also on here as well
to answer any additional questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, members of
the Community Economic Development Committee.
My name is Darren White.
I'm serving as the current interim fire marshal
for the Oakland Fire Department,
and it's our pleasure to be here with you this afternoon,
and thank you for giving us the opportunity
to present and share some information
about the adoption of the 2025 California Fire Code.
We have proposed amendments,
and I'm just gonna briefly speak to you
about a couple of the benefits
of the 2025 Fire Code adoption,
and then I'm gonna turn it over
to Assistant Fire Marshal, Javen Smith,
so he can do the bulk of the presentation.
But the first thing I wanna emphasize
is that the Oakland Fire Department
is seeking to ensure that we can continue
provide for public safety by preserving our operational necessity as outlined in some of the code amendments that were proposed to be adopted.
I also want to stress that we've actually been working closely with the Oakland Department of Transportation going back a few years now.
And my predecessor, the former fire marshal Felicia Wands O'Brien along with Assistant Fire Marshal Smith and
others have been working collaboratively to review the design and
the proposed projects that have been coming forward for the safety of our community and
our streets and the general public and their goals of reducing risk and potential injury to that public.
And then lastly, one of the benefits is that we're seeking to provide the guidance necessary
to ensure that we reduce any potential delays in our permitting processes by ensuring that
Developers and others can rely on the fact that we have
Standards that have been adopted in certain provisions of the code that have been adopted
This is supported by not only Oakland Fire Department fire prevention bureau
But also the Oakland Department of Transportation as well as our planning and building
partners and then lastly I want to just give appreciation to the bicycle pedestrian
bicycle and pedestrian committee and
their willingness to listen to us to share their concerns with us as we continue to try to design and do the things that we
believe
Achieve as much flexibility as we possibly can while preserving our operational necessity
And so at this time assistant fire marshal Smith will give an overview of the importance of the adoption of the code that we're requesting
Good afternoon. My name is Javen Smith. I'm the assistant fire marshal for the city of Oakland as mentioned
Um, we have a slide presentation that we'd like to share with you, a PowerPoint that
will help describe, uh, our situation.
Um, so this is, as was mentioned, the 2025 California Fire Code amendments, um, um, presentation.
If we go to the first slide, we'll talk really about what it is, just so you have an overview.
So the California Fire Code is part of the California Code of Regulations.
Tri-annually it's published and updated.
We must adopt it.
That is a fact.
And so we do.
However, this document is a statewide document, and therefore is intended to be modified for
specific jurisdictions, because every city has different issues, problems to face.
And so built into the code is this ability to amend it, and that's why we're here.
We're on that three-year cycle, and so we're going to need to make the amendments.
The majority of the amendments carry over from previous cycles.
If you go to the next slide, you'll see there's really only, there's four new things to discuss.
The first two bullet points you notice there, I won't get into the weeds too much about them.
The first one is just color coded fire department connections.
What that just means is we're requiring, the connections in buildings that allow us to pump water into them will be color coded so
our responding apparatus and members, but very clear understanding what they're pumping
into.
That's all it is.
Very minor change.
The second one there you see is inspections of smoke dampers in commercial buildings.
This is already in the code that are required to inspect these dampers.
However, the language is vague as to who should do that and how is that presented to the jurisdiction
that has authority, which would be us.
And so all we're doing is just modifying the existing code to require certification by
someone who is in a position to make this examination, which we already do in other
areas of the fire code.
For instance, fire escapes have to be certified every five years, stamp pipe systems, sprinkler
systems every so many years.
In a very similar way, we're just requiring that there is inspection of these smoke dammers
in commercial buildings, smoke dampers, control flow of smoke in the HVAC system if there
was a fire. The second two items on this slide are topics that have come up before that we've
had part of the code or proposed to be part of the code that section 503 which talks about the
minimum width of fire access roads it defines it as 20 feet and then appendix D which adds to
section 503 with more detail and talks about the need for even wider widths for some streets
where buildings are tall and therefore require taller ladders.
So, the next following slides are in there
to discuss these two amendment changes.
So, Section 503, Chapter 5 of the Fire Code is adopted
by the state except for one section which they leave
to every jurisdiction to decide if they would like to adopt
or not and amend or not and that's Section 503.
You'll find it in previous amendments of Fire Code 2022.
Section 503 was there.
However, if you just go back one slide,
that word adopt we've included in the language
because the language is a little vague.
It showed that we amended 503,
but we place adopt and amend
to clear up any misunderstanding,
to show that yes, we are adopting
this one particular section
that the rest of the state has to adopt specifically.
It's not done automatically adopt the code.
So we just wanna show that word, it's important.
Small but important.
The next slide talks about a specific area in 503
that is very important, and this is the width of roadways.
Fire apparatus access roadways.
How wide should they be?
Well, the code dictates 20 feet, and there's a reason.
This has to do with the ability for apparatus
to park at a scene, operate at a scene,
and still leave room for other emergency vehicle apparatus
or other vehicles to pass and in some slides coming up,
we'll see why that's very important.
So that's why this dimension of 20 feet
is a very important number to have.
It gives us a minimum width that would allow us
to operate in a safe manner
and access buildings throughout the city.
And that is we are adopting at section 503.
Now, the next slide moves into Appendix D, and I just copy and pasted this language from the first paragraph of Appendix D
to show that what Appendix D really is, it just adds more detail to Section 503.
It gives a little bit more direction.
Now, specifically, Appendix D is major use.
Not it's only use, but it's major use has to do with planning and developing multi-family residential developments,
large subdivisions, we're building bigger buildings.
What do the roads need to look like in these areas?
Brooklyn Basin, Wood Street, right?
Large buildings with large amounts of population
require access roads that are wide enough.
And in times of emergency, these large buildings,
and the pincity talks about buildings
that are 30 feet in height or larger,
require access by aerial ladder.
Therefore, we need 26 feet,
a little bit larger to access these buildings.
If you go to the next slide,
that's the section of Appendix D
that we feel is very important.
And unobstructed with a 26 feet
because of the need for aerial apparatus access.
When we deploy the outriggers,
which stabilize our aerial trucks
to then throw a ladder to a building,
that takes up some space.
And that's why Appendix D prescribes 26 feet.
So these are two amendments to the code
that we feel are absolutely necessary
for our operational needs.
If you go to the next slide, you'll find
this is not unique to Oakland.
Around this region, fire departments adopt 503
in Appendix D because of the operation need
that exists for them as well.
So you'll notice city surrounding us, Alameda County,
Berkeley, Fremont, Richmond, Santa Clara.
We took, you know, a heat map kind of the Bay Area.
This is a general practice.
So this is not something unique that we're proposing
or an amendment that is out of the norm.
This actually is the norm.
And if you go to the next slide,
you'll see visually what we're talking about.
So on the left side of the screen there,
you'll notice there's an aerial truck.
It's outriggers are extended, but we still have room for an engine which, you know,
has hose and water and equipment to operate at the same scene.
And this becomes very important.
What it's, you should notice about this picture also, there's still room for parking,
you notice there's a white vehicle parked there on the right side of the screen.
But this is not a high rise.
This is a one-story warehouse in East Oakland.
Sometimes there's this misunderstanding that the only need for an aerial ladder is to get
a tall building, and that's not true. We raise these aerial ladders for all types of operations,
and one of them is defensive operations like you see here in this picture. And having room to do
that is very important. If you go to the next slide, it's a fire from Chinatown a few years ago.
You'll notice that yes, aerial ladders are thrown, but there is room for our engines to operate within
that space next to the trucks. And again, this is not a high rise, but this is a building that
that requires quite a bit of personnel and equipment
to be brought to the roof to do a large amount of work.
And for our aerial apparatus to get to these places,
we need the room to work.
And so 26 feet is what is required by the code
to make that happen.
And that's what we plan to follow.
The next slide takes us into that high rise environment.
Again, this is West Oakland, two years ago.
And the reason we wanted to show this slide
is oftentimes the focus on this 26 feet
or in the 20 feet has to do with, oh, can a rig get by?
Yeah, can a fire truck get by?
But that really doesn't encapsulate
the whole complexity of what we're
trying to accomplish on these streets.
What you'll notice there in the foreground of that picture
is the number of apparatus at this high-rise incident.
It's over a dozen.
Engines, trucks, medical apparatus, supervisors,
battalion chiefs.
So the space to operate is not just about a lane.
high-rise response requires quite a bit of space,
and this picture is very telling.
And the importance of this kind of operation
is seen in the next slide,
where we come to understand why this is not a light issue,
or this is not something we can kind of shove to the side.
This really involves the lives of individuals who,
because of the ability to operate
and throw these aerial ladders,
were saved from what could have been tragedy.
So, we wanted you to see these photos to understand
the space that's required to do the very important work
that we're doing.
So then these are question though,
you know, is this everywhere?
Are these street widths, you know,
just kind of blanketed across the city,
we're supposed to enforce these?
And the answer to that is no.
The reality is, there are needs of many in this city,
our bicyclists, our pedestrians, our motorists,
of course, emergency response.
And so how do we know where we should enforce the code
strictly, where we have room for latitude?
And if you go to the next slide, you'll see that really
the beauty of what we've developed
is the collaboration between Oakland Fire Department
and Oak that.
The work that we've been doing over the last few years
really has been massive.
Because by putting us together in the same room
and developing the relationship that we've developed,
we meet regularly, we exchange data,
we talk about what's needed,
we go out into the field, as you can see there,
look at the streets, look at how our apparatus
will operate in those streets,
and that allows Oak Dot to come up with designs
that meet the needs of, whether it's BPAC,
other entities in the city,
But takes into account the response needs that we have.
And so this collaboration has been very effective.
And we're very proud of the work they've
been able to do in designing streets that really are
holistic and encompass everyone's needs.
If you go to the next slide, you'll
notice that this collaboration isn't just in the field.
It's in the design process.
So as projects are put on Oak Dot's desk or come to fruition,
we discuss them with them.
And we've done multiple.
It mentions here 33 projects to date,
but this slide is some months old,
so it's quite a bit more than that.
But we all come to the table to make sure
that our plans really include the needs of everyone.
Now, I want to just back up a little bit in the next slide,
kind of back out, kind of wide angle a little bit,
because it's not just about, you know, Appendix D, Section 503, and the Fire Code is not
just about Oak Dot and Oakland Fire.
It's much bigger than that.
It's about the city as a whole.
And because of new state laws that have really increased housing development and has less
than the opportunity for fire, I mean, planning and building department to place conditions
on approval of these projects on a case-by-case basis, having the Fire Code sections like
like Appendix D and 503 as part of the fire code
is an absolute necessity to answer the development
questions that come up.
When planning construction and building,
where these buildings gonna go, what's the density like?
Is this something that the city of Oakland
is gonna benefit from or be harmed by?
Having these regulations are very important.
Appendix D and 503.
And additionally, and this is what I think we're,
for this particular committee, I think it's an important point, you know, development
and building and seeing Oakland grow is extremely important.
And streamlining processes, permitting processes and make sure that businesses and developers
can actually successfully work here is an extremely important point.
And having regulations like 503 Appendix D does that, it streamlines it.
It gives us minimums that they have to work within and they can go ahead and plan and
build as opposed to, let's leave out, let's say, a minimum number and let it be a discussion.
Well now we've just extended our process of plan review by weeks while we discuss and
talk about on every case by case basis how wide the street should be.
It's very frustrating for developers and it's very difficult for us as a city.
And then finally, you'll notice the very high fire hazard severity zone is listed as a point
here, and this is where, especially when it comes to planning and building, these fire
codes become very, very important because with the state laws allowed to increase house
development, overpopulating certain streets, dead-end streets, tight streets in the Oakland
Hills and the very high fire severity zone poses a very, very serious emergency issue.
And evacuation routes and ingress and egress and our ability to work in those areas is
of high concern.
And so, having Appendix D and 503 as part of the Fire Code really just allows us to
do that job that much better, allows planning and building to do their job much easier,
and allows us to work with Oak Dot and plan the street design that's really gonna be best
for the city as a whole.
And so, that's why the last slide, you'll notice, is our recommendation to just adopt
the 2025 California Fire Code amendments as we proposed so we can get to the business
of making the city safer.
So I appreciate your time and if you have any questions
I'd be willing to answer them.
Excellent, well thank you so much
for the comprehensive breakdown, really appreciate it.
We can hear from the public commenters first.
Thank you, wanna call your name,
please approach the podium, state your name for the record.
Kevin Dolly, George Spies, and Mrs. Sada.
Hello, George Spies with Traffic Violence Rapid Response.
I wanna thank the fire marshal's office
for their engagement with Oak Dot on developing
the appropriate per project requirements
for traffic safety balanced with emergency response.
And in fact, I like it so much that I'd like them
to continue in that process, primarily focusing on
what does this project need here?
What about this block right here?
Because as we go through this process,
we see that each location offers its own unique necessities.
And so codifying these specific requirements
into the rules that Mr. Smith has been talking about
gets us to a place where that flexibility
kind of comes off the table.
I don't want to get it in the way of doing
what is necessary for making the city safe
and for allowing the professionals
in the fire marshals office to do their jobs.
but i also want to make sure that uh...
thank you for your comment
kevin delhi transport oakland sixty seconds is tight
for a hundred fifty
document
this is not an emergency
these amendments encourage wide streets which lead to speeding which lead to
death
in injury let's pull out the appendix d and icc section five of three
three years ago
with council member fights
uh... help
We pulled out Appendix D in Senate
to public safety committee.
It was to be heard early 2023.
OFD decided not to hear it.
They decided Appendix D was not necessary
and they could function perfectly fine
for the last three years without D.
Why do we need it now and why is it an emergency
when it wasn't an emergency three years ago?
ICC section 503, 20 foot width,
state code already requires 20 foot,
but allows shoulders to be included when it is safe.
Thank you for your comment.
Does that conclude?
Oh, one more.
Sorry, Mrs. Sada.
Don't forget about me now.
I know over at St. Benedict's,
there was a consideration of the width of the fence
had to be a certain width for the fire truck
to get into the property,
because the property is completely surrounded.
So within the code, is there identification?
So the width of the, in the case of a fencing?
Okay, okay.
All right, so I guess we worked that out.
The other thing I'm concerned about is gated communities.
I used to live in a community
in order to access the property you had to put in the code.
And we called the fire department
they had to wait for somebody to let them in. So is there any guidelines for
gating community where you have to have access to all codes? Don't answer me
because you're not supposed to act like you're supposed to answer me but you're
not you don't have to. The other thing is the the ADUs that sit back. Thank you
Mr. Sada. Yeah thank you so much Mr. Sada and the public commenters you know
Hopefully the leadership from Oakland Fire Department
can stick around and maybe answer
some of those specific questions.
So Council Member Unger, I'll call on you.
A couple things.
First, I know most of the discussion here
is around the bicycle stuff.
I wanted to introduce a quick amendment
that I passed around around what you were talking about,
the fire smoke damper certification.
This is a central piece of life safety equipment
in buildings to prevent smoke from getting
from one part of the building to another.
And I just wanted to, I don't know, K-top, do you have it?
Yeah.
I wanted to add in two places,
just to make sure that we're using properly supervised
and licensed contractors.
Otherwise, the risk is it's gonna be like building owners
getting my cousin Joe to certify the smoke dampers
he owns a bowling alley but he can do this so just like to introduce this
amendment to certify the contractors. Excellent thank you Councilmember Unger
Councilmember Ramachandran do you have any questions or comments on this item?
No thank you. Excellent well I really appreciate the briefing that I received
prior to answer any of the questions that I had and so I will move this item
with the amendment.
Amendments to.
I have a couple of other questions as well.
Okay, go ahead.
So do we need a second on that amendment and to vote on it?
Yes.
Should we do that however you want to do it?
However, go ahead with your questions.
My other questions are gonna be about the bike
and pedestrian stuff.
So if you want to finish this off, we can just.
So I have a motion to adopt those amendments.
Excellent.
Okay.
Second.
You can go ahead and answer your questions.
So this doesn't require that every street have 26 feet
near high rises or 20 feet.
This is just a starting point for discussion.
Correct.
It's a minimum that is set forth to start the discussion.
But what we found best practice is working with OakDOT
is to look at their site-specific street plans
and then make decisions based on the operational needs
of that specific site.
So no, it does not mean a blanket requirement
for street with throughout the city.
That would be impossible.
And I, you know, the public commenters said
that they were worried that this would foreclose
future collaboration and future discussion
with the Fire Department.
Is that your understanding?
No, quite the opposite.
Actually, the collaboration between us and Oak Dot
has done nothing but increase,
and the relationship has gotten better than it has ever been,
and we can plan to continue it.
We have plans for projects in the future,
And those plans will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
And the collaboration between us will do nothing but increase
as far as we can see.
Through the chair, Darren White, and to further ensure
that the collaboration and the collaborative spirit
continues, we've discussed recently an invitation
to the BPAC for some of our training
so they can see firsthand why we're requiring and requesting
certain things for our operational necessity.
And so we have a recruit academy coming up in 2026
there's only one way to make
that happen as an example.
And so we're hoping that members from the BPAC
can come to some of those drills and see firsthand
in a sterile environment, and then perhaps later on
in a more realistic environment,
why we operate the way we do and what the clearances
that we need are for that very reason.
So we're hoping to incorporate them
into some future activities as well.
Great, thank you.
Excellent.
Councilmember Fife?
I'm a little confused because you all sound so positive about the relationship with BPAC,
but I heard them publicly ask for this item to pull a section out.
Has there been conversation through the Chair to either of our fire representatives?
Has there been conversation about that specific aspect, about the width of the streets, and
where did that end?
Yes.
So Madam Chair, the relationship that we'd like to highlight, the great relationship
that we really appreciate, first of all, is the relationship between Oakland Fire and
Oak Dot, Oakland Department of Transportation, because it's our two entities that really
collaborate to make street design possible.
Now BPAC is a component in that relationship, and we've made it a point to attend BPAC committee
meetings, collaborate with them, listen to them. They of course also communicate with
Oak Dot. So we are all involved. BPAC has voiced some concerns about certain parts of
Appendix D and 503 and their concern is that it might hinder the work that's been done
to ensure that there's protected bicycle lanes, pedestrian access. And so it's been our goal
to reassure them and communicate with them that that is not the case.
We will continue to collaborate.
We want there to be protected by lanes.
We want the city to have a healthy, safe environment for everyone to get around.
We just want to ensure as well that emergency response is not hindered.
So the relationship that we've had with people has been actually very good.
We've had open conversations, attended their meetings, and we want that relationship to
continue.
and I think you know we had to
get them to come and look at
some operational you know
exercises that we're doing so
we can kind of understand our
point of view.
So is it possible through the
chair.
To.
To pull that part out does it
is there an emergency right now
that requires a decision be
made.
On this because I'm hearing
from members of the public that
there is not an emergency but
I'm hearing I want to get an
understanding from you because
about speeding, and how the width of our streets
contributes to so many of the settlements
that we have to approve in our closed session,
and how many accidents occur because of speeding.
And I do see environmental design as a way
to mitigate the challenges that come from reckless drivers.
Like create the environment where that can't happen.
But I want to understand, from OFD's perspective,
just more on that, because I didn't
hear much about the width of streets in the presentation in a way that could have me support
this with that particular clause in there.
Excellent.
Understood.
Excellent question.
So, Madam Chair, yes.
I want to speak first to the emergency clause.
So is there in there, the emergency literally just lies with timelines.
So come January 1, the 2025 California Fire Code must be adopted.
And so the goal is to have the amendments prepared and agreed upon prior to that January
first date.
And so the last council meeting I believe December 16th, therein lies the emergency.
It's a time constraint so that these amendments are ready to roll January 1st when the 2025
code comes into effect.
And then as far as the street design and using street design to mitigate speeding and, you
know, danger behavior in vehicles, the fire department 100 percent agrees.
In fact, you know, we're the ones that respond when there is a vehicle accident and there
is, you know, vehicle violence.
And so lowering those numbers absolutely is a priority.
The concern is how we do that.
And while it may seem that maybe pulling a section of the fire code might aid in that
endeavor, the opposite is actually true.
It limits the fire department's ability to weigh in on and help design these streets.
It also then has a greater impact on planning and building, development, densities of population.
There's so many other nexuses to Appendix D and 503 and other parts of the fire code
that even go beyond the street planning portion that removing it would be irresponsible.
It would not be in the best interest of street design or mitigating some issues we have.
We want to keep having those conversations and in a more fine-tuned approach make those
right decisions.
So can you say just, and this is my last question, because we do have another committee, and
I want to hear, I think we have more speakers.
Why did it take so long for this to come forward?
So the fire, the fire code, the 2025 fire code was released mid-July.
We got physical copy of it end of July, beginning August.
we had to start the tedious process of reconciling the new code. I should have brought a copy
of it with me. It's very large. But, Madam Chair, we have to make sure that our amendments
match the new code. And where that becomes a problem is each code adoption changes the
framework of the code. So what used to be an amendment that referred to, let's say,
115, that's now chapter 116. So what they required was for us to, line by line, go
through this code and literally make sure that the referenced amendments
match what's in the new code. To add to that complexity, and we did not bring
this forward at this time, we will bring it later, a whole chapter of the 2022
Fire Code was removed, Chapter 49, which deals with wildland-urban interface. That chapter
was removed, and a whole other document, a standalone code, the WUI Code for 2025, was
created, which required us to now examine the pages of Chapter 49 amendments that were
on the books here in the city of Oakland and find them in the new WUI Code, line by line.
So the body of work that it took to bring these amendments forward, just to bring the
already existing amendments up to date with the new 2025 code, as well as match those
with the reference documents from NFPA, UST, a number of documents and make those all correlate
so the references are correct was an undertaking.
And so we apologize for the time it took, but to make sure we got it right, we wanted
to take the time.
Any other questions or comments?
Could this pass without all of those amendments legally, if amendments were to be made early
next year or no?
Well Madam Chair, the, the, the, the, come January 1, the 2025 Fire Code is law and must
be adopted.
That, that's, so if, if, if we didn't pass the amendments at this date, then we, we would
We would not be able to enforce any of the amendments
that are already on the books.
We'd have to go by the standalone California 2025
Fire Code as written until those amendments are passed.
So that would provide a problem for even past amendments
that we have on the books.
Excellent.
Thank you so much.
And so thank you.
Just kind of hearing all of the work that went into actually
getting to this point, just really
one of the things I wanted to
provide you with I want to
applaud you all for for the that
due diligence I think you know
there's a couple things that I
really heard in your
presentation right on one of the
slides it outlines how
regionally our name neighboring
cities have already adopted both
the pendants D. and section five
oh three so it seems like we'll
be kind of following suit as
I also heard was that even in this moment
with the adoption of these changes,
what's most important is the continued partnership
and collaboration with Oak Dot
for all of the future projects to come.
And that's really going to inform a lot of the decisions
around street safety, slowing cars down,
and those are all things that are actively
still taking place, if that's correct.
Yes ma'am, 100% correct, yes.
All right, and so I think there was both a motion
and a second to adopt the amendments,
including Council Member Unger's amendments.
And if you wanna just confirm,
it looks like that's in section 909 of the code,
section G1 and 2.
And the amendment just states is employed
for the city councilmember
amendment.
And then supervised by a license C. twenty C. sixty one and the sixty two contractor.
And then and then that exact same languages and G. two as well and so those are the two
amendments.
Correct thank you.
Thank you chair brown for the of the clarity of the members.
We have a motion made by chair brown second by councilmember under to approve as amended
on consent with the amendment stated by Chair Brown on roll councilmember five
aye councilmember Ramachandran aye councilmember Unger aye and chair Brown
aye the motion passes with four ayes to approve as amended the recommendation of
the staff and afford the side on to the December 16th City Council and that is
on consent moving to open forum when I call your name please approach the
podium state your name for the record if you are participating via zoom
raise your hands you're easily identified we will take in person before
zoom speakers Blur Beekman Prescott chair Derek Barnes Kevin Dali and
Mississauga transport Oakland 60 seconds didn't give me enough time to
say everything it's misleading to say that appendix D has been passed by a lot
of other districts, many cities are removing it.
I believe as San Francisco already deleted,
I have to double-check.
I think Berkeley is removing it for this cycle.
Again, I need to double-check.
It is many, many places are removing it.
We have received presentations at the BPAC committees
on best practices, which is remove the fixed,
hard-coded limits and have fire department and DOTs work together. They've done a great
job OFD, give them a lot of credit, and I think whether or not it passes they'll continue working
together, but it's better to not have street widths hard-coded. They can work together with
or without the code, with or without the hard limits. Thank you. Moving to our Zoom speakers,
Marcus Johnson, please identify what name you signed under.
I've got chair.
Thank you. Please can start your one-minute comment.
Thank you. Earlier, there was a mention of a meeting held in Council chamber,
I believe, coming up with the ENA Costco Jell-Co discussion.
It was stated, I believe,
that the details will be provided on social media.
My request is that since I'm signed up on the newsletters of the Council and they also have my email address if they could forward me that detail of the meeting because I don't do social media.
Thank you.
I was just asking the Fire Department if they're responsible for the mandated requirement
that defibrillators be available in certain public buildings.
I know they're required in athletic gyms and some other places, and I don't know who's
responsible for the implementation of that requirement.
I just want to remind you again that you are not responding
to the request that being a sanctuary city,
what is the economic impact of that?
Because you go more than just protect from ICE.
You provide services and resources.
And unemployment for African Americans is close to 9%.
Gentrification is another.
I see people talking about gentrification,
but you never put it on the table to discuss the impact
of gentrification economically
and related to housing as well.
So the fact that you avoid this means
that something is being done or not done
that potentially really impacts our comparisons.
Thank you for your comment, Ms. Asada.
I apologize.
And that concludes your public, excuse me.
Moving to our Zoom speaker once again.
Blair big man, please unmute yourself and begin your one minute comment.
Hi, thank you. Thank you. You saw my hand very much. Um, yeah,
I wanted to quickly comment in San Diego, uh, there's city council meeting right
now, uh, they have an overflow of people talking about the future of flock in
San Diego, they're having the same issues of flock on how do, uh,
if we should be supporting it in the future of San Diego,
or if we can look for a new, uh, vendor, uh,
the choices are possible.
And we're asking the questions in San Diego,
the same as in Oakland.
So really good luck that this item is actually becoming
that we can talk about it openly and question.
And that is the key first step.
If we can do that where that's half the argument,
half the battle, that invites dialogue and questions.
And I think we can ask good questions.
So good luck how we can be continuously doing that
in Oakland and working with San Diego on these issues.
Thank you.
That concludes your public speakers for open forum.
Excellent.
All right, thank you everyone.
This meeting is adjourned.