[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:01] Good evening, everyone. Today is Tuesday, February 3, 2026. We will call the regular meeting in
[0:13] place and let's have a pledge of allegiance.
[0:23] It's allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for
[0:29] which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[0:35] Just
[0:40] came out of the closed session. We'll ask our legal counsel to do a report.
[0:46] Yeah, Madam Mayor, we do have a report out this evening by a vote of three to two with Mayor Hu and Vice Mayor Josie Voting-No.
[0:54] The council voted to refrain from seeking appellate review of the Save Mount D'Avolo versus City of Dublin case. That's the end of my report.
[1:02] Thank you. Let's move on to agenda item 3, Presentations and Proclamations.
[1:10] 3.1, Presentation of the Ramadan Proclamation.
[1:16] Ramadan is the ninth month of the Muslim lunar calendar year,
[1:22] and is the annual holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal.
[1:27] It is a time to reflect spirituality, build community, and those in need spend time with
[1:38] friends and families and celebrate and express gratitude.
[1:44] So Masha, we have a public comment for this item, right?
[1:48] I do have a public comment for this item, Mayor, and that's Brent Sanji.
[1:51] Thank you.
[1:59] So I don't want to offend anybody, but this is part of the DEI calendar.
[2:03] And I think it's offensive to Americans and Christians. They're not on the DEI calendar, and I don't think that's an accident
[2:09] So it's like a good thing that we're celebrating the Muslim holiday
[2:12] But most people don't celebrate this holiday
[2:13] We don't know anything about it and I can't really like celebrate with people that we don't even know their culture or anything
[2:21] that I want the city to celebrate Christmas and Thanksgiving and
[2:25] Fourth of July and that's not on the DEI calendar
[2:27] So it's not like it doesn't make sense to ask to put that on the calendar
[2:31] I think it's left off the calendar on purpose
[2:33] So I think the whole DEI should be thrown out with the whole calendar.
[2:35] We shouldn't be celebrating religious holidays of these people.
[2:39] No offense.
[2:40] That's just my opinion.
[2:41] Thank you.
[2:45] Masha, do we have any additional comments?
[2:47] I have no other speakers left on that item here.
[2:49] Thank you.
[2:50] Thank you.
[2:51] So we have a Dublin Muslim Cultural Society,
[2:56] Rabia Bader, to accept the proclamations.
[3:00] And also, there's a Muslim Community Center
[3:04] East Bay, we want both of you come to accept the proclamations and then take photos with
[3:12] us.
[3:17] And also, if you have anything you want to say, please.
[3:21] Thank you.
[3:24] So good evening, Mayor and respective council members.
[3:29] First of all, thank you so much for recognizing Ramadan with this proclamation.
[3:33] On behalf of the – as a board member of the MCC East Bay, I'm very deeply grateful
[3:38] to you and grateful for the City of Dublin for this proclamation and for a continued commitment
[3:44] to, for inclusion of our community and our partnership. Ramadan is a very sacred time
[3:50] for us as Muslims. It's a month of reflection, gratitude, service, and at MCC East Bay, these
[3:56] values guide our work year-round. Our example is our food pantry, which now serves hundreds
[4:03] of households in the Tri Valley serving Dublin, Pleasanton, and all across the Bay Area.
[4:09] Through these partnerships with the Alameda County Food Bank and local organizations,
[4:13] we provide fresh produce, staples, and essential items ensuring families can access food with
[4:18] dignity, especially during these challenging times. Beyond food security, MTC supports
[4:23] refugee families, provides emergency assistance, offers educational and youth programs,
[4:28] and engages in an interfaith and civic work all rooted in the belief that
[4:33] caring for our community is a shared responsibility. This work would not be
[4:37] possible without your support so we thank you so much for continuing to
[4:40] support us and we we really stand with you for for recognizing our values and
[4:46] the values that Ramadan represents. Before I conclude I'd like to uplift
[4:51] the next generation of leaders in our community I'm honored to introduce
[4:55] my daughter, Rabia. She's an 18-year-old student from Averwes High School. She was the recipient
[4:59] of the Three Valley Community Salvation Next Gen Award, the Enthalantropus Award,
[5:04] and she's going to speak on behalf of the Dublin Muslim Cultural Society. Thank you.
[5:11] Good evening, Mayor, Council members, community staff, and members of the community.
[5:17] My name is Rabia, and I'm a senior at Averwes High School. It's an honor to accept the
[5:23] Ramadan proclamation on behalf of the Muslim Cultural Society of Dublin.
[5:29] Ramadan is a month rooted in reflection, generosity, connection, and we're grateful to the City
[5:37] of Dublin for recognizing it and for fostering a community where people of all backgrounds
[5:42] feel like they belong.
[5:45] The spirit of connection is at the heart of our upcoming events.
[5:50] This Ramadan, we're bringing neighbors together at our community FTR on Friday,
[5:56] February 20th at 5.30 p.m. at Meza and Mocha in Liverbore, hosting a food
[6:04] drive to support the Dublin Unified School District food and assistance
[6:08] pantry from March 9th to March 23rd, and celebrating Eagle Fitter with the
[6:15] City on April 21st at the Civic Center, followed by Eid al-Adha on May 30th at the Dublin Senior
[6:25] Center. Each of these moments is about service, celebration, and building relationships across
[6:32] our city. As a young person involved in community service, it means a great deal to see our city
[6:40] uplift faith communities and celebrate people and to come together in meaningful
[6:46] waves. Thank you to the City of Dublin for this proclamation and for your
[6:52] partnership and for helping make Dublin a place where everyone feels welcome.
[6:58] Thank you and Ramadan Mubarak. Thank you very much. So we have proclamation for
[7:04] you to accept that we made two for each of you. Great work.
[7:12] Let's start from here together.
[7:34] That item for public comment. At this time the public is permitted to address the City Council
[7:43] on non-agendaized items. Please step to the podium and clearly state your name for the record.
[7:52] Mayor, I have 18 speakers left right now for this item and so we will start with those
[7:56] person and then we will go to those on Zoom. So our first speaker is Shirley
[8:00] Lewandowski.
[8:08] Good evening council staff. My name is Shirley Lewandowski and this
[8:15] is my helper today. Todd Benson. We're both Dublin residents. This is
[8:21] This is Dulin Canyon. I think I got my wrong glasses. Can I switch?
[8:28] Yeah. Oh, God.
[8:33] I'll just stand here and look pretty.
[8:36] That's what happens when you get old.
[8:39] Okay. Anyway, sorry about that. Thank you.
[8:42] This picture is Dulin Canyon. It's located in Alameda County, unincorporated land.
[8:47] and one of the last beautiful and breathtaking open space and agricultural
[8:51] area left in the Tri Valley. It is protected from development under the
[8:56] 2014 open space initiative and serves as a green belt barrier between Dublin and
[9:01] Livermore. Now the second slide shows all the existing animals and plants in
[9:06] the canyon. Their habitat will be destroyed or disrupted by any type
[9:12] of development. The open space initiative does not mandate a road to
[9:16] connect Dublin and Livermore. It only says that the city may consider one. If that is
[9:22] the case, then it becomes a question of what the road will look like and at what financial
[9:27] and environmental costs. Within the Dulin Canyon is a cross-bic property where the
[9:35] proposed Dublin extension will cut through 80 acres of the cross-bic property here
[9:41] And it's going to use up open space to connect to Livermore.
[9:46] The extension is one and a half miles long and depicted by this dotted line here, starting
[9:52] from Fallon Road going east all the way to North Gaines Parkway in Livermore.
[9:57] It's going to consist of 12 six-to-car lanes wide and a bike and pedestrian lane.
[10:02] And it's going to be sitting 1200 feet above and parallel to 580 here.
[10:07] Our proposed option is the solid line here, the yellow line here, which is a two-lane
[10:15] road, which is called Road, and it starts on Fallon, it goes south, and you only have to
[10:20] build a third of a mile road to connect it to another existing two-lane road called Collier
[10:25] Canyon Road, to Livermore, okay. And our proposed lane also includes a bike and pedestrian lane.
[10:33] Next one.
[10:37] The city's design is estimated to cost $160 million.
[10:42] Building it means losing 80 acres of Crosby property open space and a major disruption
[10:48] to the biodiversity of the area.
[10:50] Its multi-lanes means more traffic with more added from 580 and creating more air pollution.
[10:56] This design is currently not completely funded.
[10:59] The city is borrowing $71 million from general funds to jumpstart it.
[11:04] To help offset the cost, the city wants to commercially develop along the road on the
[11:09] Crosby property, but this must be voter approved.
[11:12] Commercial development would eliminate any financial support from Livermore and require
[11:16] annexation of the Crosby property.
[11:19] Our alternative to lane design is estimated to cost $44 million.
[11:24] dollars. It can be fully funded within the city's capital improvement budget. It saves open space,
[11:31] minimal impact to the existing biodiversity. Two-lane means less traffic, less pollution,
[11:36] no commercial development or annexation needed. This is the more cost-effective and responsible
[11:42] use of taxpayer money. If a road is considered to connect Dublin to Livermore, this is the
[11:47] design the city should build. Thank you.
[11:50] Thank you.
[11:54] Here is Brad Dabrinsitsky.
[12:03] Good evening. My name is Brad Dabrinsitsky.
[12:06] Good evening, Mayor Hu and distinguished members
[12:07] of the Dublin City Council.
[12:09] It is my honor to serve as the proudly elected representative
[12:11] and leader of the diligent, tenacious, and adaptable members
[12:14] of the Dublin Teachers Association.
[12:16] Normally I restrict my comments to the school board meetings,
[12:19] but tonight I'm reaching out to our larger community.
[12:21] Your Dublin educators need our community's help to protect our students.
[12:26] Please demand that Dublin Unified School District Management
[12:29] reprioritize their budget to invest in students and avert a potential strike.
[12:35] For over 18 months, the members of the Dublin Teachers Association
[12:37] have been advocating for ways to enhance the revenue of our school district
[12:40] so that we can invest in Dublin students.
[12:42] We have suggested early retirement incentives and update to independent study
[12:46] that would align with state laws allowing our district to recover funds
[12:49] that are lost when students are absent and medical billing for publicable services.
[12:54] While your educators have been advocating for ways to invest in students, I'm sad to report
[12:58] that in December, Superintendent Funk revealed that an accounting error, for which he has
[13:02] claimed full responsibility, has resulted in an additional $3.6 million deficit.
[13:08] This would be scary news to any concerned stakeholder. However, when placed in context
[13:12] of past behavior, it really raises questions about how effective Dublin Unified School
[13:16] district management is at managing taxpayer dollars. Based on the unaudited actuals in
[13:21] 2021-22, management underestimated the revenue by over $11 million. In 22-23, they underestimated
[13:28] revenue by almost $18 million. 23-24, they underestimated revenue by over $9 million.
[13:34] And in 24-25, it will come as no surprise that the pattern continues with revenue
[13:37] again being underestimated by over $8 million. This context begs two questions. First,
[13:43] First, how many millions of dollars is DOSD management
[13:45] off by in their accounting this year?
[13:47] As a teacher, I am so happy to be able
[13:49] to answer your question.
[13:51] Currently, DOSD management has not accounted
[13:53] for nearly 19 million in additional state revenue.
[13:56] The second question is, where did all the money go
[13:58] for the last four years?
[14:00] Some of that money is spent in ways
[14:01] that are not student-centered like outside contractors
[14:04] and the rest may language in unrestricted reserves.
[14:07] Based on Superintendent Funk's presentation
[14:09] recommendation, the Board of Trustees
[14:10] for Dublin Unified School District
[14:11] recently voted to approve several cuts. These cuts managed nearly $6 million, $6.8 million,
[14:17] and there are plans for more cuts at the meeting on February 10th. What you might
[14:20] notice in these cuts, however, is that none of them are to senior management salaries.
[14:24] If superintendent Funk does take full responsibility as he claims, why are none
[14:28] of the cuts touching his salary or the salary of the assistant superintendents
[14:31] who share the responsibility of managing the district budget appropriately?
[14:35] Our neighbors to the east in Livermore also had a draft to propose cuts. Out of
[14:41] pages almost exclusively kept cuts away from student-facing employees and programs.
[14:46] Indeed, the entire first page of Livermore's proposals are cuts to senior management salaries
[14:49] via furlough days. Sadly, Dublin's district management have not made those same student-centered
[14:54] choices. Instead, cuts from DOC management teams protect their salaries while gutting the
[15:00] Reports and services for our students. Should the superintendent of our Dublin schools, a
[15:05] man who earns more than the governor of California, have his salary protected at the expense of
[15:09] the health and well-being of Dublin students? This pattern of decision making and mismanagement
[15:14] is why.
[15:15] Time is over.
[15:16] Thank you.
[15:18] Next speaker is Tom Evans, followed by Janine Gillingerton and then Mike Grant and then
[15:24] John Cameron.
[15:24] Good
[15:34] evening, Mayor and Council, staff.
[15:37] My name is Tommy Evans, a long-time resident.
[15:39] I just want to show support for Shirley Lewandowski's efforts to find a better solution for the
[15:48] Dublin Boulevard Extension.
[15:50] We could find something that fits our budget better, is more friendly to the environment,
[15:57] for example, and doesn't need to involve the Crosby property. We can probably effectively
[16:06] accomplish all the requirements that we're trying to get by having a good road built through there,
[16:15] but we don't need to hang on to the expensive one that we're looking at now. Thank you very much.
[16:22] Thank you. Next speaker is Jeanine Gillinggarden.
[16:31] Good evening everyone. My name is Jeanine
[16:34] Gillinggarden and I would like to address the staff report from the first January meeting on the
[16:40] sale of safe and sane fireworks in the City of Dublin. I was saddened to see that of the
[16:46] options offered to the City Council for their consideration, the option of choosing not to
[16:52] out the sale of fireworks was not present. I believe the comparison cities should have
[16:59] only included those of our neighbors in the Tri-Valley and Benton counties to the east
[17:05] of the hills that separate us from the bay. Even our weather forecast put us in a separate
[17:10] category than the communities surrounding the bay. We are an inland valley. We are
[17:16] hotter and drier than communities on the other side of the foothills. And let
[17:20] us not forget the Dublin wind, which is a factor.
[17:24] Looking at this in terms of climate and vegetation, we can see that we are more at risk here in
[17:29] the Tri Valley area because of a drier climate, a hotter climate, and a substantial shared
[17:34] boundary with rural landscape, especially in West Dublin and the hills of East Dublin.
[17:40] Exactly those single family home neighborhoods that make up one of the three designated
[17:46] areas where these fireworks are allowed.
[17:48] I know that some people will be concerned that this opportunity to raise funds for nonprofits serving Dublin and Dublin residents is very significant.
[17:58] When I look through the report, the cost of the program, the 2025 program for the sale of these fireworks to the city was $79,000.
[18:08] The revenue to the city was $5,000.
[18:11] The report also notes that the costs to the nonprofits have risen and it is
[18:16] becoming harder for them to earn as much money as they had in the past for the sale
[18:21] of fireworks. So I have a couple of possible ideas I would like you to also
[18:26] consider. BAM the sale of all fireworks. Consider using the funds to have a
[18:34] carnival where local nonprofits can have booths to raise funds or let the
[18:38] non-profits use the current lottery system to secure booths at events like Splatter and St. Patrick's Day.
[18:45] Another idea, ban fireworks except at the allowed parks.
[18:51] Require a California ID to buy the fireworks, to prove the buyer lives in Dublin,
[18:56] and add a surcharge to each sale to pay for the cost of police and fire.
[19:00] and this is just an idea of mine, limit the sale to 10 booths in front of the
[19:07] police department. That gives us possibilities. Ban the sale of all
[19:13] fireworks. Why not take the money that would have been spent? We had 15 booths,
[19:19] so divide it by 15, which is the average number of booths that were allowed, and
[19:24] give the nonprofit groups each one-fifteenth of the money. You can
[19:29] do something that is helpful we can be safer in our homes and the non-profits
[19:33] can continue their good work. Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mike Grant
[19:41] followed by John Cameron and then Linda Milanese.
[19:54] Good evening Mike Grant long-time
[19:56] resident owner Guns Unlimited Repair Dublin. I'd like to comment on the
[20:00] item you brought up on January the 20th about the indoor gun range and gun
[20:05] dealerships. So you all know, I'm a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and do support
[20:11] someone having the right to open a gun quality gun range or gun store in Dublin. I think
[20:18] that all of us should know that gun dealers are highly regulated by the ATF and the
[20:24] DOJ. We're also inspected for these items like securing guns and proper paperwork being
[20:31] filled out per the law each year. Now on the other hand handgun gun ranges are not
[20:39] regulated or inspected by the DOJ or the ATF, only Cal OSHA. If they have an air
[20:46] quality complaint or an employee has to see a doctor then that trips a workman's
[20:51] comp claim and that's when they come out. Quality ranges start with good air
[20:56] handling equipment, indoor ranges can will produce high levels of burnt powder and lead
[21:02] in the air.
[21:03] This is why you need a building that is almost tight is basically negative air box, what
[21:10] it boils down to.
[21:12] Contamination out of the air is pulled through two sets of high high high filters, rating
[21:18] from Merch 15 to a Merch 17, which is HEPA filters.
[21:21] safety for the shooting. The shooters is also very important and that's ballistic
[21:27] panels between the lanes. So if you have an AED it doesn't shoot the guy next to
[21:33] you. I'm going to talk about suicide. We always bring suicide up which is
[21:37] rightfully so. I was at a seminar in recently a suicide prevention seminar.
[21:44] keynote speaker was VA Doug Collins. He had a great point and he said veteran
[21:51] suicide he said everyone can just do one thing and maybe we can save a life so
[21:57] think about that. On the panel there was a member who ran a gun range and she was
[22:02] in Colorado where her husband had a shooting in 2022. The person came in an
[22:09] older gentleman. He passed the SNF test. They rented him a gun. He hit my box ammo. He shot
[22:19] almost the whole box up. Then he turned the gun on himself and he killed himself. So what
[22:25] I'm saying here is another thing to prevent suicides is I'm against renting guns. If
[22:31] you don't own a gun,
[22:34] then go buy one legally and then you can go ahead and shoot. But
[22:38] Rending guns and not having supervision on a range
[22:41] is very dangerous.
[22:43] Thank you.
[22:46] Next speaker is John Cameron,
[22:49] followed by Linda Milanese and then Carol Silva.
[23:02] John Cameron, longtime resident.
[23:05] Right now in America we're seeing growing resistance
[23:08] spreading quickly against authoritarianism
[23:11] and fascism all across the country.
[23:14] People realize democracy is like a muscle.
[23:17] You don't use it, it will atrophy.
[23:20] From the presidency to the sycophants in Congress and the Supreme Court down to local D leaders who lost sight of the privilege and
[23:27] responsibility they've been given a
[23:29] correction is coming
[23:32] There have always been fascists here always will but now we've seen what happens when they have power
[23:39] Families broken up. No due process. No accountability
[23:43] murder
[23:45] People are rising and resisting who never have they're watching closely
[23:50] as to who is full of BS and who the real leaders are.
[23:54] We're finding who caters to the rich and powerful
[23:56] and who is concerned about doing the right thing
[23:59] for the good of the many,
[24:00] despite the efforts of the powerful,
[24:02] special interests only concerned with getting more.
[24:06] Locally, I think we need to pick up the pace,
[24:09] meet this challenge head on,
[24:11] offer to buy that federal land, FCI sits on,
[24:15] take away the opportunity for ICE
[24:17] to get a foothold in our community.
[24:20] Use imminent domain if you have to or any other way,
[24:24] but we need to get that away from them.
[24:26] One very practical use for this site,
[24:28] and I've already talked to firefighters
[24:29] about this in the area who think it's a great idea
[24:33] is to construct a park that the land sits on
[24:36] with a considerable size reservoir
[24:38] for aerial fire crews to access from.
[24:42] It's centrally located in Dublin
[24:44] to hit everything equally.
[24:46] It's a great location for that.
[24:47] aerial fire crews. What the helicopters do they can come they can extract nearly a
[24:53] thousand gallons of water in less than a minute. Instead of spending money on an
[24:58] unnecessary road most Dubliners don't want, Livermore definitely doesn't want
[25:02] and special interests are written all over it. Buy that land and put a park
[25:06] on it. You'll be preserving beautiful open space for everyone to enjoy and
[25:10] decompress from the pressures of everyday life. Protect our vanishing
[25:15] wildlife and give us a tremendous tool in combating a potential catastrophe.
[25:21] Quickly when we have the best chance to stop it, it'll save lives, save property and potentially
[25:27] billions of dollars.
[25:28] We all hope to never need such a tool.
[25:31] But don't wait to say, I wish it was something we had done before fire ripped through our
[25:37] city.
[25:38] It's, um, I've been concerned about fire for a long time, the changing weather
[25:43] conditions we have here, the way the wind acts and the heat. I've never seen it before.
[25:48] This February, the amount of frost we used to have was considerable. Now it's almost non-existent.
[25:56] So it is happening. And I agree with the fireworks. It's time to give those up.
[26:02] I mean, we are in a powder keg. And I think this park idea with the reservoir is a great idea.
[26:08] Just to prepare. Thank you.
[26:13] Next speaker is Linda Milanese, followed by Carol Silva, followed by Todd.
[26:23] Good evening, Linda Milanese.
[26:27] As the Livermore resident, I am really annoyed that Dublin wants to contaminate the open space between it and Livermore,
[26:37] with a six-lane, one-and-a-half-mile extension of Dublin Boulevard. For what
[26:43] purpose? A shortcut to LPC or Costco? Or a permanent shortcut for more traffic
[26:50] during congested commute hours? Measure II misled voters into believing it was
[26:58] a clean air open space preservation initiative. Dublin voters were duped. Who's going to pay
[27:07] for this $160 million intrusion on our open space, not live or more? The people of Dublin
[27:16] will end up footing the bill for something that benefits them in no way. Dublin residents would
[27:23] benefit more if your efforts and money were directed at developing a downtown, a real center
[27:30] for Dublin, instead of sprawling all over our open space. Dublin voters didn't get what they
[27:37] thought they were getting, and the courts agree that it's a questionable piece of legislation,
[27:44] so why not let it go? Let the appeal go and look at the sensible alternative plan
[27:51] for one-fourth the cost of one-third mile extension that connects already existing
[27:59] two-lane roads. You'll have both your connecting road as well as the open
[28:04] space you promise voters in Measure II. As a Livermore resident, I'm more than
[28:12] annoyed by the mega extension plan for Dublin Boulevard. But if I were a
[28:18] Dublin resident, I'd be furious. Don't waste their money and destroy what remains of their
[28:25] open space. Let the appeal go. Let it go and consider the alternative plan. Thank you.
[28:35] Next speaker is Carol Silva, followed by Todd, followed by Juan Pablo Dalvin Mulfine.
[28:42] Good
[28:51] evening, Mayor and City Council, Members and City staff.
[28:57] On July 15, 2024, Livermore Mayor's John Marshawn sent a letter to Dublin City's Mayor, who's
[29:07] now the former Mayor of Dublin, favoring the road extension but prioritizing preserving
[29:14] serving open space and maintaining a considerable visual buffer between the two communities.
[29:21] Mayor Marchand was concerned that the video that Dublin used to convince its residents
[29:28] to support the extension shows the road bounded by open space.
[29:34] Mayor Marchand states, even more quote, even more cynical is the name Dublin Open Space
[29:41] initiative. Since it eliminates open space, at the same time, Dublin staff
[29:48] maintains that in order to fund the expressway, there will be solid industrial
[29:54] and commercial buildings from Fallon Road to Dolan Road. Why doesn't the video
[30:00] The video showed the voters what this will really look like, unquote.
[30:05] Livermore City Council directed Livermore staff to conduct a citywide poll regarding preserving
[30:12] open space and the scenic corridor north of 580.
[30:17] The poll results showed that Livermore favors a road extension, but prioritizes open space
[30:28] and a visual buffer between our communities. Respondents were much less likely to support
[30:35] a road project if commercial and industrial development were constructed.
[30:42] On April 23,
[30:45] 23, 2025, Dublin Mayor's Sherry Hugh held a state of the city launcheon. She noted
[30:54] that the five-year capital improvement program budget is projected at $104.9 million, which amounts
[31:05] to approximately $21 million per year, with the city's proposed six-lane extension of double and
[31:14] bowl of art estimated at that time a hundred at a hundred and sixty million this including this
[31:24] well separately another item is the city's vision for the downtown Dublin project
[31:32] also the large regional event center and other street parks and general improvement projects
[31:39] projects, how does the proposed road make economic sense for Dublin taxpayers?
[31:46] Thank you.
[31:49] Next speaker is Todd, followed by Juan Pablo Galvan-Wolfine, followed by G.O.T.
[31:56] Sharma.
[31:59] Good evening, Dublin City Council.
[32:01] My name is Todd Benson, longtime resident in Dublin.
[32:04] And what I'm here to speak about is in support of Shirley's proposal to come up
[32:11] with a $44 million option for the road extension as opposed to $160 million. That would be
[32:17] a considerable saving but still meets the need of this road that I guess is still being
[32:21] planned. I'm thinking about money savings. There's a lot of good things we could do for
[32:26] that in Dublin. And on a selfish note, I can just talking about my own street. Along
[32:33] Stagecoach Road, we have multiple roads that feed off of it and people are blowing
[32:39] by it. They're just going right through the stop signs. Specifically, Jade Circle and Topaz Circle.
[32:48] Around our area, we have two police officers at Park of the Stop Sign. These guys are making bucks.
[32:55] People are not even stopping at these stop signs. They're not even looking at them. And the
[32:59] problem here is that it's a safety issue. I'm surprised nobody's been killed yet. We did
[33:05] have a neighbor's dog that was hit by a car because the guy couldn't bother to stop or
[33:10] even go the speed limit.
[33:11] So what I'm proposing with this money savings with this option that maybe we put in some
[33:16] safety into some of our streets, put in speed bumps.
[33:20] For example, to install one speed bump is about $1,000 to $7,000.
[33:26] And if you look at what type it is, asphalt is $3,000 to $7,000.
[33:30] even cheaper are rubber refurbished speed bumps. We could use that money for
[33:36] something good to save lives because I can tell you along stagecoach they think
[33:40] it's a raceway and it's a lawsuit waiting to happen. I'm surprised nobody's
[33:44] been killed there yet. So that's one option I thought that we could use that
[33:48] money that we save on this other option. The other one is an iron horse
[33:52] trail right behind Dublin High School. It's a beautiful area. A lot of people
[33:57] use it. A lot of people use it at night. I've seen high school kids walking over there, joggers,
[34:03] bikers, scooters. But it's really dark. And it's a safety issue. I've seen near-collisions because
[34:09] people can't see each other. Partly their fault. They should wear reflective vests. They should
[34:13] wear lights. They don't. So I'm proposing with some of this money maybe put some safety lights
[34:18] out there. And maybe for the summertime when people use it too, it's like an oven there.
[34:25] people are baking. It's direct sun. Let's put some trees over there. You guys have
[34:29] already put a nice beginning of a nice park over there with that nice little
[34:34] kind of walking trail. Let's let's pretty it up and let's make it safer.
[34:39] And looking at my time, the one that's not as selfish is let's look at a
[34:45] door-tea overpass walkway right along door-tea parallel to the scarlet
[34:51] drive. Iron Horse goes right through there. Let's do an overpass rockway over
[34:58] door teeth that connects on Iron Horse and ends up at the Don Bridal Community
[35:03] Park. This area has a lot of foot traffic. It would improve the public safety and
[35:09] function of that area. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Juan Pablo
[35:16] Galvan Mulfine, followed by Jyoti Sharma, and then Trepti Sagair.
[35:23] Good evening, Dublin
[35:25] City Council, Ms. Mayor, Dublin City staff. My name is Juan Pablo Galvan Martinez,
[35:31] senior land use manager for Seymour Diablo. Sorry, I should learn to write a
[35:35] little better, but yeah, that is my name. No big deal. Just up here to say
[35:40] thank you so much to the majority of the City Council that voted to not
[35:45] appeal the court's decision from this past fall that measure II did require
[35:50] environmental review before putting it on the ballot. We think it's a wise
[35:54] decision, takes a long-term view that it's the correct decision, and we
[35:58] absolutely agree with it and are very appreciative. One of our utmost
[36:02] priorities in the entire Diablo Range, which spans 200 miles, is the
[36:05] preservation of the green belt between Dublin and Livermore, the last open
[36:09] space remaining in those two cities, and our efforts in 2014 that created
[36:13] the east side of the limit line that Dublin enjoys today always allowed a road connection between
[36:20] Dublin and Livermore. I think there's quite a bit of passion in the community for a road
[36:24] alternative that could be more economically feasible and be a lot easier in a lot of respects to
[36:30] what the city is currently contemplating, but we appreciate city leadership that takes its
[36:36] decisions after a lot of thought and follows the rules. So thank you very much for the
[36:41] decision tonight. And we look forward to working with all of you in the future for Dublin's
[36:46] prosperity and the protection of open space in the region. Thank you.
[36:51] Next speaker is Jyoti Sharma, followed by Trepti Sagar, followed by Sarisha Ludiniri.
[37:07] So good evening, Mayor and the councilmember. Pretty much our request is the same, but
[37:13] from the different perspective. So my name is Jyoti Sharma, and I have been the resident
[37:19] Dublin from past 15 years. My beautiful kids, they have grown here. And I live in a summer
[37:27] Glen community, which is one of the oldest community on the east side of the Dublin.
[37:32] I'm also a former special ed teacher with Dublin Unified School District. And through
[37:40] both my professional and personal experience, I deeply value accessibility, inclusion
[37:45] and community well-being.
[37:46] After collaborating with our tight neighborhood group
[37:49] who support this idea of building a pedestrian bridge
[37:53] on the Tassahara Creek connecting the Summerglen neighborhood
[37:57] to the Emerlgen Park.
[37:59] We seek your guidance regarding the improved
[38:03] safe and accessible access to the Emerlgen Park.
[38:07] For around 1,000 of Summerglen residents,
[38:12] This access could greatly benefit senior residents, individuals with mobility challenges,
[38:19] families with stroller, and children helping them to enjoy the park without safety concerns.
[38:25] Most importantly, access to the farmers market in no time. Earlier there was stairs which
[38:33] used to pass through the stairs, but this accessibility has been blocked from past
[38:38] two years because of flooding.
[38:42] So as a long-time resident and educator, I have seen first-hand
[38:47] how thoughtful infrastructure can significantly improve the quality of life and promote the
[38:53] independence of all the members of my community. I'm happy to share the photos of the current
[38:59] condition of the stairs and along with a few innovative ideas which we can develop.
[39:06] many people are talking about the if we can stop spending towards that road and
[39:13] how many millions of dollars we can save and beautiful pedestrian bridges are
[39:20] there in Don Riddle Park very accessible very neat with a new technology
[39:25] nothing very fancy but I hope you can support our request to conduct a cost
[39:32] analysis for the pedestrian bridge and promote and provide a report back to us
[39:40] whenever possible. Thank you. The next speaker is Trupti Sagar. Actually it's
[39:47] okay I'd like to go ahead. I'm Sarisha. We've talked among ourselves. Hi my name
[39:51] is Sarisha Sinha. I'm a local real estate broker. I live within the
[39:54] Assembler Glen neighborhood and you know we're all neighbors. So we're all
[39:58] part of this initiative. I'm here to support this initiative because I
[40:01] I strongly believe in this.
[40:03] Jordan brought up a lot of great points here.
[40:06] There's been a lot of suspicious,
[40:07] not a lot of, there's been some suspicious activity
[40:09] around that area, and we're pretty vigilant
[40:11] within our communities, so we're always keeping an eye out
[40:13] to see something that we don't recognize,
[40:16] people that we don't recognize,
[40:17] something that doesn't seem right to us,
[40:19] we always call it out within our WhatsApp group,
[40:21] and that's how we all kind of get together
[40:22] and coordinate on things, collaborate.
[40:25] So anyways, we do that,
[40:27] but I think it would be really helpful
[40:28] to have that bridge connecting our community
[40:31] to Emeril Glen Park because there's so many community events that happen there and it's
[40:37] just something that will help senior citizens and differently able people access the park
[40:42] much easier because otherwise you have to go all the way around and it's actually, you
[40:45] know, it's quite a bit of a walk for someone who's, you know, not able to.
[40:48] So I'm here to support this initiative.
[40:51] I'm also here to give you my perspective from a real estate angle.
[40:55] Again, like I said, I'm a real estate broker.
[40:56] I've been doing this full time for over 20 years.
[40:58] and in the summer, a resident of Summer Glen for more than seven years now.
[41:02] So I see that addition of this bridge making it, making the neighborhood,
[41:07] making it accessible for the neighborhood residents to go across to Summer Glen Park
[41:12] will greatly increase the attractiveness of our neighborhood,
[41:16] the desirability of this particular neighborhood,
[41:18] which is already in a great location because it's walking distance to Safeway,
[41:22] to the movies, to parks, to the local schools, et cetera.
[41:25] So I think it's a great initiative, and adding some lighting along that gravelly part there,
[41:30] which is pretty dark right now, will certainly deter any unsavory characters from hanging out
[41:36] there. So I'm here to support that initiative. And again, like Jyoti said, we're happy to put
[41:40] together a proposal. If this is something that you're willing to encourage us to kind of take
[41:46] this forward from this point onwards. Thank you. And then the next speaker is Trepti Sagar.
[41:52] Thank you. Good evening, Ms. Mayer, as well as City Council member and city staff. Thank you for
[41:58] giving the opportunity to just share my perspective with regards to this particular Permisson bridge,
[42:05] which will be connecting to the Imragerin Park area. This is a very lively area at this moment,
[42:13] and this particular bridge will bring, especially it will be the photo-worthy community
[42:18] destination for the not only for the young kids but for the this community
[42:24] people as well. The bridge become will be the recognizable landmark for the visual
[42:29] asset perspective to the city and the community and it will serve as a backdrop
[42:35] for the prom photos, graduation photos and the family portrait because that
[42:39] area as I said it's very lively. From the education standpoint also and from
[42:45] the nature appreciation perspective also. This will provide a safe and engaging outdoor
[42:51] learning extension to the Daughty Elementary School. This will act as a pause point for
[42:56] the students, to the observers, toward the creek and the wildlife. And apart from that,
[43:02] it will support the environment, education, STEM learning and appreciation of the nature's
[43:08] resources. This particular bridge will encourage and increase the foot traffic
[43:15] to the nearby park and the amenities too. As already shared by Jyoti, this will
[43:23] encourage this for the walking as well as biking for the casual
[43:28] exploration. It will connect to the resident more directly to the park's
[43:32] trail and the open spaces. This will boost the park users and in terms of
[43:38] recreation as well as with the community health as well and I think I from the as I'm living in
[43:45] this community for last 18 plus year that area especially for the emeraldine park this will
[43:52] be very very useful bridge not only for the community where we are living but whoever is
[43:58] coming from the emeraldine area to the community this will be a really connecting bridge to
[44:03] all the communities. Thank you.
[44:07] Next speaker is David Buley.
[44:23] Good evening. She just heard my name is David Buley and I have been living in Dublin for
[44:27] quite some time. I am the co-author of the 2014 Open Space Initiative. That is before
[44:35] you and the work is being done on that as well as major M that was done on the west
[44:39] side of the city. I have had some experience dealing with this legislation and wrote the
[44:45] language and created some of that for us. And I'm here to tell you that as to 2014
[44:50] open space initiative, being one of the co-authors, the intent was to keep it open
[44:55] space. Guaranteed I'm the author, co-author.
[45:00] What can be done and what should be done and what's in that legislation, and it's really
[45:05] the only appropriate thing to do if you want a connection to go across, is not a separate
[45:09] road with a commercial development. That was not the intent. I can tell you that. I'm
[45:13] the writer. What can be done, if that's what you feel you need, is you can extend if
[45:19] it's necessary. The Frontage Road, about a third of the mile. That'll serve the
[45:25] purpose of getting across that area. If you put a road that has commercial development
[45:31] across that main open space area, you are violating the intent of that open space initiative
[45:41] that was never intended.
[45:44] I can tell you that and that's really the way it is. I wrote
[45:49] part of it. So I hope that you will take that very seriously. And if you are watched
[45:56] to have an extension feel as necessary for for purpose of safety all those things connecting
[46:02] across to the road that goes up towards Costco up there dueling Canyon do it by the front
[46:07] approach do that not an expensive extension across the open space that was not intended
[46:14] by that legislation I guarantee you I wrote it thank you someone left their glasses up here
[46:22] by the way
[46:26] now we're going to go to zoom for our next speaker so our next speaker on
[46:31] Zoom is Norm Lewandowski.
[46:38] Good evening. My name is Norm Lewandowski, a resident of Dublin.
[46:45] Today about the proposed Dublin Extension Road and Measure II, which are relevant to each other.
[46:53] There was a recent ruling by the Alameda Court on the lawsuit that was filed by
[46:58] save Mount Diablo and Friends of Livermore against the city of Dublin on Measure I.I.
[47:06] The judge ruled against Dublin on the city's argument that there was no project associated
[47:12] with Measure I.I. and therefore no environmental impact report was required.
[47:19] The judge said in his decision that an EIR was necessary and further stated that this
[47:27] This city misled the public on the wording of Measure II.
[47:30] He ruled that Measure II is invalid.
[47:34] Why is it that the city and the City Council in 2024 chose to mislead the public on the
[47:42] ballot wording and not just state the city's actual intended plan to eliminate 80 acres
[47:48] of open space and build a $160 million elaborate 64-lane road with commercial development?
[47:55] it. It's obvious. If you would have put the actual project on the ballot, it would most
[48:01] likely not have passed. So the city labeled the ballot for Measure I.I. as Dublin Traffic
[48:08] Relief, Clean Air, Open Space Preservation Measure. Heck, who wouldn't vote for this?
[48:16] The elaborate $160 million roadway is only 1.5 miles of road and is not
[48:23] necessary. It's meant to benefit the landowners and developers. It offers very
[48:29] little benefit to the public and will impact the endangered species that
[48:35] occupy this beautiful open space. Our city can easily build a simple two-lane
[48:40] Connector Road just like all the other neighboring cities have done for a fraction of the cost.
[48:48] The city staff claims this project will be paid back in 10 years from traffic impact fees, grants
[48:54] and other development fees. The reality is these calculations were based on a lot of wishful
[49:01] assumptions to justify the plan. It will take decades to actually pay back the money for this
[49:08] project. The money the city will spend or have tied up on this project can
[49:16] certainly be put to much better use to benefit the residents. Thank you.
[49:24] The next speaker is Melissa Pocacci.
[49:36] Good evening.
[49:42] We can hear you. You can go
[49:43] ahead. Can you hear us? Yes, thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor Hugu, City
[49:49] Council members and dedicated city staff. My name is Melissa Picacci, a dedicated resident
[49:55] and active Summer Glen community member for the past 15 years. I've had the honor of being
[50:01] the neighborhood watch captain for the Persimmon Drive neighborhood within Summer Glen for the
[50:07] past 11 years. We've seen great improvements to our city during my time here and tonight
[50:14] we look to our city council for directed assistance in improving accessibility and safety in our neighborhood.
[50:22] After long neglect, Perciven Path along the eastern perimeter of Emel Glen Park has recently been repaved.
[50:29] However, the path and the abandoned stairs across Tassahara Creek, mentioned by neighbors tonight,
[50:35] remains to be a dark and dangerous area in the evenings.
[50:40] More lighting needs to be provided along Persimmon Path and extended to the gravel path at the northeast corner of the park.
[50:48] This gravel path, which connects Persimmon Drive and Gleason Drive, needs to be paved for safety reasons,
[50:55] and most importantly, to provide accessibility to the elderly and all our Dublin citizens.
[51:01] Having this along the area, there are things from happening, like this past Sunday, or
[51:10] the Sunday morning, where that area was targeted specifically in the community, being in an
[51:15] abundant contest from more cars, shown Oakland the night before.
[51:27] Melissa,
[51:36] you're breaking up.
[51:37] we are not able to hear you at this time.
[51:42] Can you hear me? Yes. Hello? Yes, can you hear us?
[51:49] Yes, I'm not quite sure where I broke up, but maybe I'll just repeat the last portion of my
[51:58] the last portion of what I just said. Melissa, we need to do it cars.
[52:02] Are
[52:12] you there still Melissa? I'm still here. I'm sorry if the reception is not working out.
[52:22] You
[52:25] can go ahead and continue your comments if you, we can hear you maybe.
[52:32] Okay, having this all along the area would deter things from happening like early Sunday
[52:37] morning where that area was targeted specifically by car thieves emptying in a bag full of
[52:47] hours.
[52:51] One example of the safety issues this darkened is caused through the
[52:56] years. Our Dublin neighborhood thanks you for your attention and for your service.
[53:02] Thank you.
[53:06] The next speaker is Charvi Koviru.
[53:14] Good evening mayor and council
[53:17] members. My name is Charvi Koviru and I am a sophomore at Emerald High School.
[53:21] I've come here today to speak about an issue that many people have also spoken about this
[53:27] evening, which is about the Dublin Boulevard and Livermore Road Extension, also known as
[53:32] the Fallon 580 Project.
[53:34] I want to provide the perspective of a student who goes to Emerald High School to everyday.
[53:39] So past Emerald High School, like when you drive more beyond, there is the construction
[53:46] construction of the Dublin Center, which is in the middle of many roads.
[53:52] And I've also noticed there's a construction of a new neighborhood called Francis Ranch.
[53:57] So with all these, I've noticed that Dublin has been emphasizing the importance of more
[54:05] urban development.
[54:06] However, as a suburban city, I believe that we shouldn't just strive to constantly
[54:13] develop into natural habitats. We are known as a suburban city for a reason.
[54:21] This road extension, the Dublin, Boulevard and Livermore one, will cut into
[54:27] the natural habitats that have stayed, such as Dewan Canyon, and disrupt many
[54:31] special species in the area. For example, according to the Alameda County
[54:35] Government, the Alameda Whipsnake, the Loggerhead Shrike, and the California
[54:39] and tiger salamander are just some of the species that are considered to be these special
[54:44] status species. These species are so critical from maintaining the biodiversity of our environment
[54:49] as that makes our habitats more resilient to change. With this road, that chance of resilience
[54:56] is diminished. Regents across the U.S. have already experienced the devastating impacts
[55:01] of over-development into natural habitats. In Florida, for instance, projects to create
[55:07] numerous homes as well as roads have reduced critical habitats and post threats to Florida
[55:13] cougars making it difficult for these animals to roam and recover. In fact, according to the WSF
[55:19] public media, 36 of these Florida cougars have died in 2024, many from traffic collisions.
[55:26] Past experiences like these must be considered if we don't want to repeat mistakes that
[55:31] that usually come with over-development.
[55:34] So in conclusion, I urge you to make a decision
[55:39] that will allow future generations
[55:41] to take into account the significance
[55:43] of our natural habitats and species.
[55:46] Thank you for your time.
[55:50] And the last speaker on Zoom is Adia Ragunanthan.
[56:03] Can you hear me?
[56:04] So we can hear you.
[56:08] Hello, Distinguished Dublin City Council.
[56:10] My name is Aadiraganandan and I'm a sophomore at Emerald High School, where my club, Emerald
[56:15] Eco Impact, was brought into an issue raised by the Sierra Club. This concerns a one-and-a-half
[56:19] mile-long road that has plans to be built to connect North Canyon Parkway and Dublin Boulevard.
[56:25] The main issue with this is that the placement of the road would cross through a very sensitive
[56:29] ecosystem and has the potential to harm special status species in the area.
[56:35] Dublin has also failed to do an economic review under the California Environmental
[56:39] Equality Act, otherwise known as CEQA, and do a roadway ballot measure tied to development,
[56:45] both of which are procedures that need to be followed in order to move the urban line limit
[56:49] and have not been done. This project poses a major problem not only for the environment,
[56:55] but for the city of Dublin, since moving the ULL without going through these procedures
[57:00] leaves the city open to litigation and the possibility of CEQA forcing a much
[57:04] more costly, full environmental review on the city. Our proposed solution to this
[57:09] is a 1.0.3 mile long road with two lanes that would only cost around
[57:14] $44 million which is far less than the $160 plus million dollar current
[57:19] plan for the project. It will also save around 80 acres of land from
[57:23] commercial development. It does not have significant impact on the biodiversity
[57:26] diversity of the area, all while maintaining the Dublin ULL.
[57:30] The money used for this project could do so much more good for our community, and the current
[57:34] proposal does not consider the environment, the reality, or the people's opinions.
[57:39] Please consider our solution. Thank you for your time.
[57:43] I have no more speaker slips, Mayor.
[57:45] Thank you very much. Thanks for all the comments.
[57:49] So we are going to agenda item 5,
[57:53] consent calendar. So consent calendar items are typically non-controversial in
[58:01] nature and are considered for approval by the council with one single action. So I
[58:08] want to ask council members, do you have any discussions, any comments? But good,
[58:14] Good. Good. Okay. So, I look forward to Moshi.
[58:22] Second. Second. So, all in favor, say aye.
[58:27] Aye. Aye. So, all the Boston, Canada items are passed.
[58:34] Agenda item six is a public
[58:36] hearing, nine, seven, and finish the business, nine. Agenda item eight, new business eight
[58:44] Good
[58:48] evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council members, Jordan Foss, Senior Management Analyst and this evening I'll be giving a presentation on the 2026 City of Dublin Legislative Platform.
[59:04] So the City Council adopts an annual legislative platform that guides the city's legislative advocacy efforts for the upcoming year.
[59:10] The platform itself is structured into three tiers, guiding principles, which are the broader
[59:15] foundational goals for advocacy efforts, public policy priorities, which are guiding categories
[59:20] for areas of the city's support and opposition to legislation, and advocacy positions, which
[59:27] provide more specific positions on each given public policy priority.
[59:32] The advocacy positions list is by no means exhaustive, and in those instances when
[59:36] a piece of legislation comes up that is not listed in the advocacy positions, the guiding
[59:41] principle will inform the city's action. In rare cases and if needed, staff may bring
[59:46] recommendations on specific legislation to the city council for direction.
[59:53] The 2026 platform is very similar to last year's platform. The 2026 platform makes
[59:58] modifications to account for
[1:00:00] changes in state law, anticipated issues for the upcoming legislative session, as well as
[1:00:04] grammatical and or word changes, wording changes. I would like to mention as well that towns and
[1:00:10] public affairs who supports the city's lobbying and government affairs work reviewed the draft
[1:00:14] platform to ensure it contains appropriate language for proposed and future legislation.
[1:00:20] Additionally, department heads reviewed the platform and made recommendations in their
[1:00:25] areas of expertise.
[1:00:29] So diving into the changes in the platform, the 2026 platform modifies
[1:00:33] five existing priorities from the 25 platform. Priority number 1.7 was modified to add the
[1:00:39] words without burdening city resources to address future Brown Act or open government
[1:00:44] initiative legislation that may negatively impact city resources. Priority 7.1 is
[1:00:50] modified to reference greenhouse gas emissions as opposed to global warming pollution levels.
[1:00:55] This updated language is in line with the language that we see used in our current legislation.
[1:01:02] Priority number 7.3 is modified to include the added language of assisting local governments,
[1:01:07] as well as replacing local compliance efforts for meeting compliance obligations.
[1:01:12] Priority 7.4 is modified to reference water purveyors and local governments to allow for flexibility
[1:01:17] in supporting local water agencies or other municipal operators.
[1:01:21] And lastly, Priority 7.10 has modified to include the added language of local governments
[1:01:27] to specifically protect local agencies from unfunded mandates related to environmental
[1:01:31] programs and regulations.
[1:01:36] New additions were also made to the platform, of which all eight were for supporting legislation.
[1:01:41] So the draft platform proposes additions that include supporting legislation that provides
[1:01:45] for equitable funding distribution from regional transit measures.
[1:01:49] And this position is in response to SB 63, which authorized a regional transit funding measure to stabilize operations and then prevent service cuts.
[1:01:58] So by supporting this, we'd basically be supporting equitable funding distribution to ensure the local jurisdictions and local transit operators receive a fair share of the regional revenues.
[1:02:11] Next is supporting legislation that would promote planning and implementation of regional transit improvements and supporting legislation that would promote maintenance and rehabilitation of aging infrastructure.
[1:02:22] And then we'd also, another addition is supporting legislation that would provide state incentives for affordable transit oriented and mixed income housing while still preserving local planning authority.
[1:02:33] And that position is in response to SB 79, which did pass in 2025, and incentivizes high-density transit-oriented housing development statewide.
[1:02:44] This advocacy position would support the development of affordable and mixed-income housing while still preserving the local authority over design or community planning and other things.
[1:02:55] So, to continue moving forward to supporting legislation that invests in safe active transportation
[1:03:04] infrastructure and local flexibility to manage e-bike use in sensitive areas and supporting
[1:03:09] legislation that provides a balanced statewide approach to e-bike safety and supporting legislation
[1:03:15] that advocates for clear and consistent e-bike definitions, use standards and safety measures
[1:03:20] that are enforceable and practical.
[1:03:22] These e-bike additions are important because e-bikes have become more prevalent.
[1:03:29] The popularity has increased. There's more usage.
[1:03:31] The legislature is taking a more comprehensive look at ways to regulate safety and usage with enforceable policies.
[1:03:39] And the last position is supporting legislation that encourages state-level cybersecurity investments
[1:03:43] and responsible artificial intelligence standards that enhance city operations.
[1:03:49] So for next steps, if approved this evening, the legislative platform will be published
[1:03:53] on the city's website and staff will begin utilizing the platform during the 2026 legislative
[1:03:58] cycle.
[1:03:59] Staff will also be proposing a shift from a one-year platform to a two-year platform
[1:04:03] that is aligned with the California legislative cycle.
[1:04:07] So the next two-year California legislative cycle does begin on January 1, 2027 and
[1:04:12] runs through December 31, 2029.
[1:04:14] So staff anticipates bringing a proposed draft to your legislative platform to the City Council in November 2026 for your consideration to ensure that it will be ready by January of 27.
[1:04:29] So staff's recommendation is to receive the report and adopt the resolution approving the 2026 City of Dublin legislative platform. And that concludes my presentation.
[1:04:37] I'm happy to take any questions or comments that you may have.
[1:04:40] And I do want to also mention that Carly Shelby from Townsend Public Affairs is also
[1:04:44] on the call this evening, and she can answer any questions you may have.
[1:04:47] Thank you.
[1:04:48] Thank you, Jordan.
[1:04:50] Any questions?
[1:04:53] Go ahead.
[1:04:54] Thank you.
[1:04:55] Thank you, Jordan.
[1:04:56] I appreciate all the work on this.
[1:04:58] I only have one question, nothing about the additions, but one about a potential item
[1:05:03] we might want to look at, and I'm glad that Townsend is on the line as well.
[1:05:06] Now, AB 32 that is currently under litigation is AB 32 banned private companies from running
[1:05:21] prisons in the state of California.
[1:05:22] That's been appealed and it's continuing to work its way through.
[1:05:28] Do you feel it is appropriate for us to have something in our platform that takes
[1:05:33] a support position around the prevention of private prisons, particularly given the discussion
[1:05:44] of FCI Dillon?
[1:05:46] So I actually wish Carly was online.
[1:05:49] She's not online right now.
[1:05:50] She's at another meeting.
[1:05:51] So hopefully she'll be able to join shortly.
[1:05:55] She would be the best person, I believe, to Ask Townsend would have a good idea if
[1:05:58] it would be appropriate for us to put that within the platform.
[1:06:01] And again, we utilize them for a lot of the time to review this to make sure the language that we're using is appropriate.
[1:06:09] So I'll have to check with her.
[1:06:10] If she does jump on the call before we're done, then we'll definitely circle back to that.
[1:06:15] But I would like to check with her.
[1:06:16] Okay. I know it's not a new bill that's moving this legislative cycle, so it may not have been on their radar.
[1:06:23] But given that the Bureau of Prisons isn't tending to transfer control of that property,
[1:06:29] which then makes it so that it's a possibility of it being up for sale.
[1:06:33] It seems like it might be something we would want to weigh in on.
[1:06:38] I mean, it doesn't mean we can't weigh in on if it's not in our legislative platform,
[1:06:41] but it seems like we might want the nimbleness of staff,
[1:06:44] so we can talk about that more at discussion time.
[1:06:47] Thank you.
[1:06:48] Thank you.
[1:06:49] Questions?
[1:06:51] Who wants to do it?
[1:06:53] You want to do it?
[1:06:54] Go ahead.
[1:06:55] Just got two basic questions for you. First, is this informs our ledge policy or positions
[1:07:03] at the county, state, and federal level, if I'm correct?
[1:07:08] Correct. It'll cover all. Traditionally, it's focused on the state, but yes, it covers all
[1:07:13] different levels.
[1:07:14] And last time this was brought up in terms of our ledge platform, we were pushing for
[1:07:21] for certain stances and there was some pushback around that, how if, or I guess, has the climate
[1:07:28] changed and if so how?
[1:07:30] Yeah, that would be a great question for Carly, but I did speak, I've spoken to her about
[1:07:35] this.
[1:07:36] The climate has changed at this point towns and fields like it's appropriate to add certain
[1:07:42] language into the platform, both from like the state perspective as well as the federal
[1:07:47] perspective that there is not as much ethnic backlash necessarily for certain
[1:07:52] terms when it comes to funding opportunities or you know grant
[1:07:58] opportunities those types of things so I've got some suggestions but I'll
[1:08:01] wait for after a public comment any questions question yeah go ahead yeah
[1:08:09] thank you mayor good evening mr. Foss good evening good to see you I have one
[1:08:14] question I want to ask on behalf of residents and then my own question
[1:08:17] after that. So, the very first one is actually more of an administrative question. So, if
[1:08:23] I may ask this, which is the – by the way, this was a lot to go through. So, thank you
[1:08:29] for doing that job for me. I appreciate it. The – I had that preamble because the
[1:08:35] question that I have from the resident was, given that we have a lot here in terms
[1:08:40] of our legislative platform, could you share with us how our strategic plan may or may
[1:08:47] not tie into how we support some legislation or vice versa. So just give us an overview
[1:08:52] if you may.
[1:08:53] Yes, so I mean our legislative, they don't tie directly, right? So the legislative platform
[1:08:57] is going to align with our mission vision and values. It's going to align with council
[1:09:02] priorities and council goals. So there is overlap in that sense, but the public policy
[1:09:09] priorities do not tie directly to a strategic plan, goal, or objective.
[1:09:17] But again, that being said, the policies of the City Council are taken into consideration
[1:09:24] when developing the legislative platform.
[1:09:27] Okay.
[1:09:27] Thank you very much.
[1:09:28] That's the clarity I was looking for.
[1:09:30] Then let me get to my question, which is on legislative platform item six under
[1:09:37] Parks and Community Services, item number 10, so 6.10, it states that we will – we're
[1:09:49] supporting – sorry – it states that expands the protection of natural resources and strengthens
[1:09:57] the safety and scrutiny of these resources, which I'm all for.
[1:10:02] Would it be appropriate, considering the number of folks who are up here this evening
[1:10:07] providing public comment, that some of an interpretation could also be rendered towards
[1:10:12] the definition of open space because of 6.10?
[1:10:17] I believe you could interpret it that way. If the direction of council is to add specific
[1:10:22] language, then that's the direction of council. Obviously, staff will be able to make those
[1:10:27] changes. But yes, the idea of natural resources, again, we're talking about open space.
[1:10:33] we're talking about waterways, natural habitats, those types of things, air
[1:10:39] quality, those types of things. Thank you for the
[1:10:41] affirmation. Appreciate it. No further questions?
[1:10:44] Thank you. No question from you? No. Okay, so I have a one quick question too. So
[1:10:51] this is our city's legislative platform but we work with Townsend to
[1:11:01] So my question is, does it also work with all the other tri-valley cities?
[1:11:06] Do other cities have a similar legislative platform as what we have?
[1:11:12] So not all of the cities within the tri-valley coalition have legislative platforms.
[1:11:17] A couple do, and they are going to be relatively similar to us.
[1:11:21] We do follow the TDC framework, which are very high level points that then we kind
[1:11:27] to build our more specific Dublin detail around in our platform. So the framework is a guiding
[1:11:34] principle that we get about every two years. And then we again, we tailor it towards Dublin.
[1:11:40] And each city does the same thing. Okay. Thank you. So we get all our questions
[1:11:46] asked. Do we have a public comment? I do have two speakers, Mayor. The first one is
[1:11:52] Dan Morley.
[1:12:03] Hello mayor and city council. Thank you for your time. I'm generally supportive of
[1:12:09] this resolution acknowledging the fact that local government does not exist on an island.
[1:12:14] I appreciate that the city has the foresight to create this platform because legislation
[1:12:19] enacted at the federal state and county levels all have an effect on cities and the residents.
[1:12:25] Cities need to know where they stand in relation to policies and enforcement of said
[1:12:30] policies. As we have been seeing in Minnesota, when faced with policies enforced by a reckless
[1:12:36] federal government agency acting with impunity, residents on the ground look to their local
[1:12:42] neighborhood organizers, cities, counties, and states for support. So I thank you for having this
[1:12:50] package. Specifically, I want to applaud the part in
[1:12:54] 2.11 that supports legislation lowering the supermajority from two-thirds to 55 percent
[1:13:03] to approve local general obligation bonds and special taxes for affordable housing.
[1:13:09] We need affordable housing.
[1:13:11] And on one wordsmith correction, I think in section 4.2 that you mean citing starting
[1:13:19] with an S instead of citing starting with a C. That's it.
[1:13:26] And the next speaker is Liz Schmidt.
[1:13:38] Madam Mayor, City Council staff,
[1:13:40] it's true that we have a flow from this government state to this county to the city,
[1:13:45] but I want to let you know that it also can go the other direction
[1:13:48] because of the bravery and the principle of this council. Alameda County has now declared
[1:13:56] the county an ice-free zone and it's considering making setting a resolution
[1:14:02] that will allow not allow a detention center in Dublin. I commend you and I
[1:14:06] tell people I am proud to be in the city to be in the forefront of any
[1:14:10] organization and we'll have the courage to stand up and say what is
[1:14:13] happening is wrong and we need to change it. Thank you.
[1:14:18] I have no other
[1:14:19] speaker slips. Thank you for the comments. We'll come back for additional
[1:14:23] additional comments. You have additional comments?
[1:14:26] Sure. Appreciate the public comment and the background. I actually wanted to propose three changes.
[1:14:35] The first two are adding the phrase regardless of immigration status.
[1:14:41] So the first one is 1.3 currently reads, assures every person the right to equal treatment in and access to all
[1:14:48] government-sponsored benefits or funded programs.
[1:14:53] And my suggestion here is to add, regardless of immigration status, to the beginning of that.
[1:15:00] Every person regardless of immigration status, the right to equal treatment and in and access
[1:15:05] to all government sponsored benefits or funded programs. So this is under the general admin
[1:15:10] section. The second one is to section 5.13, which is under the public safety. And so currently
[1:15:21] reads provides for public safety reforms that prioritize the safety, dignity and fair treatment
[1:15:26] of all individuals and my suggestion is to again add regardless of immigration status at the end of
[1:15:30] that. And then the third suggestion that I had was under Section 8 technology would be to add
[1:15:43] a line item which would be supports protecting our residents information
[1:15:49] from being used for surveillance and targeting.
[1:15:55] That would be a new one, yes.
[1:15:56] Can you say that wording for me one time?
[1:15:59] Supports protecting our residents' information from being used for surveillance and targeting.
[1:16:27] Comments?
[1:16:28] Yeah.
[1:16:30] I'm going to want to wordsmith that.
[1:16:33] I'm generally supportive of your proposed changes, definitely all in on your changes
[1:16:40] to 5.13.
[1:16:43] We definitely need to add, regardless of immigration status to that one, I would
[1:16:47] I would like to hear staff's thoughts on 1.3 before I'm fully supportive of that only
[1:16:53] because that could, I just want to make sure that there's no unintended consequences to
[1:17:00] that one, because of funding being used for people who may not be documented, so I want
[1:17:08] to hear staff's take on that one.
[1:17:09] But I do, I would like to see us add a 5.16, I guess, with wording that supports legislation
[1:17:25] that limits the transfer of federal or state assets to organizations that would use them
[1:17:32] for for-profit prisons of any kind.
[1:17:43] Yeah, for 8.7, I'm generally supportive of your thought process.
[1:17:51] Yeah, I think, first of all, it was really well done, a lot of good work, very comprehensive.
[1:18:00] And I will say I'm also supportive of, first of all, adding a 5.16 limiting transfer of assets.
[1:18:09] I like that a lot.
[1:18:11] I also like your new eight point, whatever it's going to be.
[1:18:18] I think that's necessary. I think we need to clarify targeting surveillance.
[1:18:24] We just need to define that a little bit more.
[1:18:28] And I would be supportive of the minor addition to 513 at this point.
[1:18:35] So I'm good with those so far, but I'd like to see what we can do with your new Section 8 and, you know, how 516 might look like, too.
[1:18:50] Yeah.
[1:18:51] Yeah.
[1:18:58] I'm digesting this for a moment.
[1:19:03] So for the addition to Item 8, I think I'm pretty good with that.
[1:19:09] that I would like to also learn about how does that not come back at us in the situation
[1:19:18] of a crime, right, if we need to use surveillance and target somebody to observe them in a crime
[1:19:26] situation.
[1:19:27] So, let me ask a general question, administrative question, is tonight or right now, are we
[1:19:34] Are we asked to deliberate this and then make a
[1:19:38] Approver decline a resolution or can we make a motion to defer for further research because these items are very heavy
[1:19:45] like
[1:19:47] Tonight the it's to receive the report and to adopt the resolution approving the platform
[1:19:52] So if you you would need to make a motion to defer to another meeting to bring the edits back
[1:19:59] Can I ask you a quick question on that?
[1:20:02] Jordan, what would be the consequences of us deferring this?
[1:20:04] The legislative calendar is off and running.
[1:20:08] Deferring it to another meeting would be...
[1:20:12] We would still be under the existing legislative platform.
[1:20:17] So the changes that you have proposed that came from Townsend
[1:20:21] and our other Tri-Valley partners would not be in effect.
[1:20:25] So, the bills that they are specifically meant to engage on, you would not be able to engage
[1:20:31] on fully until we adopt the resolution set, correct?
[1:20:35] Yeah, we would not be able to, staff would not be able to support and or oppose any legislation
[1:20:40] without, without that language in there if it was, you know, specific around that bill.
[1:20:45] But anything from the previous platform would roll over.
[1:20:48] Okay.
[1:20:48] I wouldn't be supportive of deferring at this point.
[1:20:50] Jordan, are we in violation of any compliance if we defer it for further research?
[1:20:56] No.
[1:20:58] No, there'd be no.
[1:20:59] As the Vice Mayor or Josie mentioned, we would just utilize the 25 platform until the 26 platform is adopted.
[1:21:07] So if there's any legislation that either Dublin and or the Tri Valley Coalition would like to take action on,
[1:21:13] We would not, that was not currently covered in the 25 platform, we wouldn't be able to
[1:21:19] without bringing it back to you for special consideration.
[1:21:21] Okay.
[1:21:23] See, where I'm headed with this is we have one answer questions and we have specialists
[1:21:29] and consultants who can answer these questions for us.
[1:21:32] So we deliberate this in a silo this evening and we pass a resolution without having
[1:21:38] the full breadth of answers I feel is impartial.
[1:21:42] So, like he just said, there's no cost to deferring this or making a motion to defer
[1:21:49] for subsequent review because we can and there's no financial penalty to this nor legislative
[1:21:55] or compliance penalty to this.
[1:21:58] So what's the rush?
[1:22:00] I guess is my question.
[1:22:01] Is there one?
[1:22:02] Did I miss something?
[1:22:03] Jordan?
[1:22:06] There's not necessarily, I mean the rush is that the legislature is working currently
[1:22:11] on proposing bills and we like to make sure we're at the front of that and that we're having
[1:22:17] conversations early and that we're speaking to these offices. We're unable to do that
[1:22:21] from our capacity without this document unless again it's something that falls within the 2025
[1:22:28] platform. Are any of the items presented by our council member cadre for modification
[1:22:34] or the questions that were asked by Vice Mayor items that are up for the debate and
[1:22:39] legislation at this moment or this week? That would be a question for Townsend so
[1:22:43] unfortunately we don't have an answer for this week specifically you know we if
[1:22:47] something were to come back to the next meeting you know that would again that
[1:22:52] would be the sooner the better of course getting anything approved because
[1:22:56] it just allows us to act faster. Okay so missing Townsend right now
[1:23:01] is a pillar that we really need them here. Yes unfortunately she's stuck
[1:23:05] right currently at another meeting and hopefully she'll be able to join an
[1:23:08] answer any questions before the deliberation is done. I just want to
[1:23:15] address something that John said.
[1:23:20] So what I want to understand is, and this is
[1:23:23] more procedural too, so is there anything in this document aside from what
[1:23:28] we've talked about tonight that you have a need for further discussion? Okay,
[1:23:33] Okay, so from a procedural standpoint, this may sound too simplistic, but I want to understand,
[1:23:39] if we were to adopt something subject to what it is now and then have further amendments,
[1:23:47] is that procedural possibility?
[1:23:52] If we came back in another week and said, okay, we're going to look at these other
[1:23:56] items here and digest them and come up with addendums or additions to this document. What
[1:24:06] I'm saying here is this provides us with a means. There might be something that's very
[1:24:10] essential in this tonight that's coming up, right, and that you're going to need those
[1:24:15] tools. We're going to need that, right? So I just want to make sure that from a
[1:24:21] procedural standpoint we have a little flexibility. Yeah, if there's no issues
[1:24:25] use what we see here, we move forward with something like this and we come back with these
[1:24:31] five items or so and seriously get into this because I think there's some really good items
[1:24:36] here.
[1:24:39] I just wanted to ask the question.
[1:24:42] Your question to him said, is there any urgency or are there any bills moving based
[1:24:46] on the amendments that we are asking for staff's report?
[1:24:49] But I'm more concerned with passing what staff presented to us and I wanted to
[1:24:54] make sure you weren't losing sight of that that there's there's a lot of new
[1:24:57] things in here that are not in the 2025 legislative platform and I want to make
[1:25:01] sure that we are moving on that quickly because the reason they're in here is
[1:25:05] because there are bills moving on those issues like SB 63 and those other
[1:25:09] issues that are that are moving forward and so I don't want to delay the
[1:25:14] recommendations that we're getting from staff that we are all I think we
[1:25:17] haven't heard from everybody's full position but but most of us were
[1:25:20] quite receptive when that came forward from us so I just want to
[1:25:23] And make sure that we haven't lost sight of that, that those changes we're talking about
[1:25:26] to our ledge platform are not just the things, you know, what we want to pass tonight, not
[1:25:30] just the things that we're adding, yes, and so I want to make sure that that was fully
[1:25:35] understood.
[1:25:35] That's kind of what I said.
[1:25:37] Right?
[1:25:37] That's what it was.
[1:25:42] Very clear in terms of our ledge package.
[1:25:45] And if you don't know what I'm referring to, feel free to turn on the news or
[1:25:48] read the newspaper.
[1:25:49] I mean, it's a very tragic situation what's happening.
[1:25:52] Yeah, and I, so first I'll address the, yes, I understand the baseline that we have, so
[1:25:58] I'm okay with it, because we can, it sounds like we can come up for a special review again
[1:26:04] to make modifications.
[1:26:05] Okay.
[1:26:05] Fine.
[1:26:07] Look, I'm not, I'm not ambivalent to what's happening in the world right now.
[1:26:12] Okay.
[1:26:12] But what I also am very strongly considering is that what is the constitutionality of
[1:26:19] what's being requested?
[1:26:21] So I don't have time to do that unless I go and chat GPT right now, but we apparently
[1:26:26] have a city norm that I can't be really on my computer looking at things, so I want the
[1:26:32] time to review and understand the customer channel or the request that's being presented.
[1:26:37] That's all.
[1:26:38] And I'm not saying yes or no, I'm just, you got to give me some time because that's
[1:26:42] a very heavy lift item that's being presented.
[1:26:44] I'm sure attorney can weigh in given this very similar language has been
[1:26:50] approved by other cities, local cities.
[1:26:56] Yeah, I'm not concerned about the
[1:26:57] constitutionality of such a statement being included in your legislative
[1:27:01] platform. I think there has been legislation that says similar, has
[1:27:07] included similar phrasing and I haven't heard about any constitutional
[1:27:09] challenges. If I could just add, last year we had a similar conversation and we
[1:27:17] had some language proposed related to immigration status and the direction then
[1:27:23] was to go back and review it with Townsend which we did and given the
[1:27:28] climate at the time Townsend didn't feel comfortable without language and we
[1:27:32] talked about how the climate has changed and so I'd like to ask Jordan
[1:27:36] to speak about any conversations he's had with Townsend about that change in the climate.
[1:27:42] Yeah so I referenced it a little bit earlier but when we had last year when we had talked about
[1:27:47] that language Townsend was concerned about using that language again due to the unknown surrounding
[1:27:53] the federal administration coming in and what that would mean for grant funding for federal
[1:27:58] funding etc. They do not currently share the same concerns that they had just from what they've
[1:28:05] been able to see, and they do not believe that adding any language similar to what was
[1:28:12] requested last year, that adding that language would be a concern this year.
[1:28:17] So they were in favor of us adding that language if it did come back up within discussion.
[1:28:30] Working with all of our tribal cities, and I had some time with other mayors last week
[1:28:39] when we went to Washington D.C. for legislative advocacy trip and also mayor's conference.
[1:28:47] I kind of sense some of the languages we just talked about may not appear in other cities
[1:28:58] platform. If that's the sense, if Thompson has to act for all of our cities, if we have language
[1:29:07] different from other cities' language, what would be the consequence?
[1:29:13] So I guess that would really depend.
[1:29:16] It's the interpretation of the language, right?
[1:29:19] So if certain cities, and I don't specifically know what Livermore or Danville has in their
[1:29:24] legislative platform, but if they have language that's maybe more broad, they'll be able
[1:29:29] to interpret it one way and then their staff will be able to interpret it one way and
[1:29:33] then react, you know, our language is currently written the way it is and it allows staff
[1:29:40] to act that way. So, you know, really it's just kind of boils down to does it fit with
[1:29:48] kind of what the TVC collectively is working on. That's what we really think about when
[1:29:52] we work on things regionally. Does it fit really within our framework? And then we
[1:29:55] start to look at the nuance things to make sure we're comfortable signing on to
[1:30:02] I would say two, and thinking more about this, you know, the two items that councilmember
[1:30:09] Caudry is looking at 1.3 and 5.13 already say everyone. So they already capture everyone.
[1:30:21] So I think what the councilmember is getting at about putting words in your mouth is a point
[1:30:26] of emphasis here on, given what's happening around us.
[1:30:33] Sorry, I just wanted to correct myself.
[1:30:36] I left off the words for immigration enforcement cooperation for the last part of that, and
[1:30:42] I don't know if that was your question.
[1:30:43] I'm sorry.
[1:30:44] All right.
[1:30:44] That would you say?
[1:30:45] It was supports protecting our residents' information from being used for surveillance
[1:30:52] and targeting for immigration enforcement.
[1:30:55] Oh, for 8.1.
[1:30:56] I apologize.
[1:30:57] for leaving that piece out.
[1:31:00] Thank you.
[1:31:00] That makes a big difference for me because my concern,
[1:31:03] so I've got a couple of concerns.
[1:31:05] I am 100% on board with you and I will champion your point of view
[1:31:10] on 5.13, absolutely 100%.
[1:31:14] 1.3 is a little bit different only in that it talks about
[1:31:19] all government-sponsored benefits and funded programs.
[1:31:23] It does say, assures every person the right to equal treatment
[1:31:27] 100% but then it goes on to say and access to all government sponsored benefits and funded programs.
[1:31:34] I don't know that that's the position that the council wants to take when we're talking about supporting state legislation
[1:31:40] that funds whatever the benefit programs are or using state taxpayer funding to support potentially people who are undocumented.
[1:31:56] I think that that's a little bit more nuanced.
[1:31:59] I think that there are some programs where I would be absolutely in favor of that and
[1:32:05] there would be some programs that would give me slight pause on that.
[1:32:08] So I'm a little uncomfortable with adding it to that section, but I'm 100% with you
[1:32:18] on 5.13.
[1:32:19] I think it absolutely should be there for the emphasis that safety, welfare and dignity
[1:32:24] of all persons absolutely regardless of their immigration status.
[1:32:30] And I think it mostly covers what you had, the point you're trying to make, that on a
[1:32:35] health and welfare basis, it does not matter what somebody's status is.
[1:32:41] We support legislation that provides a public safety net.
[1:32:46] On the 8.7, protecting our residents' information from being used for surveillance
[1:32:51] and targeting for immigration enforcement having those words makes all the difference because I
[1:32:56] was concerned with the unintended consequences perhaps to our LPRs but with those words added
[1:33:03] I'm with you a hundred percent so I appreciate that and I hope that you're also on board with the
[1:33:12] sale or transfer properties for a proper present. How does that wording go? Mine?
[1:33:17] Mine.
[1:33:17] Mine.
[1:33:18] It would be 5.15.
[1:33:22] 5.16, yeah, which would say, so it's under the supports, so it would be the item would
[1:33:28] start with the words limits, but it's basically saying we support legislation that limits the
[1:33:32] transfer of federal or state assets to organizations that would use them for for-profit prisons.
[1:33:40] Thank you.
[1:33:41] Do
[1:33:47] you want to limit it to just assets or just limit or profit?
[1:33:56] I worded it that way because that is very specifically a Dublin issue.
[1:34:00] I mean, I think that I don't know that we would want to weigh in as a city on, we wouldn't
[1:34:08] take a position really unless it affects us.
[1:34:12] And I think that transfer is what is going to affect us.
[1:34:16] And so that's why I worded it that way.
[1:34:18] I mean, I think it would also it's fairly clear that we support legislative. I mean that we don't we're not in favor of for-profit prisons
[1:34:23] But as far as the bills that we would weigh in, I don't think we would take a position on something that was not really
[1:34:30] In our area, so that's why I worded that way, but I'm open to other suggestions
[1:34:34] But I think that that gives a clear nexus to Dublin and what we're doing. I
[1:34:40] Think we should that's a good good comment like a focus on things related to our devilies position
[1:34:48] So, Mayor and Council members, we might not have agreement on 1.3, but do we have enough
[1:34:54] agreement to move forward with 5.13, the new 8, and the new 5.16?
[1:35:07] I'm okay with that, if that's the will of the council.
[1:35:09] I can go along with that.
[1:35:10] I wanted to also introduce this other idea to give us all flexibility.
[1:35:16] As I said, I want to make sure that we get what we need out the door.
[1:35:19] But if it's the will of the council, I'm fine. I'm also listening to another council member who has a very reasonable ask, and I didn't see any harm in it.
[1:35:31] But look, I'll go with the flow here if that's what we're doing here, but I respect his positions because there is a lot in this thing. There is absolutely a lot.
[1:35:42] Yeah, I kind of understand that. And I also want to check with Townsend before we pass something
[1:35:49] additionally. So I would like to propose we pass what we already have the staff recommended today
[1:35:56] so you can move on with your work for additional amendments, things we have Townsend in the call
[1:36:03] or we have time to discuss with them before we approve additional amendments.
[1:36:09] Thank you. Is there anything, John, in the proposed amendments that you feel that you
[1:36:18] could get through tonight? There's some really good stuff, right? And I was just wondering,
[1:36:24] is there anything in there that you feel that we could throw in here that we can just
[1:36:30] move forward with and then come back to some, you know, whatever is left over, whatever
[1:36:35] it is?
[1:36:35] Yeah, so thank you for that and I really appreciate the dialogue and thank you for the considerations, everybody.
[1:36:41] I'm okay with actually everything other than 1.3.
[1:36:45] I just need more time on that because that's really tough for me.
[1:36:55] It's 5.1 seconds.
[1:36:58] one second. If we're all good. I know that I'd love to make a motion wait for a second I didn't
[1:37:05] understand what you do say like which one you it's the one the item is a 1.3 council member
[1:37:12] country which states that something about programs and regardless of immigration status
[1:37:20] forget which one it was 3 1.3 so you already made the change to 1.3 right
[1:37:26] Mayor, no, the three items that Council Member Morata is saying that he agrees with are changes
[1:37:34] to 5.13, 8.8, is it, or 8.7, and 5.16.
[1:37:42] So we'll be modifying 5.13 to add language, and then we have two new support positions.
[1:37:54] Not 1.3. I think that's fine.
[1:38:00] I have to make a motion to go back to the very beginning to receive and adopt.
[1:38:10] Where are we?
[1:38:13] I am so sorry. I had it queued up.
[1:38:16] But to adopt the resolution approving the 2026 City of Dublin legislative platform
[1:38:23] with one, two, three amendments, the first one being 5.13 adding comma regardless of
[1:38:32] immigration status, adding 5.16 limits, the transfer of federal and state assets for for-profit
[1:38:39] prisons and adding an item in section eight, which would be supports protecting our residents
[1:38:46] information from being used for surveillance and targeting for immigration enforcement.
[1:38:52] And I will second that motion. Okay so all in favor say aye. Aye. So the motion passes unanimously.
[1:39:03] So
[1:39:11] let's move on to agenda item 8.2 proposed amendments to the city's noise regulations.
[1:39:18] Good
[1:39:43] evening, City Council Mayor. Jennifer Bias, planning manager here to talk a little
[1:39:49] bit about proposed amendments to the city's noise ordinance. And we're pulling up the
[1:39:55] presentation here. And a little bit of background of why we're here tonight to talk to you
[1:40:02] about this at your December 2nd meeting, City Council approved outdoor live entertainment
[1:40:07] statement in the downtown. At that meeting, council raised concerns regarding the existing
[1:40:13] noise ordinance and some subjectivity around that area and regulations. Council directed
[1:40:20] us to return with this report. That's what we're here tonight to talk about what we
[1:40:25] discovered. And in addition, at that meeting, council also directed us to adjust the complaint
[1:40:34] process for making complaints on noise to make it simpler and just wanted to
[1:40:38] report back to you that we have added noise as an issue if you're going in to
[1:40:44] fix it Dublin so you can provide a complaint if you have a noise related
[1:40:48] issue and then you also requested that staff come back in a year's time to
[1:40:53] check in on the status of any kind of complaints we received regarding the
[1:40:58] changes to outdoor live entertainment in the downtown area so we expect we'll be
[1:41:04] back probably December of 2026 with that report and just a little refresher
[1:41:10] background the existing noise ordinance for the city does prohibit noise
[1:41:16] that's loud and necessary and natural unusual or habitual the enforcement is
[1:41:22] based on a reasonable person standard and a reasonable person standard is
[1:41:27] judged by whether an average person can find it unreasonably loud or disturbing under the circumstances.
[1:41:37] So with that, based after the December 2nd meeting, staff went back and reviewed the surrounding cities
[1:41:45] for some comparison on how other jurisdictions regulate noise.
[1:41:50] We looked at Livermore Pleasanton, San Ramon, Danville, and Walnut Creek.
[1:41:55] Then we found that there's two ways typical to regulate.
[1:41:59] One is an activity-based regulation, which Ceremon, Livermore, Danville, Walnut Creek
[1:42:05] all have.
[1:42:06] And then there's another way that is decimal-based, where you have a more technical decimal-based
[1:42:13] set on an activity or a land use.
[1:42:15] The activity-based approach again provides that balance with flexibility and enforceability,
[1:42:24] and it is really based on community needs.
[1:42:29] So for example, one thing that you might find in an activity-based approach is lawn
[1:42:35] equipment being used, and they might establish hours that activity can go on or be prohibited
[1:42:42] prohibited, and days of the week where those activities might go on and be prohibited.
[1:42:47] Also historically in our research, Dublin's complaints have been fairly limited.
[1:42:53] We did go back and pull the data 12 years.
[1:42:56] We've had about 35 complaints, all of which have been resolved under our current ordinance.
[1:43:02] But the common themes that we saw in some of those complaints were related to concerns,
[1:43:07] again, related to typical lawn equipment, leaf blowers,
[1:43:11] and late night parties that might disturb
[1:43:15] residential neighborhoods.
[1:43:20] Based on what we found and kind of looking
[1:43:23] at some of our surrounding communities
[1:43:24] and how they look at activities and the direction
[1:43:28] we received, we went back and staff is looking at
[1:43:32] and wanting to discuss tonight some changes
[1:43:34] to our noise ordinance.
[1:43:36] Those would be adding in some activity-based regulations based on the lawn, excuse me,
[1:43:44] landscape equipment, like leaf blowers.
[1:43:47] And we'd be looking at adding days as well as hour restrictions for those types of activities,
[1:43:52] as well as, again, amplified music and noise looking at days and activities.
[1:43:57] So for example, or what we're suggesting staff is recommending, we would limit landscape equipment use
[1:44:04] Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and that's when you can use your equipment.
[1:44:12] Also, you could use it Saturday through Sunday, 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.
[1:44:16] We've had a little bit of discussion around 10 p.m. on Sunday.
[1:44:20] Might be a little late.
[1:44:22] So, could hear some discussion around maybe that hour on a Sunday.
[1:44:27] Again, amplified noise and parties.
[1:44:29] we would be suggesting days Sunday through Thursday,
[1:44:34] 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., as well as Fridays and Saturdays,
[1:44:41] 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.
[1:44:49] Tonight I'm here again bringing back this report to you,
[1:44:53] to seek your direction and regards to the proposed changes
[1:44:57] that I just presented.
[1:45:00] The next steps for staff would be going back and then rolling up our sleeves and making those
[1:45:04] changes based on tonight's discussion in your direction and then bringing that back in a
[1:45:09] form of an ordinance. With that, I'm available for any question.
[1:45:13] Thank you so much, Jennifer. And questions?
[1:45:18] And I know we'll get into this discussion and get into the weeds here, but oh, that's
[1:45:22] pun, huh? Never mind. So you made a point about the leaf blowers or the landscape
[1:45:33] equipment on Saturday night. Who's doing that stuff at 10 p.m. at night? What's
[1:45:39] going on there? I think that's a question. I want to know where you came up
[1:45:42] with that number. You know it varies. It varies based on community needs and
[1:45:45] bases. You know, I occasionally will work late in the evenings in the
[1:45:52] summertime. So, you know, again, am I out there at 10 o'clock at night? Probably not.
[1:45:56] But this is just, again, a basic basis to start the discussion of what might be reasonable
[1:46:03] and see where we would want to head with do we want to have hours? Do we want to talk
[1:46:09] about activities? Right? How do we want to look at addressing some of the concerns
[1:46:13] of the communities that we see?
[1:46:15] Thank you. Appreciate it.
[1:46:19] Thank you. I appreciate it. I have one question. I think you alluded to
[1:46:23] but I'm not sure this the staff report actually laid it out very explicitly is the intention here
[1:46:29] that we're only talking about these things in residential areas as opposed to citywide.
[1:46:35] They would be citywide but yes our suggestion would be for these two items with the suggested
[1:46:40] changes that they would be limited to resident residential activities. Yeah the Norse ordinance
[1:46:45] obviously would be citywide but the but these changes would specifically be at residences.
[1:46:50] Right.
[1:46:51] Okay.
[1:46:52] Thank you.
[1:46:52] That's my only question.
[1:46:54] Questions?
[1:46:56] I've got two questions.
[1:46:57] I guess how, for a context, how big of a problem is this within our city?
[1:47:04] How many complaints do we typically get in a year, for instance?
[1:47:09] Yeah.
[1:47:09] Again, we don't receive very many noise complaints.
[1:47:13] We do have, I have the kind of breakdown for the last 12 years.
[1:47:18] years. But I think I said 35 in my presentation since 2012 was the count. It seems like the
[1:47:25] last 2024 and 2025, the numbers have gone up from maybe like 6, 10 to maybe 13. So there's
[1:47:35] a little bit of an uptick in the last few years. But normal data that we were able to
[1:47:42] provide is maybe three to four a year.
[1:47:46] And then, second question was just around enforcement.
[1:47:49] What does that typically look like?
[1:47:51] I mean, who's enforcing this code?
[1:47:55] Yeah, good question.
[1:47:57] Our code enforcement staff would be responsible for addressing or receiving any complaint
[1:48:03] and then any kind of follow-up that would be needed if the complaint to address the
[1:48:07] complaint.
[1:48:12] Go ahead.
[1:48:13] Okay.
[1:48:13] Thank you.
[1:48:14] Good evening, Ms. Bios.
[1:48:16] So I'm actually looking at Table 2,
[1:48:19] and it's hard for me to support this,
[1:48:22] considering you have nothing about rolling your trash bins
[1:48:24] into your driveway at 3 o'clock in the morning.
[1:48:27] And I think we need something about that.
[1:48:29] I'm joking.
[1:48:30] All right, real question.
[1:48:32] Which is, there are plenty of folks who contract
[1:48:38] their landscaping work,
[1:48:40] work, and therefore it may be written in the contract that they can start sun up or work
[1:48:48] until sundown.
[1:48:49] How will we as part of the enforcement process or next steps educate either the contractors
[1:48:56] or homeowners so that they know what the times, the limitations are that will be put
[1:49:00] on noise in the residences?
[1:49:04] Good question. I think part of this process is once we get some information around the
[1:49:11] direction we want to go, we'll be developing the process for any kind of outreach that would
[1:49:16] be needed to let residents or let, again, commercial operators know that these are the
[1:49:20] rules and that's how we would address that.
[1:49:25] Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Jennifer. So I just have some other comments. I heard
[1:49:35] from residents. There's two things I heard about their noise complaint. One is the school
[1:49:42] district. Somehow they said they have a place. We heard of that. But it's not, I don't think
[1:49:51] it's the noise from this leaf blower or noise from these parties.
[1:49:57] It's more like operations, like trucks, those kind of noise.
[1:50:01] Do we have any regulation to regulate those kind of noise?
[1:50:08] With these changes, we're not suggesting regulating
[1:50:10] commercial noises or activities that generate noise
[1:50:15] with commercial or industrial uses.
[1:50:18] Again, that hasn't been an area
[1:50:19] that we've seen a lot of complaints around, we will still have our existing noise ordinance
[1:50:24] in effect.
[1:50:25] So if somebody is concerned and complaining about that, our code enforcement officers will
[1:50:31] still address those complaints.
[1:50:33] These changes would just simply make it that if the complaint was this activity that
[1:50:39] we've specified, we now have a day and a time limit around, that it would become
[1:50:45] less subjective and more direct.
[1:50:47] like, hey, you're unrolling your trash cans, you're blowing your lawn at 3 a.m., that's
[1:50:53] outside of the time that that's allowed, and then they would need to address and not do
[1:50:57] that activity anymore.
[1:50:59] Does that help?
[1:51:00] So for the commercial noise, what's our current regulation?
[1:51:05] It's just based on a reasonable standard.
[1:51:09] Based on, like, do we have, like, you said, present has a decibel-based, what kind of
[1:51:18] current our community, what kind of standard we have?
[1:51:23] Yeah, we don't have a decimal-based standard or an activity-based standard that would
[1:51:29] address any industrial or commercial activities.
[1:51:32] So if somebody calls, they would be required to comply with the reasonable person standard.
[1:51:42] Resonable. I don't got this.
[1:51:46] Well, Mayor, we talked about, this is one of the reasons we went back and looked at this issue is because when we were talking about the downtown live music,
[1:51:56] the vice mayor brought up the fact that we have this very general subjective vague noise
[1:52:04] ordinance, right? And so that's why we researched other ways of doing it. And given the fact
[1:52:10] that we don't really experience complaints about commercial activities, I mean, you have
[1:52:15] one-offs, what we chose to focus on was noise from residences. And those are the
[1:52:20] things that we've we've heard about okay yeah got it okay yeah and as a
[1:52:26] company I heard is about I think it's a military bugle cause right like as a
[1:52:32] many military the bugle calls yeah well the system is going under maintenance
[1:52:38] right now so I hate to tell you this it's not gone away it's going to come
[1:52:42] back but the hope is that they'll have more control over the volume and the
[1:52:47] But it's coming back and it will be in use.
[1:52:51] Okay.
[1:52:51] Got it.
[1:52:52] Okay.
[1:52:53] Thank you so much.
[1:52:55] That's all the questions we have.
[1:52:56] Are there public comments?
[1:52:59] I have no speaker slips on the side of Mayor.
[1:53:01] Great.
[1:53:01] Okay.
[1:53:02] So any additional comments you want to make?
[1:53:04] Yeah.
[1:53:05] Thanks.
[1:53:05] Go ahead.
[1:53:06] First of all, thank you for the outreach and the comparison from other cities.
[1:53:13] I am an agreement that 10 a.m. or 10 p.m. Excuse me on Saturdays and Sundays is maybe a little outside the
[1:53:19] Scope of what we would want to do if we decided we wanted to go forward with this
[1:53:23] Maybe just Saturdays and Sundays 8 a.m. To 8 p.m. I was struck by your comment that you're only getting 6 to 80
[1:53:30] Year because I think they must all be coming to me. I think I'm getting that many per year
[1:53:35] So I appreciate that we're at least taking a look at this
[1:53:42] Certainly there are other things that people complain about the noise
[1:53:45] Some of those things we don't have any control over the bugle calls. For example, the city doesn't really have control over
[1:53:51] You know noise from the football stadiums band practice, you know
[1:53:55] We have a second high school now that is right in the middle of a neighborhood
[1:53:58] Now that I'm working at both high schools their band metronome at four o'clock in the afternoon
[1:54:02] If I lived right next door to that would be certainly
[1:54:07] I'm not sure I would be considered a reasonable person in that circumstance, but there are things that we can't really
[1:54:12] That's not our property. That's not anything we can do about that
[1:54:15] But I think from the landscaping at the crack of dawn, I think we can certainly put that in there. I think to John's point, like, how do we tell people about that?
[1:54:26] We do, quote, enforcement on a complaint basis, correct?
[1:54:29] Right.
[1:54:30] So for example, we have, off the top of my head, I'm thinking we have an ordinance that says you can't have a basketball hoop that's in the street that's at your curb.
[1:54:39] but we don't drive around to every, you know, we wait for people to, to their
[1:54:43] neighbors to say these kids are playing basketball in my court. Code enforcement,
[1:54:47] you know, that's not okay. I would imagine this would be similar is the
[1:54:51] approach we would take. I mean we would certainly want to let everybody know
[1:54:53] that we've taken that, that we've done that, but we would be taking
[1:54:59] complaints, correct? Not driving around it, we wouldn't have code enforcement
[1:55:03] out there driving around at 6 a.m. on a Saturday check and to see if
[1:55:05] anybody's running a leaf blower. Correct. Our code enforcement program is
[1:55:08] It's Monday through Friday, 8 to 5.
[1:55:12] And if a complaint comes in outside of that, we address it, but we're not actively looking
[1:55:15] for violations on weekends.
[1:55:17] Let's follow up based on the complaint.
[1:55:20] So I'm generally supportive of this.
[1:55:22] I think it is a baby step towards addressing the things that affect people's quality
[1:55:28] of life.
[1:55:28] I think the amplified noise, I don't know whether we want to put the word parties
[1:55:33] in there.
[1:55:34] I think we would want to just leave it as amplified noise, because I don't think we're
[1:55:39] trying to regulate people chatting in their backyards, so much as we are them playing
[1:55:43] noise through their Bluetooth speaker or whatever, that is keeping the neighbors awake.
[1:55:48] And I think the rest of it can sort of fall under reasonable person standard.
[1:55:52] But you know, you got to turn the music off.
[1:55:55] You got to turn the amplified speeches off at whatever time we set in this.
[1:55:59] I think these are good suggestions.
[1:56:02] I wouldn't want it to say your party has to end at 10 p.m. on a Saturday night.
[1:56:07] There might be, you know, graduation parties or whatever that people, you know, that doesn't happen all the time.
[1:56:12] Taking the word parties out and having the amplified noise to me, that seems like a good balance between, you know, just turn the music off, keep doing what you're doing.
[1:56:23] But the reasonable person standard continues to be applicable if you live next door to
[1:56:28] somebody who has parties every week and is out there having, you know, 20 people in the
[1:56:32] yard playing in the pool or whatever until midnight every weekend.
[1:56:36] So I'm supportive of this.
[1:56:37] I would love to see us change the Saturday, Sunday, leaf blower lamp escaping equipment
[1:56:42] to an 8 p.m. and or even 9 p.m. I don't know in the summer, you know, maybe sundown
[1:56:48] as the end point but the 7 a.m. weekday 8 a.m. weekend start time I think is
[1:56:55] perfect and the amplified noise I think the times are right so that would be my
[1:57:00] my preference thank you any clarification so if we went back to the
[1:57:08] ordinance itself and 528 020 it's as regards to what you're trying to add to
[1:57:16] this amplified noise, where would you – I'm just curious as to how you would – would
[1:57:20] that be a separate section in there, because it's got a lot going on in A, and you would
[1:57:26] create a separate section within there to describe specifically amplified noise.
[1:57:34] That's my only question.
[1:57:35] Correct.
[1:57:36] Yeah, we would probably –
[1:57:37] With those times.
[1:57:38] A separate section, maybe a little table, or just a sentence of what the requirement
[1:57:43] would be.
[1:57:44] We will come back with that ordinance and those changes as we do and present that information
[1:57:52] to you and what the actual language will be and where it will be inserted.
[1:57:56] But yes, it will be inserted in that section.
[1:57:59] Thank you.
[1:58:00] Okay.
[1:58:00] Thanks.
[1:58:01] Thank you, Jim.
[1:58:02] Ms. Biow, it's just a recommendation, if I may, for the next version that you'll
[1:58:06] be presenting to us.
[1:58:08] And actually, parlaying off of Weissmeyer's point here, which is the table two, if we add
[1:58:15] another column that said examples, that would actually, I think, give a perspective to folks
[1:58:20] of what that means.
[1:58:22] That way, in column A, you could generalize that state, make them more general statement,
[1:58:27] and then column C would be the examples hereof.
[1:58:31] Okay.
[1:58:32] That's all.
[1:58:34] Comments?
[1:58:35] I'm not particularly adamant about this one.
[1:58:37] I mean, I think some of the changes that you suggested seem reasonable, doesn't seem like
[1:58:44] a huge issue at the moment.
[1:58:48] I'm not particularly strong about it, but I'm okay with what's being presented.
[1:58:55] So I agree with data 8 p.m. during the first one, Sunday to Sunday.
[1:59:02] Second one, amplify the noise without parties. I think that's great. So that would be our
[1:59:09] direction to you. Today we just need direction. And thank you so much. That's good work. And
[1:59:16] I'm looking forward to next time when you'll come to bring the more detailed language
[1:59:22] there.
[1:59:23] All right. Thank you very much.
[1:59:24] Thank you Jennifer.
[1:59:27] So moving on to agenda item 9, city manager and the city council
[1:59:32] reports.
[1:59:34] Mayor and council members, I want to respond a little bit to the residents that came out
[1:59:39] from Summer Glen, appreciate their feedback on, you know, needing pedestrian bridge there.
[1:59:45] I did communicate with one of them and maybe she didn't see it before she came to the
[1:59:50] meeting but that that property is owned by zone 7. Having said that, city staff
[1:59:57] will go out there and take a look at the lighting.
[2:00:00] And see what's happening on the trail to see if there's anything that we can do. We are
[2:00:04] responsible for portions of the adjacent trail, so we will do that. Four new pickleball courts
[2:00:12] have been installed at Wallace, so at least one of you is happy about that. And you're going to see
[2:00:21] information coming out about this very soon. It will be included in the summer activity guide,
[2:00:25] But we are planning a community party on July 4th, so don't plan anything for that day except to show up at Dublin Sports Grounds
[2:00:32] And it'll be a good old-fashioned American party right in your backyard. That's all
[2:00:37] Thank you. So
[2:00:39] John you want to start? Thank you mayor for myself
[2:00:44] Attended Ava board meeting as well as their finance meeting as well. Nothing new to report there
[2:00:51] Also, I did get the opportunity to go to Sacramento for the League of California City's Governance
[2:00:56] Transparency Labor Relations Policy Committee.
[2:01:01] I want to let everybody know that it was ratified to have an artificial intelligence policy
[2:01:07] by the GTLR.
[2:01:10] So there will be one now that is officially from that agency.
[2:01:15] And then, also, I had the pleasure and honor to attend the ribbon cutting for the Iron Horse Trail,
[2:01:21] which I actually learned quite a bit about the railway that we used to have, but no longer have,
[2:01:26] and a good commemoration to what we have now.
[2:01:29] So with that, that's all I have for now.
[2:01:31] Thank you, Michael.
[2:01:34] Sure. I had a few things.
[2:01:36] had a HACA meeting, labor negotiations, had a LAPTA finance administration meeting, nothing
[2:01:46] to really report on those. What I really enjoyed with the accompanying men of Councilmember
[2:01:54] Morata was installing the new board of the chamber. That was fun. You felt very, you
[2:02:00] know, empowered. No, it was fun. Anyway, and a couple of ribbon cuttings. The men
[2:02:06] Nassino Farms, I think a couple of us were there, very impressed, and guys, Jim, and I
[2:02:14] think, oh yeah, Iron Horse Trail, that was great.
[2:02:18] So we were all over the place, yeah, yeah, I'm good, you know.
[2:02:22] Castle Member.
[2:02:23] Yeah, two had a pretty busy couple weeks, so the League of California Cities Community
[2:02:28] Services Policy Committee meeting, the Iron Horse Trail opening, the East Bay Leadership
[2:02:34] Council leadership series dinner. That event was fantastic. Yesterday we had the
[2:02:41] Mendocino Farms event which was also great. Earlier had an I-Gate board meeting
[2:02:47] and I'm happy to share that I'm now the vice, selected the vice chair of that
[2:02:52] board and the MLK Fellowship Breakfast in a words hosted by the Three
[2:02:59] Values Community Foundation another really great event and finally the
[2:03:04] federal military community committee meeting. So very busy a couple weeks.
[2:03:10] Thanks. Thank you. Also a busy few weeks. I was done up in Sacramento for the Cal
[2:03:16] Cities Public Safety Policy Committee meeting. They are also doing a e-bike
[2:03:23] task force for Cal Cities and Public Safety will have two or three members
[2:03:28] from public safety on the task force and I did put in for that I don't know
[2:03:34] when we'll hear the deadline to apply for it was yesterday so we'll see I'd
[2:03:38] love to be able to have Dublin's voice heard on the e-bike task force that'll
[2:03:42] be statewide. Obviously the Iron Horse Trail Park grand opening was amazing
[2:03:47] and as always our historian Steve Menier is an amazing person to talk about
[2:03:52] all the history of the things that used to be once were. I have had two
[2:03:57] You'll have to committee meetings and also stop waste.
[2:04:00] Want to alert folks that stop waste board did pass a new revenue measure that will go
[2:04:09] on everybody's, all the jurisdictions within Alameda County, their haulers, and it will
[2:04:13] be 30 cents a month for residential and a little bit more for commercial to help recover
[2:04:22] stop wastes, regulatory costs for helping to deliver the programs that they deliver
[2:04:27] to all of Alameda County, so a very tiny increase on everybody's bills.
[2:04:33] And then East Bay Leadership Council dinner, that dinner was truly amazing.
[2:04:38] Stacey Abrams was the keynote speaker and I'm hoping that that was recorded somewhere
[2:04:42] for folks that didn't get a chance to go because it really was truly an amazing evening.
[2:04:47] And that was it for me.
[2:04:48] Thank you.
[2:04:48] Thank you. Thank you. Very busy week for seems for a lot of people here. And I was in a lot of ribbon cutting as well. There's one ribbon cutting. I think it's a gym guys.
[2:05:02] gym guys was a good one too. Beyond this iron horse nature park and open space
[2:05:10] ribbon cutting and we were pretty proud. I think in the past four months we have
[2:05:16] opened three parks. The what is ranch park, the nature park and this
[2:05:23] iron horse nature park and community like open space. So three parks in
[2:05:30] four months. That's what I would say they have done. I'm so proud of that. And beyond that,
[2:05:36] for last week, the whole week, I was in Washington, D.C., with all the other mayors from Trivali.
[2:05:43] So we had legislative advocacy. We actually got to meet a lot of people. And we actually
[2:05:55] to meet both senators from our California
[2:05:57] and with all the other mayors from California.
[2:06:03] So that was a good meeting as well.
[2:06:05] And the mayor's conference,
[2:06:07] there's a lot of good topics, safety.
[2:06:10] And then in one of the launch meeting,
[2:06:13] the mayor of Minneapolis actually went to speak to us.
[2:06:18] That was like a highlight.
[2:06:20] But one quick thing I want to share with you
[2:06:22] is another mayor who's in suburb of Minneapolis
[2:06:26] also spoke in one of our sessions.
[2:06:29] So we heard from them in real person
[2:06:34] and they just confirmed whatever we have seen on TV.
[2:06:39] The situation was pretty severe.
[2:06:42] They confirmed with us.
[2:06:44] Sometimes you heard all the news from TV,
[2:06:46] from social media you still don't know
[2:06:49] you know, if it's just like in TV, but it's real.
[2:06:56] That's the message I heard from both mayors from that area.
[2:07:01] Quite alarming.
[2:07:02] So that's my last week.
[2:07:05] It was freezing cold, snowing, storm,
[2:07:09] like all the things happened on a Sunday
[2:07:11] and then the rest of the week was cold,
[2:07:14] but weather was okay.
[2:07:16] So with that said, thank you everybody
[2:07:18] for your great work and will adjourn the meeting at 9 0 8. Thanks for all the
[2:07:25] audience.