DOCSLIB.ORG

Will Richmond Be Great in 2008?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Richmond, California Will Richmond Be Great in 2008? WELCOME TO RICHMOND NEXT EXIT • Visit Rosie the Riveter WWII NHP • Stroll the 32-mile Bay Trail • Enjoy the public art • Meet friendly folks WELCOME TO RICHMOND NEXT EXIT • Lock and load • Wait for next convoy • Drive defensively - avoid potholes • Sirens? Shelter in place Two Roads to Richmond? 2007 Year End Review Tom Butt, Richmond City Council Member January 1, 2008 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Top Three Richmond Stories of 2007 ............................................................................................................ 1 City of Crime and Violence or a Cool Place to Live?................................................................................ 2 Chevron – A Richmond Enigma................................................................................................................ 5 A House Divided - Sometimes .................................................................................................................. 8 Richmond Advances and Stumbles in 2007 ................................................................................................. 10 Tom Butt Nominations for 2007 Advances............................................................................................. 10 Tom Butt Nominations for 2007 Stumbles.............................................................................................. 13 E-FORUM Reader Nominations for 2007 Advances .............................................................................. 15 E-FORUM Reader Nominations for 2007 Stumbles ............................................................................... 15 Development Projects During 2007.............................................................................................................. 16 E-FORUM Reader Nominations for Best 2007 Development Projects................................................... 16 E-FORUM Reader Nominations for Worst 2007 Development Projects ................................................ 16 E-FORUM Reader Nominations for Best 2007 Organizations................................................................ 16 City Employees ............................................................................................................................................ 17 City Employees Nominated by E-FORUM Readers for Roses ............................................................... 17 City Employees Nominated by E-FORUM Readers for Garlic............................................................... 17 City Departments, Policies and Services...................................................................................................... 17 City Departments, Policies and Services Nominated by E-FORUM Readers for Roses......................... 17 Police .................................................................................................................................................. 17 City Manager ...................................................................................................................................... 18 Public Works....................................................................................................................................... 18 Code Enforcement .............................................................................................................................. 18 Tom Butt E-FORUM .......................................................................................................................... 18 City Departments, Policies and Services Nominated by E-FORUM Readers for Garlic ........................ 18 City Council........................................................................................................................................ 18 All Departments.................................................................................................................................. 19 Public Works....................................................................................................................................... 19 Special Award for a Citizen................................................................................................................ 19 2008 Predictions from E-FORUM Readers.................................................................................................. 21 How did E-FORUM Readers 2007 Predictions turn out? ............................................................................ 21 How Did We Do on My Wishes for 2007? .................................................................................................. 21 My wishes for 2007 seem to fit into three categories: cleaner, leaner or greener......................................... 21 Tom Butt Wishes for 2008 ........................................................................................................................... 23 Richmond, California 2007 Year End Review Page 1 Tom Butt and E-FORUM Readers Introduction For several years, I have prepared detailed year-end evaluations of City of Richmond services, problems challenges and wishes. Originally, these were conveyed to my City Council colleagues and the city manager as a way of providing input into the annual city manager performance evaluation and establishing my priorities and legislative objectives for the coming year. Since 2002, I have invited public participation, and I have shared the results on my E-FORUM. • At the end of 2002, I shared one of these priorities on the E-FORUM in New Year's Resolution - A Full Court Press on Blight, January 3, 2003. • Following 2003, I went whimsical and authored Out With The Old – In With The New, January 1, 2004, providing a number of awards and multiple choice predictions. • At the beginning of 2005, I decided to expand the New Year’s Day, 2004 Year-End Review, December 31, 2004, to become a broader evaluation of the City of Richmond and to give E- FORUM readers an opportunity not only to participate but to also play the principal role. • At the beginning of 2006 was What Can We Fix in 2006?, January 1, 2006. • This year, it was Will Richmond be Heaven in 2007? January 1, 2007. I recommend you take a look at these previous E-Forums, and you will be amazed at how many challenges have persisted unabated, how many predictions have been fulfilled and how one year’s top stories became distant memory a year later. What follows is not based on a scientific poll or survey by any standard, although the 2007 City of Richmond Citizen Survey has proven to be useful tool in evaluating, as never before, the state of mind of Richmond residents. Some of what I have written reflects my personal opinions, and some of it reflects the opinions of people who live or do business in Richmond, including some City employees. The only public input quoted herein is from readers of the E-FORUM, which is a self-limiting sample. Comments from E- FORUM readers are in quotation marks and italics to distinguish them from my own. As before, I have censored almost nothing, which will surely offend some people. However, I value my reputation as an objective and equal opportunity critic, and I welcome responses, comments, arguments and debates. I especially solicit corrections. I extend special thanks to all those citizens and City employees who keep me informed of both problems and solutions all year long. Your input is invaluable. Please keep it up. My E-Forum is my best tool for dispensing with my own frustrations, and I hope it provides useful information for those who subscribe. Top Three Richmond Stories of 2007 Last year, it was easier to pick out singular events for this review. This year it is much different, so I have selected three broad themes that are collections of many stories that played out throughout 2007 and will continue to evolve in 2008 and beyond. They are at once both complex and subtle, as well as a mixture of both reality and perception. Richmond, California 2007 Year End Review Page 2 Tom Butt and E-FORUM Readers City of Crime and Violence or a Cool Place to Live? Richmond has always struggled with its image. Ten years ago, I explored this subject in a paper I wrote to try to better understand the challenges and opportunities to change both the image and reality of this remarkable city. Click here to read it. Then, as now, Richmond was defined by violence, although the circumstances were remarkably different. In 1998, Richmond had completed a three-year run of dramatic decreases in homicides, (62, 46, 52 and 52 in years 1991-1994 versus 26, 34 and 30 in years 1995-1997), yet the City of Richmond Image Survey found that crime, drugs, gangs and violence dominated opinions about the most serious problem in Richmond.1 Similarly, respondents listed crime, drugs and violence as the things for which Richmond was best known, according to respondents who live or work in Richmond.2 As this is being written, homicides have climbed back up to a new high of 47 for year 2007, the highest since 1994 and the highest since I began serving on the city Council. In 2007, Richmond was once again rated as one of the top ten most dangerous cities in the U.S. based on 2006 statistics. See Richmond Ties Last Year's Homicide Record, December 16, 2007. The 2007 City of Richmond Citizen Survey showed that safety was a huge concern of Richmond residents,
Recommended publications
  • To: Ashley Nguyen, Project Manager Metropolitan Transportation Commission Dear Ms

    To: Ashley Nguyen, Project Manager Metropolitan Transportation Commission Dear Ms

    From: Terry Abrams Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 5:05 PM To: MTC Info Subject: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement Project To: Ashley Nguyen, Project Manager Metropolitan Transportation Commission Dear Ms. Nguyen and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, I am writing in support of adding the Richmond‐San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement Project to Plan Bay Area and to the 2015 Transportation Improvement Program. By prioritizing the re‐opening of the third lane on the Richmond‐San Rafael Bridge during peak evening commute hours, we will make a big difference in cutting traffic, reducing air pollution, and improving the quality of life in the North Bay. Thank you. Terry L. Abrams ABRAMS CONSULTING Management Consultants www.abramsconsulting.net 1 From: Jeff Alpert Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 1:14 PM To: MTC Info Subject: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement Project To: Ashley Nguyen, Project Manager Metropolitan Transportation Commission Dear Ms. Nguyen and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, I am writing in support of adding the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement Project to Plan Bay Area and to the 2015 Transportation Improvement Program. By prioritizing the re-opening of the third lane on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge during peak evening commute hours, we will make a big difference in cutting traffic, reducing air pollution, and improving the quality of life in the North Bay. Thank you. Jeffrey D.Alpert Managing Partner Milestone Trailer Leasing LLC Ph Cell 1 From: Shannon Appelcline Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 11:57 AM To: MTC Info Cc: Subject: Support for Richmond/San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement Project I am writing to express my strong support for a bike lane across the Richmond/San Rafael Bridge.
  • 4 Independent Political Action

    4 Independent Political Action

    Solidarity Political Basis of Unity: Suggested Bibliography #4 Independent Political Action In the labor and social movements, we call for political independence and a break from the two-party system. The Democratic and Republican parties are dominated by corporations and merely offer different flavors of pro-war and pro-business policies. These capitalist parties maintain a stranglehold on politics in the United States and offer only dead ends for working class and oppressed people. The Democrats in particular have functioned as a trap for organized labor and as the graveyard of social movements. We argue against engagement in the “lesser evil” approach of working with the Democratic Party, which tends over the long term to push the overall political climate to the right. We argue, instead, for the political independence of movements. When possible, we support third parties and independent candidacies that stand on these principles. Our long-term strategic goal is the construction of a mass party that can champion workers’ interests independently of the two-party system. Draft Revision 1, September 2014 Socialists as well as working-class and social movement activists have attempted to build independent parties for more than 100 years. The renewed interest in campaigning for socialist and community candidates stands on that tradition. In the past, those efforts were unable to break through at a national level and several were incorporated into the Democratic Party. Today, election laws, the amount of money necessary to build a campaign and the emphasis on campaigning through the media have raised the stakes against independent political action. Current Initiatives Solidarity is Prioritizing The Green Party campaign for governor/lieutenant governor in New York State is important for the issues it is raising.
  • Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority

    Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority

    Steering Committee Draft | Ocotber 2020 Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority Steering Committee Draft | Ocotber 2020 Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority Prepared By: 1625 Shattuck Avenue Suite 300 Berkeley, California 94709 510.848.3815 ORANGE COUNTY • BAY AREA • SACRAMENTO • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE • SAN DIEGO www.placeworks.com Table of Contents List of Figures & Tables ii Executive Summary 3 1. Introduction 13 1.1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Lifeline Transportation Program 13 1.2 CBTP Guidelines 14 1.3 2004 Richmond-Area CBTP 15 1.4 Current Richmond Area CBTP 15 1.5 COVID-19 and CBTP Development 17 2. Study Area Profile 18 2.1 Demographic Analysis 18 2.2 Transportation Patterns 24 2.3 Transportation Network 28 3. Previous Studies and Mobility Gaps 33 3.1 Local Studies 33 3.2 Countywide Studies 37 3.3 Current Studies 39 3.4 Thematic Mobility Challenges 40 4. Outreach and Engagement Summary 43 4.1 CBTP Advisor Groups 43 4.2 Outreach Strategy 44 4.3 Outreach Awareness 44 4.4 Outreach Results 46 4.5 Outreach Summary 54 5. Methodology and Recommendations 56 5.1 COVID-19 and CBTP Development 56 5.2 Evaluation Criteria 57 5.3 Evaluation Process 60 5.4 Recommended Projects and Plans 62 Appendix A Existing Conditions Report Appendix B Outreach Materials and Results Appendix C Recommendations Scoring Results Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan i Contra Costa Transportation Authority List of Figures
  • West Contra Costa/Albany Transit Wayfinding Plan

    West Contra Costa/Albany Transit Wayfinding Plan

    FINAL WEST CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN and WEST CONTRA COSTA/ALBANY TRANSIT WAYFINDING PLAN Prepared for: West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee October 2011 Acknowledgements WCCTAC BOARD City of El Cerrito Janet Abelson, Vice Chair City of Hercules Donald Kuehne City of Pinole Roy Swearingen, Chair City of Richmond Courtland “Corky” Boozé City of Richmond Thomas Butt City of Richmond Jeff Ritterman City of San Pablo Genoveva Calloway AC Transit Joe Wallace BART Joel Keller WestCAT Tom Hansen Contra Costa County John Gioia WCCTAC STAFF Christina Atienza, Executive Director Linda Young John Rudolph Joanna Pollock WCCTAC WORKING GROUP City of El Cerrito Yvetteh Ortiz City of Hercules Robert Reber City of Pinole Winston Rhodes City of Richmond Chad Smalley, Hector Rojas, Steven Tam City of San Pablo Kanwal Sandhu, Adele Ho AC Transit Nathan Landau, Puja Sarna, Aaron Priven BART Diedre Heitman WestCAT Rob Thompson Contra Costa County Jamar Stamps MTC Jay Stagi CONSULTANT TEAM Fehr & Peers Nelson/Nygaard Bob Grandy (Project Manager) Linda Rhine Brooke DuBose (Deputy PM) Joey Goldman Matthew Ridgway Meghan Mitman Studio L’Image Ellen Poling Sue Labouvie Josh Peterman Max Heim Steve Rhyne Carrie Carsell Eisen Letunic Nikki Hervol Niko Letunic Nikki Foletta table of contents I Introduction II Study Locations III Community Participation IV Travel Demand Management & Parking Strategies V Richmond BART Transit Center Enhancement Strategies VI Richmond Parkway Transit Center Enhancement Strategies VII El Cerrito Del
  • For Several Years, I Have Prepared Detailed Evaluations of City of Richmond Services, Problems Challenges and Wishes

    For Several Years, I Have Prepared Detailed Evaluations of City of Richmond Services, Problems Challenges and Wishes

    Richmond, California Will Richmond be Riven in 2011? 2010 Year End Review Prediction and Wishes for 2011 Tom Butt, Richmond City Council Member January 1, 2011 Table of Contents A Decade of TOM BUTT E-FORUMS .......................................................................................................... 1 2010 – A Remarkable Year in Richmond ....................................................................................................... 2 Top Three Richmond Stories of 2010 ............................................................................................................ 3 1. Independent Progressives Sweep City Council Race ........................................................................ 3 2. Point Molate Casino a Poor Bet? ....................................................................................................... 6 3. Chevron Business and Utility Tax Issue Settled................................................................................ 8 Most Controversial Issues of 2010 ................................................................................................................10 1. Pot ....................................................................................................................................................10 2. Censored ...........................................................................................................................................10 3. Flotilla ..............................................................................................................................................10
  • RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, May 19, 2020 the Richmond City Council

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, May 19, 2020 the Richmond City Council

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, May 19, 2020 The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:02 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference. Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. (See, for example, March 31, 2020, County Order extending the shelter-in-place order until May 3, 2020, and March 19, 2020, statewide shelter-in-place order). Accordingly, Governor Gavin Newsom issued executive orders that allowed cities to hold public meetings via teleconferencing (Executive Order N-29-20). DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance at the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to Councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below. Consistent with Executive Order N-29-20, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting. The public was able to view the meeting from home on KCRT – Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99, or live-streamed online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/ 3178/KCRT-Live. Written public comments were received via email to [email protected] and eComment. Comments received by 3:00 p.m. on May 19, 2020, were put into the record and considered before Council action. Comments received via email during the meeting and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were read into the record.
  • San Francisco Bay Plan

    San Francisco Bay Plan

    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
  • REQUEST for QUALIFICATIONS and PROPOSALS Notice of Development Opportunity Historic Anitas Building: 920 Macdonald Ave

    REQUEST for QUALIFICATIONS and PROPOSALS Notice of Development Opportunity Historic Anitas Building: 920 Macdonald Ave

    REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS Notice of Development Opportunity Historic Anitas Building: 920 Macdonald Ave. Macdonald Ave. and 11th St. - 1940’s Source: Online Archive of California City of Richmond, California Issued by the City of Richmond, CA City Manager’s Office, Development Services Submission Deadline: May 3, 2019 at 12:00 PM (PDT) City of Richmond, CA REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS Notice of Development Opportunity 920 Macdonald Ave. City of Richmond, California City Council Mayor Tom Butt Vice Mayor Melvin Willis Councilmember Nathaniel Bates Councilmember Ben Choi Councilmember Eduardo Martinez Councilmember Jael Myrick Councilmember Demnlus Johnson III City Manager Carlos Martinez City Manager Bill Lindsay Stay updated on all Richmond Opportunity Sites: http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/OpportunitySites Request for Qualifications/Request for Proposals: 920 Macdonald Ave. 2 City of Richmond, CA Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................... 4 II. NEIGHBORHOOD & COMMUNITY ASSETS............................. 6 III. SITE VISION...................................................................................... 21 IV. SITE AND PARCEL SUMMARY...................................................... 23 V. DEVELOPMENT TEAM SELECTION............................................ 29 VI. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS..................................................... 30 VII. SELECTION CRITERIA, PROCESS & SCHEDULE.................. 33 VIII. CITY NON-LIABILITY & RELATED MATTERS....................
  • Richmond Progressive Alliance Revives Campaign for Stronger Tenant Protections

    Richmond Progressive Alliance Revives Campaign for Stronger Tenant Protections

    Richmond Progressive Alliance revives campaign for stronger tenant protections Apartment building in Richmond, 23rd Street/Nevin Avenue (Photo by Fabian Graber) By Fabian Graber Posted May 11, 2015 9:00 am Advocates for stronger tenant protections in Richmond received support last week when the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) decided to join their efforts. The RPA is an influential political player in the city, with members—Jovanka Beckles, Eduardo Martinez, and Gayle McLaughlin— holding three of the seven seats on the city council. The group’s steering committee voted on Wednesday “to reaffirm and update its historical position” in support of just cause protections against eviction and a “fair rent” ordinance, said Marilyn Langlois, a coordinator with the organization. Just cause for eviction policies commonly list a set of conditions under which a tenant can be rightfully evicted, while fair rent policies, sometimes also referred to as rent control or rent stabilization, aim to limit yearly rent increases to a certain percentage. Langlois said the RPA’s steering committee also voted to join “a growing community” of organizations advocating these issues, spearheaded by the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Page 1 of 3 (ACCE), a non-profit community organization that recently supported Richmond tenants in a partial rent strike. The debate on how to tackle rising rents in Richmond has gained momentum over the past months. In February, the city council, on the initiative of Vice Mayor Jael Myrick, directed the City Manager’s office to draft a just cause ordinance within 90 days, which the council would consider at a future meeting.
  • Botanical Priority Guidebook

    Botanical Priority Guidebook

    Botanical Priority Protection Areas Alameda and Contra Costa Counties the East Bay Regional Park District. However, certain BPPAs include Hills have been from residential development. public parcels or properties with other conservation status. These are cases where land has been conserved since the creation of these boundaries or where potential management decisions have the poten- Following this initial mapping effort, the East Bay Chap- \ ntroduction tial to negatively affect an area’s botanical resources. Additionally, ter’s Conservation Committee began to utilize the con- each acre within these BPPAs represents a potential area of high pri- cept in draft form in key local planning efforts. Lech ority. Both urban and natural settings are included within these Naumovich, the chapter’s Conservation Analyst staff The lands that comprise the East Bay Chapter are located at the convergence boundaries, therefore, they are intended to be considered as areas person, showcased the map set in forums such as the of the San Francisco Bay, the North and South Coast Ranges, the Sacra- warranting further scrutiny due to the abundance of nearby sensitive BAOSC’s Upland Habitat Goals Project and the Green mento-San Joaquin Delta, and the San Joaquin Valley. The East Bay Chapter botanical resources supported by high quality habitat within each E A S T B A Y Vision Group (in association with Greenbelt Alliance); area supports a unique congregation of ecological conditions and native BPPA. Although a parcel, available for preservation through fee title C N P S East Bay Regional Park District’s Master Plan Process; plants. Based on historic botanical collections, the pressures from growth- purchase or conservation easement, may be located within the and local municipalities.
  • RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, June 1, 2021 the Richmond City Council

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, June 1, 2021 the Richmond City Council

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, June 1, 2021 The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference. Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. Accordingly, Governor Gavin Newsom issued executive orders that allowed cities to hold public meetings via teleconferencing (Executive Order N-29-20). DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance at the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below. Consistent with Executive Order N-29-20, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting. The public was able to view the meeting from home on KCRT Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT-Live and http://www.youtube.com/user/KCRTTV. The methods to submit public comment were via mail, email to [email protected], teleconference, and telephone during the meeting. Written comments received by 1:00 p.m. on June 1, 2021, were put into the record and considered before council action. Written comments received after 1:00 p.m. and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were also put into the record.
  • RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, February 23, 2016 the Richmond City

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, February 23, 2016 the Richmond City

    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, February 23, 2016 The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Nat Bates, Gayle McLaughlin, Vinay Pimplé, Vice Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and Mayor Tom Butt. Absent: Councilmember Jael Myrick arrived at 5:31 p.m. and Councilmember Jovanka Beckles arrived after the City Council adjourned to Closed Session. PUBLIC COMMENT The city clerk announced that the purpose of the Open Session was for the City Council to hear public comments on the following items to be discussed in Closed Session: CITY COUNCIL A-1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Bill Lindsay and Lisa Stephenson Employee organizations: Service Employees International Union (SEIU, Local 1021); International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees (Local 21); Richmond Police Officers Association (RPOA); Richmond Police Management Association (RPMA); Richmond International Association of Firefighters (IAFF, Local 188); and Richmond Fire Management Association (RFMA). The Open Session adjourned to Closed Session at 5:32 p.m. Closed Session adjourned at 6:32 p.m. The Regular Meeting of the Richmond City Council was called to order at 6:36 p.m. by Mayor Tom Butt who led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Nat Bates, Jovanka Beckles, Gayle McLaughlin, Jael Myrick, Vinay Pimplé, Vice Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and Mayor Tom Butt. Absent: None. STATEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None. AGENDA REVIEW Councilmember Pimplé continued items I-3 and I-4 to the March 15, 2016, City Council meeting. cc23Feb2016 Page 1 of 4 PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND COMMENDATIONS E-1.