Speaker 0: I can say we do not have any speakers for non agenda as a next item. Council referrals will tracker update is on here. Did you want to speak to that?
Speaker 1: 49.
Speaker 2: Instead of directing staff to return with the Sanctuary City Contracting Investment Ordinance, this item is placed on the agenda at the request of Vice Mayor Vella.
Speaker 7: So I brought this in part for well, for a couple of different reasons. One, I want to make sure that our sanctuary city ordinance is being followed. I think there was an intent by this council to do this sort of review and make sure that our policies are contracts. And what we do is in line with the values that we proclaimed. There were a couple of issues that are questions that have come up. One was, how does this impact our investment portfolio? This is about investments moving forward. So I wanted to be clear about that. This is about investments moving forward. And we have looked at divesting before and other things are it's in line, I believe, with our investment policy in terms of looking forward on on future investments. Other cities have moved similar ordinances forward. Berkeley was one of them. Richmond was another. It would be nice if the city of Alameda could could join those cities. And also in terms of how we're spending our money, the technology that we're using to make sure that everything is in line with what our our proclaimed and professed values are. This really has to do with extreme vetting or data mining technology. It has to do with data brokers. And we want to make sure that the that. All of the city resources that we have are being used and that they're being used in line with our sanctuary city ordinance. And also I think this provides that sort of public transparency and check where we can make sure that everything that we're doing has a process and that it's very clear and we're looking for certain things before we contract and agree to contract with different entities. I thought that would happen with Vigilant Solutions, you know, wouldn't have happened if we had had something like this in place where we had a process for doing this sort of review. And I think it also gives us an opportunity to review our contracts because people that we contract with, where we have these rolling contracts that the last couple of meetings we voted on different contracts with different data vendors, that that kind of roll on and on and on for for long periods of time if they change their policy. This gives us an opportunity to check. And it also schedules it in so that we're not having to reach back or look for it. It just starts building it in. And so staff know what to look for and vendors know that they're going to be in breach of our our ordinance if they don't disclose the information to us because it's part of what we're looking for. So that was the impetus for Bring It Forward. And I you know, I want to thank the folks from the Oakland the Oakland group that that is focused on making sure that we.
Speaker 1: Are.
Speaker 7: Adding to transparency as well as the ACLU. They've been very supportive of this. And I'm sure you all got a number of communications on this item.
Speaker 0: Any other comments from council before I call the public speakers? Okay. Samina Usman and Brian Offer and then Gerry Johansson.
Speaker 8: Good morning. Good evening. Good night. Good morning, Mayor.
Speaker 5: An honorable councilmembers. My name is Brian Hofer. I'm a member of Oakland Privacy.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry I called a first.
Speaker 5: My apologies.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 8: I'm a member of Oakland Privacy and the Deportees Coalition that sent you a support letter earlier where a 19 member.
Speaker 5: Organization representing thousands of East Bay residents. I urge you to adopt.
Speaker 8: This ordinance tonight, if possible. For targeted communities, this is a matter of some urgency. And I want to thank and recognize Vice Mayor Vella for her leadership in carrying this legislation. There's only essentially two components, and so there's really two questions for you. Should you be subsidizing Trump's deportation machine by giving contracts to vendors like Vigilant? Should you be profiting from Trump's xenophobic policies by investing in those same companies? Obviously, the answer to both is no. The freedoms afforded to us by the Bill of Rights.
Speaker 5: Including the First Amendment.
Speaker 8: Also give vigilant the right to gather data and sell it to their customers. That's what newspapers do. So we need another mechanism to disincentivize these companies that care about maximizing profit. You're probably familiar with Edwin Black's book.
Speaker 5: IBM and the Holocaust.
Speaker 8: Without IBM, the number of people that would have died would be a fraction of what they were. But they knowingly, willfully helped Hitler automate the destruction of millions of people. And so that's what we're trying to move away from concerns about the administrative burden. You've done this before.
Speaker 5: Done this before. This is not a new concept.
Speaker 8: Wells Fargo Border Wall Contractor Prohibitions.
Speaker 5: Berkeley and Oakland have anti nuclear weapons ordinances.
Speaker 8: That have been in effect for over.
Speaker 5: 15 years. The number of contracts that would probably fall under this and come that.
Speaker 8: Alameda would be in the single digits with the declaration under the penalty of perjury and a misdemeanor penalty.
Speaker 5: The burden is really on the vendor, not on the staff. So we ask you to make a stand like you did tonight with the vigilant LPR proposal. Make sanctuary sanctuary status real by putting a little more behind. Just a word. Thanks.
Speaker 0: The main.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Simone Osman. I'm the government relations coordinator for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Our organization is a member of the Deport Ice Group or Coalition. You know, when Alameda joined the number of other cities who became a sanctuary city, I think communities breathed a sigh of relief because they recognized that, you know, we are joining together with other cities to to say that, no, we are going to be protecting our residents and making sure that, you know, people aren't going to be targeted based on their citizenship status. We are in documentation status now. We truly want to be a sanctuary city. We need to make sure that we have all our bases covered, that that that we aren't going to be partnering and engaging any in contracts with companies that are actively working on targeting communities, vulnerable communities that that are concerned about their data or their information that's being gathered that would be used against them. And one aspect of this ordinance that I found particularly interesting is the extreme vetting aspect. Now, the Muslim community is well aware that our administration has been targeting the Muslim community based on their national origin and based on their religion. And people are concerned about how their information via Twitter or Facebook, whatever, is going to be used against them. And we know that these companies are trying to focus on people, not only people who are coming into this country from other countries, but also people who may have, you know, certain visas or even green cards, people who are naturalized citizens. This data can be used against them. And this is not what Alameda is about. This is not what we want to be. And we want to make sure that our most vulnerable communities are going to be protected. And we truly are following the the, you know, the spirit of the sanctuary city ordinance. And we want to make sure that we support that by passing this ordinance. And so I truly I hope that the council will consider this and consider this tonight because. We have vulnerable communities that are on the line. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Gary Hansen and then Mike Katz. If you want to speak on this item, please submit your slip.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Almost good morning. I'm Sherry Johannsen and I'm representing the Alameda progressives tonight. I'm sorry. There's not a whole army of me behind behind me in support of this ordinance. The Alameda progressives were proud to stand with this council in creating and being one of the first cities to create the sanctuary city. If you can recall, we sort of took our initiative to put hearts at schools and all over the community and where we don't see those hearts quite as often as we did a year ago. I want to make sure that you understand that that's the real. Reason that we support Sanctuary City. It's the heart of Alameda. It's the people. It's the children. It's the whole inclusiveness and diversity of our people. And the problem with saying you're a sanctuary city is you really have to stand up and be counted and say, yes, we are a sanctuary city. We are going to protect the people in this in this. Our neighborhood and the people that we live with every day and work with every day. And when we see things like the license plate readers and we see some incidences that have happened, we tend to think, well, maybe you guys are not as strong in your support of the sanctuary city. And I think I was at another event earlier today in Encino High School, and the gentleman that spoke said that it's not just our children now, but it's their babies. It's saying that we really stand for something and that we're going to protect everybody. So I hope that you will stand very strong with the sanctuary city and oppose ice. And following the money is a really important. And that's that's what this ordinance is about. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mike.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Honorable Mayor Spencer, members of the city council, members of staff and remaining members of the public. This is where the glory of elected office lies. Late night, last minute decisions on the city council. My name is Mike Councilor Colby. I'm also a member of Oakland Privacy. I encourage you to support the ordinance before you tonight. I think it was great when Alameda joined many other Bay Area cities in declaring themselves a sanctuary city. However, what I found with most of the sanctuary city resolutions or ordinances is they were great. They were a great expression of support for undocumented and vulnerable communities. However, this ordinance really is where the rubber meets the road. It's where the city takes that sanctuary, that expression of sanctuary and puts it puts their money where their mouth is. It's been said that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph over good is for good men to do nothing. This is getting away from that and actually doing something. It is. Stop feeding the data into the deportation machinery. And I look forward to your support for this debate and hopefully we'll see more of this around the Bay Area as well. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And that completes our speakers.
Speaker 3: Okay. I'll go first. So just briefly, I believe in everything that the vice mayor said when she brought this. This is a power that we have as individuals and as a community that nobody is going to tell us there's federal supremacy over this. We can contract with whoever we want a contract with. I mean, we could do business with whoever we want to whoever we want to do business with. There's no threat that if we do this, that someone's going to say, oh, I'm going to cut your federal funding or something like that. So this is complete within our authority. So I don't know why we don't do it. These efforts have been successful in social justice and social change throughout history. I mean, we all you know, I hear about the great workers strike, you know, every week in my office and in I remember being in college during the vesting in South Africa. And, you know, those things may not have been done overnight, but they were ultimately successful. And, you know, just like the, you know, the famous saying, you know, the arc of history bends toward justice. You know, we need to just keep bending that arc and getting there. So, you know, I'm fully prepared to support this. And I appreciate the vice mayor for bringing it forward.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 8: Okay. I think this is the logical extension of what we did when we declared ourselves a sanctuary city. And I guess the. They ask on this is to have staff look at the attached ordnance. I see that it's it's been ranked. So we'll see it at the at the update at the workshop. Where it sits among all the others. All right.
Speaker 0: But they ask, is this ever approved tonight? That's what I was about.
Speaker 7: About my.
Speaker 9: My.
Speaker 8: It's not notice.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. We we could not adopt it as a first reading tonight.
Speaker 0: There are some some where alluding to that. So I think it's.
Speaker 8: Say I was just reading off on.
Speaker 0: Oh I appreciate your I was going to raise the same thing.
Speaker 6: And Ashcroft I am not opposed to having staff look into this and all the various implications. But I also and and by the way, as an Arab-American, I am certainly I have heard Azman speak several times and am always impressed and am ever mindful of, you know, the risks that are out there to vulnerable immigrant populations. As the city council and the gentleman alluded to this, the work we do sometimes in the wee hours of the morning, we balance a lot of different interests. And I would be remiss to not mention that less than two weeks ago in Alameda, we had a very tragic incident where in the course of an armed robbery attempt , a woman from one of our immigrant communities was shot and killed. Not even shot, actually, it was it wasn't Charlie, but killed. And those assailants are still being looked for. But I also am very impressed with the work that Mr. Hofer has done from Oakland Privacy. I've read the Davis ordinance that has to do with the regarding the use of surveillance technology in it establishing a penalty for violation thereof. And while it's not the same thing because this is a, you know, divestment sort of approach, I did appreciate it. And I don't know how much you had to do with the the first paragraph of that ordinance, but it's something I would like our staff to also take a look at, because this is this is what I found compelling. And it's where I talk about the balance that we always seek to find. Whereas the city council finds that any decision to use surveillance technology, again, little different than what we're doing tonight, that must be balanced with the need to investigate and prevent crimes, protect crime victims and society from those who commit crimes, protect civil rights and civil liberties, including privacy and free expression and the cost to the city. Those are all things that we consider. And I don't think they're they're mutually exclusive. And, you know, this might be a road map for us at some point and a little different topic, but I very much support staff looking into into this and coming back to us.
Speaker 0: So I would also want to hear from staff and the ramifications. And honestly, this has a lot of technical language in here that I think it's very important that I go through legal and actually come back and let us know what the impact would be. But this is really asking from our departments. But. This has a lot in here. And it's like every contract and and including one of them says that anyone we hire for construction or public works construction bids request for information include notice of the prohibition listed above. I'd like to know so. But this when you break it down what this really is asking and what we think the impact would be and the cost. And I agree with member Ashcraft. I, I, I was hoping that we would have heard something by now in regards to the cameras. The, our police chief had asked for the additional cameras for security. And I and and I thought I thought we were going to get something back by now. And I haven't heard anything on that. But I do think it is very important that we hear also from the chief and. But what impact this could have on that. And one of I'll say one of my jobs is, in fact, to do our best to protect the safety of every person, regardless of immigration status. And unfortunately, I do want to speak to this, because this is something that I think everyone needs to be aware of. We have had our chief come here and say that unfortunately, we've had like ten. We currently have ten vacancies, I believe. And his ask was to add cameras. And I wanted to make sure that everyone is really aware of of what is going on in our town from 2016 to 2017.
Speaker 6: Is ten days. I think we're getting off of.
Speaker 0: Other people out of things. But okay, so if you want to cut me off again, this happened all night. So let's go ahead. I'll call you. Want to make a motion?
Speaker 7: No, I it's I think it's just more of a point of order about this specific.
Speaker 0: Make your motion. I've been interrupted throughout the night. Go ahead.
Speaker 7: So I, you know, I. I do appreciate that we want to have legal review it and legal always reviews all of our ordinances. And, you know, but I also want to make sure that this does come back to council in a timely manner, because I do think it's important and I do think that it's urgent, as I noted, on the. Referral. And there are some dates in there for for the review to happen. And at this point, obviously, we're not going to make May 1st, which would then give us time to go through and do a review. But we do still have vigilant solution license plate readers and we have other contracts. I don't know what sort of legal system we have in terms of are we using Westlaw or LexisNexis, that sort of thing. And I think what I'm I think what this is trying to do is trying to just get a sense of what contracts do we have, who are we giving our our public taxpayer money to? And I think the first year is going to be hard.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry, did you want to make a motion? Because I got cut off when I tried to talk.
Speaker 7: It was a point of order because you were talking about something that was an.
Speaker 0: Genuine to talk.
Speaker 7: Though. I'm talking about something that's been agenda.
Speaker 0: This is agenda. I'm asking the question information. But I was trying to speak with goes to issues that relate to this.
Speaker 7: So I'm trying to ask staff and have a conversation with our acting city manager, because I think part of the concern that I've heard is the amount of time it's going to take to review this and and go through our contracts. And I think part of this is just establishing a protocol and a practice for the review and to have it be transparent. So. With that, I'm going to make a motion to have direct staff to look at adopting the sample ordinance for the Sanctuary City Contracting and Investment Ordinance.
Speaker 3: Second.
Speaker 0: All those in favor I.
Speaker 6: To have staff look in, to.
Speaker 1: Look at.
Speaker 7: To look into this ordinance.
Speaker 0: Although, I suppose.
Speaker 8: I have a question and you reread your we state your motion.
Speaker 7: I said direct staff to look at adopting the sanctuary city contracting and investment ordinance. So have staff back to us. With us with it.
Speaker 8: With an analysis.
Speaker 7: Of the proposed ordinance.
Speaker 0: What should happen is they would go to the priority setting meeting where we would discuss it there. If it if we're treating it like our other referrals.
Speaker 6: It is that I mean that.
Speaker 7: It's a referral.
Speaker 0: That the.
Speaker 6: Motion.
Speaker 7: Motion is to have staff and will be analysis.
Speaker 1: And.
Speaker 8: Will discuss and.
Speaker 4: We can discuss it on the right.
Speaker 8: On the 18th. Right. Yeah.
Speaker 1: That's the that's the motion I'm in.
Speaker 8: I'm in.
Speaker 6: That's right. Yes.
Speaker 3: Sorry.
Speaker 0: It's late when I post. So for one, emotion carries. And where are we now?
Speaker 6: Council communications.
Speaker 0: Council communications.
Speaker 6: Mayor and. I want to apologize. I didn't mean to be cutting you off. I was trying to raise a point of order that I thought we were moving away from the topic of the council referral. That said, I did attend an amazing all day meeting of the Statewide Policy Committee.
Consider Directing Staff to Return with a Sanctuary City Contracting and Investment Ordinance.  (Vice Mayor Vella)