Speaker 1: Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I'm here. Can you please read the last item, which is item 27?
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Councilwoman Zendejas, Councilmember Pierce, Councilmember, your UNGA recommendation to request city attorney to draft an urgency ordinance to establish a moratorium on all evictions on commercial and residential units for a minimum of 30 days. Or as long as the City of Long Beach has an active emergency proclamation related to COVID 19. Request City Manager to suspend utility shutoffs for a minimum of 30 days. Establish an ordinance during the duration of the Declaration of emergency requiring all airport convention center and hotel employees to allow employees to wash their hands every 30 minutes and to evaluate the feasibility of implementing an economic relief package for working families and small businesses impacted by COVID 19.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to ask if you're not speaking to, please put your phone on mute, if possible, whether that's staff or on the council side. That would be great. Thank you so much. And the way we're going to do this just for just for process is I'm going to begin with the the makers of the motion . So we will go Councilmember Richardson, Councilman Warringah, Councilman Pearce and consumers and Day House and then after all four of them have have have spoken on their item, then I will go ahead and go down the rest of the council in order. And if you have a comment, then please that would be the appropriate time to comment. And so I will go just down, down the lines as everyone has a chance to comment or ask questions. And I'll just start from District one all the way down and go and go in that direction. We also have public comment, which we will do once the winter's emotion on the floor. So let me begin by Councilmember having Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So within this, I'm going to make a motion place. Motion on the floor. So first I proposed, and we all empathize with the small businesses, the families, the entire Long Beach community, and also thank them for the cooperation in the interest of the health and safety of our community. Response by the city of Long Beach has been swift and clear and comprehensive. Thanks to our mayor, our city manager, our entire city thinks the purpose of this motion is to address the economic challenges facing our community due the impacts of the novel coronavirus. We, as policymakers have the authority and the social responsibility for policies that ensure that this temporary crisis become a permanent economic catastrophe for all these families and small businesses. Therefore, the exploration and adoption of a local economic relief package for the city of Long Beach is not just a reactive response to the crisis. It's a proactive way to place our city and our community in a in the best position possible to emerge from this crisis swiftly and in the strongest way possible. Since we submitted the proposal last Friday, a lot has changed. Many of the items within this proposal have already been addressed administratively, which will allow us to remove them from the proposal and focus on the remaining substantive items. I want to state that all of the ideas in this proposal are important. However, given the amount of work associated with this proposal, we're asking that staff prioritize the housing issues and ensure that the other issues are addressed subsequently. For the sake of time. I walk through the first part of the motion related to utility shut off and hand-washing. Back. I walked through the portion related to the feasibility of the economic relief package for small businesses and working families. And then lastly, I'll end with direction on the eviction moratorium, since this is going to be the most substantive item. First, the motion requests that the city manager take steps to suspend utility shut off in the time since we made this motion set up has already been suspended by the Long Beach Water Department Department and spoke out. Edison thanked the city city manager and Coca Edison. We can remove this from today's motion. Secondly, the motion requests an ordinance adding protections for workers to wash hands every 30 minutes in order to limit transmission of the virus and add an added level of comfort for workers and I Convention Center Airports and hotels. In speaking with our health department, our city manager, rather than institute an ordinance, there may be more appropriate ways during the emergency to address a directive, which could include an order by our health department. I'm supportive of this approach. I look forward to seeing what the city manager comes back with to let the motion reflect this direction. Next. Next up, there are items related to the economic package. The intent of the portion is for staff review to evaluate the feasibility of these nine items and return to council with further consideration of cost impact, next steps and timing for implementation. So I'm going to walk through one from today. The first one, an internal review of sick, sick leave and disability processes within city staff is already conducting the review and has made accommodations for city staff that have been very well received. We can take this off the list too. Identifying either funding with field view of the revenue to support our hotel industry or tourism industry has been impacted by the progression of the outbreak and speaking with the club president at length, they have thoughts on how this could support recovery efforts through local programs, this vacation program. Let's take this feedback into consideration. Number three, we need to explore mortgage relief program by and by. If we enact a full eviction ban, we need to ensure there's a backstop protecting small property owners and landlords from mortgage payments, and they require state or federal action. So we're asking staff to take appropriate steps to engage in that conversation. Number four, streamline processes of resources through partnerships with EBRD to support laid off workers. Educate. Educate folks on the resources available and explore additional education for impacted workers who are not covered by unemployment benefits. Next, we want to explore emergency loan assistance programs for small businesses who suffered significant loss programs as a result of this crisis. In speaking with City Manager Modica, Economic Development Department is exploring these solutions and should have to be able to speak to that. Should we have questions on that tonight? Number six. Potential partnerships that deeply assist people under self-quarantine as a result of the of the emergency with a priority on seniors. And in talking with our city manager and our mayor's office, we're beginning those efforts of a coordinated effort to support and check on individuals. We also know that a number of council districts are beginning the process of doing health and safety and welfare checks. So we like the progress here. Number seven, extend training opportunities. And we've spoken with the health department and they will explore making training available to businesses, essential businesses that remain open through the crisis. Number eight, relief for laid off furloughed workers in the affected industries, not limited to including but not limited to a rate of return and layoff and recall policy. The point here is that we're going to come out of this. Let's make sure that, as you know, hotels are going from 90% occupancy to 10% occupancy as restaurants are being hammered. We look at policies that we can put in place to ensure that this temporary crisis does not become a permanent crisis for workers and have just come back. Our workers have a right to return. And number nine, the worker retention policy to protect workers through potential bankruptcy and subcontracting that could occur through this crisis. The hope is that all of these will be vetted and reported back to the city council after the housing issues. After the housing moratorium. The eviction moratorium positions have been addressed. Finally housing the emergency. This emergency has exacerbated our current housing crisis. It impacts both tenant and housing providers. I'm glad to see the letters of support from some of our largest property owners in our city. I paid attention to the letters of concern from tenant folks who are already seeing reductions in their household income. And the small property owners will have to make make mortgage payments every month despite the COVID 19 crisis. The goal here is to take all of this an acceleration. Keep folks in their homes and protect our local economy, which includes local housing providers. The governor has put forward guidance and that should be considered as we move forward. The motion is to request the city attorney draft an urgency ordinance and minute order for consideration at the next City Council meeting to establish a moratorium on its impact on commercial residential units. For a minimum of 30 days or as long as the city of Long Beach, Los Angeles County or state of California have an active emergency related COVID 19 ordinance should also include a prohibition on late fees and prohibition on Section eight termination by the Housing by the Housing Authority for the Restoration of serious . There's further direction that the city that the city council needs to provide city planning in order to craft this motion. So the first question is, should the moratorium expire on May 31st, as suggested both by the order, by the governor's order or some sooner date or only expiration during the declaration of emergency within this motion? I think that we should align with the governor's order. We can revisit it later, but we should have aligned with the Governor's Order of May 31st. We understand that agency may be incentivized to keep their declaration of emergencies ongoing for a longer period. Then the moratorium should last for purposes of federal state funding, which may be may be after the social distancing orders have ended. So we don't want to necessarily be connected to the emergency. The emergency declaration may last longer after we've returned to work. Number two, should moratoriums were placed for all evictions or only evictions for nonpayment of rent. It should apply to all evictions. People can't shelter in place if they don't have shelter. Secondly, evictions are executed in the court, and I wouldn't be surprised if the courts were to be ordered to close. However, we know that this needs to be designed in the way that we have that we need to disincentivize fraud. Communicate clearly. This is not a holiday. We know that workers are impacted and the safety net of EDI will trigger. And many residents, not all but many resonate, will be eligible for unemployment benefits. So someone may be on short, maybe short on their rent. This is certainly they should be in the zone in a way to encourage that. They should certainly pay what they can. This is why we need to be very intentional about drawing a distinction in this in this ordinance between COVID 19 related evictions and other evictions and how those are remitted. Remedy once the emergency has ended. So once. So, number four, once the moratorium is lifted and unlawful detention detainers may proceed, should Senate have some grace period with which to bring crime? It'd be difficult for a ten would not have the ability to pay rent to bring rent current immediately after the expiration moratorium. Other jurisdictions are considering a 4 to 6 month rate for a grace period. The answer is yes. We should include a grace period only for those impacted by COVID 19. This benefit makes sense. It still requires some level of documentation of COVID related loss of income to qualify for that repayment grace period. These requirements can include a notice of hardship by the Senate to the landlord in advance of the due date. To ensure that property owners can be prepared, this could also include evidence of attempting to make payments or payment arrangements. As this is important, important to encourage people to pay rent again. All of this should be taken in consideration in the design of this of this moratorium. And thank you. And that concludes my column.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and go down for the other folks that were on this item. So the next speaker would be council members and de house.
Speaker 2: The. So. Hammer. Oh, okay. Um, yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Unfortunately, this public health and financial crisis that we're going through will be had the most impact on our most vulnerable communities, which are low income residents and our small businesses. I think that as city leaders, we have the obligation to use our resources at our disposal factors to stop the spread of this horrific virus that is going on COVID 19, but also to aid the community in whatever way we can during this extremely difficult time. How hard decisions have been made already, and they will continue to be made in the next days and weeks to come. And I think that we all agree we have an obligation to help the people that have been impacted by these closures and by social distancing. It seems to me like one of the biggest things we can do to help both individual residents and for their public health is to freeze evictions for both the duration of the crisis. And we need to make sure that whatever happens in the next few weeks, people are able to remain in their homes with access to water and power in order to keep themselves in quarantine. For the extension of of the time that the COVID 19 is gone. It's really hard because we have no direct, you know, inclination of when this may be over. But one of the things that we can see is that, you know, we really need to help out our community right now. And I'm very, you know, very thankful for the state and federal government for actually taking bold steps and to helping us locally. Public health experts have told us that our single greatest weapon into stopping the spread of coronavirus is ensuring that everyone possible can stay home with me, that this item makes this possible. It also asks that our city staff together plan so that we as local governments reimburse them whatever we are able to invest in our business, businesses and during and after the time of this incredibly stressful time. Unfortunately, we don't have the resources to do this alone, and we all need to rely on our county, state and federal partners to continue helping us. But we still have an obligation to do what we can. And this is what I represent and that first step in helping our community out.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilmember. I'm going to move on to. I'm going to go to Councilmember Pearce. And if you're not speaking. Please, you're my.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you. Thank and really thank you from Member Richardson for coordinating this item. I know that is I think the four of us all had pieces of this item that we all kind of felt near and dear to our heart. And we did an excellent job of really coordinating into one piece. And I think you've answered and took most of the talking points that I was going to make reference to the things that I want to tease out that are most important for me, not only for our constituents, which include renters, landlords, small business owners. The really here is that this is about really making sure that we all can breathe a little easier and be that the pressure valve has been released a little bit, that if you, a landlord have an opportunity to have some grace periods with your mortgage, pay a different percentage. So that makes it easier for you to accept that a tenant might not be able to make those payments. And so I know that staff has a lot of work ahead of them on this item, but I think that it is the right item. Again, not just because this is about tenant issues, but this is about the health of our local economy. We know what the hotel industry, 98% I'm sorry, 89% of the workers in our hotel industry live right here in the city of Long Beach. And so if we are closing down hotels, which I will tell you just today, we know that our highways are closing. We know that the court systems are closing, our restaurants close of are closing. So these are our tenants. These are our residents that our neighbors that we really need to make sure we're providing a safe community for them. So I support the item that's in front of us, the questions about notification. I think that when a tenant or a homeowner or anybody that that needs to pay rent or mortgage, when that triggers, when they lose that job, they reduce their hours that that notification should be made as soon as possible to their landlords, of course, the person they owe that to. And they should begin working on a plan, as Councilmember Richardson said, whether that's paying a percentage and a payment plan. For example, my rent is $2,000 a month, which is more than I bring home from council. So being able to talk to my landlord and say this is the reduced amount that I can pay with my current income, this is what I would be able to pay on top of it in the next six months. So if I divided that up over six months, that's $333 a month additional that I would need to pay when this moratorium is lifted. The really making sure that our tenants are small business owners are not only getting that relief, but that they're sitting down with somebody and working through a payment plan. I think that they should do that with the person that they owe the debt to. But I'd also like to see economic development and the team work on financial literacy for our community members. I think it's going to be the biggest need that we see not only in trying to get a temporary job for short term jobs , getting new jobs, but really sitting down and saying, what are your finances and how can we help? Because we know that financial literacy is not something that is our strongest suit, I think, in our school system. And often when an emergency like this happens, a lot of us are just kind of paralyzed and trying to figure out what we have to do. The next part I would mention in the questions that were asked is in reference to timing. I agree that we should tackle the housing situation first because they are the most detailed and difficult to try to unwrap, but also give our community members the biggest opportunity to breathe. The same thing that council members and they have said is this is not about tenant issues, this is about a health issue. I believe that this affects all evictions because we know that nobody should be moving right now when we're asking people to stay in their homes and to go out for only necessary items. It's really important that we're not sending a wrong message that says, well, it's okay if you have to move locations and good luck finding another place, particularly in this situation when it comes to the worker, if you've got it listed on here, I know that our hospitality industry was the first industry that was really hit hard, that we expected to see a lot of closures. You know, hopefully it doesn't get to a place of bankruptcies, but we know that that industry is going to go through the biggest change. So depending on where we end up, we can't see the future. This is going to be a big impact for all of us, all of the employees in the city of Long Beach. So I would ask that staff, when thinking about the worker pieces around worker retention, recall workers, that that is not just for hospitality, but that is a program we are looking at holistically to give some guidelines and in case. Might or might not remember. We already have some of these policies on the books when it comes to the airport and the convention center that were passed in 2013. But but in the time of having new contractors come in when their contracts get renegotiated, that workers get the opportunity to stay on the job. I forget if it was 30 days or 60 days to prove themselves when a new employer comes in. There are some model language and other policies that we can kind of look at already. I don't think that this work will be the most difficult. I think it will be the easiest. When we talk about hand-washing, I want to clarify that, you know, it's difficult to mandate that an employee washes their hands every 30 minutes. But I would like to say that we want to encourage that there are best practices for health and safety and that workers are not punished for them . We have seen industries punish workers whenever they have tried to go to the bathroom, wash their hands, do things on a normal day of work. In an epidemic like this, we can't have that happening. And so working with staff to really have some best practices. Again, maybe it's not an ordinance, but an order from our health department on how we have health and safety, making sure that those training opportunities our health department has been doing is also available to anybody that does. Food service is really important. And the last thing I'll say is for vulnerable populations or seniors, those that have a compromised immune system, I know that the mayor and I had a conversation. My community members have been talking nonstop about what system do we have in place? And it feels like there's a lot of micro communities creating systems to give out food, to say, you know what, I was one of those people that got too many rolls of toilet paper and I want to give them back. How do I do that? It'd be much easier to have a centralized system within the city, whether that's the mayor's office or city manager's office, and that we each have a staff role in that. So I know Randy has been kind of the point person in our community working with our neighborhood associations and know that it's an item in the in this agenda. I just wanted to say that we're here to help as much as possible and as much as we can have a coordinated effort. I know that we've all had a lot on our plates lately, but that is something that I think could rise above some of the worker recall items. So it's more housing, small business loans or housing vulnerable populations, small business loans. And some of the worker our return issues would be the the order that I'd like to to hopefully get us to work on. I know there will be questions. I'm sorry if I talk too long, but it's an important issue and I really hope that we can count on our council and our city to do what what's best in this public health crisis. So I'm sure we will. Thank you guys so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Councilor Marie Ringo. Contrary, Ringa. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and go down just the rest of the council. And so when I can if you have a comment.
Speaker 3: A given, you hear me?
Speaker 0: Sorry. Go ahead, Councilman Marengo.
Speaker 3: That was uncanny. They were saying, I want to thank my cast members, colleagues for bringing this up and all the great comments you made right now. One of the things that I was going to focus on was the fact that the eviction is a very important part of this whole process, and they know that that's being addressed . However, we have another community that we haven't really discussed here that's the homeless community, and the opportunities were not an opportunity that they have to go through this process. If Cosmo Richardson can go in there, so work with me for a bit on this. Maybe it's possible, maybe a third or not. But I'm looking at the possibility because hotels and motels and other other establishments are being closed, are closing. Is there an opportunity for city staff to look at ways that we could get vouchers or other types of payment that we can make available for those that are being evicted or thrown out or whatever that already are in the streets, who can take advantage of maybe have the the the hospitality industry and getting some some revenue out of this opportunity for to get people established somewhere and they'd have to be out in the street. So yes, to bring that out there as a possibility, because obviously, like I said, the the environmental justice community would include homeless in this. And I think we should look at ways that we can. There meet this challenge. This is a challenge. Now, we may look at this as an opportunity for them as well. But other than that, we haven't heard, at least not yet during the discussion as to what the effective date would be for these reviews and come back in terms of the initiation date or no. I would certainly suppose to support the date of when we went into this emergency, and that would be through the declaration of a state of emergency, which would take us to as it was the last Wednesday or Thursday. And that's all we could have at this point.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. Now I'm going to go ahead and move on to the council. I'm going to call that the council member. And if you have a comment, please, that's when you comment, I'll just go down the line. If you don't have a comment, you can just say no comment and we'll just move on to the next to the next member. So first one would be Councilmember Price.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. So a couple of questions. I know Rich Anthony is probably either on the call or there in person, but he did send a very thoughtful email that asks for us to provide some clarification in a few areas. So if it's okay, I'd like to just start and talk to Mr. Anthony regarding the motion that's on the floor. I understand the motion. As currently on the floor is proposed to sunset on May 31st. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Councilmember Price and councilmember, right. Oh, I'm sorry. This is. This is rich. Anthony, I just wanted to confirm I'm on the phone, and that's the way I'm interpreting the motion.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then my understanding and I'm going to address this with some recommendations or amendments in a minute, but currently the motion that's on the floor applies to all evictions. Correct?
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 2: Not just those for nonpayment, but it's people that are being evicted due to non-covid-19 related reasons such as nuisance activity, illegal activity, domestic violence, things that are enumerated in the code.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 2: Okay. As the motion is currently presented on the floor. Is there any provision for a grace period for the tenant to pay rent after the moratorium expires on May 31st?
Speaker 3: Yes. I thought Councilmember Richardson did a great job on explaining that. I feel like I have the information I need in order to bring back an ordinance.
Speaker 2: Okay. Can you what could I trouble you to just repeat it to me? Because there was just a lot and I was trying to take notes during Councilman Richardson's movement of the item, but I missed that entirely. So could you share with me what your belief on that is?
Speaker 3: Certainly. I don't mean to step on Councilmember Richardson's toes. Councilmember Richardson, do you want to re-explain or do you want me to do it? I'm happy to do it. I mean, you take a crack at it, and at the end, I can I can probably clarify the first part about how it applies and then anything that's missing . Okay. I'll I'll take a shot at the way I understand the motion on the floor, which is tenants who are not or are not being evicted because of the COVID 19 related reasons. Those tenants who take advantage of the unlawful detainer ban, who can show that it's a COVID 19 related reason, will have 4 to 6 months after the ban is lifted to come current on rent. They will have to continue to make their regular rent payments and they will have 4 to 6 months to make up the entirety of the rent payments that they missed. Tenants who have taken advantage of the unlawful detainer ban or moratorium, who do not have a COVID 19 related reason for why they couldn't pay rent or were otherwise subject to eviction who have no COVID 19 reason. Those tenants would not have a grace period within which to repay the rent they didn't pay during the moratorium. They would have to come current immediately upon expiration of the moratorium.
Speaker 2: Okay. All right. That that explains that. Thank you very much. Okay. So I. I would like to. First of all, I want to thank my council colleagues who brought this item forward. I think it's a really important conversation. I do want to give a huge commendation to our economic development team, because several of the items that are in here they have been working on in terms of business stimulus. In fact, Lisa West from my office worked with economic development and we put out an email to all of our business owners regarding all the loans that are out there available, you know, any sort of stimulus packages that are available. And but I mean, a lot has changed and it's changing on a daily basis. But I want to thank our economic development team for allowing us to at least be able to get that information out when we had it, which was after the president's speech about small business support. And as a small business owner, I'm very, very grateful that our economic development team has been working on that, and I would hope that they continue to do so. And this item kind of formalizes what they've been doing, and I think that's fantastic. But any ideas that come out as a result of COVID 19 economic discussions obviously should be included. We shouldn't limit ourselves to the four corners of the agenda item tonight because I think there may be some opportunities that come up that we may not be aware of even yet. So in regards to the residential moratorium item. When we come back, Mr. Anthony, to go on this.
Speaker 3: So I think I can get something done in time to have the council consider this at a special meeting on Tuesday. Would it be March 24th, next Tuesday? I don't want to make that firm, but I understand the urgent nature of this. So the latest it would be would be maybe a special meeting on Thursday, the 26th at the latest. But I'm confident I can get something done by the 24th.
Speaker 2: Okay, great. And I ask that because, Councilor Richardson, one thing I didn't see in here and I could have missed that. It's been a really crazy week, so I could have missed it if it was. And the document was any sort of request for staff to research property tax deferment for property owners. As we all know, that's coming due on April and April, and it would be good to see if we can do anything about property tax deferment, which isn't it? Is that okay with you? Would you accept the amendment to ask for our report? Just to report back on that when we come back.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 2: Okay, great. Thank you. Um, I the the one aspect that I'm really struggling with, with the motion that's on the floor tonight, and I understand the reasoning for it. Obviously, we want to do everything that we can to try to help, you know, workers and the city residents in the city. Again, you know, I'm a small business owner. I'm having to have very difficult conversations with my employees. My husband and I write the check for their payroll every two weeks. I'm also a manager managing over 80 people who are all government employees but very, very concerned about the economic impact that this is having on them. So I'm very aware of the very difficult conversations that we're all having and need to have. But the one area where I really struggle with on this item is evictions that are happening for non payment of rent due to COVID 19. I do not think we should be limiting property owners rights to evict tenants under the law who violate a term of their rental agreement by virtue of committing one of the enumerated offenses that's listed in our California code. Whether it's a nuisance property, whether it's criminal activity, whether it's dog fighting, you know, whatever of the enumerated sections that are in there, if they involve something other than nonpayment of rent for COVID 19, I don't believe the moratorium should apply to that. And so, Councilman Richardson, are you open to an amendment that would limit the moratorium to nonpayment of rent due to COVID 19?
Speaker 3: If I if I can respond to it. Mr. Mayor. Great. What I'd like to talk through a little bit is even if someone has committed an offense and they, you know, we want to get the landlord want to get rid of this person and it's not related to COVID 19 under the order. It's not a convenient time for people to move. So for the sake of so we're not saying you shouldn't be evicted. What we're saying is don't serve them today. You know, if if you know, certainly call the police, maybe there's some provision that is tough for Rich to look at and say in extreme cases, there's, you know , there's something that could happen. But the idea here isn't necessarily protect bad guy. The idea is to limit movement. You can't shelter in place if you don't have shelter. So. So what? So what the recommendation was, what I added was that I want to have a separate process for non cogat related entities, a separate process altogether. I look at it as almost two moratorium. There's one for Kogut related. There are benefits associated with that, like a grace period for catch up. And then there are instances where it's not all it related. Let's say someone doesn't have a cold experience and they're just not paying the rent and gaming the system. But they have to know that there's a penalty and there will be evicted and that this eviction should happen as soon as the period is over. And so and so I think there should be if you're open to giving giving the city attorney a little bit of a way to say we want to apply the simple protection of not moving through the end of this. That's the point. However, deal with it separately and there could be open to the idea that he may have to deal with all, you know, finance cases you're talking about. But I think that we say in general, the message should be, you know, not necessarily just related to COVID. It should be COVID is treated this way, we understand in hardship, but period, people should not be moving in this in this moment. This is a public health emergency. And so we should stay in place. And so I'd love to hear I'd love to actually hear from Mr. Anthony. If there is a way to divine this in the way that addresses some of or maybe makes, you know, Cancer Council member praise or others who feel the same way, they can feel a little bit more comfortable that there could be a way to address these issues. Well.
Speaker 2: Okay. If possible, I'd like to kind of finish my comments, but I still would love to hear from Anthony, but I kind of want to finish my thoughts on it. Okay. So my concern is this, and I get that we want to limit people's movement. Absolutely. But private property owners are not. They're not part of our health care system. They're not a public entity. They're not a public agency. And if anything, property owners, they have a duty to protect the peace and enjoyment of the property of all of their residents. We talked about this when we talked about Lilo tenant Willow and just cause eviction. And one of the things we talked about is for something for an offense to rise to the level that it qualifies as a violation of one of those very limited, enumerated offenses. It's pretty serious. And what it means is, by the time it comes to the attention of the property owner, another neighbor has complained police may have already been called. It's not I mean, you made a great point. A lot of courts are closed. So certainly we can't be offering them the court option as a way to provide peace and enjoyment, because even if the police come out, if courts are closed, we're not going to get that matter adjudicated or a restraining order issued if courts are closed for a period of time. So it really leaves the property owner in a very difficult situation because they have received complaints from someone who lives on the property, whether it's domestic violence, criminal activity, nuisance behavior, whatever of the enumerations that exist, they now feel that they have to take action to protect the other resident. And so I don't believe that we as a public entity can force them to become a public entity that's providing a service. So there may be two paths to address COVID related nonpayment and nonpayment related eviction. But I feel like the moratorium, if it were in place, would only offer a diversion of those two categories of cases on the back end, not on the front end, because the moratorium would be in place and would apply to all evictions regardless of category. Now, Mr. Anthony, I could be wrong, but my understanding of how the moratorium. Once it's over effect payment or nonpayment. And the period up is really on the tail end, not on the front end because of the moratorium which applied to all evictions, then it would certainly apply to all evictions equally. At the outset, Mr. Richardson's right. Absolutely. It would keep people in their homes. But I don't believe that we can or should mandate that on property owners. So, Mr. Anthony, is there an alternative that prevents people property, that allows property owners to get rid of nuisance? Nuisance or one of the enumerated violators from being a victim.
Speaker 3: As much as I'd like to tell you, I have an idea that would be acceptable to the position espoused by Councilmember Richardson and the one espoused by EU Council member Pryce. I can't think of one. I mean, I think I think it's clear each one of your respective positions. And there is no way to thread the needle here. It either applies to all evictions, including the non monetary evictions. And that comes with the, with the kinds that you just espoused or we go with all evictions and yes, it would apply on the front end, as you described it. But I think everyone understands one another's positions, and I don't know of a way to rectify those two.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. So I'm concerned about on the front end with the issue and you know what happens? Who can be evicted? That's really I love that we have a grace period option for COVID 19. I think that's fantastic. I support that wholeheartedly. I'm just that's the one area where I think Councilman Richard Richardson and I may disagree and we may or may not get to a place of agreement. But but I love that we're having these discussions. I think it's healthy and good. The other question that I have is, does the current motion on the floor allow for or require any sort of advance notice by the tenant to the landlord that they may not be able to make rent?
Speaker 3: Again, Councilmember Richardson, correct me if I'm wrong. I think I heard and I think the motion said that the notice there does need to be advance notice. And I don't know how far in advance. That's a question I was going to ask for a clarification. So I'm glad you brought this up, Councilmember Price. But it wasn't it's not they can't default in the payment of rent and then several days, months or weeks later, give a reason why and give documentation why. I mean, they could, but that's not what I heard Councilmember Richardson say it needs to occur on or before the date that rent was due. Absolutely. So that's that's my comments with respect that. Yeah. So just to clarify, yes, there should be a notice of hardship in advance of the rent due date. Those are the words that are used. So if you perceive if you're going to claim this hardship and you're going to, you know, default on your rent, there needs to be some notice. And that factors into whether or not you're eligible for whatever benefit happens after the fact.
Speaker 2: Okay. Okay, I got it. And I think that's great. I mean, I think something like 7 to 10 days would be ideal, but that's not for me. I defer to my colleagues on what you think advance notice looks like and how detailed we want to get on that. Okay. So with that, I mean, I think I'm in agreement with pretty much everything. Oh, the one thing I wanted to ask for the stimulus package is, Councilman Richardson, would you be open to the city also exploring the feasibility of a moratorium on meters, enforcing meters through the end of March, just so we have a better.
Speaker 3: Parking.
Speaker 2: Meter on parking meters.
Speaker 3: Parking meters. And then the second part where staff explorers can comes back. Absolutely. Let's have totally explore that and give us all the impacts on it. Well, actually.
Speaker 2: That would be great. Sure. Okay. So I think that a good. So for the mean, for the motion that's on the floor right now, I think there's I'm in agreement with everything Councilman Richardson has proposed except for the moratorium based on nonpayment of rent as a result of impact of COVID 19 versus a moratorium against all evictions . And I think for me, that's an important one. And so if that amendment is not being accepted, then I think that the option that I have at this point is to make a substitute motion that would include all the provisions that Councilman Richardson has indicated regarding the residential moratorium item, but that the moratorium would be limited to nonpayment occurring as a result of the fact. The impact of COVID 19.
Speaker 3: Set an.
Speaker 2: Eviction.
Speaker 3: Sure.
Speaker 2: So.
Speaker 3: So I think I find some I mean in listening to you and and and resampling, I think as long as there's a councilmember getting around. So yeah. Councilmember Richardson, we before we discuss that substitute, there needs to be a second. Is anyone willing to say that?
Speaker 0: Rich. Rich. I got it. Thank you. And so I just want to make sure that before we move forward. So Councilwoman Pryce, I think, is making a substitute motion. I just want to clarify.
Speaker 3: Well, not yet.
Speaker 0: Well, hold on. I got it. Hold on a second. Thank you. So, Councilman Pryce, I think you're about to make a substitute motion, and either you're going to make the substitute motion and we'll call for a second, or I think Councilman Richardson sounds like he's maybe willing to to change the motion. So Councilman Price has the floor. So would you like to continue and make that motion or a return, or do you want to hear from Councilman Richardson?
Speaker 2: I'd love to hear from Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 0: Okay. Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: So. So I completely understand what it is that you're expressing the issue, the issue here. But I think we may be able to find a middle ground and long term emotion and willing to make an amendment in the case that there is so that that line is going to be hard to draw. First of all, between cogat related and corporate related, it is only going to try his best to figure out how to document Kogut related. But Corbett related. The day yesterday meant something different than it did today, because the governor's order just today, just yesterday, expanded COBRA related from people who are sick or have been laid off to people who haven't been able to commute to work or whatever due to due to the stay in place order. And it will likely change again between now and when it's over. And so if so, maybe there's a way to say, you know, expand this, you know, COBRA related incidents, non-covid related. There should be if there's a way and I'm looking for the rich here, there's always a case. The nine calls that will. They're the way to sort of sort of, I don't know, appeal it or appeal it or say something to the fact of it is delayed some period of time, but not on the 31st. I don't know. Is there any room on that space? Because that's going to determine whether I accept the friendly or if we or if we if we just go with alternative motion. I think the goal here, again, this isn't the typical and it rates like this is, you know, there are victims on all sides here. And that's why we want to we want to sort of make sense, but also don't want to create a situation where we set a goal line that moves tomorrow and or we create a giant loophole for people to say, well, my interpretation as my interpretation is that you're not you're not impacted by COVID. And some of that I am impacted by COVID. And if that's a moving target. So for Mr. Anthony, just. So two questions. One, do you understand that that point about a moving target? And two, is there a way to add? Well, I'm not sure there is. It may not be. Is there a way to add on that second portion potentially? You know, something that there's an alternative process and with interest on the front end so that, for example, if any correlated or if a police department is releasing, then that is that is treated differently than if police department is not related and it is not what it was. I was able to figure this out. Well, I think we could if you wanted to get more granular and specific about which nonpayment causes of action for eviction you wanted to you wanted to prohibit in which you didn't. You know, we could we're going to get pretty specific if we go down that road, but we could if you wanted to make it so that nonpayment, evictions, that moratorium expired sooner than May 31st, like April 30th or any other date you might choose. We could, but I don't think the last thing you had mentioned was maybe some sort of an appeal to before somebody that he this is a particularly egregious act that a tenant committed. They shouldn't be able to avail themselves of the unlawful detainer prohibition. I don't see how that works. So hopefully that guidance, I don't know how helpful it is. I think maybe the discussion will do that. Here's what I'd like to do. I'd like to move forward with with the eviction on COVID related, but I want you to separately so we can move forth out of the next meeting. I want you to grapple with this issue or no, call it related, because I know that the goal line is going to move. I know that this is going to create a giant gap in this system. I also understand that we need to I think it makes more sense to say, hey, you know, the benefits, like the incentive based program, the benefits of having a payment plan and documenting that you've you've attempted to make payments during the emergency. All those things are connected to the payment, the incentive to keep people paying rent or paying whatever they can get as opposed to you can get in the system. A You cannot, right? So if, if I'm okay with saying for what we know we can get now, which is called the relief that those people need relief and we need to do a little bit more work, a little bit more work on the other side. So I would say come back with what considerations you would need to know in order to expand this to others in a separate system or a second secondary moratorium. And is that something you could do, Reg? Because if so, I'm going to I'm going to make that motion.
Speaker 0: Well, there's already your yard. You already have the motions. And let me let me hold on a second. Yeah, we actually have. So Councilman Pryce still has the floor. So just to be clear, guys, thank you. So Councilman Price actually still has the floor. She's she was getting clarification and allowed and I was okay with Councilman Richardson getting clarification. And so just so where we are at, it sounds like, is that Councilmember Richardson is open to taking Councilman Price's suggestion and just moving forward on the COVID 19 piece on the on the eviction piece, and that that would be the motion . But I want to go back to Councilwoman Price to make sure that that's how she heard it or if she has additional comments or suggestions. Councilman Price.
Speaker 2: I so I'm a little bit concerned because the family was that it just applies to nonpayment related to COVID. But it sounds like there's a second piece that we're going to come back to explore. And so, you know, I'm just trying to keep this as clean as possible and saying that I agree with the provisions, but I absolutely have no interest in supporting a motion tonight that ties the hands of property owners for non-covid related evictions that are legally enumerated in the California code. So I'd like to make a substitute at this point because I'm a little bit concerned about the second part piece. And it to me, it's it's unfortunately a little bit messier. So what I would like to do is make a proposal that all of the original motion is included in this, but that the eviction moratorium is only adds to COVID related nonpayment, that the tenant provides the housing provider with notice of an advance of rent being due . That is my son.
Speaker 0: Okay. That is the most. Is. Is there. Hold on. Is there a second to the motion? Also there's a second by Councilwoman Mongo. Somebody call a point of order.
Speaker 3: Rex, which has been called the point of pride, councilman. Okay. So what you just described is the motion that I just made. And what I asked for is more information. You indicated that you're uncomfortable with this piece. And what I'm saying is I want to learn more about that piece. But the actual ocean that's on the floor is the same as yours. You can't make a substitute motion. That's the exact same of the main motion. So this is actually under the point of order. Council Member You are adding that second piece, so technically it's not the same motion. So the point of order is not well taken.
Speaker 0: Okay, so we're going to move forward. So we're moving forward.
Speaker 3: But. Well, okay.
Speaker 0: Okay. I think the city attorney has as opined on the point on the point of order. So we have we have a substitute motion on the floor currently. Now we're moving on next. Councilman Price, I know you have the floor. Did you have any other additional comments?
Speaker 2: No, thank.
Speaker 0: You. Okay. Next up is Customer Supernova. Did you have any comments?
Speaker 3: Yes, I do. Thank you. So at this point, I'm addressing the substitute motion and that it is exclusively to provide for evictions due to nonpayment of rent. And that being said, I would like to address some of the comments we got from housing providers, and these are my words, not theirs. But the question was to me my interpretation. Why is the buck stopping with the housing providers? Why are they on the hook or for the nonpayment? So I would like to ask the question of the city attorney and could the city step up here and use some type of funding? And I would recommend a housing trust fund or some other funding source to make the residents payments for them that are COVID related. I think that is an amendment to the substitute motion, but I'm willing to make a substantive council on price is not able to accept that.
Speaker 2: Sorry about that. Is that something staff have? Is that even a feasible option? I don't even know if it's a feasible point.
Speaker 3: I mean.
Speaker 2: I'll be honest, I'm a little bit uncomfortable adding that in because I hadn't thought about it. So I may not accept it, but I don't know if council or staff can talk about it.
Speaker 3: So this is optional. Go ahead. Well, no. If the city attorney would like to weigh in that great. I mentioned the housing trust fund as a possible funding mechanism for this. Um, considering it's an emergency situation, if there are other funding sources, maybe the amendment could be to to examine other funding sources to help both the tenant and the landlords in this case. So this is Rich Anthony, deputy city attorney. The short answer is, I don't know for certain, but it's something we'd have to look into. But I doubt it. I don't think we could use housing trust fund money for that purpose. But I can't give you a definitive answer. But Linda Tatum is here with me and she's nodding your head in general agreement with me. We can look into it and report back, but we don't we don't think it will work. Okay. And if we looked at could the amendment be to look at other funding sources that we might have to work the same way if the housing trust fund is out of the question? We can still look into that. I think that question is completely you know.
Speaker 2: Darrell, I appreciate where you're coming from. I think that's a really good point. I'm I'm not going to accept that amendment right now. I'm just trying to keep this as simple as possible so I'm not going to I just want my sub to be what the sub is. I had hoped that it would just be very clean amendment, but it's just the sub now, so I'm not going to accept that at this time.
Speaker 3: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Mongo.
Speaker 2: So I appreciate Darrell's comments and I appreciate the Suzy Price Economic Relief Package amendment. What I'll do is I'll make the subscribe with a request from city staff to explore what options are available for alternative gaps. So let me give you an example. In talking with a housing provider, there are agencies that should the. Tenant not be able to provide them. All they have to do is receive the notice of nonpayment from their landlord and take it to a third party and. Bet that other party will pay it and make them current on rent. And so I feel like it's really important that we explore the agencies and nonprofits that already support this. So if we could also get on some subsidy, what is in council and prices item plus a report back on. Other funds. Available to tenants and housing providers that can fill the gap, because I think that that's critical in the whole process to know what other. Resources are available because at the end of the day, what we don't want is. Someone who's to support is that someone who has already passed due to months and is choosing to stay in a unit that should that won't be able to come. Complete eviction process. Make a housing unit available potentially to someone who is currently homeless. I mean, it's not like you're taking these.
Speaker 3: Out of.
Speaker 2: Out of circulation. You're hopefully getting them into other homes. And you're also not seeing that someone who is currently behind on rent and about to get evicted wouldn't potentially be better in a situation with their family or other other.
Speaker 3: Support.
Speaker 2: Where they could get back up on their feet and be able to move through the crisis with support. So I think those are the resources that are critical. So that would be my substance.
Speaker 0: If there's a substitute. Substitute, is there a second on that?
Speaker 3: Yeah. Supernova second it.
Speaker 0: Okay. There is a second on that. Then the manga motion is the motion that's on the floor. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 3: Okay. So thank you very much. I want to thank you all for this conversation. I think it's very timely. And first of all, I would just say that I want to help the welfare of our city should be the priority at this point. And I think that has been the focus, particularly over the last week. A lot has changed just in the last few days. And I want to commend I haven't had an opportunity to say it publicly. I commend our city staff, particularly our health department, our public administrators, our staff and the leadership of the mayor during this very tough period. As I said, and I want to talk.
Speaker 0: Hey, everyone, can you please mute your phone? Thank you. Go ahead.
Speaker 3: Councilmember voters, we should remind. We should be making every effort to try to bring calm and relief to families, single parents, seniors and everyone in our community. And yes, a workforce that definitely is being impacted. I'm going to lower my support for the ideal of an eviction moratorium this evening related to COVID 19. I think that's a very important distinction that should be made because we want to discourage anyone from taking advantage of the system or the situation all around. Right. Housing providers, but also renters. And I would just hope that this moratorium didn't have to come before us. You know, I'm seeing some amazing things and people are coming together in amazing ways of the community understanding and supporting one another, supporting their neighbors and fellow human being during this very, very tough time. Everybody is impacted. And no matter what your economic status is or was a week ago, it's different today. And particularly those who are without work, that is that is a very, very tough time thing for any family to face. And so this is compassionate. This is responsible. This is. These are extraordinary times. And so extraordinary times make for extraordinary public policy. And so I think we should be doing something to bring relief, bring calm, manage stress in our community. But but also understand that we should not be creating a situation where individuals should be or we're encouraging individuals to take advantage of the situation. I'm hoping that this crisis will bring out the best in everybody. And like I said, we're all in in impacted by this all the way around. I do think that there's there's some merit to looking at the feasibility of looking at using a housing trust fund or other sources. And also monitoring with relief is available to us and will be available to us from the federal and state governments. We can't go this and we can't realistically do this alone. Right. We're going to have to have support from from the feds and the states state government. And I think there's obviously some some no decision has been made there. And so hopefully over the next week or so that will come out, become more clear for our staff to be able to bring that what is available and what is available for our residents in the city. I want to speak to for the most part, everything else is pretty much self-explanatory. I'm certainly supportive of looking at the feasibility of of of most of the points that that have been raised here. But I'm 39 when it comes to looking at the suitability of a road of relief for laid off and furloughed workers and mine worker retention in specific industries called out here. I would just remind you all that, you know, truck drivers for truck drivers are impacted now. Dockworkers are being impacted. Gyms are closing. So gym and fitness trainers and employees who work in the fitness industry, retail workers, artists, workers, musicians, restaurant workers, servers, bartenders, cooks, folks in the entertainment industry . These is the airline employees. So if there is I know there's a subset on the floor, I would add a friendly amendment to both eight and nine to include workers in all of these impacted industries, to see what type of relief can be available for them as well. So these are all working families and they make up the fabric of each.
Speaker 0: Councilman mango tree in my comment. Do you accept that as part of your substitute substitute?
Speaker 3: First of all, Madam Chair of the Fifth District Council member, would that be a subset? Would therefore Amendment B be? Acceptable? Would you be open to amendment?
Speaker 0: Councilman.
Speaker 3: Hello?
Speaker 2: Can you hear me?
Speaker 0: Yeah, we can. Go ahead.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 2: Hello? Okay. I think they're excellent amendments. I excitedly think that those friendlies I think that they're very poignant to the the crisis. And I also appreciate how each of you started your comments. I often get lost in my notes and I just do want to take a step back. And all of these amendments and so much of this motion and the other components of that were handled by city staff in advance. And I just think we just need to once again thank our city manager, our interim city manager, the city management team that worked tirelessly over the weekend, the economic development team, because they really, really have stepped up and they wholeheartedly accept the funding.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you to them. Those have been accepted by Councilman Austin. I know that vice mayor and Vice Mayor Andrews had the call had dropped from his connection. For some reason, it's back on now. So we we skipped over his comments. And so we're going to go back to Vice Mayor Andrews.
Speaker 3: Mr. Mayor and the mayor.
Speaker 0: Yes. Vice Mayor Andrews.
Speaker 3: Mr. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 0: Mr. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 2: I. As a matter.
Speaker 0: Okay. We're going we're going to keep going then.
Speaker 2: So, Heidi.
Speaker 0: It's Vice Mayor Andrews there.
Speaker 2: But.
Speaker 0: Guys. I got it. Is Vice Mayor Andrews there? Okay. We're going to we'll get back to Vice Mayor Andrews if you want if you want to still speak.
Speaker 2: Next up is the only one who can hear Vice Mayor Andrews.
Speaker 0: He's not on the line. Thank you.
Speaker 2: We were talking. Oh.
Speaker 0: We're going to keep, you know. No.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Can you hear me now? Now we can hear you. Thank you. Fine. Go ahead by saying that.
Speaker 3: Sorry, I get cut off here. Okay, fine. You know, and I just like to listen to every one about, you know, college, to be honest with them, which I think is at the situation where we're in. It's something we've never, ever dealt with. It's going to take, I think, patience and soul searching to do the right thing, to put compassion over properly. You know, I'm supporting their side. Long as we ensure that we can deal in the application and not application to our landlords of our properties. Can you hear me?
Speaker 0: We can hear you. Keep going.
Speaker 2: Hang on. You've got that.
Speaker 3: Wrong. Can you hear me now?
Speaker 0: Hey, we need everyone. We need everyone to put up. Put it on mute, please. Except for Vice Mayor Andrews. Thank you. Thanks, Mary Andrews. Go ahead.
Speaker 3: Okay, fine. You believe me now, sir?
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 3: You mean. Can you.
Speaker 0: On? I'm here. Yes, we can continue.
Speaker 3: Okay, fine. Thank you very much. There's going to be so much confusion in here. This is a different, you know, situation we're in.
Speaker 2: But.
Speaker 3: You know, I want to thank everyone for bringing this into the digest today because I think it's very important. And I think we all realize, you know, the situation that we're in. And I think this situation, you know, we're and it's something that we have never, ever had to deal with. And it's going to take patience and soul searching to do the right thing, to put passion over property. Yeah, I'm supporting this idea. As long as we ensure and we can build verification and notification. Right. I support working families. I know that we are in the crisis, yet small mom and pop landlords need to be notified if they're not going to be received. But they can be an income. Also an act of language in the ordinance that needs to clear it is not a rent pass. This is assistance to those who need the additional time given in the circumstances. And we need to work together to establish the relief package that is going to help tenant landlords, business owners and camouflage and more that we're going to get through this by working together. As far as the length and the hand-washing cost for employees. I would like to throw this to the city manager team to do some additional research into how we could be incorporated in vessels that work.
Speaker 2: In the high.
Speaker 3: Concentrate area. And with these comments, I'd like to leave it at that. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice managers. Before I move on to Councilwoman. Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Okay. I set the friendly note. The friendly.
Speaker 0: I was. Yeah, I was. I was just going to call the quotation and verification.
Speaker 2: Well, what.
Speaker 0: Is. Hold on 1/2, everyone. I got it. Hold on.
Speaker 2: The mayor on?
Speaker 0: Yep. I'm here. 1/2. Thank you. Before we move on to great clarification on the motion as well is I need everyone to please mute their phone.
Speaker 2: Waiting for the mayor.
Speaker 0: I need everyone to mute their phone, please. Thank you.
Speaker 3: And are there.
Speaker 0: The mayor is here. Huh? Okay. The mayor is here. Everyone just mute their phone for a second. Thank you. So what we're going to do now is Vice Mayor Andrews has also made a friendly amendment or a friendly suggestion to Councilwoman Mongo and her subsub. And so, Councilman Mongo, would you be I think I heard her say that she would accept Vice Mayor Andrews's suggestion for staff to look into. Is that right? Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 3: Record. You verify the basement, you take over. Yes. Hello?
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah, we got.
Speaker 3: It in there.
Speaker 0: We're just waiting, guys. Broke. Put your phones on mute. We're just waiting for.
Speaker 2: You to speak again at the very beginning. So I was waiting for him to get on to just continue the queue up a vote. I didn't know if somebody was before me, but.
Speaker 0: I can. You can hear me? I have a question. Can you guys hear me or. No?
Speaker 3: This is Charlie. I'll walk down to Kumasi Franklin, the mayor of if we can. Just wait one minute, though.
Speaker 0: The mayor is. The mayor is.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 0: In the chamber. Huh? We're going to. We're going to just hold for 1/2. Can you. I'm here, aren't I? Yes.
Speaker 3: Go ahead. The mayor's here.
Speaker 0: Can you guys hear me or no?
Speaker 2: Amy Goodman.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Okay. So. So please. That we're going to continue, if you can hear me. I am continuing the meeting. Okay.
Speaker 3: Okay. All right.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 2: Finished speaking.
Speaker 0: Guys, I got the meeting, so I need everyone else to put their phone on mute, please. Thank you very much. Vice Mayor Andrews had a friendly amendment to Councilwoman Mango, which I believe she has accepted. Councilwoman Mongo, you've accepted that? Okay, perfect. Now we're good. Now we're on the substitute. Substitute motion before we move on to the next person cued up, which is Councilmember Pierce. We are going to go, if you don't mind, Councilwoman Pierce, we have two members of the public. Can we go to members of the public first and then we'll come back to you? Or do you want to keep going? Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 2: I'd like to get clarity because I thought that councilmember or vice mayor. And his speaking sounded like he supported the original motion, not the substitute substitute motion. So can we just be clear before we.
Speaker 0: I.
Speaker 2: Public comment and then I'll see my comments for the end?
Speaker 0: Sure we can. We can if you get clarification on the substance substitute. But it was my impression that Vice Mayor Andrews was supporting the motion that's on the floor, which was Councilman Bongo's motion. So I will get we'll get clarity from that.
Speaker 3: That's accepted.
Speaker 0: So that that's so that is the motion that's on the floor is councilman mangas motion. So, Councilmember Pierce, when I'm going to go is the public comment. We only have two speakers on public comment or we have three or we can or you can we can go back to users. Cueing everyone up. It's up to you.
Speaker 2: And that's a public figure.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So I have I have three members of the public. Please. Will come up one at a time. Maria Lopez. Maria Lopez here. Oh, yeah. Yeah. There she is. Okay.
Speaker 1: Okay. So my name is Maria. I'm a proud one resident since I migrated at the age of three. And now I'm the director of Community Organizing for Housing Long Beach, and I organize with a large tenants union. And obviously I am here in support of item number 27, the coronavirus economic relief package for Long Beach families and small businesses. I want to thank first all city staff, Rex Richardson's office and also all community members who have gotten this done today. It's apparent that there is a lot of impact, impact depending on literally how much income you can make. So obviously, folks who are in poverty are mostly devastated with these effects. Kids are back at home and they need to eat. And not to mention they need a space to learn and grow, which most of them do not have because they live in overcrowded housing. Their parents are residents are losing hours of work and some are even losing their jobs. Not only are vulnerable families right now in this time of need saying, hey, there's a lot of stuff going, but they're also receiving eviction notices. Just how Westar did in the ninth and in the second District just this past Friday, serving 60 day notices. And also what we are seeing is even rent increase notices. So there is no worry on the landlord side to make sure that tenants can stay in self-isolation or quarantine with their families because they are being impacted in different various ways. Also, I want to echo some of what already council has said. Rex Richardson states that we would want to encourage tenants to pay what they can. That is true. I believe. I believe that is true also as they are paying what they can. They should also not be having to be their rents being increased. And so with that same note, Councilwoman Pierce states that we should not have anyone moving during these times. And with that same token, I want we don't want to see rents go up as jobs are being lost and prices for bare necessities like water and toilet paper, as you all have seen, I'm sure, have gone up skyrocketing. And so we would also like to see. I want to hear more of this advance notice as still as it's still not hashed out how our tenants going to be able to communicate with their landlord when we can't even find a landlord for four months on a building they just bought on Daisy Avenue right here on Fourth and Daisy. So I want to know that also, would landlords be the one telling tenants, Hey, because obviously we have more connection with landlords via city council. So would you all be communicating with landlords? You minutes know about those things. And also, if you think you're about to vocalize, you know, let's continue to move towards right of council, local enforcement mechanisms, etc.. Thank you so much time.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next was is. It can be.
Speaker 4: So I can say sisters for resident. I think it's clear that we're heading into. So I'm going to raise it up. I think it's clear that we're heading into a recession. Um. Unfortunately, our federal government. And the people on top have failed us. And now we're dealing with an epidemic. A pandemic that. Many people in this generation, you know, has never even had any impact interaction with. That being said I think it's. Beyond a shadow of a doubt evil to even contemplate putting people up in this moment where, you know, hundreds, if not thousands across the city are panicking and . You know, spending most of their time off in grocery stores trying to pack for what they unfeasible moments. You know, my mother works for L.A. County in the county is, you know, has an emergency plan that says this is going to last to June, if not July. So I can understand why any landlords would think it's even feasible of a thought to put people up during this moment. As it stands, the federal government right now is dealing with a potential economic package that will essentially be a bailout. To a lot of landlords and and businesses across the country, whether that means a payroll tax cut or there's a variety of ways of doing that. But I don't think it's appropriate to have this evictions going on in the midst of something so serious. I want to thank, first of all, the council, Rex Richardson for bringing this up as well as a councilman during a I believe he seconded it. I think there should be some level of enforcement on companies like Westar and perhaps Kenny who are actively giving out eviction notices to people in the middle of of of this crisis . And, you know, they should be ashamed of themselves. And the companies in the organizations that represent them should be ashamed themselves as well, because it's very clear that the federal government is working right now on a economic package to bail you out. So if that's the case and if top down, there's already funds going to be coming up down the way, you shouldn't be so greedy. In any case, I'm eager to see what the city manager and city attorney have in mind for any economic relief. I think we on the local level, micro, micro wise and immediately try to figure out some kind of economic stimulus. That way, the more people we have spending money, the less money that the city is losing. Because as it stands, you know, going to have major budget issues later on down the year. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mike Murchison. Mayor and council members. Good evening. I raced down.
Speaker 4: Here because there was audio.
Speaker 0: Problems. I apologize to address the entire agenda item, not just the sub sub. I'll say this to.
Speaker 4: Start off with, I'm in support on behalf of rental property owners SPEIER And the Apartment Association and Councilwoman.
Speaker 5: Mungo's.
Speaker 0: Subsub. I do want to bring up the fact over the last two and a half, three years, it's been very clear at.
Speaker 4: Public meetings that tenants have had a difficult time.
Speaker 0: Paying rent with rents the way they've been. I think we've heard that here on public testimony. So I caution you to basically say that we're going to defer the payment of rents versus looking at the housing trust fund or other government subsidies to offset this. There has to be an understanding what are tenants going to do if they have to pay back three or four months rent by a certain date, if they're having a tough time because.
Speaker 4: They're going month to month to.
Speaker 0: Begin with. So please take that into consideration. When staff is.
Speaker 4: Looking for whether it's the housing trust fund or whether.
Speaker 0: It's some other entity that can help offset these payments that are not coming forward. Secondly, you know.
Speaker 4: Rental property owners.
Speaker 0: Have the same struggle in a different way than tenants do in the fact that if the tenants are not paying the rent, then landlords have a tough time paying their mortgage. They're going to go into default. So we have to acknowledge that this is not just a tenant situation. This is a landlord and tenant situation. And everybody in Long Beach. I just want to make sure that the landlords are at least addressed in our future discussions. In mentioning the second part of Rex's excuse me, Councilmember Richardson's agenda item on the hotels. Many of you may have seen that the Hyatt closed Marriott nationally is cutting back 10,000 employees there. These hotels are big, big suppliers of your bed tax in your city. So anything mayor and council that you can do to take a look at bed tax rebates for not only the hotel but the hotel employees so that they share in getting something back, I think is extremely important. I think on behalf of the tenants excuse me, on behalf of the rental property owners and the hotels, having the mayor and the council send a letter to the Treasurer, to the tax collector for the April payment, it's a step in the right direction because we're all suffering here. So it's important that we communicated to those agencies that are expecting.
Speaker 4: Collection of payments here come April.
Speaker 0: I appreciate the comments tonight. I think it's been a very good dialog, but I am a little bit uncertain as to how renters are going to pay back landlords in the next several months if they're happy, if they're going month to month as it stands right now. So please look at alternative situations. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment. I have Councilwoman Pierce, then Councilwoman and D.A., then Councilwoman Price, and then Councilmember Richardson all queued up to speak. I'm going to speak after when once everyone else has spoken so that after the next four have gone up. Councilmember Price. I'm sorry, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, everybody, for your comment. Oh, it's. I only put it down every. So I was optimistic coming into this meeting that we were all on the same page with the level of crisis that we are in. So I naively assumed that we would find a middle ground that would allow for our entire city to feel safe. And so I didn't talk a lot about what's happened in my district in the last two months, but just. Several days ago, one of the buildings in my district. They all receive. An eviction notice. By. 13 people made in a building on Ocean Boulevard received an eviction notice five days before we called this meeting. And so those are 13 families that are going to be out on the streets if we allow this vote to happen just like it is and. It's hard for me on one hand to say we are going on lockdown, that our kids can't go to school, but our kids can't have playdates that we have to cover up if we're going to go into a grocery store. But this is a moment of crisis and that it's okay to tell somebody, sorry, you got to go. So the items and areas where I felt like made sense. Councilmember Price you obviously you hit on, you know when PD when people feel unsafe. I lived in an apartment where there was a violent person next door and they had to get evicted. And so I hope, as we're all cued up again, that maybe we can continue to have a conversation about what this next piece looks like because. So COVID 19, you know, it could mean that, yes, somebody lost their job, that they lost their hours. It could also mean that now they have to take care of an elder that used to live in a multi-family senior facility, that they decided to move into their home and now they're caring for somebody else and now they have additional resources. I know that I spent $400 at the grocery store, but I didn't have budgeted. What does that mean for a family of four? For Jose, who's the bedroom owner? People are going to go in and get their haircuts. And she has four kids. And so thinking about every single impact of what COVID means in our community when we're putting our community on lockdown, to say that you can only not evict somebody if they haven't if their hours got cut or if it becomes a paycheck issue. It's really hard for me. And so I would really like to hear maybe it's from from Stacy, maybe it's from Susie if there are other items. Because I know even though you're talking about looking at the housing trust fund, this council and the council before us has never funded the housing trust fund. There's no money in there. I will also say that my neighbor received an eviction notice before the COVID 19 process happened. She got a three day notice. She called. Unfortunately, I don't like to call out our city departments when they when we dropped the ball. But she called our our health department, our housing department and said, I need rental assistance. And they told her that she needed to go on Section eight waitlist. It took me calling our city manager's department to get her to talk to the right person to get connected with the right resources. People out there do not know that there is money for them, and even when they think they know, when they call it, they talk to the wrong person on the phone. Then they're left out high and dry. And so putting people in that situation in the middle of what is a crisis, like I said, when we're on lockdown, when I mean, I'm getting yelled out on Facebook for walking down my neighborhood block and we're going to ask people to uproot their families in the middle of this. I think that if it's not a safety issue, if PD hasn't been called in, it's not for an emergency safety issue where residents don't feel safe. But we have to figure something else out. People qualify for unemployment. We're not saying that they're not going to pay their rent at all. And this is to the next issue. So as I mentioned in my beginning comments and I didn't make friendlies. And so, you know, I'm typically not the person to make friendlies, but I guess I would clarify that my comments in the beginning were that we should have staff also give direction. When a tenant can pay something that they should, whether that's a certain percentage of what their income is. So whether that's their disability or their unemployment or whatever their money is that they are getting, that they should continue to pay some type of rent as a percentage. So I guess that's a question for the city attorney. Is that something that's possible or does it need to be just an eviction moratorium? Or is there another layer where we can really give direction to say that, you know, landlords should be able to accept a percentage of income?
Speaker 3: We certainly can put in the ordinance to the extent that tenant can pay, they have to pay. And I'm certain landlords would be happy to accept whatever can be paid.
Speaker 2: So I got on my little answers that never hit. Listen to everybody. Um. So I would say, you know, that is the one area that I like to hear from my colleagues as we go through this. Um, I guess a more specific suddenly would be a friendly for. Evictions only for nuisances. You know that it's not for any other reason, but it's a new sense of action. And that way we can try to make sure that. But if it has to do with anything that has to do with unable to pay their rent, that those people aren't being put out on the street. Because what happens when people can't pay their rent, whether it was a director, they work for the hotel industry or they took on more responsibilities or whatever it is. We know Financial Times fluctuate, but that they're not going to be able to go find that 2000 to $7000 it takes to get into another place. And so just being able to limit it. So I'm asking for a friendly. To have this for evictions, only for nuisances and COVID 19. Councilmember Mungo.
Speaker 3: Butler.
Speaker 0: Okay. So Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 2: I think that it's important to identify some of the funds and answer some of Jennings questions. But interval health. Interval health has been funds that they set aside to help these kinds of situations. And I'm open to hearing a little bit more about what my other colleagues have to say. Okay. I'm not I'm not done with my comments if you don't want to accept the family. I think it's really important for us to understand how difficult it is. For tennis on any given day. And this is not saying that landlords are bad. This is not saying that we expect landlords to take the brunt of this thing, that we are in this together as a community in crisis. And we're asking for. For us to act that way, you know, and to really understand the impact of this and not, you know, try to. Try to make this a black and white issue about about renters versus tenants versus landlords, which is why this item also includes all the other items. It includes, um, you know, going back and talking about mortgages and moratoriums on that and all of those other pieces. So, you know, I think it's great that we've gotten to this point, but it is really heartbreaking when I know so many families in my district are going to be out on the street for no reason of their own, not because they couldn't pay, not because they were a nuisance tenants, but that we're allowing people to get kicked out in the middle of this crisis when. While trying to figure out how to feed our family, period.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Counsel County.
Speaker 2: But I wanted to. Yeah?
Speaker 0: Do you? I'm sorry. Did you have more? Councilwoman.
Speaker 2: Yes, I.
Speaker 0: Was. Okay, go ahead. Continue.
Speaker 2: Can you hear me?
Speaker 0: Continue.
Speaker 2: Thank you. On the worker piece. I know that we talked about it earlier. And and I does say the same thing that I said in the beginning. So I'd like to just clarify. The hope is that if. The points that we put in here about the hotel industry, that it would be for city wide, not for one specific industry, but that there would be a process in place where employers could follow an easy process when it's time to hire people back and to make sure the people are being trained on health and safety standards. So trying to claim this as a win today. But it's. It's hard. Thank you, guys.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Zendaya's.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Let me see if I understand this correctly, because I believe that Councilmember Price was saying that kind of like, you know, excluding those who are nuisances to the property so, you know, to where they're renting. And I think that that's very important as as, you know, we really need to find some kind of solution. We are in a crisis and we are, you know, needing to be quarantined at this moment. There are so many, so many possibilities of spreading COVID 19 and just by being outside of your home. And I think that that's what I'm seeing that keeps being lost in translation, if that's even something that could cover what was going on right now, I think that right now we're all very worried. But one of the things that we really need to focus on is to stop the spread of COVID 19. And the only way we're going to be able to do that is for us to remain at home and be in, you know, be outside as least as possible. And that's what we really have to focus on when we're thinking about this. One of the things that I I think is that one is it's going to be hard for everyone across the board, including renters who lose their jobs, who can't pay or who now find themselves having to pay more on food and and supplies to be able to maintain themselves at home. We're also, you know, small business owners are being impacted so, so bad as they were struggling before. Now they're just I don't even know, you know, what's going on right now with our small businesses, because it's just so heartbreaking to see that our small property owners who want to be the good landlords, who want to be, you know, as open as possible and be as helpful to the community as possible, know what happens when they're in turn, have to pay their mortgages. So we really have to find some kind of solution that will help everyone. And I think that what is being said tonight, you know, this economic relief package that we're presenting, this item I think is very important to moving forward and for the safety of our city and the survival of our city. Because as you seeing, you know. Yes, right now, we may be ahead of the curve, but that's what it's going to take. And we have to continue being a part of the process. And these are really so many pieces of it in Long Beach and just silence. We see so many people that are vulnerable in our communities, especially with our seniors and our, you know, residents with disabilities, including myself, that are so much more vulnerable to this type of virus, is affecting, affecting and ultimately taking lives. And that's where what is here is that lives are at stake here. And our community is really in need of our leadership and is really in need of all of us helping them feel some kind of calmness and some kind of, you know, protection and some kind of, you know, they just want to feel that we are doing everything possible that we can to to make sure that our city and our residents in this city are protected. So I think that, you know, we need to really look at this and we really need to make sure that, you know, we are doing the best that we can to make sure that we ensure the safety and the stop the spread of this COVID 19. So I think that there's a way to do this. And I'm getting, you know, a little confused on the steps and the families and stuff. But I mean, you know, I'm trying to keep up. So right now, if if you if somebody said sorry, tell me, please tell me what's on the floor right now.
Speaker 0: Yes, Councilwoman. Actually, we're about to do that, I think. Yeah, we're right. Actually, that's what we're queued up to do next before Councilwoman Pryce speaks. So, did you have anything else, Councilmember?
Speaker 2: I just want to say that this is that we're in a crisis and we have to we have to be active and be proactive in this crisis mode.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. We have two other speakers, which is Councilwoman Pryce and then council member Richardson. And then I'm going to speak. Let me go ahead and first, if I can have the city attorney clarify the motion, the sub sub motion. I think I it's it's mostly the the original motion with some with some changes as it relates to the eviction piece of focusing on those impacted by COVID 19. There were also some friendly amendments that were that were added as far as getting information about different types of workforce, workforce groups that are out there and and labor groups that are out there. But did you want to maybe go if even if Rich wants to maybe kind of Republican for subsub.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I will try to do that, Mayor. Thank you. So I think in order to repeat everything that's on the floor, I do need to start at the beginning, which is the original motion was moratorium expires May 31st of this year. It's there's a 4 to 6 month grace period for people that avail themselves of the moratorium. The notice needs to be the notice by the tenant to the landlord of its inability to pay needs to be delivered to the landlord prior to the underpayment of rent. And there was also a friendly to that motion to ask staff to look into the possibility that the county tax assessor could somehow waive or allow for a reduction or defer the property tax payment. Susie's second city council member, Price's sub, adopted all of that, but said that the only the only tenants that would be eligible for the prohibition on unlawful detainer would be tenants that were suffering a COVID related inability to pay the sub cerb was the same what made by Councilmember Mongo the same as council member operations, but also directed staff to explore the possibility or availability of other funds that could help pay rent on tenant's behalf to make up the difference . And there was also a friendly add to that, I believe, by council member Austin that you I think described quite well, Mayor, having to do with workforce and some other labor related issues, which I don't I can't recall all the details, but we'll certainly look at the tape. That's what I believe is on the floor.
Speaker 0: And I think.
Speaker 3: Hopefully I clarified things rather than saying.
Speaker 0: Yeah, and I think a request also by Vice Mayor Andrews to also look at workforce specifically as it relates to folks who are washing doing car washing work and other types of work. I think I got that piece as well. And so I think that is.
Speaker 2: May I, Mayor Vice Mayor Andrews also asked for better clarification on notification to the landlords and verification of COVID 19 connectivity. And then one other point of clarification is that we wouldn't ask the assessor for relief. We'd ask the Treasurer, tax collector.
Speaker 0: Okay. So that's. That's the motion. The mayor. Hold on 1/2. That's a motion that's on the floor. And when you're speaking, can you actually clarify who's speaking that? I'm not exactly sure who that was. So who's the next? Who else? Okay, Councilman. Mongo. Thank you. I'm going to I have two other folks on the speakers list now, unless there's a clarification on the motion.
Speaker 2: I'd like to clarify. I'd like to clarify. I just want to repeat for the record that I did make a friendly or ask for a friendly on the nuisance eviction, but that was not accepted yet.
Speaker 0: That's correct.
Speaker 2: I just. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And now we're moving on to Councilman Price.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So a couple of things. Councilwoman Munroe, in your subset, I just want to make sure and this is why I was hesitant to accept of Superyachts. I just want to confirm the moratorium is not conditioned on the request to look at additional funding sources. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Not.
Speaker 2: So we can come back on the 24th and vote on this. And it wouldn't we wouldn't have to have staff report on other funding options to do so. No, I would imagine that that would go on simultaneously, especially since many of these other funding sources from the federal and state governments are rapidly evolving and may not be available by then. But maybe.
Speaker 3: It's.
Speaker 2: Okay. Okay, great. Thanks. Well, in light of that, I'm going to support the subscribe. Let me just say, Councilwoman Pierce, you know, I think perhaps there's a little bit of confusion. All of the hypothetical situations that you provided would be covered under the sub sub. And the amendment that that I had originally made that was not accepted. COVID 19 related impacts include every single impact that results in a loss of financial resources such that they can't pay rent, so they are having to provide childcare having reduced hours in your job. All of those would result in lower ability to pay your rent or decrease the ability to pay your rent. So it's very broad in terms of what the impacts are. The impacts need only be as a result of COVID 19. But as we've all talked about, the financial impact of COVID 19 are huge. They're affecting people not just because of layoffs or not just because of reduced hours, but because people have to procure additional childcare now. So it would cover all of that, all of the hypothetical situations you described would be covered under this. You also said one thing council woman Peirce Let me just I know council member Mongeau made a comment and I think she made it a just about you know, so and so economic package you council member Peirce council and then they have Councilman Richardson and Councilman Urunga should be applauded for bringing this item forward and having this discussion. I am happy to consider this your package. It's to me, ownership of it can be with you. I think I started my comments by talking about what a great item it is and really highlighted every single aspect of it. But there was one area where I disagreed and I think when we're talking about compromise. Accepting amendments and being open to amendments, even the ones that could impact, you know, that could that could cause us to be divided. It's really it takes a lot of leadership to think about. If I don't accept this amendment, what could happen? There's always a risk. And I've seen it happen time and time again on this council. We're a simple amendment that's very important. Someone is, for whatever reason, things change. So I would like to see that, you know. Councilmember Pearce, you said something like, I would like to consider this a win. Well, you know, I don't I don't like to use the terms win or loss in anything that we do. Even in my day job, you know, we.
Speaker 0: Actually can't ever pierce.
Speaker 2: Me about how we're handling ourselves.
Speaker 0: Carter Pierce. Actually, Councilman Price has the floor, so let's let's. She's she has up. She has the floor. Continue, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 2: So I'll be. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, Mr. Mayor, so my recommendation would be that it's not a win or a loss, but as a council body, the four councilmembers who brought this item should feel very proud. And I will repeat as often as I can, and you'll allow me to, that we're having this discussion because of you. So thank you. We don't agree on every aspect of it, but thank you for allowing us to have this discussion. We are going to put forth an item tonight that is consistent with what the governor has allowed us to do and actually more detailed than what the governor has allowed us to do. We are taking action tonight to try to help our businesses. We're taking action tonight to try to help renters. We are taking action to look at these issues. To me, if you want to couch it in the terms of when or what, I would consider it a win. But I wouldn't couch it in those terms. I'd couch it as progress. And it's progress that we are making together as a body, even if we don't agree 100% on every aspect of it. And so I would just urge my colleagues to think about it that way. It's a difficult conversation. I'm grateful that we've had it and I'm thankful. Councilman Richardson, Councilman Yarrawonga, Councilwoman Pearce and Councilwoman Van de Hockey for allowing us to have this discussion and for boldly bringing this item forward. Thank you for doing so.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. I have Councilmember Richardson and then I'm going to close. Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to go back to the beginning. So the purpose of this was really to acknowledge the economic crisis that we're in. And we do have a lot of authority, as I said, to to make sure that we can kind of control this crisis and make sure we present opportunities to land the right way. We recovered the right way, right a lot. We're taking some big steps here where we're thinking about how, you know, if this cascade of layoffs would have happened, hadn't been happened. When we come out, how do we prepare the workforce for workers who get their jobs back and keep temporary from crisis, from turning into permanent catastrophe for families? So a lot of good things that we're doing here. The differences between the motion that I laid out and and where we've landed. They're nuanced. They're small. They are important. I think that the issues raised about, you know, whether someone's a nuisance, should they be extended that rate? I, I agree. I agree. I just want to flesh it out a bit more. But there are areas where they're not there wouldn't be applied in this. In this instance, for example, if a building, an entire building, you know, dozens of families receive a 60 day notice due to substantial remodel. Then it would be very difficult because some of those people will will likely have been affected by COVID 19 and some of them will not. How do you evict the whole building? When you go for a substantial remodel in this moment, that's a lot of movement and it's counterintuitive to our social distancing strategy. And on that point, that's why I think we need to continue to do more work. But I'm happy to support what's in front of us today. Work day. It's not complete. It means more work. We acknowledge this at the beginning that the motion we laid out on Friday has changed between Friday and Tuesday. Just given the changing nature of what this is, I am anticipating that at some point we may need to come back and readdress this given, you know, I anticipate that the slowdown, the economic slowdown and our social distancing strategy will continue to ramp up in California. And we may be looking at an entire situation where we're looking at no more. It's going to be apparent that that COVID impacts, everybody will be able to isolate themselves. I want to read that one point that I didn't hear in the city from the city attorney. That was in my original motion. I wanted to extend this. The paint leaked. I've called this out in my in my comments, but both the extension to section eight as well as the payment, I want to make sure that that was Mr. Anthony that he did catch that. No, you're absolutely right. That was an oversight on my part, not to restate that just because it was never the subject of discussion, but that is in the motion in your motion in the sub and in the subsub. Right. Thank you. So I'm going to I'm going to close by saying I encourage the city council. The unanimous that I am voting for this motion is the right thing to do for all of these families. It's in alignment with the order that the governor has submitted. It is not perfect. We are going to have to continue to meet and work these things out. But tonight, we're giving a lot of cards, the people who are who are struggling and have a lot of anxiety. And that should be the message that comes out tonight. We're giving a valuable heads up to our landlords. We know that they are going to take a hit as well. And we're going to stay vigilant and find solutions to help resolve this whole issue. I want to thank all my colleagues and I support the motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to close up for for the evening some make some final some final comments. I want to just want to just go ahead and say, actually, I have one more council member that still wants to speak again. That's Council Pierce. And then I'm going to make my comments.
Speaker 3: Go ahead.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to say that I make comments about it being a when we're about our community. And I do believe that this is a win and I am proud of this item. And I do think that we still have more work to do. And I'd like to continue to treat everybody. With dignity and respect. And I know that I get emotional, particularly when it's about roof overhead during difficult times. Obviously, we're all feeling a lot of stress, but I want to apply this council for the steps are taking. I do believe that we need to do more and I believe it will come back to do more. So I hope that I have you guys with dignity and respect as we handle some of the most difficult votes that we will ever handle on our term in council. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So let me just close out. First of all, I strongly support the motion that's in front of us today. And I think that it is a really strong package. I want to go back and just say one is of course, I want to thank the four original makers of this motion. I know they put a lot of work into this, especially Councilman Richardson and his team. I also want to thank all the other council members that added to this motion. And I think the entire council tonight obviously is interested and cares about economic relief and economic development. And I think you heard that from all the comments and all of the substitutes that were made tonight. So the whole council is engaged and cares about this issue. And I think that's very clear. It's also very clear, and I don't want it to get lost tonight about what's actually happening with the council, what's in front of us. And the motion that's in front of us does provide relief for tenants that are facing eviction during this crisis. It does provide opportunities for us to look at giving economic and financial relief as it comes to bill payment through our utilities. It does provide opportunity for us to look at financial packages for small businesses, for business, for for businesses that really need our support. And it looks at broadly asking staff to come back with recommendations as it relates to supporting workers, workers that are in the current workforce and those that unfortunately are facing layoffs. I want to uplift all of this tonight. This is important. But I also want to just add that this is a step in the right direction. But I think as we are all aware, we are at the at the beginning of what is going to be a long and very difficult economic recovery. And the city's actions tonight, I think, are absolutely an important part of that. But the broader question is how in the next few weeks and months ahead are particularly low wage workers who are dependent on this economy? How are they going to be able to survive not just beyond rent? We're talking about food insecurity. We're talking about childcare. We're talking about not having any sort of income coming into them and into their families. And so while there is some, the city can do the real work and the real relief must come from the state and the federal government. And I think I would encourage us also in the weeks ahead to work with our congressional delegation, with the administration and with the governor and the legislature to ensure as robust a financial package as possible. I have been personally heartened to hear on both sides of the political aisle conversations around direct financial assistance to the population of the country, especially low wage workers and low income workers. There's conversations about a direct basic income check, universal basic income, which we should absolutely support during this time. And we're talking about direct payments of anywhere between a thousand and others are talking about two, three or 4000 of direct check payments to every American. And this is, by the way, being proposed by both Democrats and Republicans. So we are not going to have the ability for many of our low wage workers to make ends meet and to survive unless we get direct financial assistance into the hands of workers in the form of direct payments so that they can make and survive during this health and economic crisis. And the last thing I'll say, I think the governor and the legislature are also putting together some packages for us. And the last thing I'll say to that, to the council and to the public is we are we are entering. Once we get past the immediate health crisis, which is in front of us right now and will continue, I believe, for probably weeks and months ahead. The absolute next focus for for this body and for the city is going to be economic recovery. The economic recovery piece is going to take all of our attention. It's going to need all of our attention, all of our support. And this is an economic recovery that, first and foremost, is not just about the workers that are that are being laid off as we speak from hotels and the tourism industry and child care centers . But for small business owners that are there trying to make payroll for their small businesses and their workers all the way through the economic and business system that we have here at the city, including our own city, where. We are going to have to make very difficult decisions as it relates to our finances and our budget in the weeks, months and probably years ahead. And so I want to commend the council. Every single one of the members for their work on this, but also what they're for, the work they're doing in the community. And there will be a lot of work ahead in the future. And so with that, I'm going to call the roll call vote, and I will begin with District one. I district to.
Speaker 2: I.
Speaker 0: This are three. I district for. I five.
Speaker 3: But.
Speaker 0: By District six. By District seven. By District eight. By District nine.
Speaker 3: All right.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that motion carries, as we conclude, we do have before the adjournment. We have second we have the second public comment period. And I do have one member of the public who has signed up for that.
Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft an urgency ordinance and minute order for consideration at the next City Council meeting, to establish a moratorium on all evictions on commercial and residential units for a minimum of 30 days, or as long as the City of Long Beach, Los Angeles County, or the State of California have active emergency proclamations related to COVID-19. The ordinance should also include a prohibition on late fees and a prohibition on Section 8 terminations by the Housing Authority of Long Beach (HACLB) for the duration of this period; 

Request City Manager to work with the Department of Energy Resources, the Water Department and investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to suspend utility shutoffs for a minimum of 30 days or until emergency proclamations are no longer in effect, whichever is longer; 

Request City Manager to work with City Attorney to establish an ordinance during the duration of the declaration of emergency requiring all airport, convention center, and hotel employer allow all employees to wash their hands every 30 minutes to limit community