Richmond City Council
September 24, 2024

From: Alice LoCicero
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comments for open forum-consent calendar Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:48:24 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Consent Calendar Item N8e Appt of Alice LoCicero to Community Crisis Response Program Advisory Board

Mr. Mayor and Council Members

Thank you for considering me to be part of the advisory board for the Community Crisis Response Program. I consider myself to be very lucky to be a resident of Richmond, and I appreciate the opportunity to contribute my time and experience to the city. In my career in Massachusetts, before moving to the bay area, I worked closely with first responders at city, state, and federal levels in implementing and providing services in disaster and crisis mental health programs. I also taught Psychological First Aid to responders and participated in debriefing first responders after critical incidents. In addition, I had the privilege of teaching idealistic and energetic young students in criminal justice programs in college and university settings.

Once implemented, Richmond's Community Crisis Response program will be of great value to the community at large, and to the existing network of first responders. Once again, the city of Richmond is in the forefront of developing a program that has the potential to be an advantage for all, and will provide a model for other cities and towns in the future. The development of this program so far has been data-based and approached with care and concern for the community and the needs experienced by community members. I look forward to the opportunity to assist in the ongoing development of the program.

Sincerely,
Alice LoCicero
From: Roz Rendon
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public Comments for Open Forum- Consent Calender Comment Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:03:44 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Hello City Clerk, Richmond Mayor and Councilmembers,
My name is Rosie Rendon and I am excited and thankful to be appointed tonight to the Community Crisis Response Program’s Community Advisory Board. As an active member of my community, I am looking forward to bringing my unique perspective, skills, and knowledge to this board. I hope to bring this much-needed program to fruition. I understand how critical our Crisis Response Program is and how it needs to center our residents' safety in Richmond. I look forward to collaborating with other board members, city staff, and the council liaison to ensure this program is successful. Thank you for the opportunity! Forever In Community,
Rosie Rendon
From: Janet Johnson
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comment on agenda item P1: oppose
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:59:27 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Resolution P1 allows for city staff and consultants to design community engagement and evaluation processes instead of allowing residents and City Council to develop a public process. As written, this proposal is too vague. It calls for a study without defining what meaningful community engagement would look like.

For these reasons and others, I oppose this resolution.

Sincerely,
Janet Johnson
--
Janet Scoll Johnson
pronouns: she/her
Co-Chair, Richmond Shoreline Alliance
; Check out the Richmond Shoreline Alliance
online toxic tour of the Zeneca site here!
Co-Coordinator, Sunflower Alliance
KM6NKD
From: Janet Johnson
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comments agenda item #P.2: support
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:58:27 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Clerk, City Council, and staff:

I'm writing as a local environmental leader in Sunflower Alliance and as a resident of Richmond for 43 years.

Sunflower Alliance supports the resolution brought by Vice Mayor Jimenez, Councilmember McLaughlin, and Councilmember Robinson. We're happy that this proposal will fundessential city services and advance a responsible plan ahead of refinery closure or transition.

We have an opportunity to use these funds in ways that benefit the community directly
, and we hope the council will commit to using a portion of these funds to develop a robust local economy beyond Big Oil. We need to invest in healthy local businesses that undo the climate, environmental, and health harms caused by Chevron and other polluting industries. At the end of 10 years, we want to see a Richmond with healthier neighborhoods, cleaner air and better, family-sustaining jobs.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Janet Johnson
--
Janet Scoll Johnson
pronouns: she/her
Co-Chair, Richmond Shoreline Alliance
; Check out the Richmond Shoreline Alliance
online toxic tour of the Zeneca site here!
Co-Coordinator, Sunflower Alliance
KM6NKD
From: BK
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Eduardo Martinez; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Cesar Zepeda; Gayle McLaughlin; Soheila Bana; Melvin Willis
Subject: Agenda Item P4 Sept 24, 2025
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:37:27 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Richmond City Council Members,
The attempt to identify affiliations of potential members to reduce the number of volunteers from certain groups is not a genuine interest in diversifying commissions.

As a frequent volunteer, I wonder why you would want to turn away volunteers who are willing to give their time and energy because they are associated with another group of volunteers? Why penalize people for being deeply engaged and wanting to do more?
What’s next? Will you base decisions on the number of Black and Brown volunteers on a commission or board? Do you only need one Baptist member? Two LGBTQI members? What is too many?
The requirement for a prospect to disclose their "political affiliations" is a gravely bad idea and the collection of this additional and unnecessary data does not pass the
democracy test.

In Solidarity,
B K Williams
pronouns: She/Her
Politics in itself is incomplete. It is through our humanity that it becomes complete.

From: Diana Wear
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public Comment item P-4
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 12:59:51 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor and City Council Members,

Re: Public comments agenda item # P-4.

I am writing in opposition to item P-4 on today’s City Council agenda. This is not grounded in good common sense, nor should we discourage public participation in the political process, thus diminishing the already minimal powers of our mayor, and be logistically challenging.

The item's definition of a "political affiliation" is:

1. Political Affiliates include individuals who hold membership, have leadership roles, participate in setting policies, or actively engage in activities such as canvassing, fundraising, organizing events, or participating in election campaigns for political advocacy groups whose primary focus is at the city or county level.

First, we are told that boards and commissions are advisory so it’s not as if our residents are making policy decisions.

We need recruitment of volunteer commissioners and board members. P-4 sends the wrong message to residents—if you are involved with election campaigns or other important city improvement groups, you cannot serve our City in this valued role.

If we really are about these civic bodies our focus should be on the following: expecting more from our board and commission volunteers to merely show up just over half the meetings each year. We should make efforts to instruct our volunteers on what it means to serve: to learn the mission statement of their board or commission, to set goals, deliverables, and to maintain levels of accountability. As it is, it is very difficult to even get volunteers to be active.

Boards and Commissions need education, oversight, and encouragement. Richmond residents of all types should be encouraged to join these civic bodies.

Sincerely,

Diana Wear
Chair, Economic Development Commission
From: TARNEL ABBOTT
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Eduardo Martinez; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Cesar Zepeda; Gayle McLaughlin; Soheila Bana; Melvin Willis
Subject: Agenda Item P 4
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 11:47:18 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Richmond City Council Members,
I urge you to reject item P4. It is flawed in many ways.

Requiring people who apply to serve as volunteers on a city board or commission to disclose their "political affiliations " unless they are Democrats or Republicans is UN- democratic. This is very reminiscent of the McCarthy era in this country when people were harassed for their "political affiliations". The City of Richmond should NOT be allowed to ask, demand or keep track of in any way people's political affiliations.

Volunteering for these positions should be encouraged not curtailed.

Tarnel Abbott
Richmond Resident
Portal  Search... 
Meeting Date
Agenda Item
Name
Email
Comment
Position
Status
City Council
9/24/2024 4:30 PM Discussion
Regarding
Proposed
Amendments to
Ordinance on
Political Aliates
and Democratic
Representation for
Boards,
Commissions,
Committees, and
Task Forces
Phillip Front [email protected] To Mayor Martinez
and Members of
the Richmond City
Council, I
appreciate the
council's eorts to
promote
transparency and
fairness in our
city's boards,
commissions, and
task forces, but I
have concerns
about the
proposed
ordinance that
would limit the
percentage of
appointees who
are aliated with
the same political
advocacy group.

First, I believe the
disclosure
requirements as
written are too
vague. For
example, it's
unclear what level
of participation in a
political group
would require
disclosure. Does
volunteering once
Against Appro
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 1/6 for a campaign
count, or does it
require a more
active leadership
role? Without
clearer guidelines,
this ordinance
could be applied
inconsistently,
potentially
resulting in unfair
exclusions from
civic participation.

Second, and more
importantly, I think
the proposed 35%
limit on political
group aliations
raises signicant
First Amendment
concerns. Courts
have consistently
upheld the
freedom of
association as a
core constitutional
right, and limiting
someone's ability
to serve on a
government body
based on their
political aliations
could be seen as
infringing on that
right. This
ordinance could
create barriers to
civic participation
based solely on
political
involvement, which
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 2/6 is both illegal and
contrary to the
values of a
representative
democracy. While
ostensibly, the
intent is to prevent
any one group
from dominating
these bodies, let's
be honest here:
this is meant to
limit the inuence
of the Richmond
Progressive
Alliance. For
people who
oppose the RPA's
ideology, this
might seem like a
good solution, but
it's exactly the kind
of restriction that
the First
Amendment was
designed to
protect against. If
people think the
RPA poses a
political problem,
then a political
solution—through
elections and
public debate—is
the appropriate
path, not legislative
limitations that
infringe on
constitutional
rights. Thank you
for considering my
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 3/6 concerns.

Sincerely, Phillip
Front
9/24/2024 4:30 PM Discussion
Regarding
Proposed
Amendments to
Ordinance on
Political Aliates
and Democratic
Representation for
Boards,
Commissions,
Committees, and
Task Forces
Brittney Ross rossbrittney@gmail
.com
Dear City Council, I
am appalled that
this amendment is
even on the table.

Councilmember
Bana, I urge you to
withdraw it
immediately. This
is a blatant
attempt to limit
civic participation
from the RPA --
which, by the way -
- I am not aliated
with or a
particularly strong
advocate of. I am
against this
amendment as a
matter of principle.

The "denition of
political aliates"
is laughably vague.

Anyone
"participating in
election campaigns
for political
advocacy" is an
aliate? Are you
kidding me? What
if I reshare a
candidate's post
online? Is that
"participation?"
Furthermore, this
is obviously
unenforceable.

Against Appro
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 4/6 How on earth is
the city supposed
to monitor this? I'm
angry that you are
even considering
wasting city sta
time with this
ridiculous idea.

Brittney Ross
9/24/2024 4:30 PM Discussion
Regarding
Proposed
Amendments to
Ordinance on
Political Aliates
and Democratic
Representation for
Boards,
Commissions,
Committees, and
Task Forces
Joe Puleo joepuleo@hotmail.
com
This is a misguided
attempt tp limit the
inuence of people
who support RPA
goals. The
calculation method
is vague and it
doesn't provide for
any way to make a
determination of
who is a member
of the proscribed
or limited political
group. If one
doesn't like the
RPA's inuence on
Richmond City
government there
is a way to change
that; Elections!
Against Appro
9/24/2024 4:30 PM Direct Sta to
Conduct an
Assessment, Study
and Community
Outreach on the
Usage of Chevron's
$550 Million
Payment Over the
Next 10 Years
Jennifer French [email protected]
du
I support Soheila
Bana's P1 agenda
item. It lays out in
detail a proposal to
solicit community
input in spending
the Chevron
monies while
evaluating how to
maintain a strong
For Appro
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 5/6 city budget. There
is nothing wasteful
in allocating some
funds to really hear
from the
community, rather
than relying on
yearly surveys of
the community. I
might add I have
never received a
survey asking for
my thoughts on
how funds should
be spent but I have
received
communication
from Ms. Bana on
activities related to
my particular area
of Richmond,
Hasford Heights.
9/24/24, 1:08 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 6/6