Written Public Comments Received 2-3-2026 — Richmond City Council, February 3, 2026

FROM: KAT T
DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2026 – 12:4 1 P. M .

SUBJECT: PUBLIC COMMENT

COMMENTS:

I request that Richmond City Council create an avenue for obtaining responses from representatives who are perhaps not as able to timely communicate with constituents.

This mechanism would be in addition to available contact information speciﬁc to individual councilmembers and the mayor. I am resident of District 2 and have received at best automatic messages about receipt of my communications: with Mr. Zepeda more than a year ago about untoward conduct near the Hollistic Healing Collective (Vista del Mar Village Shopping Center) and more recently a month ago about public input regarding the Chevron settlement and concerns about the local judiciary; and with Mayor Martinez about the latter. I have left voicemail messages with their staff (no one ever answers) requesting meetings — thinking maybe that would be a better route — and still nothing. Given the importance of communication with constituents, I hope this Council will take steps to ensure there is an additional mechanism available when we are unable to communicate with the people who ask for our votes. Since there is no back-and-forth permitted during meetings, it's hard to know what else to do. Thank you.

From: Claudia Citroen
To: City Clerk Dept User; Shasa Curl; Shannon Moore; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Eduardo Martinez Subject: City council meeting 02.03.26 open forum / public comment Date: Monday, February 2, 2026 8:49:22 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.
Grievance and Oversight Demands: Follow-Up by City Attorney and City Manager Richmond, CA Financial & Infrastructure Mismanagement (Including Housing, Sewer, Fire Safety, Marina/
Cove Construction Oversight, Pension Liabilities and Lacking Non- Profit Spending Control

The city council finds itself boxed into a corner of its own making. For years, it has punted difficult financial decisions, tolerated wasteful spending, and failed to make meaningful course corrections. The result is a persistent structural deficit that makes it nearly impossible to offer raises, let alone implement a serious retention strategy for city employees.

Independent reporting and formal oversight reviews indicate gaps in fiscal management, project review, public safety planning, pension oversight, and transparency in Richmond, CA.

These include over-reliance on settlement revenues, delayed and incomplete oversight of housing projects in Marina and Cove, sewer system upgrades approved before full environmental review, refusal to fund a dedicated EMT vehicle for the Fire Department, and Council decisions to divert funds into nonprofits that cannot provide quantitative impact data while ignoring current pension obligations. Residents report limited awareness of costs, operational impacts, and environmental and safety consequences. Independent bodies have highlighted these issues and recommended corrective actions.

Council agenda new bossiness
follow-up on high-risk financial history, Chevron settlement mismanagement, Marina/Cove housing project approvals, sewer system upgrades approved without full EIR, Fire Department EMT vehicle funding refusal, and pension obligations ignored in favor of nonprofits that cannot provide quantitative impact data. This needs to include supporting evidence such as council meeting minutes, votes, agendas, consultant contracts, project budgets, EIR submissions, pension actuarial reports, and nonprofit funding applications/internal memos.

Community repeatedly not only requests these during open forum public comments but also voices grave concerns regarding transparent review procedures for all spending decisions, enforcement of legally mandated pension obligations before discretionary spending, full EIR, operational, and financial impact analysis prior to approvals, and clear accountability for public funds, infrastructure, and emergency services resources. (Please correct this list if any inaccuracies occurred.)
Fiscal Management
High-Risk Financial History:

California State Auditor previously designated Richmond, CA as high-risk due to structural budget imbalances, pension obligations, and weak long-term planning. Despite partial improvements, lacking fiduciary oversight continues to raise concerns regarding allocation of revenues and implementation of corrective actions.

Over-
Reliance on Chevron Revenue:

A disproportionate share of the General Fund preferred
allocation to council connected non profits depends on Chevron funds. Currently city avoids to disclosure the fragility of the city’s revenue base, raising concerns about sustainability and fiscal prudence.

Chevron Settlement ($550M) Oversight Gaps:

Council approved settlement
without a binding allocation framework. 2024 Financial Consultant contracts, spearheaded

by
council Jimenez turned out to be a “research strategist” with no CPA degree (who reminded council to consult CalPers prior to any formal public input or enforceable prioritization!).

Based on the 01.27.26 council meeting residents are concerned about council willingness on fund allocation directed toward stable, long-term financial needs instead of political aligned

special interest group’s moonshot projects.

Multi-home Construction & Infrastructure Oversight Failures Marina and Cove Housing Projects:

City Council and planning staff failed to review and
deny approval of projects timely and complete oversight in accordance to city code compliance. Residents report lack of transparency on expenses and community impact.

Development related sewerage components, pushed under “emergency ordinance”

by
a commercial builder group of the Cove Housing project are not yet approved before proper Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analysis. Yet builder requests preliminary construction approval at Thursday’s planning commission and forced city wide sewer upgrades due to capacity constraints. Residents remain unaware of operational impacts, including pump station noise, cost allocation, and environmental consequences.

Fire Department Equipment:

Fire Department submitted for years requests for dedicated EMT vehicles in order to reduce maintenance costs of existing fire trucks used currently on all calls. Council continued refusal to fund by prioritizing short-term savings, over long-term efficiency is fiduciary irresponsibility! It endangers public safety and created unnecessary expenditures. A few months back fire department responded to a residential fire and scrambled for over one hour to locate contracted EMT transport for a serious burn victim they were not equipped to provide adequate EMT. The patient died during a much delayed air transfer! Pension Funding and Nonprofit Allocation Mismanagement
Refusal to Discuss Current Pension Obligations:

Council uses consent calendar agenda to
avoid reviewing current and future pension obligations, as historically reviewed under new business. Richmond police department contract negotiations are intentionally delayed for almost one year and the public has no information about the reasons. RPA majority however continues to prioritize and approve redirected funds towards politically aligned nonprofits, (described by critics as “ineffective moonshot” projects). These organizations fail to provide quantitative impact data at their marginally acceptable presentations. Due to lacking biannual financial audits of all city budget recipients gross financial abuse and embezzlement might occur again (Richmond LAND CEO Rany Jones 250k).Lack of transparency and access to information makes their eligibility and funding rationale unclear.

Council demonstrates poor
fiduciary decision-making, misalignment of funding with legally mandated pension obligations, and political capture of public funds.

Transparency & Public Accountability Issues:

These are just a few aspects which

illustrate
data handling weaknesses. Residents remain largely in the dark not only on housing projects, actual need of sewer project and related costs, long overdue and critically essential fire and EMS equipment, oversll pension obligations and lastly lacking transparency in most nonprofit funding. Incomplete reporting and lack of proactive engagement exacerbate trust and governance issues.

Legal Basis / City Charter Duties:

Duty: Balanced budget & prudent management; Legal
Source: CA Gov. Code § 53850, Richmond City Charter § 701; Application: Mismanagement of settlement funds, housing/sewer approvals, fire department and pension obligations:

1. -> Oversight of city operations & planning; Legal Source: Richmond City Charter § 202; Application: Approvals of housing, sewer upgrades, pension allocations, and refusal to act on public safety requests

2. -> Transparency & recordkeeping; Legal Source: CA Public Records Act (CPRA), Richmond City Charter § 502; Application: Residents in the dark on project costs, operational impact, pension funding, and nonprofit allocations

3. -> Fiduciary responsibility; Legal Source: Common-law fiduciary duty of elected officials; Application: Failure to safeguard public funds, review environmental/operational risks, or prioritize legal obligations

and especially employee pension funding.

Targeted Council Task Requests:

Housing Projects – Marina/Cove: Review council
approvals, planning reports, expense records, contracts, and public communications.

Sewer
System Upgrades: project proposals, EIRs, engineering reviews, permit applications, noise/impact studies, public engagement records.

Fire Department Equipment: multi-year
EMT vehicle requests, memos, council votes, maintenance and cost reports.

Pension &
Nonprofit Funding: pension obligation reports, actuarial studies, funding allocation decisions, nonprofit applications, council deliberation notes, internal memos, and quantitative impact data submitted by nonprofits (if any).

Financial Controls: allocation of settlement funds,
consultant contracts tied to project review, budget tracking for all ongoing

From: Tom Butt - external
To: [email protected]
Subject: TOM BUTT E-FORUM: BIG CORRECTION -- Public Comments - Agenda Item O-1 -- Contract With Liftech Consultants for Planning and Design Services for Relocation of the SS Red Oak Victory, $299,797 Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2026 2:28:17 PM
Attachments: image004.png
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.

For reasons that I can’t explain, I erroneously stated that Alternative C was the plan selected by the National Park Service for Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park in the General Management Plan
. In fact, it was Alternative B. I have
revised my comments to reflect that.

The most important thing is that Alternative B has the SS Red Oak Victory in historic Shipyard 3.

Spending $300,000 to provide a design and cost estimate to build a new dock for the SS Red Oak Victory
is a bad idea and a profound waste of money that could be better spent maintaining the SS Red Oak Victory, which is unfortunately on the way to becoming a rusted hulk, or hiring a fundraising genius to go some after really big grants.

Don’t get me wrong; maintaining and saving this ship should be a Richmond, if not a national, priority. There is an old saying that a boat is “a hole in the water into which you pour money.” An 80-year-old Victory ship is a 455-foot-long hole that can swallow a lot of money. Spending tens of millions of dollars to move the ship just 2,000 feet from its current location is not going to save it.

Just when I thought I knew everything about shipbuilding and the WWII Home Front, I read the most recent book on the subject,
Launching Liberty, by Doug Most, published just last
year. While the book covers a lot of the details with which many are familiar, it provided a historical backstory about how the shipbuilding program was born, and, most importantly, it made the case that building thousands of ships in yards all over America, was absolutely critical to victory. In WW II. For the first years of the war, Hitler was sinking ships faster than they could be built, but that all changed. Without the cargo ships, the food, vehicles, tanks and ammunition could not have been delivered to the front where they were needed. The war could actually have been lost!

Richmond was the home of the most productive shipyard, and that story, which includes the SS Red Oak Victory
, deserved to be told for generations to come.

Early planning for Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park did, in fact, envision mooring the SS Red Oak Victory
at historic Shipyard 3.

Some history: In the Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, Alternative B, which was adopted, the SS Red Oak Victory was anticipated to be docked at historic Shipyard 3.

Richmond Shipyard No. 3 / SS Red Oak Victory In alternative B, there would be two park areas for Shipyard No. 3. The characteristics of these desired future park areas are described in table 2. The historic district along the waterfront and the SS Red Oak Victory would be in the Historic Engagement Area to enable visitors to experience many sights and sounds associated with World War II-era shipyard operations. The remaining area of Shipyard No. 3 would be in the Industrial/Port Landscape Area—while allowing for contemporary port activities, this area would provide visitors with a sense of size and scale represented by the open industrial landscape. Over the next 25 years, the 76Historic Engagement Area could be enlarged upon reevaluation of the needs and goals of the Port of Richmond.

In alternative B, visitors could explore some of the World War II sites and structures in the historic district of Shipyard No. 3 including the two southernmost graving basins/drydocks, general warehouse, sheet metal shop, whirley crane(s), and Berth 6A, where the SS Red Oak Victory is docked. The remaining structures and areas of Richmond Shipyard No. 3 would continue to support contemporary port operations.

To better interpret Shipyard No. 3, some interiors of the historic structures could be modified to reflect their World War II uses. In addition, in alternative B, visitors could explore the historic Kaiser shipyard through models, artifacts, exhibits, demonstrations, and other interpretive programming. Park visitors to Shipyard No. 3 would have opportunities to learn from community members about Richmond’s World War II home front stories and experiences.

In alternative B, the mooring of the SS Red Oak Victory at Berth 6A in Shipyard No. 3 would provide another means for visitors to appreciate the scale and immensity of the shipyard operations; visitors would have an opportunity to tour a surviving Victory ship that was built and launched in Richmond in 1944.

The views of Shipyard No. 3 from the SS Red Oak Victory would provide visitors with a comprehensive understanding of the historic shipyards layout. In addition, visitors would have views of the City of San Francisco and the San Francisco Bay.

These views could help visitors understand the importance of the land and sea connection and the shipyard’s relationship to the international war effort.

Richmond Shipyard No. 3 is a National Register Historic District that contains six World War II-era historic buildings (sheet metal shop, general warehouse, machine shop, forge shop, first aid station, and cafeteria), whirley crane, and five graving basins/dry docks. In alternative B, the historic shipyard and its World War II structures would provide the setting for visitors to experience and explore the fabric of a wartime shipyard: its scale, how it operated, and its role within the context of the nation’s war effort. In this alternative, historic structures would be managed to retain their World War II-era appearance. Some of the interiors of historic structures would be rehabilitated and used to illustrate World War II shipyard uses. Interiors of other historic structures would continue to be used for contemporary uses by cooperating partners and port operations.

Since the General Management Plan was adopted in 2008, there have been radical changes that provide even more justification for berthing the SS red Oak Victory in historic Shipyard 3:

The Bay Trail and Canal Boulevard were extended to reach the southern tip of Shipyard No. 3, making it far more accessible than anticipated in the General Management Plan.

The Riggers Loft was rehabilitated and became a public venue for over 10 years. It could be again.

The SS Red Oak Victory was moved from Berth 6A to Basin 5 and became fully publicly accessible. It also has abundant parking and laydown space, which would not exist at Sheridan Point.

The Richmond Ferry Terminal was constructed at the tip of “Ford Point,” and its parking (typically full) takes up all of the landside area adjacent to Sheridan point Observation Point, the location identified in the General Management Plan Alternate C for RSS Red Oak Victory mooring.

Richmond Moves can provide a $2.00 ride from the Visitor Center to the SS Red Oak Victory.

Figure 1 - Alternative B showing SS Red Oak Victory at historic Shipyard 3 It is also unlikely that BCDC will approve new Bay fill for this project when a mooring with public access already exists.

On April 7, the Richmond City Council unanimously approved the General Management Plan for Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park with Alternate B. The City’s approval was anticipated in the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park Establishment Act of 2000, which includes the following direction:

(g) General management plan

(1) In general Not later than 3 complete fiscal years after the date funds are made available, the Secretary shall prepare, in consultation with the City of Richmond, California, and transmit to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a general management plan for the park in accordance with the provisions of section 1a-7(b) of this title and other applicable law.
(2) Preservation of setting

The general management plan shall include a plan to preserve the historic setting of the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park, which shall be jointly developed and approved by the City of Richmond.

The City’s action was also a part of the public comment, which has a deadline of April 29 to comment on the draft general plan for the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park.

The plan outlines three options for the park’s future:

” Under alternative A, conditions would essentially stay the same as they are now. Visitors would use self-guiding tools or join National Park Service tours to learn about the park’s history. The cost estimate is $200,000 in facility upgrades and $700,000 a year in ongoing operating costs.

” Under alternative B, known as the “preferred option,” a World War II Home Front Visitor/Education Center at the Ford Assembly Building on Harbour Way South would provide information about the home front effort and familiarize visitors with historic sites nearby. Visitors would be able to go see the outside of historic buildings and some building interiors where artifacts, exhibits and programs would be available. The estimate is $9 million in facility upgrades, plus $2.6 million in annual operating costs.

” Under alternative C, activities would be centralized at the visitor/education center, where people would view exhibits, learn about the history and get information about self-guided tours of historic buildings nearby. This plan would cost $10.6 million in facility upgrades, and $2.4 million a year for operations.

The text of the City’s resolution follows:

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND APPROVING

THE ROSIE THE RIVETER/WORLD WAR II HOME FRONT NATIONAL HISTORICAL

PARK GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

WHEREAS, The Richmond City Council adopted Resolution 129-99 expressing support for the proposed Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park and committing the City of Richmond and the National Park Service to a partnership, and,

WHEREAS, in October of 2000, President Bill Clinton signed into law the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park Establishment Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-352, Sec. 1, Oct. 24, 2000, 114 Stat. 1370), establishing Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park in Richmond, CA, and

WHEREAS, the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park Establishment Act of 2000 includes the following direction:
(g) General management plan

(2) Preservation of setting The general management plan shall include a plan to preserve the historic setting of the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park, which shall be jointly developed and approved by the City of Richmond.
and,

WHEREAS, the final draft of the General Management Plan (Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment) has been completed, following numerous public meetings and outreach processes that began in 2002, further described in Chapter 6 of the Plan, and have continued through March 18, 2009, and,

WHEREAS, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements have been fulfilled and are further described in Chapter 5 of the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, and

WHEREAS, in consultation with the cooperating partners, including the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, the Richmond Museum Association, Rosie the Riveter Trust, Levin Shipping, the Council of Industries and Eddie Orton (owner of the Ford Building, the National Park Service has selected Alternative B as its preferred alternative, which is also the environmentally preferred alternative.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Richmond, in accordance with g(2) of Pub. L. 106-352, Sec. 1, Oct. 24, 2000, 114 Stat. 1370, does hereby approve of the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, including Alternative B, and,

THEREFORE IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richmond directs the city manager to provide a copy of this resolution to the Secretary of the Interior.

The Red Oak Victory is owned by the Richmond Museum Association, whose board has never endorsed or officially recognized the plan to

move the Red Oak Victory to
the east side of the channel next to the Richmond Ferry Parking lot, Rather, the proposed move has become both an obsession and foregone conclusion with some Red Oak crew members, some Richmond City Council members and some City staff. The singular motivation by the ship’s crew for the proposed move, as summarized in a Richmond Standard article, is anticipation of increased visitation resulting in increased revenue.

Fred Klink, the ship’s director or marketing, estimates “a three-fold increase in annual traffic” for the ship if it relocates to a more visible location near Rosie the Riveter World War II Home Front National Historical Park and the Ferry Terminal.
“The major benefit to us is increased visitor traffic and the revenue that comes with that,” Klink said.

Supporters of this proposed relocation include Mayor Eduardo Martinez, Vice Mayor Cesar Zepeda and Congressman John Garamendi. But some in the community don’t want to move the ship from its current location near Riggers Loft and the historic Whirley Crane, including former Mayor Tom Butt.

The City Council’s motivation is to clear out Point Potrero Marine Terminal to fulfill the dream of a future offshore wind support facility or even a new shipyard.

Members of the Richmond City Council have been touting the Port of Richmond as a location to provide, “operations and maintenance facilities and potentially light manufacturing” in support of offshore wind (The Port of Richmond Investing in its Future, June 3, 2024). On May 23, 2025, the Port of Richmond solicited proposals, “from qualified firms to provide conceptual design and preliminary engineering services for the Port of Richmond Offshore Wind Terminal.” In June of 2023, the City Council invited a consultant to make a presentation about opportunities related to offshore wind. The Agenda item stated, “Various state and federal studies show that the Port of Richmond is a good candidate site to support the offshore wind industry …There are opportunities for the Port of Richmond to support the offshore wind industry as a manufacturing / fabrication site, construction support site, operations and maintenance site, or as a shipbuilding site.”

The City Council is so invested in the offshore wind opportunity that they have directed City staff to start clearing out Point Potrero Marine Terminal, including two historical items that are in the way – the Riggers Loft and the Red Oak Victory – now, even the whirley crane. Unfortunately, our president for the next 3 years is doing everything he can to kill the prospect of offshore wind power.

In January of 2025, Trump ended leasing of all offshore sites for wind projects, “Under the authority granted to me in section 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1341(a), I hereby withdraw from disposition for wind energy leasing all areas within the Offshore Continental Shelf (OCS) as defined in section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1331. This withdrawal shall go into effect beginning on January 21, 2025, and shall remain in effect until this Presidential Memorandum is revoked.” Although the withdrawal did not technically affect already executed leases for California, it essentially shut down the program that was depending on federal finding.

President Trump strongly opposes the use of wind power for generating electricity and has pulled the plug on all offshore wind projects. Just this month ,“The White House on Aug. 22 abruptly halted the nearly complete 65-turbine Revolution Wind project in the Atlantic Ocean, leaving developers and construction workers wondering how to proceed.

On August 30, 2025, the Trump administration canceled the $679 million previously earmarked for Humboldt County, the target development that the Port of Richmond was hoping to support.

Estimates of the cost of moving the Red Oak Victory range from $12 million to $20 million, and no source of funding has ever been identified. There is no documented basis for the estimate that the number of visits will “triple,” quoting Fred Klink, who also said, “We sell out many of our events and we bring in a good revenue stream that is more than sufficient to maintain the ship as a museum. But I agree that’s not enough to meet our long-term goals.”

It’s no secret that the premier “long term goal” is to enable the ship to actually get underway on its own power, ultimately providing cruises like the SS Jeremiah O’Brien. One obstacle is that the City’s agreement with Auto Warehousing Company (the adjacent car importer) prohibits the Red Oak Victory from firing up its boilers for fear the nearby imported vehicles will be damaged. The other is Coast Guard approval based on the condition of the ship. Moving the Red Oak to the channel is no solution, as it will still place it under the Auto Warehousing prohibition. The Coast Guard restriction is an indication that major maintenance is required.

The logic of maintaining the existing location is that the ship is part of an historic ensemble that includes not only the ship, but the extant structures of historic Shipyard 3 -- six buildings (four of which have been repurposed and are in active use), the graving basins and the whirley crane. By the way, the City wants to get rid of the whirley crane, also.

The argument for moving the ship is based on the assertion that it is too hard to find by the public and that if it were in a more visible location, passers-by would flock to it like grocery shoppers buying impulse items at the check-out counter. The proposed new location is not exactly high visibility either. It would be seen only by Richmond ferry riders, who are mostly in a hurry to get to work or get home and employees and patrons at the Ford Assembly Building (the Craneway is closed indefinitely). It would not be visible from the Rosie the Riveter Visitor Center and would be over a quarter mile walk. In its current location, you can park almost right next to it.

Despite lamentations about its “remote” location, The Red Oak Victory is well known and much appreciated by the public, earning 4.5 stars from Trip Advisor and rated as the 5th most popular of 44 things to do in Richmond. According to Trip Advisor, Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park is Richmond’s top attraction, but the largest photo on the Trip Advisor Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park page is not the Visitor Center, it is the Red Oak Victory!

Figure 6 - Red Oak Victory earns 4.5 stars as Richmond's 5th most popular "things to do in Richmond."

Figure 7 - The most popular thing to do in Richmond is Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park, but the Trip Advisor page features the Red Oak Victory

The revenue challenges of the Red Oak Victory are not a result of insufficient visitation; they are challenges shared with other museum ships regardless of their location. Essentially, a museum ship cannot rely on visitor revenue for long term maintenance.

The Richmond Ferry parking lot is already maxed out, and there would be no proximate location for the hordes of future anticipated visitors to park. There would be no laydown space as exists at the current Basin 5 location.

There is a lot of evidence that people will find their way to seemingly remote locations in Richmond if they want to. The Riggers Loft, right next to the Red Oak Victory hosted 22,000 patrons in 2024. The East Brother Beer Co., on the way to the Red Oak Victory, probably hosted at least that many. There is no more remote location than Point San Pablo Harbor, but some 30,000 people annually find their way out there to the Sailing Goat and various events.

2025 was the 25th anniversary of Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park, and we should be building it up, not dispersing and abandoning its components. There are many ways to increase visitation of the Red Oak Victory.

Keeping the Riggers Loft as a public destination and event venue is one of them.

Wayfinding signs could be added in Point Richmond and along Dornan Drive, providing wayfinding information to tens of thousands, at a fraction of the cost of moving the ship. A Bay Trail segment actually terminates at the Red Oak Victory, but it could be better signed.

With no money to fund a move, and the logistics of such a move making it at least five years in the future, probably more, the Richmond Museum Association should focus on maximizing revenue at the current location.

Despite that fact that Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park is Richmond’s No.1, attraction, both City Council members and City staff have had a lukewarm affinity for it over the 25 years since its establishment, even though most of its assets are owned by the City of Richmond in a unique “partnership park” arrangement.

Instead of obsessing over moving the SS Red Oak Victory, we need to all pull together to support Richmond’s top attraction, our own national park, and focus on the large grants or endowments needed to keep the SS Red Oak Victory afloat. If there is $12 million to $20 million available for the Red Oak Victory, it should be used for maintenance, not for a move with no proven benefits.

From: Tom Butt - external
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public Comments - Agenda Item O-1 -- Contract With Liftech Consultants for Planning and Design Services for Relocation of the SS Red Oak Victory, $299,797
Date: Sunday, February 1, 2026 1:43:15 PM
Attachments: image004.png
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.

Spending $300,000 to provide a design and cost estimate to build a new dock for the SS Red Oak Victory is a bad idea and a profound waste of money that could be better spent maintaining the SS Red Oak Victory, which is unfortunately on the way to becoming a rusted hulk, or hiring a fundraising genius to go some after really big grants.

Richmond was the home of the most productive shipyard, and that story, which includes the SS Red Oak Victory
, deserved to be told for generations to come.

Early planning for Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park did, in fact, envision mooring the SS Red Oak Victory
at Sheridan Point, but the basis for that no longer
exists.

Some history:

In the Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, Alternative C, which was adopted, the SS Red Oak Victory was anticipated to be docked at Sheridan Point.

In alternative C the visitor would be directed to the Richmond waterfront where the World War II Homefront Visitor/Education Center the SS Red Oak Victory and the views of shipyard No. 3 would provide a historic setting in which to learn about the American World War II home front stories…

With the SS Red Oak Victory located at Sheridan Point Observation Park adjacent to the visitor/education center at the Ford Assembly Building park visitors would be able to explore a wartime ship that was produced in one of Kaiser’s shipyards. The views from the SS Red Oak Victory
and the World War II Home Front Visitor/Education Center would provide visitors with a sense of the size and scope of the war effort…

The
SS Red Oak Victory would be in the historic engagement area where visitors can become engaged in the activities associated with shipbuilding and the role of victory and liberty ships during World War II…

The World War II Home Front Visitor/Education Center, located in the waterfront portion of the Ford Assembly Building referred to as the craneway, would be the primary destination for visitors to
Rosie The Riveter World War II Home Front National Historical Park.

Visitors to the center would be surrounded by historic resources of Richmond's World War II home front, including the historic Ford Assembly Building, SS Red Oak Victory moored at the adjacent Sheridan Observation Point Park, views across the Santa Fe channel to the historic structures of Shipyard No. 3, and views of Richmond's inner harbor. The concentration of these historic structures and views would provide a setting that supports the in-depth exploration of the stories and events of America's home front at the visitor/education Center…

Also, in Alternative C, Richmond Shipyard No. 3 was seen largely as something to be viewed from afar but not experienced except for guided tours:

In Alternative C, Shipyard No. 3 would be in the Industrial/Port Landscape Area While visitors would have access to this area only during scheduled guided tours, observing contemporary port activities from a safe distance would provide them with a sense of size and scale represented by the open industrial landscape. The characteristics of the Industrial/Port Landscape Area are described in Table 2

Visitor Experience
In this alternative the World War II sites and structures of the Richmond shipyard No. 3 would provide the historic backdrop for interpreting the Kaiser shipyard and Homefront stories. Periodic guided tours of the shipyard would be offered but visitors could also view and learn about the former Kaiser shipyards from the World War II Home Front Visitor/Education Center at the Ford Assembly Building and from designated viewing areas located outside Richmond Shipyard No. 3 and along the Bay Trail.

Historic Resource Conditions
Richmond Shipyard No. 3 is a National Register Historic District that contains six World War II historic buildings (sheet metal shop, general warehouse ,machine shop, forge shop, first aid station and cafeteria), whirley crane, and five graving basin/dry docks.

The preservation of the facades of the historic shipyard buildings would provide visitors with distant views of the historic district and help them to understand the scale and impact that Kaiser and his shipyards had during Richmond's World War II home front effort. The historic district would include the World War II sites and structures that illustrate the shipyards historic operations; these would be interpreted off-site. While the historic structures and their features would continue to retain their World War II-era appearance, the interior spaces of the structures would be used for contemporary port uses and would be closed to park visitors.

Visitor Services and Facilities
in Alternatives C, visitor facilities would include viewing areas with parking and interpretive signs; all visitor facilities would be located outside the boundaries of Richmond Shipyard No. 3

However, since the General Management Plan was adopted in 2008, there have been radical changes:

The Visitor Center was not located in the Craneway; it was located in the Oil House, some 500 feet further east from its anticipated location in the Craneway, and some 1,200 (almost a quarter mile) from Sheridan Point.

The Bay Trail and Canal Boulevard were extended to reach the southern tip of Shipyard No. 3, making it far more accessible than anticipated in the General Management Plan.

The Riggers Loft was rehabilitated and became a public venue for over 10 years. It could be again.

The SS Red Oak Victory was moved to Shipyard No. 3 (Potrero Point Marine Terminal) Basin 5 and became fully publicly accessible. It also has abundant parking and laydown space, which would not exist at Sheridan Point.

Richmond Moves can provide a $2.00 ride from the Visitor Center to the SS Red Oak Victory.

It is also unlikely that BCDC will approve new Bay fill for this project when a mooring with public access already exists.

The Red Oak Victory is owned by the Richmond Museum Association, whose board has never endorsed or officially recognized the plan to

The City Council’s motivation is to clear out Point Potrero Marine Terminal to fulfill the dream of a future offshore wind support facility or even a new shipyard.

On August 30, 2025, the Trump administration canceled the $679 million previously earmarked for Humboldt County, the target development that the Port of Richmond was hoping to support.

Figure 6 - Red Oak Victory earns 4.5 stars as Richmond's 5th most popular "things to do in Richmond."

Figure 7 - The most popular thing to do in Richmond is Rosie the Riveter WW II Home Front National Historical Park, but the Trip Advisor page features the Red Oak Victory

Keeping the Riggers Loft as a public destination and event venue is one of them.

Volunteers are already doing a good job organizing and publicizing events like pancake breakfasts and movies, but surprisingly, there is no sign on I-580 identifying exits to the Red Oak Victory. There are wayfinding signs on Canal Boulevard, but they don’t start until you enter Pont Potrero Marine Terminal, and they are small. Wayfinding signs could be added in Point Richmond and along Dornan Drive, providing wayfinding information to tens of thousands, at a fraction of the cost of moving the ship. A Bay Trail segment actually terminates at the Red Oak Victory, but it could be better signed.

From: Glenda Rubin
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: February 3, 2026 City Council Meeting | Public Comments Agenda Item O-2 ICE-Free Zone Ordinance and Citywide Protocol
Date: Monday, February 2, 2026 10:30:15 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,
I am a Richmond resident and live in the North and East neighborhood.

I urge the Council to approve Agenda Item O-2 directing the City Manager and City Attorney to draft a proposed ICE-Free Zone

Ordinance for our
City.

I strongly support passing such an ordinance.

ICE agents are breaking the
law, disregarding our constitutional rights,

and murdering people with
impunity. While an ordinance cannot completely protect our residents and anyone located in Richmond, I have no confidence

that anything less than
the most stringent prohibitions of ICE's activity in our city can be effective.

Sincerely,
Glenda Rubin
From: Madison Mennie
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public Comment O.2
Date: Monday, February 2, 2026 9:38:02 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,
My name is Madison Mennie and I am a resident of Richmond in District 5. I support this item and urge you to move the ICE Free Zone Ordinance forward. In light of the numerous horrific events including those that have been heroically documented by bystanders—namely the deaths of Alex Peretti and Renee Good, as well as the wrongful and terrifying kidnapping of five-year-old Liam Ramos—it is now more important than ever to ensure our community is protected from ICE's blatant violations of use-of-force policies. We must be prepared for anything, as ICE and the White House have made it clear that they will not uphold our constitutional right to due process. Proactive steps are necessary to safeguard our neighborhood from another horrific tragedy.

This community has always been a safe haven for immigrants, and I want to keep it that way.

We are a wonderful collection of people who all deserve basic human rights and decency.

Please move this forward so we can be ready.

I appreciate that this proposal goes beyond enforcement and addresses real community needs, such as emergency shelters, clinics, multilingual alerts, and coordination with trusted local organizations. Neighbors are organizing, but we need the city’s help to guide residents and support efforts to safeguard our community.

Thank you for your time, and I appreciate your call to action to ensure ICE remains out of Richmond.

Madison Mennie
From: Sara Sunstein
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Claudia Jimenez; Sue Wilson; Eduardo Martinez; Soheila Bana; Jamelia Brown; Cesar Zepeda; Doria Robinson Subject: 2/3/2026 Agenda O.2
Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2026 12:12:01 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.

To City Clerk, the Mayor, and all Council Members,
As a resident of the Annex, I'm in total favor of the city coming up with ICE-free zones.

The proposed ordinance in the agenda aligns with my thinking and desires--to keep ICE away from all city-owned and controlled property, including schools that are open or are shuttered.

And that personnel, employees are to be non-cooperating with Federal ICE and other immigration/border agencies, following a coordinated implementation strategy and staff trainings. The community will be included in preparedness and communication plans.

I appreciate this being on the agenda and discussed--and hopefully passed, asap.

Thank you.

Sara Sunstein
1664 San Benito
Sara Sunstein
Ortho-Bionomy®, Somatic therapy
510.526.5414
http://www.sarasunstein.com

Given the immensity
of oil used and pollution caused by war, peace may be one of the best solutions to climate change. http://www.rabble.ca/news/2009/10/fight-climate-change-ending-war From: Martine Johannessen They/Them
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public Comment Agenda Item O.3 for 2/3 Meeting Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2026 11:44:57 AM
Attachments: img-af04038e-78f1-4b13-9689-2774d867c5c6
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,
My name is Martine Johannessen and I am a researcher at Communities for a Better Environment here in Richmond. I’m not able to attend the council meeting tonight, but I wanted to write in support of agenda item O.3. I strongly urge City Council to direct the City Attorney to evaluate the legality of the proposed ordinance to ban corporate land grabs in Richmond.

At CBE, we hear from Richmond residents all the time about the harms of bad landlords and corporate housing ownership on their lives. Richmond residents deserve to have access to high quality, affordable housing, and rest assured that they’ll be able to stay in their homes, not displaced when large corporations see these homes as a profitable commodity. This proposal is a practical and creative step to help make housing stability, affordability, and accessibility a reality.

It’s especially important to consider the impacts of corporate real estate actors right now, given City Council’s expressed interest in transitioning Richmond towards a clean economy, upgrading city infrastructure and cleaning up toxic sites using the $550 million won from Chevron. Corporations often swoop in during these sorts of “green transformations,” scooping up properties cheaply, and displacing longtime residents. It makes sense to be proactive and start thinking now

about how to protect Richmond
residents from possible harm.

By moving forward with this ordinance, Richmond can be an inspiring example for other cities — across California and beyond — on how to protect working-class communities of color from corporate greed and gentrification, by enabling community ownership, and keeping residents in their homes.

Thank you,
Martine Johannessen

Martine Johannessen they/them
NorCal Staff Researcher
Communities for a Better Environment and
CBE Action, a project of Tides Advocacy
340 Marina Way, Richmond CA 94801
www.cbecal.org

Richmond City CouncilFebruary 3, 2026

Richmond City Council
February 3, 2026