5PM City Council [Updated 04/26/2022 @ 12:40 p.m.]
Meeting Time: 04-26-22 17:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
5PM City Council [Updated 04/26/2022 @
12:40 p.m.]
04-26-22
17:00
43 23 5 2 14
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
5PM City Council [Updated 04/26/2022 @ 12:40 p.m.]
04-26-22 17:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
8. Ordinance Amending Section 12.72.060 and Adding Chapter 12.104 of the Sacramento City Code, Relating to the Old Sacramento Docks (Passed for Publication 04/19/2022; Published 04/22/2022) [Two-Thirds Vote Required] File ID: 2022-00845
1 0 1 0
19. Quarterly Climate Update File ID: 2022-00813 17 5 1 11 Public Comments-Matters Not on the Agenda 1 0 0 1
CORRESPONDENCE added to Items 19 and Public Comments - Matters Not on the Agenda - See Agenda Item Below [Updated 04/26/2022 @ 12:40 p.m.]
4 0 0 2
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for 8. Ordinance Amending Section 12.72.060 and Adding Chapter 12.104 of the Sacramento City Code, Relating to the Old Sacramento Docks (Passed for Publication 04/19/2022; Published 04/22/2022) [Two-Thirds Vote Required] File ID: 2022-00845
Overall Sentiment
Davi Rodrigues
Location:
Submitted At: 10:43am 04-23-22
Davi Rodrigues
PO Box 160965
Sacramento, CA 95816
[email protected]
It came to my attention the city would like to pass an ordinance relating to the city docks. While most of that ordinance seems worthy, a section of it states that it will prohibit fishing from the public docks. The state constitution, article I, section 25 expressly forbids passing laws prohibiting fishing from, and on the public lands of the state, and grants only the state legislature the power to set conditions and seasons for fishing. A later amendment to the state's constitution gave the latter authority to the Fish and Game Commission. Since then, the commission has formulated a process for opening and closing areas to fishing, and that involves public meetings where the whole of the state is notified and can participate. Fishing is a statewide resource, and the state legislators framed that amendment so that the state would occupy the management of it.
Please remove that portion of the ordinance
Agenda Item: eComments for 19. Quarterly Climate Update File ID: 2022-00813 Overall Sentiment
Steve Wirtz
Location:
Submitted At: 6:50pm 04-26-22
The City should be prioritizing its climate action plans and funding to match!!! We have a climate Emergency. We need to act like it.
Global warming is wrecking havoc to our county, state, nation and the world! We need BOLD ACTION NOW by our local leaders here and around the world.
Steve Wirtz
[email protected]
Greta Lacin
Location:
Submitted At: 6:10pm 04-26-22
A few council meetings ago, there was a discussion on how to spend surplus dollars, about 10 or 11 million.
Councilmember Harris suggested using it on climate action programs. It is ironic that the City Council has spent major $ on programs for children, cultural and art programs, and almost nothing on meaningful climate action.
Without taking climate seriously, there will be no future for our precious children. This stark fact should be pretty obvious to you all.
Kay Crumb
Location:
Submitted At: 5:56pm 04-26-22
My name is Kay Crumb, and I'm a member of District 6.
Every time climate comes up in the council, we talk about car electrification. But electric cars aren't the only solutions, and they shouldn't be our major solution. We need to put more funding towards people centric transportation (walking, transit, biking, etc.). I've been continuously frustrated at the steps and funding the city allocates for climate change initiatives. Y ou've stated this is an emergency, but with the road expansions and sprawling suburban neighborhoods that depend on cars say otherwise. We had a chance to keep several roads in downtown and some of our neighborhoods closed to improve safety and encourage people to walk/bike, but those roads were opened back up to cars when pandemic restrictions eased or when the pilots were completed.
There's been no movement to start those projects again even though many were well received.
We need to build a community that is focused on moving people, not cars.
Dale Steele
Location:
Submitted At: 5:31pm 04-26-22
I am writing as a long time resident of Sacramento and Midtown. I am also a lifelong Californian concerned about the health and safety of my family and the public at large due to increasing climate impacts.
The city's Climate Action Plan is over 1 year late. This delay has not been explained. If there is a lack of staff and resources to complete the CAP then the city needs to direct more help to finish it and address the climate emergency declaration. More transparency is needed on this delay.
The final CAP must include all recommendations supported unanimously during the Mayors' Commission on Climate.
The city must allocate adequate funds to match grants and needs more staff to work on climate change. The state budget being proposed by the governor includes significant funds for climate issues and the city needs to take similar steps. Please provide adequate resources and staff to complete the CAP and address the climate emergency declaration.
Kate Wilkins
Location:
Submitted At: 4:55pm 04-26-22
This update is comprised almost entirely of tentative meeting dates for future "workshops" and "updates". The CAP is still not public, there is no movement on funding for the active transportation projects, and there is not enough staff capacity to work on projects. The Council's support of climate action seems limited to staff quarterly updates. Please allocate more funding for climate action in this year's proposed budget, allocate more funding to expand the number of staff, and prioritize climate in planning efforts.
Rick Codina
Location:
Submitted At: 4:07pm 04-26-22
The City is seriously behind schedule in its CAP and seriously underfunding its climate actions. The two climate managers are understaffed resulting in such short-term projects as tree planting and bike lane expansion stymied even when funding exists. The City needs to add funding beyond Measure U for active transportation, but it also needs to bolster operational funds for expanded permit staff to capture more of the currently unpermitted HVAC and water heater changeouts. This equipment will need to be switched out to electric heat pumps through future ordinance mandate and the City permit staff has to be ready to handle it. Rick Codina, Built Environment Task Force, Mayors Climate Commission.
Megan Elsea
Location:
Submitted At: 1:58pm 04-26-22
The City passed a climate emergency declaration in 2019. That declaration should inform the City's decisions on allocation of resources - $ and staff - to address the climate emergency. Obviously, that has not been happening.
Progress is too little and too slow. Other problems such as homelessness and crime may seem and may be more immediate, but a worsening climate will worsen those problems. Please figure out how to act faster and more effectively to cut GHG emissions - for example cutting vehicle miles traveled and electrifying everything. We must make huge cuts in GHG emissions by 2030. I don't want to hear any references to 2045 from the City ever again.
Anything after 2030 is simply too late and therefore irrelevant.
Rosie Yacoub
Location:
Submitted At: 1:09pm 04-26-22
I am a 350 Sacramento member in District 5. I am writing to express disappointment in the delay of the CAP .
Time is of the essence and delays mean GHG reductions are being put off. This is suggestive that more staff support is needed, either by allocating more time to this work from existing staff, or hiring new staff. In the final budget, the City needs to include funding of 75 to 85 million S identified that will satisfy the match needed to get funding for the for transportation ideas, AND allocate funds needed to support the other early policies adopted by the City including the support of the EJ committee and the funding of an existing building electrification pilot, and achieving a baseline canopy closure of 25% by 2030. We can’t let opportunities to secure funding get away from us due to lack of local investment. The City’s budget needs to be updated to include more on climate, and these investments will have health and safety benefits beyond just the reduction of GHGs.
Jill Peterson
Location:
Submitted At: 1:02pm 04-26-22
Sacramento once again has the "distinction" of being included in the top ten cities in the nation with the worst air quality. This is a disgrace; how can our leaders allow us to be on this list year after year? Two years after the Council was told by the MCCC to get going on a CAP that adopts both adopts and funds the MCC’s recommendations, the City has yet to even release a draft CAP . Now there are vague references to a summer timeline, when the City previously promised the draft would come out in 2021! This must be a priority since without such planning Sacramento will become unlivable in our lifetimes. With fires, drought, and elevated temperatures on the horizon, city leaders must act now and not delay any longer. There is simply no excuse. Jill Peterson, Local Issues Lead, Citizens' Climate Lobby, Sacramento Jane Lamborn
Location:
Submitted At: 12:06pm 04-26-22
I am writing to urge you to prioritize taking actions to address the climate emergency facing our community. The first step is to acknowledge that the goal should be net zero by 2030, not 2045. The next goal should be partnering with other regional organizations, as well as SMUD and Sacramento County, to secure funding for the transportation projects identified on your "seven big ideas" list (Jackrabbit Trail, Two Rivers Trail, etc.), Attachment 2, Schedule of Climate Action Milestones. take immediate actions. If we do not reduce the use of gasoline- powered vehicles, we will not meet our carbon reduction goals. The Sacramento City Council has been a leader in addressing climate change, and we need it to do even more: adopt the 2030 goal and fund actions to meet it.
Thank you. Jane Lamborn, resident of Wilton, [email protected] Anne Stausboll
Location:
Submitted At: 11:26am 04-26-22
In June 2020 the Mayors' Commission on Climate issued a clear roadmap for addressing the impacts of climate in our city. Almost two years have gone by and the city still has not demonstrated that addressing climate change is a priority. The city has not developed its climate action plan, and the proposed budget released yesterday makes it clear that addressing the impacts of climate is not a priority. The transition to a clean, healthy, and equitable city should be front and center in the city's planning and budgeting. The stakes couldn't be any higher and soon we will be out of time. The council must provide staff with the resources urgently needed to get the climate action plan in place, and must start prioritizing climate in its planning and budgeting.
Anne Stausboll, Chair, Mayors' Commission on Climate Change Muriel Strand
Location: 95820, Sacramento
Submitted At: 9:26am 04-26-22
I expect that the city's CAP assumes that we can graft our fossil fuel lifestyles onto PVs, windmills, and batteries.
However, it's my engineering opinion that this won't work. Fossil fuel energy is several hundred times cheaper than humanpower. Thus, price signals mislead people into making inaccurate choices about what's actually needed for real decarbonization. Electrification will not be enough; social engineering is needed. (Also, electronic controls have a habit of failing and replacements are often very pricey.) Since the city cannot even figure out how to permanently house the homeless, we will be completely unprepared when climate refugees really start coming.
More info:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256048802_Sustainable_Investment_Means_Energy_Independence_F rom_Fossil_Fuels
and
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333581837_Is_it_true_that_'Small_Is_Beautiful' Chris Brown
Location:
Submitted At: 9:09am 04-26-22
By melding the timeline for the CAP and Genral Plan updates the urgency to deal with the Climate Emergency is being diluted. We will undoubtedly see temperature extremes and wildfires in California this year with impacts on our air quality as well as potentially more catastrophic impacts depending on the location of these. Sacramento is the capital city of California and showed some leadership role we should play in the 2019 decisions to declare climate emergency and set a goal of GHG neutrality by 2030 with cooperation of others. But we are now behind both SMUD and the County in addressing the climate emergency. They are the help the City's declaration was looking for, and we need to accelerate the City's actions on climate. Tonight's report indicates that the next workshop on accelerating climate action will not be till summer at the earliest, and that the plan resulting from February's transportation workshop will not be complete until 2023. Please demand better.
Susan Herre, President of ECOS
Location:
Submitted At: 7:42am 04-26-22
ECOS urges the City in its CAAP to portray the entire path of greenhouse gas reductions from the present 3.4M MTCO2e to carbon neutrality in an estimated year. If future projects are to be relieved of evaluating their GHG emissions impacts because the projects are deemed consistent with a CEQA-qualified plan, then the CAAP must show how the path to carbon neutrality will be achieved. Sacramento can be a leader in sustainable and equitable growth and reducing of GHG emissions. The concept of integrating land use and transportation is still right today.
The key is to implement it. Therefore, ECOS urges the City to use SacRT’s transit system as the backbone for a whole network of development and active transportation. This approach offers much potential for building community and transit ridership, increasing housing and equity, reducing GHG emissions and VMT, preserving open space, and attracting federal grants.
Luke Wilson
Location:
Submitted At: 9:37pm 04-25-22
I am very concerned that your CAP is now a year late in arriving. Every time this important business is postponed the targets that you have embraced become harder to realize. Y our staff is doing good work but needs more help. Please add to the budget for this important work.
Y our new budget does not have the funding necessary to finish the CAP and to provide matching funding for potential federal and other grants. Without an adequate budget you will fall another year behind your professed goal to implement actions to back up your approval of the Climate Commission's work of almost two years ago.
Please budget adequately for this important work.
Luke Wilson
Laurie Litman
Location:
Submitted At: 2:46pm 04-25-22
I support a bold, timely, and groundbreaking Climate Action Plan (CAP) but we aren't seeing that, are we? The current CAP update is long overdue and still lacks the political support to do the job right. As you kick the can down the road over and over again, be aware that your constituents are facing existential crises (ones that can kill us), including extreme heat, lack of food and water, diseases, and so many other threats as a result of your inaction. The Council has the opportunity to show what an authentic CAP can be, one that recognizes the sheer scale of these threats and uses all the tools we have to address the climate crisis. We need you to stop acting like business as usual is acceptable, prioritize the climate crisis and its related effects (including homelessness) in your budget, hire more staff, decarbonize across the city, and show other municipalities what is possible. It's in your court. No excuses.
Kathryn Webb
Location:
Submitted At: 2:05pm 04-25-22
My name is Katy Webb with 350 Sacramento and I am writing in today to address how the Climate Action Plan is over a year late. We need transparency about why the CAP is being delayed, and it needs to be made public as soon as possible. The council needs to provide city staff with the resources to complete the CAP . Second, The CAP needs to include the recommendations unanimously supported in the Mayors’ Commission on Climate 202 report. Third, Budget discussions are upcoming. The city needs to set aside dollars this year as a match for federal grants and other potential funding sources. Without allocating these funds, the City will not receive funding for any of the transformative projects that Council supported in February. Next, Hire more city staff to work on climate projects. Finally, Governor Newsom is proposing significant funds toward decarbonization efforts in this year’s budget. Will the City of Sacramento also put money towards our decarbonization priorities? Thank you.
Agenda Item: eComments for Public Comments-Matters Not on the Agenda Overall Sentiment
Matthew Kessing
Location:
Submitted At: 11:45am 04-22-22
This comment is for agenda item 20. Delta shores is a green-field development and the decision to not include off-street, segregated bike paths with connectors to the Sacramento River Bike Trail at the Freeport Regional Water Facility and the light rail station at Morrison Creek is really confusing, especially when viewed in context of the Council's stated commitment to active transportation as part of it's Climate Plan.
The bike infrastructure as provided on Consumes River Blvd is a striped gutter adjacent to three lanes of fast- moving Stroad, and shouldn't be considered acceptable. Without proper bike or pedestrian infrastructure to give these new single family houses access to existing active transportation networks, or new proposed light rail stations, all this development does is further entrench Sacramento's car dependence and all but guarantees that we'll miss our climate goals.
We need to do better.
Agenda Item: eComments for CORRESPONDENCE added to Items 19 and Public Comments - Matters Not on the Agenda - See Agenda Item Below [Updated 04/26/2022 @ 12:40 p.m.]
Overall Sentiment
Debra Banks
Location:
Submitted At: 6:50pm 04-26-22
Mayor & Councilmembers, it is paramount that the council take action and show leadership in leading the climate work for the City. To date, that hasn't been the case and we point to the delay in the release of the Climate Action Plan. Worse, the 2022 -2023 City Budget has a paltry $630,000 allocated to work towards meeting our climate goals of carbon neutrality. With a transportation workshop that has identified over $200 million to create infrastructure for Active Transportation projects, it is an abysmal lack of allocation to help us pull down much needed grant funds from available State and Federal dollars. Sacramento needs to act on the Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change recommendations. The effects of climate change impacts every other issue the city cares about and it's about time the leaders of our city took climate Shira Lane
Location:
Submitted At: 6:47pm 04-26-22
Hello my name is Shira Lane founder and CEO of Atrium 916, a Creative Innovation Center for Sustainability, that supports and accelerates local creatives to build-creative solutions to drive us towards a sustainable future.
We have an Atrium artist that is working with an Italian company with a new technology in paint that cleans the air. This is external and internal paint. Food waste also exacerbates the climate change crisis with its significant greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint. Most small mom and pop restaurants in the city of Sacramento serve food in Styrofoam, something McDonalds gave up 40 years ago. This is not only hazardous to our community health it is also a large contributor to solid waste and food waste issues. We do not recommend a ban – but we suggest a pilot project where city or other organization with good buying power purchases a large amount of compostable containers and sells it to our city restaurants at the same price as Styrofoam.
Elizabeth Barrett
Location:
Submitted At: 3:31pm 04-26-22
We are in a climate emergency. Addressing air quality must be our top priority. Stringent measures are in order--without delay--and without politics.
Karen Jacques
Location:
Submitted At: 1:48pm 04-26-22
I appreciate the City providing this quarterly public update its response to the climate crisis. This is a crisis that is worsening by the day. The City Council has adopted a climate emergency declaration (2019-0465). It is imperative that the City do everything in its power to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030 or as soon thereafter as humanly possible. Given the speed that the climate crisis is worsening, 2045 will be too late.
It is also imperative that the City prioritize the funding the use of its funds to respond to the crisis Davi Rodrigues
PO Box 160965
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 761-3419
[email protected]
Office of Sacramento City Attorney
Susana Alcala Wood
915 I Street, 4th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814-2608
RE: Sacramento City Proposed Ordinance To Prohihibit Fishing From the Public Docks Title: (Pass for Publication) Ordinance Amending Section 12.72.060 and Adding Chapter 12.104 of the Sacramento City Code, Relating to the Old Sacramento Docks
Ms.Wood,
It came to my attention the city would like to pass an ordinance relating to the city docks. While most of that ordinance seems worthy, The last portion of it states that it will prohibit fishing from the public docks. The state constitution, article I, section 25 expressly forbids passing laws prohibiting fishing from and on the public lands of the state, and grants only the state legislature the power to set conditions and seasons for fishing. A later amendment to the state's constitution gave the latter authority to the Fish and Game Commission. Since then, the commission has formulated a process for opening and closing areas to fishing, and that involves public meetings where the whole of the state is notified and can participate. Fishing is a statewide resource, and the state legislators framed that amendment so that the state would occupy the management of it. It was signs and prohibitions at the local level that inspired it in the first place. I urge you to counsel the city to remove this part of the ordinance before its' adoption. I have been engaged attempts to block fishing areas for a couple decades, although it's pretty much limited to private owners thus far. I didn't think a municipality would attempt this. The only recent attempt at this happened during the outset of the Covid-19 scare, and several municipalities had asked the Fish and Game Commission to close their popular fishing areas to prevent the spread of the virus.
That attempt was met with outright hostility from many fisherman, and in that, it had at least a semi plausible reason, but many felt that exceeded the commission's power, having been created solely to manage the resource. Sacramento City has not cited a single reason for doing so, not that they have the authority anyway.
I hope you understand, and again urge the city council to omit that portion of the ordinance Sincerely,
Davi Rodrigues