Fighting Over The Same Scraps
In Which: Council outlines conflicts of interest. There isn't as much money for Community Services as there used to be. And Public Art gets a boost from Councilmembers Andrews and Roche.
We’re still playing catch-up this week, so the article below is about the City Council Meeting from last week. Next week we’ll be back on schedule!
Leisure Terrace Apartments
During Public Comment, an anonymous person who said they live at Leisure Terrace Apartments off of E Street by Hayward High—still within city limits—ran through a litany of allegations against their landlord and the City. They ranged from issues with habitability to forcing tenants to sign inaccurate documents to hiding public records.
As the tenant went to great lengths to remain anonymous, it’s impossible to verify the claims in any detail. But if anyone from Leisure Terrace wants to talk about the issues they’re facing with their landlord, reach out.
Conflicts of Interest
The political pond of Hayward is comically small, considering the size of the City. Swimming in it runs the risk of being involved in one or more of the large nonprofit entities that provide services to Hayward residents. To give an idea of the extent of that reach, of the seven people on City Council, only two had no admitted connections to any of the organizations receiving funding.
Councilmember Zermeno and Mayor Salinas both sit on the St. Rose Foundation Board
Councilmember Goldstein has a professional relationship with the CEO of Be A Mentor
Councilmember Syrop’s mother is on the board of the Hayward Arts Council
Councilmember Bonilla’s mother is a child care provider with 4C’s
Most of these connections aren’t too direct, but were worth mentioning. However, Councilmember Zermeno and Mayor Salinas had to remove themselves from the chamber during the discussion of funding where St. Rose was involved.
This created a bit of an issue where both the Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tempore were both absent from the meeting, but the City Attorney suggested putting the Facilitator role on Councilmember Andrews, the next-senior member of the Council.
Economic Development/Infrastructure
Most of the questions were for clarification and have been explained before: St. Rose isn’t getting funding because they haven’t spent what they already have, South Hayward Parish is in the same boat, but got some money for a discrete project they could finish quickly, and the Home Rehab from Rebuilding Together Oakland is non-competitive and needs to find a new vendor.
The only really new question came from Councilmember Syrop who asked if the Downtown Streets Team worked outside of Downtown as a part of the funded project. Staff responded that no, it isn’t, but the City has a separate contract to handle South Hayward near Tennyson, but not near Hesperian in West Hayward.
When it came time to give comments, the only real thread through this portion was wanting more funding for FESCO’s security system. Unfortunately, the CSC Commissioners who were there didn’t get much of a chance to explain why they didn’t get full funding—one Councilmember even mentioned that the price seemed low for a security system, possibly without knowing that it was only for cameras on a building the size of a large-ish single family home.
As was mentioned during the deliberations, the request was only for cameras and several of the cameras were indoors, though it was never explained why. During the interview, the FESCO rep said it was mostly to handle people on the outside, so some commissioners pointed out that it was strange to have indoor cameras.
Regardless, FESCO does good work and it’s also a good political move to support them, so at Council’s direction, additional funding will likely go toward FESCO if it becomes available.
Everything Else (Arts & Music and Public Services)
After Mayor Salinas and Councilmember Zermeno returned, the rest of the ARCs were discussed. During Public Comment, the same anonymous member of the public cast doubt on the oversight of the groups that receive funding through the CSC process.
After saying their piece, City Staff jumped in and clarified that there is a lot of oversight—it’s one of the bigger duties that the Community Services Department handles. They did 5 in-person assessments last year, not to mention the very rigorous reporting requirements that are needed by anyone getting HUD money.
Commissioners then took a moment to speak and highlighted different parts of the process. Chair Austin Bruckner-Carrillo spoke about some of the changes that had come to the CSC that some Councilmembers may not know about: no more site visits are allowed, there’s a new online portal to help out commissioners, and because it’s easier for first-time applicants, there are more now than ever—which means more need.
Commissioner Jesse Gunn spoke positively about the disagreements and conflicts that had happened during deliberations. He said that a variety of viewpoints is positive and shows that the members were really engaged with the process. Commissioner Calvin Wong also spoke about some of the considerations that went into deliberations, with special consideration being put on age diversity for the Arts & Music services.
Not Enough Money To Go Around
Right out of the gates, Mayor Salinas highlighted an issue that has plagued the CSC for the last several years: “This is tough work,” he said. “We get all this need, but yet not enough money.” Councilmember Syrop gave some historical context to the problem, “5-7 years ago,” when many of the Councilmembers who served on the CSC in the past were serving on the CSC, “the amount of funding available actually matched how much money was being requested pretty neatly.”
But that situation has changed. “I don’t like to see organizations fight over the same scraps,” he said. “I want to grow that pot.” He challenged the City Council to consider increasing the funding for Services—which comes from the City’s General Fund—during budget negotiations in May.
Councilmember Zermeno also recognized this reality, “The decisions have been and are very very difficult and will be more difficult in the future because… we know there will be more applicants next year.” But, ever the optimist, he also challenged the Council to find additional funding, “Let’s go find some more money somewhere.” Though no ideas were immediately put forward.
Questioning Priorities
Unfortunately, Councilmember Roche didn’t seem to have internalized those comments. After hearing that there was a cap of up to $50,000 that non-homelessness services could receive in funding, she said, “[no food agency] got the full $50,000 and I’m wondering what the discussion was around that.” She continued, “Because none of the food security people received full funding… there does seem to be a sort of glaring hole.”
Staff corrected her that Mercy Brown Bag and Spectrum Community Services’ Meal Program for Seniors both received $50,000—they were merely prioritizing food for seniors. However, what the Commissioners failed to mention, was that the Services Funding Request totaled $1,289,380 while only $654,950 was actually available to allocate.
Councilmember Bonilla Jr was one of the several Councilmembers who had questions about the limited funding that 05 Sikh Seva received this cycle. “How do we rationalize a computer clubhouse for $144,000 over potentially food for folks in our community who, I think, need food more than computers.” This may have been a reference to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs which is not without criticism. However, one of the shortcomings of 05 Sikh Seva’s application was a lack of data—since they feed everyone without question, they can’t get granular data.
But the CSC pointed out that they had been asked to provide some data for two years in a row, now. And, although they did provide it after the fact, it should’ve been in the initial application. City Staff has been trying to work with them for two years, as well—Staff even admitted that they’re only now hopeful that they’ll come to the table.
Obviously, the CSC would have loved to fund 05 Sikh Seva’s $260,000 request—something multiple Councilmembers had questions about—but there are limited funds that need to be prioritized. In order to make an informed decision, data needs to be available. If there was enough money available, the concerns around their data gathering wouldn’t have mattered—why split hairs when there’s cash to splash?
Finally, Mayor Salinas tried to get Council to understand the reality of the current funding situation, “We may not be able to cover all of our bases when it comes to food.” It’s noteworthy that the same people who speak at length about the looming budget deficit are the same ones wondering why we don’t have more money to fund social services.
Informationally, six of the 40+ unfilled Sworn Officer positions within HPD would have fully funded every agency requesting funding this year—not to mention the $10,000 signing bonuses the City is offering new hires.
New Funding For Airport Hangars
I’m not a taxes expert—even looking at the Wikipedia entry for TEFRA makes my eyes glaze over—but the main takeaway is that the Hayward Airport is getting 8 new hangars. These were approved a while ago, but because of greedflation, the company building them needs more money. They’ll be getting it by using the City’s nonprofit status to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds for up to $5,253,000.
It doesn’t cost the City anything—the company is the one on the hook—but given the sum of money, it does make one wonder who else can take advantage of it. I’m sure there are rules, but I don’t know them.
The hangars will only really be big enough to hold, at most, two small planes but not big enough for most private jets. You still need to be in a certain tax bracket to have flying as a hobby, though.
Public Art Referral
Councilmembers Andrews and Roche put forward a referral for a Public Art fund of some kind. The primary idea being floated is a 1-2% fee on all development permits that would go into some kind of fund—sort of like in-lieu fees for affordable housing—and possibly require public art in larger developments. The implementation timeline would be, at earliest, 2025.
Councilmember Roche explained that she co-signed it because it “creates a more desirable community” and adds “a sense of sophistication.” The other cities she mentioned that have it already were definitely interesting choices: Palo Alto, Berkeley, and Alameda—not cities usually compared to Hayward.
Council was generally supportive of the referral, with Mayor Salinas seemingly excited about the tourism prospects. “It does generate a buzz,” he said, “It does generate activity and also brings community together, especially if done right.” That last point is definitely going to be a wrinkle.
As the Planning Commission pointed out, art is explicitly subjective and clearly what members of Council are thinking about does not likely jive with what the community is thinking about. I don’t want Hayward to look like Palo Alto or Berkeley—we’re different and deserve to be distinct. We have our own style and shouldn’t be relying on folks, like our Mayor, who want us to be more like Sonoma.
In the same vein, Councilmember Syrop pushed for art and culture staffing over an art fund. “Not just art for the sake of art,” he said, “but the culture around art.” With his mother being on the Hayward Arts Council, he admitted this was a dear concept to him. He wanted to create a creative arts ecosystem—something past City Councils had courted when they pushed for development that targeted the “creative class.”
It remains to be seen if ideas this big survive the staffing and budget shortages that the Council will have to grapple with this May.