[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] As to the first item, real property and negotiations with the city manager and the city attorney under government code section 54956.8, the city council discussed the matter and the various APNs that were initially discussed or identified to be discussed tonight. Certain of them were not discussed and provided unanimous direction to the city manager with respect to continuing negotiations.
[0:29] On item number two, real property negotiations under Government Code Section 54956.8, with respect to property at Grand Avenue and
[0:38] bent the and the listed APNs that are on the agenda.
[0:44] The City Council unit provided unanimous direction to the city manager in the city attorney with respect to various proposed land transfers, price and terms.
[0:54] On item number three, conference with legal counsel, existing litigation under government
[0:59] code section 54956.97, and sub-D sub-1, the city of San Marcos versus Sins, Lens,
[1:09] Sulu, Pastrana, a trustee of the AC-1 and AC-2 land trust-dated March 14, 2021,
[1:23] San
[1:25] 8227, the City Council received a status report from special council and
[1:36] didn't provide directions, simply received the status report and
[1:41] discuss a matter and no action, no reportable action was taken on that matter.
[1:46] That concludes the closed session report.
[1:48] Thank you, Mrs. Peake.
[1:49] With that, the closed session is now adjourned and we will be going right into the,
[1:54] I'm calling to order the regular City Council meeting for July 23, 2024, if you could please rise for the
[2:01] pledge of allegiance.
[2:05] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic
[2:11] for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
[2:19] Okay, have an invocation this evening?
[2:22] God of Peace, we invite you to preside over this meeting, even if we have different
[2:27] opinions give us the spirit of unity. Help us each listen politely as others share their
[2:32] points of view. Help us to carefully consider the relevant information that has been gathered.
[2:38] Help us to be innovative as we brainstorm solutions. Help us work as a unified team in combining ideas
[2:45] for a great outcome. Help us to work as a whole. May we have the spirit of camaraderie in this room
[2:51] and work together on a shared mission.
[2:53] Amen.
[2:57] Okay, can we please have the roll call, Mr. Scullik?
[3:00] Yeah, Council Member Musgrove.
[3:01] Here.
[3:02] Council Member Nunez.
[3:04] Present.
[3:05] Council Member Sonella.
[3:06] Here.
[3:07] Deputy Mayor Jenkins.
[3:08] Here.
[3:09] And Mayor Jones.
[3:09] Here.
[3:10] Okay.
[3:12] Proclamations and presentations are up next.
[3:15] We have no recipients that will be here this evening,
[3:17] so we will be actually moving on to our consent calendar.
[3:20] Are there any items that any council members wish to pull?
[3:24] I will be pulling item number 12, any other issue, any other agenda items?
[3:31] Move to approve the balance.
[3:33] Madam Mayor, one moment please.
[3:37] I'll withdraw the motion.
[3:48] Yes, council member.
[3:54] I'm going to be pulling item number 7.
[3:58] Okay. Item number 7 and item number 12 will be pulled. And I'll make a motion to approve
[4:05] the balance. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Motion and second. All in favor?
[4:09] Aye.
[4:10] Any notes? Okay. Seeing none. Okay. Item number 7. Council member.
[4:17] Yes.
[4:18] Thank you, Mayor. At our last council meeting, I had voted no on this item, so I wanted
[4:24] I'm going to make sure to re-register this, my no vote on this item for the same reasons that I previously stated at our last council meeting.
[4:35] Okay. Any further discussion by any councilmembers?
[4:39] Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve?
[4:42] Move to approve item number seven.
[4:43] All right, I'll second that. We have a motion and a second all in favor.
[4:47] Aye.
[4:47] Aye.
[4:48] And no?
[4:49] And no for me.
[4:50] Okay item number 12, the item that I pulled, I actually have a long history of if there is a current business.
[5:00] In a location, I'm sorry, but we actually had three speakers on item. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Have them here. I didn't I didn't know. Okay. My apologies. We're going to go back.
[5:14] Sorry. It's okay. We were just moving quickly. Okay. So I have to actually. Oh, we have a few. Okay. I'm not sure exactly what the process is. I don't know either because it's never happened. But since I made the motion, I am comfortable with retracting it or whatever the proper.
[5:32] as I am. Okay, Mr. Speaker, is that good? I would recommend that the council vote on that as well.
[5:41] Okay, we have a motion and a second to be discussed, I guess it would be, to bring that back.
[5:49] We have, you can simply send it and then, and then bring it back after whatever, we've never had
[5:57] this in 18 years that I've been on the council.
[6:00] I'm a good rescind.
[6:02] Okay, all right, we have a motion in a second, all in favor.
[6:05] Aye.
[6:05] Aye.
[6:06] Any notes?
[6:07] Okay.
[6:07] Seeing none.
[6:08] Public speakers on item number seven.
[6:11] Make a motion to reopen the item.
[6:15] No, we just need to do a rescind.
[6:17] Did I think?
[6:17] She said rescind.
[6:18] Do you, do you rescind and bring it back?
[6:21] I think by rescinding it, you did bring it back to life, so.
[6:26] Okay.
[6:26] All right.
[6:27] Okay.
[6:27] All right, we have some public speakers started out by Justin Ann, followed by Emily
[6:34] Mohamed.
[6:35] Then it will be Warshan Ismail,
[6:40] then we have a few more after that as well.
[6:43] Those are the first three.
[6:46] Welcome, Justin.
[6:49] Under the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Grants Pass, Oregon versus Johnson, localities
[6:54] are not able to arrest, ticket, and find people for sleeping outdoors and public property even
[6:59] of leaders have failed to produce enough affordable housing or shelter for everyone in the community
[7:04] who needs it. This decision sets a dangerous precedent that causes undue harm to people experiencing
[7:09] homelessness and gives free rein to local officials to prefer pointless and expensive arrests and
[7:14] imprisonment rather than real solutions. The A.F. amendments broad language prohibiting the
[7:19] inflection of cool and unusual punishments was understood at the time of its adoption to the U.S.
[7:24] institution to embody the principal proportionality, meaning that a punishment must be appropriately
[7:30] tailored to the seriousness of the offense. In Grants Pass, where the offense involves
[7:36] sleeping outside where no alternative shelter exists, any punishment including fines and
[7:40] jail time imposed by Grants Pass is plainly disproportionate.
[7:45] The twisted logic here ignores the if amendments prohibition on disproportionate punishment,
[7:50] which the Supreme Court has used to bar making it a crime to be addicted to drugs and to ban the death penalty for children and
[7:57] people with intellectual disabilities, for example. Not only this is wrong, morally, but we wouldn't be in this situation
[8:05] if it weren't for a rogue Supreme Court who was able to shove this through despite it clearly going against a long, long precedent.
[8:15] not to mention that it is against international law as housing is a human right, and also considering that Sam Marcus doesn't even have a shelter,
[8:27] it's ludicrous to criminalize houses people instead of addressing actual underlies and causes which is them not having access to shelter.
[8:41] There was a lot of talk at the last city council meeting about, you know, impact to the environment or whatever.
[8:47] Well, poverty is a big impact to the environment and you can address it by buildings.
[8:53] You can start off with a shelter.
[8:54] You could move on to things like affordable housing to actually give people places to live.
[8:59] That way they don't have to live on the street and dump sewage wherever that could be a hazard.
[9:05] I understand that it is a hazard and it would be nice if it didn't happen.
[9:08] But people are in desperate situations, so there was so much talk about, you know, unshelter
[9:13] people they don't want to go into a shelter was because there's rampant abuse in these
[9:18] areas.
[9:19] And let's take, for example, I mean if I lost my house and then someone was trying to
[9:23] put me into a shelter as opposed to sleeping in my car, I would much rather stay in my
[9:28] car because I know that I can at least have a chance of possibly going back into a housing
[9:33] at some point, whereas so many of these people that end up in shelters, it's like they're
[9:37] conceding whatever they have left.
[9:40] They lose so much of their autonomy.
[9:42] And what we need is more affordable housing solutions.
[9:46] We should not be formalizing homelessness.
[9:48] This is immoral.
[9:49] This is unacceptable.
[9:50] It should be illegal.
[9:51] Thank you, Justin.
[9:52] Next speaker is Emily Mana.
[9:54] Mohamed, followed by our word Sean is male.
[9:58] And then after that, it will be Rebecca.
[10:00] Councillor Russeller.
[10:03] Good evening, members. Good evening, councilmembers. I come here to oppose resolution number seven. It's completely inhumane to criminalize the House's population, especially when there's a lack of resources here in San Marcos. Today, I was like, okay, because you guys said there's a lot of resources, so why not take to the streets and see if there actually is some. But what I found is that majority of the resources are located in other areas of North County, such as
[10:32] ocean side or Esquindillo, but there is none. There's not any here. There's one safe place,
[10:38] but they only offer housing assistance, and that's a whole process as well. But there's
[10:43] no access to instant housing. Some people have emergency situations. You guys talk about
[10:48] the chance for fires here, because we do. Like that guy said last week, we delivered a
[10:54] bowl, so there could be fires here. So what happens whenever people lose their homes because
[10:58] of fires. We don't have emergency housing. We don't have a shelter. We don't have the
[11:02] resources for that. So, I mean, I understand if, you know, that's y'all's opinion and you
[11:07] guys want to criminalize, you know, unhoused people. I mean, that's you, right? But at least
[11:13] do that. Having a plan for people, having people in mind and having something available.
[11:19] That's all I ask. So just reconsider it. Make you free of time.
[11:23] Thank you, Emily. Next up is Warshawn Ismail, followed by Rebecca Rosler, followed by Angelina Guzman.
[11:39] This ordinance in its essence will criminalize and further stigmatize unhoused people.
[11:44] Criminalizing homelessness is a cruel policy. By definition, issuing misdemeanors, citations, fines,
[11:50] and incarcerating our all forms of criminalization.
[11:55] That has opted to punish people rather than addressing a larger systemic issue.
[12:00] Homelessness is pervasive and a multifaceted issue that is exasperated by government and legislations.
[12:07] We cannot resort to criminalizing the vulnerable members in our community.
[12:11] We are your constituents, regardless of housing status, unhoused people are deserving of dignity and respect.
[12:17] and of a sustainable solution to ensuring their well-being,
[12:22] not an afterthought prioritized over aesthetics.
[12:26] These are human beings not objects that cannot be displaced
[12:29] and disposed at your leisure.
[12:32] Rather than wasting money on a temporary solution,
[12:35] we can allocate resources and our efforts into making affordable housing,
[12:39] providing funds for emergency shelters and services.
[12:43] Reducing the rates of disparity will be more effective
[12:46] and spearheading homelessness.
[12:48] It goes without saying the unhoused people
[12:50] are at an intersection.
[12:52] More often than not being a part of marginalized communities,
[12:55] just proportionally people of color,
[12:57] people of lower socioeconomic status,
[12:59] people that are severing from substance abuse
[13:01] and or mental illness,
[13:04] and how that ties into mass incarceration
[13:06] and limited already limited scarce resources.
[13:09] Once that criminal label is branded on the individual,
[13:13] this placing unhoused people will not solve
[13:15] the issue of homelessness. They have nowhere to go and I urge you to vote against agenda item seven and it should be
[13:24] stated that last week or the last city council meeting, the expert couldn't even explain how on-house people being branded and criminalized will
[13:34] solve the issue of perpetual poverty. Thank you.
[13:41] Through Worshawne, next up is Rebecca Ursula, followed by Angelina Guzman, and then it will be Angelica Santiago.
[13:53] Good evening Mayor Jones and Council members.
[13:55] Today we are living through the greatest global displacement crisis in recorded history,
[14:00] with nearly 120 million people being forcibly removed from their homes due to violence, climate change, and poverty.
[14:07] I never expected this displacement to be happening within my own city.
[14:13] While people are at their most vulnerable, I find it disheartening that the city is willing to cause further stress and criminalize our houseless residents.
[14:22] I understand the desire to have our public spaces appearing clean and safe, but as a city that seems to send houseless residents to neighboring communities to receive assistance, I would urge the city to allocate funds to create space.
[14:36] such as a safe lot or shelter within our only city boundaries and at this time I would
[14:43] like to share a statement from a fellow resident who could not be here tonight.
[14:47] So on behalf of Fatima Rios Perez, she shares Dear Mayor Jones and City Council members.
[14:53] As you move forward with tonight's second reading of chapter 1033 of the Municipal Code.
[15:00] Um,
[15:03] pertaining to encampments, please also consider investing in housing resources for the unhoused communities.
[15:09] Ten years ago, I found myself without a home. I had just turned 18 years old.
[15:14] I was a freshman at Cal State San Marcos, and I was the primary caregiver of my 10 year old sister.
[15:20] I was not only looking for a place to lay my head at night, but more importantly, somewhere safe for my little sister.
[15:26] That summer, fall and winter, we had an abundance of help from Chaos State Samargas and other members of the community.
[15:33] My mission hills high school teachers offered to take us in, a former elementary teacher, and
[15:38] then, Nob Hill principal, Mrs. Nella, council member Mike Semella's wife, connected us with rock church for
[15:47] Thanksgiving meals and Christmas gifts.
[15:49] We both received new sneakers and more importantly, my little sister and
[15:53] American girl stall, which was on her wish list.
[15:56] My sister and I are very fortunate to have wonderful people in our lives who went
[16:00] a hand when we needed it most.
[16:02] Unfortunately, not everyone has the same level of support.
[16:06] At that time, an encampment was a realistic living option for us.
[16:11] As the city takes measures to safeguard city assets from dangers posed by camping encampments
[16:16] and living and vehicles, I hope the council also makes strides to aid these individuals
[16:21] as they, too, could be San Marcos residents, just like me.
[16:25] I'm grateful for the opportunities I've had while growing up in San Marcos,
[16:29] graduating from Cal State and now serving as the Chair in the City's Planning Commission.
[16:33] In the future, I hope we can allocate resources for
[16:37] others to get back on their feet instead of constituting misdemeanors and prosecuting fines.
[16:42] Thank you for your time.
[16:44] Thank you, Rebecca.
[16:45] Next up, Angelica Guzman, followed by Angelica Santiago.
[16:50] and then Jake Parvin?
[17:00] Well, I don't think the voting outcome is going to change,
[17:03] despite me wanting it to do so.
[17:05] I come with a solution.
[17:06] It's considerate me trying to do your guys' job
[17:09] by offering some help.
[17:11] I had the privilege of talking to Councilmember Sonella
[17:14] last meeting, and he was able to say that, you know,
[17:17] if the tax increase was passed in San Marcos,
[17:20] there would be the possibility of potentially using
[17:22] the city's tax money to potentially buy some property
[17:26] that could be used as a shelter because the closest one is an escondito, which is, you know,
[17:31] rather far. And I was thinking, if, you know, people were trying to look for shelter in other
[17:36] places, what other setbacks could that cause for them? Well, if someone was suddenly on
[17:41] house, but they still had a job in San Marcos, and they were forced to move to escondito and
[17:46] say they lost their house as well as their car, public transportation might not take them
[17:50] where they needed to go, they might not be able to afford having public transportation
[17:54] passes. So they lose the ability to head to their job and they lose the ability to make money,
[17:59] and then they lose their ability to potentially house themselves in the future. So having our own
[18:04] shelter on our own lands would be the first step as well as potentially a welfare office
[18:08] in San Marcos as well. I know that is particularly government business, but you know we can always
[18:14] dream. Additionally I would like to see the language surrounding the topic of encampments changes
[18:21] from the council members, it can be an emotional topic, you know, it can't be, but it starts
[18:26] to trickle into logical fallacy territory when we bring up examples of our own family
[18:31] members who are struggling with something so such extreme as substance abuse, which not
[18:37] every unhoused person, you know, suffers from and that might be something that is a stereotype
[18:42] placed on them, or you know, the waterways being clothed with furniture that we have no evidence
[18:48] of actually seeing that it was unhoused people doing so I know plenty of times I grew up in New York
[18:53] so a lot of people would actually leave their own property on the streets and it would end up in
[18:58] you know damaging places and that was from house people who were doing something like moving um so we
[19:04] need to avoid that um but we definitely need to take steps to the city to make sure that I understand
[19:09] you think that getting people off the streets is the best way to solve things but they're on the flip
[19:15] There has to be something for them to actually have a process of getting their life back together having the housing options offered.
[19:22] If this Walmart and San Marcos has a designated safe parking space making that openly available,
[19:28] having community workshops for perhaps resume building and this own building, things to actually help people improve their lives.
[19:36] Thank you.
[19:39] Next up is Angelica Santiago, followed by Jake Parvin, and then Alan Geracci.
[19:51] Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Council Members and staff.
[19:54] My name is Angelica Santiago, and I'm a community educator with Universidad Popular.
[20:00] First of all, before I go to my comment, I do want to think Phil and his team for providing and dropping off donations for a food pantry. That it's open to all of our residents here at the Autumn Drive Office. So if you guys want to donate or stop by, please let us know and we'll give you a tour. So definitely I'm very disappointed on the decision that was made on July 9th on the approval of this encampment ordinance. So on that same day, right?
[20:27] We, it was approved to take this tax measure to the ballot and have the people vote and
[20:33] decide what they want, right?
[20:35] And we spoke about unity and community and working together, right, and improving and
[20:42] creating solutions.
[20:43] But part of those individuals is our homeless population, our individuals without a home, right?
[20:49] So we want to make sure that we are able to include them.
[20:52] And it's a big, it's such a wide spectrum.
[20:55] So we have college students, high school students, elementary students, we have single moms, single fathers.
[21:01] It's a whole spectrum, so it's not just your typical, right, stigma, homeless that sometimes we have in mind.
[21:08] So it's definitely a topic that we should include our community.
[21:12] A lot of us can be homeless any day.
[21:15] I have worked with many different individuals, elders, single moms, or even men, trying to improve, right, trying to get resources.
[21:22] Yes, I've used the city of San Marcos resources. There's a deficit. There is no housing. There's a huge waiting list.
[21:30] Yes, I have referred them to interface to Escondido. It's far. I've come to school from Escondido to San Marcos or even to this.
[21:39] And it's a two-hour transportation taking the bus. That is way too long for some of the individuals or it's not stable.
[21:46] and there's no resources for them at the moment, right?
[21:49] They have to wait five years, 10 years,
[21:51] or try to figure out a different situation.
[21:56] And we saw that that was also an issue with Vía Serena.
[22:00] Yes, people were provided resources to the end,
[22:05] but it was such a complicated process.
[22:08] And we do want to speak about the environmental damage,
[22:11] which is very crucial,
[22:12] but we also have to speak about the environmental justice
[22:15] and include our community all of our community including those folks that
[22:20] unfortunately don't live in a stable house and this is a really crucial topic
[22:26] not just for me for a lot of people because my brother was homeless right he
[22:31] was born and you know he wasn't born he wasn't raised here in San Marcos he
[22:35] graduated from Mission Hills High School he not not to brag but he was one of the
[22:40] best soccer players. He got many different trophies for being an amazing goalie and as well at
[22:47] Polymer College. But unfortunately he had obstacles and we didn't have the resources.
[22:53] Thank you. Thank you. I'll talk about it later. Thank you.
[22:56] Next is Jake Parvin, followed by Alan Jorakchi and then Christina.
[23:11] I'd like to say that I think the people are the one that...
[23:14] I'm sorry we can't we can't hear you if you might want to.
[23:18] I just wanted to say that I think the approval of the ordinances is that we just criminalizing the act of not having a house in the county where a minimum wage job can barely afford to land for one bedroom and a share of the permit is illogical and definitely a more I would like to suggest that you guys always have your presentation to go down to a local business and you guys talk with the local business on their new established connection so that we're.
[23:46] you guys give presentations on that. I think maybe going down to an account meant talking with
[23:51] some of those people, getting no sides of the story, seeing a new situation, maybe go down to
[23:55] a local warmer after one o'clock and talk with some of those people who are living out of the
[24:00] curve. It's obviously not a choice that they've made. It's a systematic issue.
[24:09] That was just my
[24:09] recommendation. Thank you. Thank you, Jay. Next up, Alan Geracci, followed by
[24:15] Christina.
[24:19] Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council, staff and members of the
[24:23] community. I'm so glad to be able to add my voice to opposition to this
[24:28] ordinance. They stumbled past us in every community in America. Some are begging,
[24:35] some earnestly are seeking work, somewhere rags, or war medals, or both.
[24:42] These are our homeless brothers and sisters.
[24:44] The homeless population is expanding, but the problem is solvable if we can bear to look
[24:50] long enough to see the reality of the homeless.
[24:54] If we can't bestur ourselves long enough to implement solutions and if we can muster
[25:00] We are the courage to act pragmatically by staring the harsh realities calmly in the face. A solution is not to use criminalization or courts to solve the problem. By issuing citations or notices to appear in the court of law, we burden our courts and fail to address the issue, as if to sweep the problem under a municipal rug like it really does not exist. When I was a deputy city attorney for San Diego,
[25:29] So I routinely move to dismiss such citations in the interest of justice.
[25:36] Granted, the complexity of the task is daunting.
[25:39] According to Judge Robert Coates, who chronicled homelessness in San Diego County in a street is not a home.
[25:47] 33% of homeless are mentally ill, while 33% are in poverty looking for work and just need transitional shelter.
[25:57] 15 to 20% are women, 33% are substance abusers, 25% are veterans, 10% are teen runaways.
[26:07] Only 5% prefer homelessness and usually drift from place to place.
[26:13] By passing an ordinance today, the city is taking the wrong path.
[26:18] I recommend tabling this second reading and providing the community a workshop to identify
[26:25] by real solutions.
[26:27] We need to challenge the private sector, encourage and incentivize nonprofits, join ventures,
[26:34] and foundations to produce affordable housing.
[26:37] We need to approach this problem with solutions that include temporary shelters and low income
[26:43] housing solutions.
[26:45] Let's strengthen the inclusionary zoning ordinance by requiring developers to do more to meet
[26:51] the problem and maximize the existing inclusionary zoning ordinance so that developers don't constantly
[26:57] get out by buying their way out and not providing low income housing and by simply paying
[27:05] in lieu fees and walking away. We can and we must do better. Thank you.
[27:12] Thank you, Rowland. Next up, Christina.
[27:31] I wish the City Council could see community outreach as
[27:34] a beautiful resource that could help their city thrive, instead of seeing it as some
[27:38] displeasing obligation to try and get rid of what they see as a nuisance. Finding people
[27:43] who already don't have enough money to even pay for rent or groceries? Please someone explain
[27:49] to me how that makes any sense. And while you're at it, can you tell me where that money goes?
[27:55] Because it's most likely not going where it should be like providing shelters and effective resources
[27:59] courses for these people. Our economy has a lot of improvements to make.
[28:04] Charging and punishing those who are facing at the worst should not be a solution.
[28:08] If we really want a problem solved, we need to be investing in long term solutions.
[28:13] Mayor, you boast about having the highest percentage of affordable housing in the surrounding
[28:18] area, but with all due respect, it is not enough. Please continue working towards providing
[28:24] the quality of life you always refer to. Everyone in your city deserves that quality
[28:29] of life. Not just the ones blessed enough to have a roof over their head.
[28:34] Thank you, Christie.
[28:39] I have a letter to read from one of our residents,
[28:41] Mary Lee Vickers. Dear Mayor Rebecca Jones and fellow council members,
[28:46] I'm writing this to urge you to address the critical issue of homelessness in our district.
[28:51] The homeless man living on a sidewalk in my neighborhood has been there for over a year,
[28:55] and I have corresponded with the mayor and her hands have been tied due to various
[28:59] Government entities. My frustration continues as this still has not been taken care of, and now there is a second man living under the 78 freeway underpass blocking the sidewalk and bike paths on Mission Avenue.
[29:12] One of these men has been homeless in San Marcos for many years as we recognize him from living on the bike path with others along the railroad tracks.
[29:22] How can we be certain this is safe to ride a bike on a path that is hidden from the road in many areas?
[29:29] After encountering many homeless people on the bike path, we stopped riding our bikes in that area.
[29:35] It's gratuitous exposure to untreated mental health issues and drug abuse and a host of other contagions that I can't begin to identify.
[29:47] The possibility exists as spreading viruses amongst themselves and the rest of us.
[29:51] These men are encamped within 500 feet of the Learning Jungle Preschool.
[29:57] They are in my shopping center along mission-
[30:00] And my granddaughter has been exposed to various individuals at CVS on Woodland Parkway and to me, they could be a threat to my well-being and security for my family. Is this in your neighborhood? Perhaps not, but I imagine that you would tire of it after a year and seeing no sign of improvement as trash continues to grow. This is unsightly unsafe and a potential danger to me and my neighbors and my family. As a Sam Marcus homeowner, I have a strong commitment to having a beautiful home and
[30:29] the community. I've lived here since the 1970s and I love San Marcos, but I also see that
[30:35] most of the improvements being made don't include my neighborhood. I would like to believe
[30:39] that our area has not been forgotten, sincerely, merely, vickers. And then I've also had mentioned
[30:46] this last time in actually Deputy Mayor Jenkins had read an email from Cheryl Brown, which
[30:53] that she has sent more messages since and calls about thank you for taking action.
[31:02] Thank you for caring about our community.
[31:04] Thank you for trying to keep us safe and doing your best to make sure that we have a good
[31:11] community where people are not defecating on the streets, not urinating on the streets.
[31:16] Thank you for taking action.
[31:18] So with that, I will make a motion to approve this for the second reading as I did the first
[31:25] time.
[31:26] I disappointed the first time as well.
[31:28] And do I have a second?
[31:30] Second.
[31:31] Okay.
[31:31] I have a motion and a second.
[31:33] All in favor?
[31:34] Aye.
[31:34] Aye.
[31:35] Any notes?
[31:37] Sure.
[31:38] Yes.
[31:38] Deputy Mayor.
[31:39] Feel free.
[31:40] No problem.
[31:42] Sorry.
[31:43] I just want to also read an email that I received today.
[31:47] I don't know if everybody received it or not.
[31:49] I afforded to fill, so he'd have it for the record.
[31:53] Dear Deputy Mayor Jenkins, I urge you to read this article and carefully consider its human
[31:59] impact before final vote tonight on the encampment ban.
[32:03] While I fully realize that criminal activity dumping and blocking public access must be remediated,
[32:10] there are folks who have no choice due to a variety of issues including lack of affordable
[32:15] housing.
[32:16] I hope the City Council considers options that do not include enacting an encampment ban, and attached is an article from the San Diego Union, and it's from Kathy Steele.
[32:29] So I just want to make sure that was read into the record, and then could I ask a couple questions?
[32:35] Sure, I feel free.
[32:37] There were a couple comments came up tonight, and I just want to make sure accurate information is out there.
[32:46] And I think everybody knows this, but I'm not sure.
[32:51] So we have a sheriff's unit called the COPS unit, who probably many of them are sitting
[32:56] back there tonight.
[32:57] I'm getting some head nods.
[33:00] And they do outreach along with other teams, other resource teams, to help the homeless
[33:10] population.
[33:11] And so, I'm just wondering, Michelle, if you could kind of explain a little bit about what
[33:20] they do, because I know they have a lot of interactions, actually, I remember one
[33:25] time, several years ago, and I don't think the person sitting back there, but the sheriff
[33:32] was so excited, and I think we got a letter about this, I don't know how long ago, and
[33:38] And it was from a family because the COPS unit had helped this family move from a homeless
[33:44] situation living in a car to a resource for them, which I believe was a McAllister situation.
[33:54] And so they do a lot of work with the community, so it's not like people are not receiving
[34:01] any resources.
[34:01] So, I'm wondering if you could just explain some of what they do, we do to help people, and then I have a follow-up question.
[34:12] Yes, thank you, Deputy Mayor.
[34:14] The cops unit in actually, any of our deputies, when they do make contact with the unhoused population, they offer services.
[34:21] And they notify our county social worker, Yolanda, so that she can follow up and get directly in contact.
[34:28] On a bi-monthly basis, we have an organized outreach team that interacts with the unhoused
[34:34] population to offer shelter, medical assistance, enrollment in welfare programs, as well as
[34:40] case management.
[34:42] In addition to that and the one-on-one appointments that are made, should somebody need help obtaining
[34:48] an ID card or enrolling in SNAP benefits to obtain housing.
[34:52] The deputies assist with appointments as needed on a case-by-case basis, depending on the
[34:57] location and the social work is this.
[35:01] We also work with people assisting the homeless or POT, which is a nonprofit that provides ongoing outreach throughout the city. We have a dedicated social worker, Monica Ryan, who provides resources for unsheltered residents throughout the city.
[35:18] Okay, and then one follow-up question. Because I think there might be a perception that our sheriffs are going to automatically be going out there.
[35:30] are ticketing people, I'm not sure what the right term is, ticketing people, giving them
[35:41] a misdemeanor for what they do, but what plan do we have in place to before that sort
[35:48] of thing happens? There has to be something, they're not just going to go out and do that
[35:53] without trying to provide more help is my personal opinion. And so I'm wondering if you could explain
[35:59] What is the plan moving forward to still try to help people?
[36:04] I think the plan moving forward is fairly similar to what's in place today.
[36:09] This does offer the deputies the opportunity to make contact a little more easily with unsheltered folks.
[36:15] The current process is if we have an encampment that is close to the creek or is an obstruction or is creating an obstruction on public property,
[36:26] We may contact with the folks that are there, offer services.
[36:30] We also post the location with a 72 hour posting notice to let people know that on a date certain we will be coming by to clean the area.
[36:41] And so we're offering the opportunity to relocate to a different area or to one of the shelters or one of the areas that do provide services.
[36:49] My understanding is that this would kick in if people were choosing not to comply with the direction to change their location if that location was causing a public hazard.
[37:04] Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that because there were some comments made that we, that I think were maybe a misperception.
[37:17] And I think our deputies and our other support staff do try to provide if the person is willing to try to provide to get them to transitional housing.
[37:31] And so I think we're doing everything we can.
[37:35] Can we try to do more?
[37:37] Sure, we'll try to do more, but I am in favor of this moving forward.
[37:44] So thank you for clarifying all that.
[37:45] Thank you, Deputy Mayor.
[37:49] Yes, Councillor Neill.
[37:49] I want to agree with and also thank the Deputy Mayor for making the comments that she
[37:54] did.
[37:55] I think that's an important clarification.
[37:57] And thank you, Doris.
[37:59] City Manager, for kind of further putting a little bit more cover around the process because
[38:06] I too am confident that this will be handled in a responsible way with empathy.
[38:12] And when some of the speakers use the word criminalizing the on-house, I don't think
[38:17] I think that's really the intent of this ordinance.
[38:20] I think it really is to try to get folks help first and foremost.
[38:24] And then for those who refuse help, then we need to look out after the rest of our community,
[38:30] there are other 100,000 people who live in San Marcos to ensure that there's environmental protections and
[38:35] public health protections for everybody in our community.
[38:40] For that reason, I'm supportive of this ordinance.
[38:42] And, you know, we do have a long history of trying to get people into the services, trying to get them help.
[38:49] And, you know, as far back as I want to say, it's probably been at least 15 years that we have spent at least $120,000 a year for homeless services to help people before.
[39:06] And we actually back then, I don't even think we had any point in time count back then.
[39:13] And I don't think it was really an issue as far as something that we were feeling.
[39:18] It really has been something that has grown over the years.
[39:23] But we have a long history council member just wanted to bring that up to you.
[39:28] Of working very hard to get people to the services if they are so inclined to actually take those services.
[39:34] So we've always been very compassionate, so I want to assure you, being that you're one
[39:38] of our new council members, we have really worked very hard and tried to get people to help
[39:44] that what they need.
[39:45] And, you know, 10% of our total housing stock were doing much better than any other city
[39:51] in the county.
[39:52] Can we do better?
[39:53] Well, if we had a money tree, I would say definitely we could.
[39:57] Unfortunately, that's not the case.
[39:59] We do work with...
[40:00] Prior developers to pay for affordable housing. And we actually do the best with that when it ends up being that they were able to cobble that money together. But really, if you point back to 2012, May of 2012, when redevelopment agencies actually ended because of the state legislature, that's where you can point back to where we really became a society that had a growing housing shortage.
[40:29] So, you know, I'm on the successor housing agency for the county.
[40:34] I see what's coming across.
[40:36] It's becoming more difficult to actually use those funds that we did have allocated toward affordable housing.
[40:43] I really wish the legislature would undo that action that they took because it really did.
[40:49] There were many agencies that did a lot of good including the city of San Marcos.
[40:53] So anyway, we do have a motion in a second.
[40:57] I think we should just after the discussion go ahead and codify our vote again.
[41:03] So I have a motion to approve, a second to approve, and so let's take a roll call.
[41:09] I'm going to voice vote.
[41:11] All in favor, aye?
[41:13] Sorry.
[41:14] I think she is.
[41:14] Oh, I'm sorry.
[41:15] Councilmember, you had something else?
[41:17] I'm sorry.
[41:17] I already spoke.
[41:18] I didn't look your way.
[41:19] Sorry.
[41:20] Thank you, Mayor.
[41:21] I do want to make a couple of comments.
[41:23] First, I want to thank the speakers that are here tonight and spoke on this issue.
[41:28] I think it continues to show that this obviously is an issue that we are confronting and we are going to continue to confront.
[41:38] It doesn't change my mind in terms of the issue that I have with actually, regardless of the intent, I think the result is criminalization.
[41:47] and so I'm not in favor of that but I'm certainly encouraged by our speakers today and the
[41:56] ideas that they're bringing forward and so that is really refreshing that we do have
[42:04] some tangible ideas that potentially we should be pursuing and so I'm going to continue
[42:09] to request that as a body as a council we do look at any potential options that we may
[42:16] have to offer our residents that are really finding themselves in these difficult situations.
[42:23] And I think it's something that I think it sounds like we, or it seems like we disagree
[42:29] that I don't think we have the resources to face this right now as we speak.
[42:36] And so I do want us to continue to pursue options so that every time our deputies are one
[42:44] One of us encounter somebody that is on-house, somebody that needs resources, that we actually
[42:50] do have an ability to provide them with those resources and those options.
[42:55] And so I do encourage for us to continue to actively seek that and to bring actual
[43:02] resources, actual housing, or maybe places that the residents and find themselves on-house
[43:09] actually can take advantage of.
[43:11] And that is one of the issues that I continue to see that we do not have sufficient beds.
[43:16] We do not have sufficient temporary permanent housing.
[43:21] And so my request is going to continue to be the same.
[43:26] Thank you, Council Member.
[43:27] Yes, sure.
[43:29] Council Member, I must say.
[43:30] I'll be extremely brief.
[43:31] And as the speakers were up here, I was going through the actual ordinance.
[43:34] It's a number of pages, so as certain areas are being addressed,
[43:37] I was finding those and reading what it says.
[43:39] because this is not all on the shoulder of the deputies.
[43:42] It talks about public works, code enforcement, or any other employees or contractors that City has because not one particular scenario fits every person who might encounter, but consistently through that and ever talks about the status of the individual, it talks about the conduct.
[43:59] So the ordinance does not address homelessness, the ordinance addresses illegal camping,
[44:03] being disposing of property, leaving property abandonment and the contamination of the public
[44:08] rights away. And that's what the ordinance addresses. So we could be, as I said two weeks
[44:12] ago, it applies to everyone in this room, everyone in the community. Thank you.
[44:17] Okay. Are we ready to vote?
[44:20] I'm emotional. Is anyone okay? I want everyone to have their voice heard. So okay, I'm emotional
[44:27] in the second all in favor.
[44:28] Aye.
[44:29] Any no's?
[44:30] No.
[44:31] Okay.
[44:31] Motion passes four to one.
[44:34] We have oral communications up next.
[44:37] No.
[44:37] No oral communication.
[44:39] I'm sorry.
[44:39] Do item 12.
[44:41] Sorry.
[44:42] Item 12.
[44:43] Oh yeah.
[44:44] Well you know what?
[44:45] We just keep moving all around.
[44:47] So I started to get into that and then I'm thinking I already did.
[44:51] Okay.
[44:51] So I have had the same stand each time on any business that is currently.
[44:56] located in a certain space.
[45:05] I think it's a new business that I don't believe that that business should have to annex into a congestion management because it's not really actually bringing in more traffic. It's the same traffic that was there, but it's a new business that is taking over that traffic. I think it's an unfair burden, and so therefore I will not be supporting that.
[45:29] item number 12, any further discussion from any other council members?
[45:35] I think more information on the particular change on the business.
[45:39] Some may require that, so there may be an issue with the amount of services that the city
[45:43] provides.
[45:44] So is this designed to be a blanket ordinance because this specifically talks about an area?
[45:50] It is any change of a business, and I'm okay with it actually being a vacant piece of land
[45:56] and then getting a CUP and having to annex into congestion management on a piece of property
[46:03] that is currently there that has had a use on it. I just don't think that it seems
[46:08] fair to me and so I actually have voted since the very beginning. I forget what year it was
[46:12] but it was quite a while ago. Anyway, that's my feeling about that. So anyway, any other
[46:21] further discussion? I'll move to approve item 12. I'll second. Okay we have a motion and second
[46:29] all in favor. Hi. Hi. And he knows. No. Okay. Motion passes 4 to 1. Moving on to oral communications
[46:37] now. Okay. So we do have five speakers. We have a 15 minute time period and then the rest will
[46:46] be after our other business.
[46:49] So our first speaker is going to be Tom DeGratis, followed by Joshua Labrato, followed
[46:59] by Emily Muhammad, and then Angelina Guzman, followed by Worshawne Ismail.
[47:08] Hello.
[47:09] Hello.
[47:10] Hello.
[47:10] Hello.
[47:10] Hello.
[47:11] Hello.
[47:11] I'm Marco City Council.
[47:13] I would like to thank you for a wonderful place to live.
[47:17] Very, you're doing a great job.
[47:19] I really want to thank the San Marcos Fire Department
[47:22] who responded so heroically and quickly to a unit
[47:27] that burnt in our mobile home park.
[47:33] That's why I'm here today.
[47:35] I'm from Viston Meadows,
[47:36] Those mobile home park board of directors, HOA, we have a new property management company
[47:45] that is what we believe is unfairly giving out eviction notices.
[47:53] Some homes I believe do need some restoration, some paint, some upkeep.
[47:59] I will agree with that, but there is one case where a 72-year-old woman, her place,
[48:08] was what I believe was one of the nicer homes, and this MKC Western management company that
[48:18] took over and about the years of the COVID time, around 2004 or so, or 2020, I'm sorry.
[48:27] All right, she's in two thousands of dollars of attorney fees and her place is just fine.
[48:36] I have about five other cases here and some of these people are long time residents.
[48:41] Maybe she's actually one of the original residents where her parents bought the home back in the 70s.
[48:50] I just believe this is unethical business practice.
[48:53] I would ask the city clerk that if he could briefly scroll through some of the rent roles,
[49:03] if any of those rents have been doubled in the last year or so or last three years they've
[49:09] been there, this would be a violation because they pressure when the homes get sold.
[49:16] They pressure raising the rents, doubling the rents, which is against the ordinance.
[49:21] We love the ordinance, and we appreciate the fact that the owners did not ask for a large increase this year.
[49:31] They were right where we were expecting, but it's this new management company that are using lawyers, intimidation, and eviction notices to put us in a very uncomfortable, very stressful way of living.
[49:49] And that's about all I have to say for now, if there's any help, we really don't want
[49:54] to have to come to the city on an issue like this, but we are talking about our homes
[49:58] here in San Marco.
[50:00] But I would like to know if there's any help we can get as far as any kind of, we are reaching out to HUD, right now. So, Tom, this does fall within a regular city business. However, it is not a agenda. So what I would request that you do is leave your contact information. We will have our housing services team get together with you. Very good. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is going to be
[50:31] Joshua Liberado, followed by Emily Muhammad, Angela Guzman, and then Worshan Ismail.
[50:44] I'll keep this brief.
[50:45] Good evening, city council members.
[50:47] This might not be your first time seeing my face, but it is the first time you're knowing
[50:51] my name.
[50:53] First, let me introduce myself.
[50:54] I'm a Cal State San Marco student, and my tuition is being fully paid and funds provided
[50:59] by me and my family.
[51:00] Secondly, second, do not use my hour money to punish those at their lowest.
[51:08] Some weeks ago, I saw a graphic where up to 44% of the city's funding will go to law enforcement.
[51:16] I do not support the vote to criminalize unhoused people.
[51:19] Reverse the vote.
[51:21] Do not put the vanity of the city over the people of the city.
[51:24] Third, you have the power to issue a permanent ceasefire statement.
[51:28] And use your influence, be an example for the cities and towns that surround us.
[51:33] That's it.
[51:35] Joa, next up is going to be Emily Muthamid, followed by Angelina Guzman, and then Warshon
[51:43] Ismail.
[51:47] Good evening, council members.
[51:48] My name is Emily Mahmoud.
[51:50] I go to Cal State University San Marcos.
[51:53] I come here before you speak on a issuing a permanent ceasefire resolution using your power
[51:58] for good.
[52:00] every day there are 505 bombings in Palestine and that is 21 per hour and there are over 40,000
[52:08] people that are dead and we don't even know how many people have died. So just, you know,
[52:13] user voices for changing for good things because it's awful what's going on. There's a genocide
[52:18] going on and, you know, whatever side you see things people are dying. People are dying. So
[52:23] just use your voice for good and put a ceasefire or permanent ceasefire resolution on the agenda.
[52:28] that's all we ask of you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Emily. Next up Angelina Guzman,
[52:34] followed by Warshan Ismail.
[52:46] My name is Angelina Guzman. I am the children of people from
[52:51] Occupied Territory in the Caribbean. You guys call it Puerto Rico. We call it Puddingken.
[52:56] I am also the daughter of a man whose father was born in Beirut, Lebanon, which has been bombed
[53:02] by the Israeli military.
[53:05] So let's bring it here, this land right here.
[53:10] We have been here for weeks and you're not listening to us,
[53:14] which you have the full ability to do that.
[53:17] But what I will not stand for and what I urge you to speak up against
[53:21] is the prejudice that we have experienced in this very room.
[53:25] That includes racist remarks that have been whether or not intentional
[53:29] or not, not apologized for,
[53:33] allowing other citizens to speak up with races and anti-Semitic remarks towards
[53:37] the people I stand with and not telling other city members to be quiet when
[53:43] it was on of our terms to speak up. However, I will thank Mayor Jones for
[53:47] defending me at one time when I was being interrupted. I'd like to see that
[53:50] energy for everyone. Listening to our name corrections, I understand some names
[53:55] are hard but you know here at once the understand or ask that's also something
[53:59] we can do. Also, it seems that you can, you know, involve yourself in international business,
[54:08] mayor Jones, if you're able to post support for Israel. So our request for a ceasefire
[54:14] statement should not be impossible, actually. It should be very doable considering the fact
[54:18] that it is now normalized to stand in support of Palestine following the ICJ's ruling that is
[54:22] illegal apartheid state and is demanded to pay reparations to the Palestinian people. It has slaughtered
[54:28] for 100 years. So, you know, maybe go with the trends for once, like people always say,
[54:34] our generation does and release the statement. We're not asking you to solve, you know,
[54:39] world peace. We're asking you to release the statement. And we've been here for weeks
[54:43] doing that. It should not be this hard. Thank you.
[54:48] And next up is Warshan Ismail. And I almost missed Justin Gans also wanted to speak under
[54:54] public comment. I wanted to let you know, Justin, you will be at the second comment period.
[55:00] But I didn't want you to think I forgot about you, Warsaw. At this point, your silence and censorship are a response with disturbing implications. Throughout the past few weeks, council, city council meetings, we have come to the conclusion that you council members do not have an issue condoning violence. Your sole issues that we are demanding peace for Palestinians, for our Arab and majority are Muslim. You council members have shown us that your judgment is clouded through
[55:29] bias in your comments mainly yours Rebecca Jones. It has recently come to our attention
[55:36] that you have reposted and participated in an Israeli rally. Israel is a genocidal occupational
[55:43] apartheid regime that has massacred a documented estimation of 186,000 lives from 76 years and
[55:52] nine months. This is a direct indication that you mayor and any council member that has
[55:58] knowledge of her affiliation with Israel is corrupt. The pushback was not with the mayor
[56:05] and council members need to remain neutral. Rebecca Jones, the reason you have remained
[56:09] silent and refused her demands is not for the well-being of this city, but because you yourself
[56:15] are Zionist. Are you Rebecca Jones aware that Zionism kills and has killed over 40,000 Palestinian
[56:22] innocent civilian lives. You pray for peace, that's what you commented, but do you
[56:28] pray for the peace of Palestinian lives?
[56:36] Are you a Zionist, Rebecca Jones?
[56:47] This
[56:48] is your time to amend what you willingly posted on your social media page, and
[56:52] is there anything you have to say for yourself.
[57:08] You should step back from your
[57:10] role as mayor, not only have you refused to represent our voices, but you are
[57:15] biased and unfit to protect and serve the marginalized members in San Marcos. Do
[57:20] Do you have anything to say for yourself?
[57:34] Are you a Zionist?
[58:06] Thank you, Warshan.
[58:07] Next up is going to be our ordinances item number 17.
[58:13] Ordinance 2024, 1549.
[58:15] The ordinance amending municipal code title 14,
[58:20] construction within street sidewalks and public places,
[58:23] underground utilities, sections 14.04,
[58:27] 4.01014.1260 and 14.12240 and 14.2080. It's a second reading but do we have any discussion
[58:43] on this item?
[58:49] We do have a presentation on item 17, that ordinance if Council would like
[58:55] We'll hear that tonight.
[58:57] Thank you.
[58:59] All right, so this is the introduction of an ordinance, 2024-1549, which is a mending title
[59:07] 14.
[59:08] Title 14 pertains to construction in public streets and public places.
[59:15] So we're recommending that City Council introduce ordinance 2024-1549.
[59:22] and specifically the amendments that were focused on tonight pertain to sections 14.04.010, 14.12.160, 14.12.204, and 14.218.080.
[59:38] They're relatively minor changes, but we'll walk through them here really quick.
[59:42] So title 14, it establishes requirements anytime someone wants to work within a public street.
[59:48] So it pertains to things like encroachments and street repair, things like that.
[59:53] We actually updated this title relatively recently in 2022.
[59:57] you. And these are the four.
[1:00:00] All sections were proposing to modify the relatively small modifications. In the first section, we clarified the definition of a driveway. There's a reference in the second section to a residential driveway, which is not actually a chapter, chapter definition. And so we've removed that misleading reference. In the third section, we are replacing pavement restoration language that was in place prior to the
[1:00:29] the 2022 update and that is still required to mimic current city practice.
[1:00:38] The pavement restoration requirements are not changing.
[1:00:41] They have been the same since before 2022.
[1:00:45] And we are simply restoring the language that describes them.
[1:00:49] And then in the last section we're clarifying encroachment requirements that require that
[1:00:56] the private property owner maintain any private encroachment that they are allowed by permit
[1:01:01] to construct on city property.
[1:01:06] So as far as the introduction, we feel that this is not a project as defined by section
[1:01:12] 15378 of CEQA guidelines, because there is no potential to result in a director and direct
[1:01:18] physical change to the environment.
[1:01:20] And if it was found to be a project under CEQA, it would be exempt on the basis that it
[1:01:27] It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that proposed ordinance would
[1:01:32] have a significant effect on the environment.
[1:01:35] Staff recommends that Council introduce ordinance 2024-1549, amending municipal code title
[1:01:44] 14, title of construction within streets, sidewalks and public places, underground utility facilities,
[1:01:51] Section 14.04.010, 14.12.160, 14.12.240, and 14.21.080.
[1:02:03] Thank you.
[1:02:07] Much definitely. Any questions from the council?
[1:02:11] Council Member Senella.
[1:02:12] Just a comment. I'll make a motion if there's not anybody else that wants to comment on this.
[1:02:17] I just, not just specific to this ordinance that we're looking at tonight, but
[1:02:23] it seems to me over the last few months, maybe even most of the year there's been a number of
[1:02:29] ordinances I've been reviewed and enhanced and change slightly where needed.
[1:02:35] I just really appreciate the effort that staff's making on that.
[1:02:38] I do know from my time, my eight years at Valesuitos Water, we struggled with that because there's so
[1:02:44] many policies and processes that an agency like a water district or a city you know that
[1:02:52] we're operating under a lot and so it takes a lot of effort and time to go through this
[1:02:56] and I don't recall that effort taking place in the first year that I was on the council
[1:03:02] but I definitely noticed it the second year and I really appreciate it so thank you.
[1:03:08] Oh and with that I moved to approve item number 17.
[1:03:11] All right. I'll second that. I did want to comment on that. I think at our first goal
[1:03:17] setting, we did discuss this with staff that we wanted them to bring back things as they
[1:03:23] were coming along. And thank you, Mrs. Peake, because we know that you're involved in this
[1:03:27] too to make sure everything's written properly. So anyway, we have a motion and a second
[1:03:32] any further discussion from Council? Seeing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye.
[1:03:37] Any notes? Okay. Moving on. And yes, that was an introduction so that we'll come back at our next meeting.
[1:03:46] Then we are going to move on to public hearings. Item number 18, the resolution 2024, 9335 and 2024, 9336,
[1:03:55] adopting the Act of Transportation Plan and approving a general plan amendment, GPA 24-001 to amend the mobility element
[1:04:04] as recommended by the Planning Commission by vote of six to zero.
[1:04:08] So we have a presentation on this.
[1:04:11] Yes, we do, thank you.
[1:04:12] Thank you.
[1:04:13] And we're off again.
[1:04:15] So on this one, we're recommending that City Council adopt a categorical exemption,
[1:04:21] approve a resolution that would adopt the Active Transportation Plan,
[1:04:25] and approve a resolution for a general plan amendment,
[1:04:29] and we'll walk through all of those in tail.
[1:04:33] So first, starting with the Active Transportation Plan, we don't currently have this document
[1:04:38] as a city.
[1:04:39] And it's a really important way for San Marcos to map where we're headed as far as
[1:04:45] Active Transportation goes.
[1:04:47] It also ties into things like climate action goals and equity across our communities.
[1:04:52] So it's a really important document that we're bringing forward tonight for your consideration.
[1:04:56] but what exactly does it do?
[1:05:00] It looks city-wide, and the goal is to identify high stress environments where biking or pedestrian facilities are lacking, and then to fill those gaps with infrastructure and programs and policies to make a much more reliable and connected network across the city. So, it looks very holistically and ties in with things like our trails master plan to form a city-wide network that you can use to access all of the key destinations.
[1:05:29] in the city. What it does not do is commit any funding to these sorts of efforts. So this is
[1:05:36] a planning level document. It's mapping out that network but it does not commit any funding
[1:05:43] to any particular project and it doesn't identify any future sources of funding. So the city would
[1:05:49] need to use this document to try to leverage future grant opportunities and things like that to
[1:05:55] to actually construct the infrastructure
[1:05:57] that's identified in the plan.
[1:06:01] The strategy for the ATP,
[1:06:03] we first assessed all of the existing infrastructure
[1:06:06] in San Marcos and mapped that city wide.
[1:06:10] So that enabled us then to look in
[1:06:12] at first and last mile connections.
[1:06:15] We really focused on areas like schools and parks
[1:06:18] and transit as some of the most important destinations
[1:06:21] for our city.
[1:06:23] Then we looked at the places where we had gaps
[1:06:25] in that network. And the thought there was that if we look at places where we construct
[1:06:32] a relatively short segment of biker pedestrian facilities and we can close a gap, now we
[1:06:39] have just made a much larger segment function much better with a relatively small investment.
[1:06:45] So we've really prioritized those things as well. We've also focused on low stress alternative
[1:06:52] So in some places it is very desirable to use a bike facility that is on an arterial roadway, but some riders may still want to have a different choice available to them. And we recognize that and the ATP anticipates that.
[1:07:11] So there are facilities for you if you are very comfortable on a bicycle, there are facilities for you if you want an alternative route that doesn't take you on a busy street.
[1:07:20] And then we've looked to minimize conflicts between vehicles, bikes,
[1:07:25] pets, and to overall improve the safety of our network.
[1:07:32] There are a number of pedestrian enhancements that the ATP contemplates.
[1:07:37] So first, it just looks at kind of an enhanced pedestrian environment.
[1:07:42] And that means an environment that feels better and feels more enticing,
[1:07:47] engaging, that people actually want to get out and walk in.
[1:07:50] So we do that with wider sidewalks, landscape buffers,
[1:07:54] benches, all the stuff that Joe's team is really good
[1:07:57] at turning out for us.
[1:07:59] And then we add in some engineering elements,
[1:08:02] things like mid-block crossings at appropriate locations.
[1:08:06] These are very context-sensitive improvements.
[1:08:09] They're not the right solutions everywhere,
[1:08:11] but sometimes they are.
[1:08:13] And in this photo, you see curb extensions,
[1:08:17] such as exists today in Santa Leihau.
[1:08:19] That's the kind of feature that makes pedestrians much more visible to drivers.
[1:08:24] It has a relatively high upfront investment because it is a capital project to construct
[1:08:30] those, but then the return and the maintenance are relatively low.
[1:08:34] So the ATP proposes facilities like that as strategies.
[1:08:39] We don't specify any particular locations for these strategies, but just that they are
[1:08:44] available in the toolbox for the city to use.
[1:08:47] When it comes to bike facilities, we have the whole range of bike facilities proposed
[1:08:56] in the ATP, all the way from things that tend to make people a little bit less comfortable
[1:09:01] like riding in a class 3, which is basically a sharrow, so you are riding with the traffic.
[1:09:07] We're working to move away from those types of facilities towards a class 2,
[1:09:17] which is
[1:09:18] little three-foot gore strip to give you a little bit more comfort and separation.
[1:09:23] And then where we would like to ultimately end up is with the Class 4 and the Class 1.
[1:09:30] Those are separated or multi-use paths so they're completely separate from vehicular traffic.
[1:09:39] Altogether the ATP is proposing to add in the interim network about 36.8 miles of Class
[1:09:48] one in class four facilities. I say interim because the plan actually includes two separate maps.
[1:09:56] There's the interim map that we can achieve with relatively
[1:10:00] We're not going to spend a lot of money today. We don't have to acquire right of way. It's not going to require very large capital projects to get those interim facilities constructed. And then we also have the ultimate bicycle network that will take more time. We will incrementally develop that, or we might get a grant that would give us a large segment of the ultimate network. And when we do achieve that ultimate network, we're going to be looking at over a hundred
[1:10:29] 100 miles of protected class one and class four facilities,
[1:10:34] the most comfortable types of facilities in San Marcos.
[1:10:39] The general plan amendment comes into play for this as well.
[1:10:43] And one of the reasons that we're pursuing it
[1:10:46] is to link in with this active transportation planning.
[1:10:50] Another reason is to update our traffic performance metrics
[1:10:54] and finally our truck route designations.
[1:10:57] and then there are some policy changes sprinkled throughout there that tie in with these three themes.
[1:11:04] As far as active transportation planning, we want to adopt the ATP and we'd like to have changes in the general plan that are consistent with what we're showing in the active transportation plan.
[1:11:16] One of the main changes there is removing the bicycle network map that is currently in the general plan.
[1:11:23] It won't exist in the general plan anymore.
[1:11:26] It will exist only in the active transportation plan.
[1:11:29] So it'll be a much more current document
[1:11:31] and we don't have to worry about conflicts
[1:11:34] between the general plan and our active transportation plan.
[1:11:39] We'll also update the traffic performance metrics.
[1:11:44] As you all know, we have a new metric
[1:11:46] for measuring traffic performance and that's VMT.
[1:11:49] the city relies on both VMT consistent with SQL law, and then we also look at roadway
[1:11:58] and capacity delay as far as a level of service perspective for general plan consistency.
[1:12:04] So we're reworking the general plan to mirror the way that we're actually doing business.
[1:12:09] It's one of those updates so that it is now evident from our general plan the way that
[1:12:15] the city will review applications.
[1:12:17] We've also added some sections in there to highlight some proactive strategies to make
[1:12:23] our streets safer, things like improving driver attention or implementing traffic calming
[1:12:29] measures where they're appropriate, and just overall improving compliance with roadway
[1:12:34] regulations.
[1:12:35] So these are now goals that are discussed in our general plan.
[1:12:41] And then with the truck route designations, we had a bit of an odd situation where we
[1:12:47] There were designating truck routes in the general plan, and then we also had listings
[1:12:51] of truck routes in the municipal code.
[1:12:54] And that was a little bit odd, and it also meant that in order to keep up with the kind
[1:12:59] of updates that we're talking about tonight, these regular house cleaning kinds of items,
[1:13:04] we would need to do a general plan amendment every time we wanted to update the truck routes.
[1:13:10] And that kind of construct is probably not the best for staying current, so we're suggesting
[1:13:15] that we just rely on the truck routes that are in Title 12. City Council just considered those changes recently.
[1:13:25] And then we would remove them from the general plan. So no conflict, and we can update them coming to City Council much more easily.
[1:13:36] These actions are categorically exempt under the common sense rule.
[1:13:41] The amendments that were proposing are policy level changes, and they don't result in any physical improvements.
[1:13:48] The EIR 11-44 was certified by City Council back in 2012, and no substantial changes have occurred.
[1:13:57] The previously adopted and certified EIR is adequate without any modification.
[1:14:05] We did go through a robust public comment process in order to arrive at the active transportation
[1:14:12] plan that we brought you tonight.
[1:14:15] From fall of 2022 through summer of 2023, there were a number of workshops held by staff
[1:14:22] and consultants.
[1:14:24] They also attended a number of public-facing events, things like the spring fling.
[1:14:29] They were out there trying to get public input.
[1:14:31] But the public had opportunities to mark up maps of the city with the areas that concerned
[1:14:37] them and all of that was rolled into the plan that we're bringing you tonight.
[1:14:45] We also conducted walk audits in coordination with the school district for each of the 18 schools
[1:14:51] that are in San Marcos and conducted handry surveys with the students reached out to the
[1:14:58] parents so.
[1:15:00] There's also a safe routes to school element included in this plan that really reflects the perspective of the schools and what we need to do for safety within a half mile radius of each school. Finally, we coordinated extensively with the neighboring jurisdictions to avoid a problem where we propose a bike facility or something similar and then it ends at the city boundary. We have made every effort to tie in so that if the street continues, we have some
[1:15:30] Some level of concurrence from the adjacent jurisdiction that that facility type as we're
[1:15:36] describing it should also continue.
[1:15:38] We published the draft ATP for public comment in winter of 2023, and the feedback that
[1:15:45] we received is all incorporated in what we're bringing forward tonight.
[1:15:50] We were also active on the boarding commission circuit, so the Climate Action Plan Working
[1:15:57] group got an overview in May, traffic commission, received a presentation in June, and then planning
[1:16:04] commission voted 6-0 on June 17th, recommending that City Council approve the exemption, approve
[1:16:12] the general plan amendment, and they also noted and filed the proposed active transportation plan.
[1:16:19] So with that, staff's recommendation is on the screen that you adopt the categorical exemption,
[1:16:26] approve and adopt the active transportation plan and approve the general plan amendment
[1:16:32] and we're available for any questions.
[1:16:35] Thank you so much, Stephanie.
[1:16:37] So I actually do have some questions about what we're committing to tonight.
[1:16:43] So since I'm a board member at Sandegg, we've had a lot of discussions about bike lanes and
[1:16:52] And what is the preferred bike lanes and all of that.
[1:16:58] And one of the things that I'm unclear about is that I didn't see a map that specified
[1:17:04] this and maybe I missed it because it is quite a bit to read.
[1:17:07] But are we committing to on class 4 bike lanes to specific roads that are going to have curbs?
[1:17:15] Because what I've been hearing from a lot of serious cyclists is that they feel, because
[1:17:22] a lot of times they're actually in packs or, you know, groups that if there are curbs
[1:17:28] associated with a class four bike lanes that they're actually not safe and then what happens
[1:17:34] is one catches the curb and it goes all haywire and then there are some pretty bad accidents.
[1:17:41] And so I guess my question is are we committing to specific curbs or is it class four without
[1:17:48] an actual curb or could it be without an actual curb? Because I would just be very careful if we're
[1:17:56] going to spend money on infrastructure. I want to make sure it's the proper infrastructure that,
[1:18:00] you know, maybe, you know, a year from now, there's all this data out there that says, oh,
[1:18:06] Class 4 without a curb is actually the best sort of situation. And I just want to make sure we're
[1:18:13] not getting boxed ourselves into anything. So if you could maybe clear that up for me.
[1:18:17] Sure, we are committing with the Active Transportation Plan to have class fours on certain
[1:18:22] roadways.
[1:18:23] So, Discovery, San Marcos Boulevard, Rancho Santa Fe, Mission, those are some of the streets
[1:18:29] that would have class fours.
[1:18:31] But the design of the class four is not set by this document.
[1:18:35] This includes a toolbox, much like we were talking through the pedestrian enhancements.
[1:18:41] It's a toolbox and so there are a number of different ways to design a class four facility,
[1:18:46] and we can design the right class for facility for each location.
[1:18:51] Perfect, because I, you know, there's been a lot of discussion also down on the 101 in
[1:18:57] Incinitas.
[1:18:58] Well, I guess it's maybe even Cardiff.
[1:19:00] I think it's Cardiff, more Cardiff, that some of the driveways, the ingress and
[1:19:06] egress actually is pretty unsafe and people have gotten even in Lucadia.
[1:19:11] I think there have been some serious, actually, I think fatal accidents.
[1:19:15] at least one that I can remember off the top of my head.
[1:19:19] I just want to make sure it's not boxing us in
[1:19:21] and it doesn't seem like it based on what you just said.
[1:19:24] So I just like to be on the record of when we do design,
[1:19:28] we do the design of this that we're keeping that in account.
[1:19:31] We want to make sure we get plenty of feedback
[1:19:33] from our serious cyclists, you know, like my, you know,
[1:19:38] maybe they don't live in St. Marks,
[1:19:39] but they certainly use our bike lanes.
[1:19:42] I want to keep people safe when they're on our streets.
[1:19:44] We don't want our fire department and our sheriff deputies have to go out to accidents that are that are fatal because we
[1:19:51] Didn't design it properly. So just make sure that we reach out to the cycling groups and make sure we get plenty of feedback from them as to
[1:20:00] What they're seeing and what they're comfortable with because, again, they might not actually be living in the city, but if they're using our infrastructure, we want to make sure we keep them safe. So, thank you. I think we're going to be doing that. Yeah. Thank you so much. Any other discussion? Yes. Councilmember Sonella? Mayor, and thank you again, Stephanie, for the presentation. I think this is brilliant that we have this plan that's now going to, as Stephanie said, provide a toolbox of options for us to deploy.
[1:20:29] So as appropriate, the old saying of plan your work and work your plan well, in this case we can't start to work the plan until we have the plan and now we have it, right?
[1:20:41] And so I think that's really good and I think the more that we can do and I understand that this is going to be a slow rollout and it's going to be dependent on finances in a large part.
[1:20:51] But the more that we can do to make riding bikes and walking the streets safer and more enjoyable.
[1:20:58] and more of a convenient avenue for folks to get around.
[1:21:04] It helps both the environment by taking cars off the streets.
[1:21:08] But it also helps move the remaining cars around our community quicker.
[1:21:12] And I think that's definitely something that can benefit everyone in our community.
[1:21:17] And I'm just glad that this is a great starting point.
[1:21:19] And I think this is just a brilliant plan to thank you.
[1:21:24] Hey, yes, Councilmember Musgraff.
[1:21:26] So interestingly enough, I was in Washington DC last week.
[1:21:29] And in the metropolitan area and a lot of the graphics you were illustrating are already
[1:21:35] in place there.
[1:21:36] Everything from protected bike lanes, cleared delineations, even the wider sidewalks,
[1:21:42] which makes it easier for pedestrians to get around vehicle traffic moving and being completely
[1:21:47] aware of the very many lime and different scooter bikes.
[1:21:52] But we were there five days and saw a lot of interactions without any even near accident.
[1:21:58] So it does work as long as everyone's educated and is aware what they're doing.
[1:22:02] And I also see an opportunity here as we continue with our process of providing more affordable homes at homes for
[1:22:08] our residents to partner with those developers and say, look, as we're putting this in, this is an opportunity for your residents to make it a more
[1:22:17] walkable environment and the ability to get around and I like the interconnectivity with the bike paths.
[1:22:25] And the last thing is I'm on the Sandeg Transportation Committee and ATPs come up all the time and very frequently notice is given for grant monies that are available for jurisdictions but almost consistently one of the qualifiers as you have to have an ATP because the money will be allocated to support those projects so to see this as an opportunity for us to move forward to improve our community, make it better for our community and then leverage some of that grant money
[1:22:55] to help to free the cost is fantastic.
[1:22:57] Thank you for the presentation.
[1:22:59] All right, thank you, Council Member Nunez.
[1:23:02] Thank you. I just really, my comments are brief.
[1:23:06] I want to thank staff for all the work
[1:23:08] that has gone into this great job.
[1:23:10] And I'm going to echo what's already been said.
[1:23:14] So long time coming, I really like that this was presented
[1:23:18] to our commissions.
[1:23:20] I think that's really great to see
[1:23:22] and that it was so well received.
[1:23:24] So thank you for all the work that's gone into this.
[1:23:27] All right, thank you. Deputy Mayor.
[1:23:30] A couple of questions.
[1:23:34] So this will become part of our current general plan, correct?
[1:23:40] The active transportation plan will be its own separate document,
[1:23:44] but the general plan will be modified so there's no inconsistency between the two.
[1:23:48] Okay, so when that is updated,
[1:23:52] We did it some future date.
[1:23:54] Will this document be reviewed for possible enhancements or maybe any needed changes
[1:24:03] versus just including this in the plan without looking at to see should there be some revisions.
[1:24:10] So it could be edited at some point in time.
[1:24:13] Yes, needed.
[1:24:14] And I would expect that it would be edited where we certainly put in a ton of effort and
[1:24:19] And we think we've gotten it right, but we're going to learn.
[1:24:22] We're going to learn from this, and as we implement, we want to have the benefit of that
[1:24:26] experience.
[1:24:27] So I would expect that you're going to see it modified back here at council at some
[1:24:31] point.
[1:24:32] Okay.
[1:24:32] And then my last comment is, I believe we have about 200 miles of streets in the community
[1:24:40] right now that we maintain roughly.
[1:24:44] And so I think that's pretty significant, of course that's 200 miles of current streets,
[1:24:50] there will be more.
[1:24:52] But I think that will be pretty significant if we could get half of those, whatever percentages
[1:24:57] at the time to be defiled.
[1:25:00] All of these possibilities. Yes, I think this will be significant and I think there will actually be additional lane miles of bike facilities that come online through this because even in some of the streets, for instance, where we're proposing a class four, where we have the right of way to do it, we may also provide an on-street facility. So there may be some streets that actually have two different types of facilities so that people have an option.
[1:25:30] So we may be doubling up on some of our lean miles.
[1:25:34] Okay.
[1:25:34] Okay, thank you.
[1:25:36] I had a follow-up on that.
[1:25:38] For clarification, is this more of a standalone document
[1:25:41] so that we can update it more frequently than the actual general plan?
[1:25:45] Correct.
[1:25:46] Okay, that's what I had understood.
[1:25:47] I just wanted to double check.
[1:25:49] So Deputy Mayor, we'll be able to keep this more updated on a regular basis
[1:25:54] because it is more of a standalone by itself.
[1:25:56] So I just wanted to clarify that.
[1:25:57] All right. Do we have any speakers? Okay. This is a public meeting. So I move to close a public meeting second. All right. All in favor.
[1:26:07] Hi. I know. Okay. It is also up for an adopter approve. Any further comments from any council members? If not, do we have a motion?
[1:26:18] I move their approval is presented.
[1:26:20] I'll second.
[1:26:20] Okay, motion and a second, all in favor?
[1:26:22] Aye.
[1:26:23] Any notes?
[1:26:24] Okay.
[1:26:24] Seeing none.
[1:26:26] Motion passes unanimously.
[1:26:27] Thanks again for all the hard work.
[1:26:28] Yes.
[1:26:29] Item number 19, Resolution 2024, 9337 confirming the diagram and assessment and approving for the
[1:26:39] levy of the annual assessment of a landscape and lighting district number one for fiscal year
[1:26:44] 2425.
[1:26:45] Do we have a presentation or no,
[1:26:50] no Madam Mayor, no presentation, this is an annual.
[1:26:53] This is an annual housekeeping item, but so okay, any questions that any council members
[1:26:59] have?
[1:27:00] I think this has been all definitely as long as I've actually been on the council, so my
[1:27:05] teeth here.
[1:27:07] No, no questions, just I remember this from last year as well.
[1:27:10] Okay.
[1:27:10] Do you, is that a motion?
[1:27:12] Council member?
[1:27:13] Closing hearing.
[1:27:14] Yes.
[1:27:15] Yes, to close the hearing, yes.
[1:27:18] Public hearing.
[1:27:19] Okay, we have a motion to close the public hearing.
[1:27:21] All in favor?
[1:27:21] Aye.
[1:27:23] Any noes?
[1:27:24] Okay, seeing none.
[1:27:25] No, no.
[1:27:26] That would be for an adopt.
[1:27:28] I'll move to approve item number 19.
[1:27:32] Okay, we have a motion in a second to approve.
[1:27:35] All in favor?
[1:27:36] Aye.
[1:27:37] Any noes?
[1:27:38] Seeing none.
[1:27:39] Okay, motion passes.
[1:27:41] Resolution number 2024, 93338 confirming.
[1:27:45] Wait, sorry, yep, it's the same diagram and assessment and providing for the levy of the annual assessment of Velocito's Town Center, which is another one that is a yearly one, but I'm going to finish reading that street maintenance district for fiscal year 2425.
[1:28:02] That is also a public hearing, any questions from the council? And oh, I forgot to ask, we don't have any public discussion.
[1:28:11] Okay, so what is again a public hearing?
[1:28:17] Do we have a motion and a second to close the public hearing?
[1:28:20] All in favor?
[1:28:21] Aye.
[1:28:22] Any notes?
[1:28:23] Seeing none?
[1:28:24] Okay.
[1:28:24] And then do we have a motion to approve?
[1:28:26] Move to approve the resolution.
[1:28:28] I'll second.
[1:28:29] Okay, we have a motion and a second.
[1:28:30] All in favor?
[1:28:31] Aye.
[1:28:32] Any notes?
[1:28:33] Okay.
[1:28:34] Moving on to ordinance 2024.
[1:28:37] 1550 ordinance amending sections 20.310.
[1:28:40] 0.020, 2310, 0.030, 20.310, 040, 20.310, 050, 20.310, 060, and 20.310, 0.080 of Title 20 of the
[1:29:00] Samarcus Municipal Code, relative to inclusionary housing requirements and associated density bonus
[1:29:06] calculations for residential, rental projects, and inclusionary housing agreements.
[1:29:12] Now, I challenge anyone to say that 10 times faster or twice faster even for that matter.
[1:29:18] Do we have a presentation on that this evening?
[1:29:21] Yes, Mayor Jones, we do have a presentation.
[1:29:23] Poonum, Proilod, Deputy City Attorney, we'll be making the presentation tonight.
[1:29:28] All right, thank you.
[1:29:30] Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers.
[1:29:32] First, today we're going to talk about the ordinance updates to 20.310,
[1:29:41] oh, this is the
[1:29:41] wrong, oh, that's correct, okay, sorry,
[1:29:49] I think I went back to far, anyway, today we're
[1:29:52] requesting the City Council adopt amendments to the inclusionary housing ordinance, which
[1:29:56] which is in the chapter 20.310.
[1:29:59] The amendments.
[1:30:00] Council are being requested to address requirements for inclusionary housing and associated density
[1:30:04] bonus calculations for residential rental projects, and also amendments to the section on
[1:30:09] inclusionary housing agreements. Now, we'll get to the slide that's up for you. Sorry
[1:30:13] about that. The city's inclusionary housing ordinance establishes requirements for the inclusion
[1:30:20] of affordable housing units for low, very low, extremely low, and moderate income households
[1:30:25] and residential projects that require development plans.
[1:30:29] Section 20.310-30 of the ordinance provides exemptions for certain residential development projects,
[1:30:36] including but not limited to the construction of new residential rental projects.
[1:30:41] Unless the developer has otherwise agreed by contract with the city to build affordable housing
[1:30:46] in consideration for a direct financial contribution or any other form of local assistance from the city.
[1:30:51] The city adopted this exemption for the construction of a new residential rental projects consistent with the Court of Appeals 2009 ruling in the Palmer 6th Street properties versus the city of LA case.
[1:31:04] In that case, the Court held that Los Angeles's ordinance requiring residential rental developers to construct affordable housing units subject to rent restrictions for at least 30 years,
[1:31:16] or pay an in lieu fee towards building affordable housing elsewhere violated the Coast of Hawkins Rental Housing Act.
[1:31:23] The court noted that requiring a rental housing project to provide affordable housing units at regulated rents is clearly hostile to residential landlords' rights to set rental rates at the start of a tendency.
[1:31:40] California legislature adopted Assembly Bill AB 1505 effective January 1st, 2018, which
[1:31:48] restored local agency authority to impose affordable housing requirements on the development
[1:31:53] of residential rental units. The city intended to include these requirements with the general
[1:31:57] plan update, but as that process was initiated but delayed, the city's decided to seek these
[1:32:02] amendments on a standalone basis today. Staff recommends amending chapter 20.310 to be consistent
[1:32:09] it with state law, and to promote the creation maintenance and preservation of affordable housing.
[1:32:18] I'll now briefly go over the proposed ordinance changes.
[1:32:22] First, we would amend section 20.310-30F to remove the exemption for the construction of new residential rental projects.
[1:32:31] Next, we would amend section 20.310-30E to allow inclusionary housing units to be counted towards
[1:32:40] density of bonus entitlements to be consistent with government code section 659150882 that's a lot of numbers too and to clarify that chapter 20.310 is
[1:32:53] applicable to density of bonus units by removing it from the exemption section.
[1:33:04] Next the city currently requires residential rental projects of more than six units to reserve at least 15% of units for target households which are extremely low,
[1:33:13] very low, low or moderate income households.
[1:33:16] Government code 65850 grants HCD the authority to review a local ordinance if it requires
[1:33:23] more than 15% of the total number of units be affordable to or occupied by target households.
[1:33:30] If either one the local agency has failed to meet at least 75% of its regional housing need
[1:33:35] allocation share over a five year period or two, the local agency has not submitted the required
[1:33:42] annual housing element report for two consecutive years.
[1:33:45] That hasn't been the case for us, but we are asking that in order that we not be subject to HCD review,
[1:33:52] 20.310-40B will be amended to require residential rental projects to reserve 15% of units for target households,
[1:34:00] unless the higher percentage is requested by the developer, or to pay an in-loop fee to provide housing opportunities for target households.
[1:34:07] Currently,
[1:34:14] 2310-50 allows rental projects of 6 units or less or 4 sale projects to have
[1:34:21] the ability to pay the in-loop fee.
[1:34:23] The amendment will allow all residential projects to have the option to pay in in-loop
[1:34:27] fee instead of reserving units, instead of reserving units for target households, sorry.
[1:34:34] The amendment of 2310-60 is also going to be clarified to state that it also applies
[1:34:39] is to rental residential projects in addition to four sale projects.
[1:34:50] Next are amendments to 2310-80, which pertains to the inclusionary housing agreement.
[1:34:57] A first will allow displaced tenants from another
[1:35:00] The next city affordable housing project to be placed on a waiting list for a new project. The next one will provide guidelines for that tenant relocation. And then also it will provide the city with a copy of the annual lease agreement for affected units to facilitate monitoring for compliance with the inclusionary housing requirements.
[1:35:24] These proposed ordinance updates led to the review of the city's in lieu fee calculation to align with industry standards and regional best practices.
[1:35:32] The city engaged Kaiser, Marston Associates to prepare an inclusionary housing in lieu
[1:35:38] fee study to evaluate the potential of updating the inclusionary housing in lieu fee for
[1:35:43] the city. As part of this effort, KMA reviewed the current in lieu fee and impact fee levels
[1:35:48] charged in local jurisdictions and evaluated a range of approaches to determine appropriate
[1:35:53] housing in lieu fees levels for the city. Adoption of the updated in lieu fee will come back
[1:35:59] before council at a future meeting, and we'll be available for public review prior to the council meeting.
[1:36:05] When adopted by council, the updated fees will be applied to both for sale and rental residential projects.
[1:36:18] For public outreach, city staff met with the Building Industry Association on July 10th to inform them of the proposed updates to the inclusionary housing ordinance.
[1:36:27] Staff intends to have additional discussions with the BIA in August to discuss the proposed new in lieu fees for
[1:36:34] projects prepared in the KMA inclusionary housing in Lufi study prior to the study being
[1:36:39] presented to City Council.
[1:36:46] For environmental review, the proposed amendments are exempt from CEQA because this is not a project
[1:36:52] as defined within the meeting of CEQA, even if it was found subject to CEQA, it is exempt
[1:36:57] under CEQA guidelines section 150610B3, the commonsense exception.
[1:37:06] In closing, these proposed updates will ensure the city's standards and requirements are consistent
[1:37:11] Senate would state law and will promote the creation, maintenance, and preservation of affordable housing.
[1:37:19] This item went to Planning Commission on June 17th, 2024, and Planning Commission recommended approval of these Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Amendments by a vote of 6-0-0.
[1:37:35] So, staff's recommendation, this is an introduction of first reading of the ordinance amending the Section 20.310, or Chapter 20.310 related to Inclusionary Housing Requirements and
[1:37:47] and associate density bonus calculations
[1:37:48] for residential rental projects
[1:37:50] and inclusionary housing agreements.
[1:37:54] Okay, thank you.
[1:37:56] We have one public speaker with the council
[1:37:59] like to start the discussion
[1:38:00] or would we like to hear the public speaker first?
[1:38:04] Yes, I agree.
[1:38:06] I just want to hear what you all had to say.
[1:38:08] Okay, Carol Gendell will be our speaker.
[1:38:12] Thank you, Carol.
[1:38:16] Good evening, all.
[1:38:17] It's always a pleasure to see you.
[1:38:19] I've got to confess I'm a little confused as always, hang on a second here, by the in lieu of the and I feel like we have builders who are allowed to pay this fee but I don't see the housing stock growing very much and it goes back to the discussion that we had on the homeless.
[1:38:45] us. We do not have very much low income housing. When the VS Serena project was in hot discussion
[1:38:55] a couple of months ago, part of the problem was people didn't have any place to go. So
[1:39:01] to say, well, if somebody needs to move and they're going to be put on a list for priority,
[1:39:09] We have no housing for them to go to, so in lieu of fees are kind of nice, and I know
[1:39:18] you talk about the fact that we are doing the best among our surrounding communities,
[1:39:24] but we don't have enough low income housing.
[1:39:28] And I strongly urge, and I don't know how this fits in with this recommendation.
[1:39:38] But I urge that we do more to figure out how we can get more low income housing integrated into our community.
[1:39:50] So that we do not have the kind of situation that we had with residents coming to us saying we have no place to go and you're telling us we have to live.
[1:40:00] We're living now, or we have people who are living on the streets who really would like to get housing, and there is no place to go. We've got to do better, and I don't know. I question whether in lieu of fees, even if it is the industry standard, are the right thing to do. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, Carol. I actually, and staff may want to jump into the in lieu fees.
[1:40:27] What I would like to mention is that many times we actually use the in-loop fees to
[1:40:33] cobble together so that we can have an actual bigger project.
[1:40:37] And in the Vilis Arena project, for instance, that was actually a necessary thing because
[1:40:44] we were actually building more of what our community needs.
[1:40:48] So it needed to be rehabilitated.
[1:40:50] It was it was in such a dire bad shape. I mean it really it really quite it really was and then I wanted to say
[1:41:00] On one hand, I understand what you are saying about that the folks had nowhere to live
[1:41:06] And that maybe you know if we had just housing units sitting around I personally
[1:41:12] Think I'm glad that we don't have housing units be just sitting around because they're really important for people to actually live in
[1:41:19] And so we can't just have them sitting around, we need to make sure we're helping people and actually having them to actually place for them to live.
[1:41:26] So the goal is not to have them vacant, it's to actually have them habitated because it is helping people, but it's specifically about the end loop fees.
[1:41:34] Maybe staff wants to mention, you know, if you wanted to take a stab at how that might look, but I feel like and for me, you know, like I've been on the council quite a while.
[1:41:47] and thousands, I would say, definitely over a thousand of our current housing units of
[1:41:54] 3,000, which is 10% of our housing stock, and it's not just in the local area that we're
[1:42:01] doing the best.
[1:42:01] We're actually, we've built the most in all of San Diego County for our percentage of
[1:42:07] the entire county of San Diego, of having for our total housing stock and percentage wise,
[1:42:14] like we have built the most.
[1:42:15] But maybe staff wants to take a stab at how we view and what our policy in lieu fees are
[1:42:22] because the developers are actually paying their fair share.
[1:42:26] They are paying a good amount and then we have developers that are specifically affordable
[1:42:31] housing developers that go out and get tax credits so that they are able to build it.
[1:42:36] The problem has been quite frankly is we get mandates from the state and then we don't actually
[1:42:42] have any way.
[1:42:42] It's an unfunded mandate, but we've really done a lot to actually build those housing units.
[1:42:48] But maybe they want to talk specifically about the end loop.
[1:42:50] If I could stick one thing in lieu of fees as I understand and please correct me if I'm wrong, allows a situation
[1:43:00] where instead of having low income or more affordable housing within a project, it's moved to another more
[1:43:11] segregated community?
[1:43:13] No, actually not segregated because what ends up happening is there are areas that
[1:43:20] are specified by the state.
[1:43:22] Like right now I think it's actually in the North City area, if I'm not mistaken, I forget
[1:43:27] what that's called.
[1:43:28] There's a technical term for it.
[1:43:29] Sylvia can correct me, hi, Carol.
[1:43:32] At the moment you qualify for your credits based on a variety of factors in a high resource
[1:43:37] areas, what it's called.
[1:43:38] So at the moment, the high resource area is actually in the north city area for San Marcos.
[1:43:44] And actually the next north city, and this was because it was such a large project.
[1:43:50] They are actually required to build it on site because they're doing such a large amount
[1:43:55] of development.
[1:43:57] And so there actually, it's going to be right in that north city area.
[1:44:02] I think it's maybe just a little like a block off of North City, but it's it's going to be right in that area.
[1:44:09] So I understand and I hear you. I watch it and I know that we really are very intentional about our efforts in the affordable housing.
[1:44:18] And like I said, it's important to have a big development if you possibly can, if it makes more sense.
[1:44:29] because there was one development, and I'm just going to give you, I know this is probably just going on and on.
[1:44:34] But one of our developments where it was built on site, this was off of, I want to say, Borden Road.
[1:44:41] It sat there because it's really hard to qualify for it. It was a project that was actually for sale project,
[1:44:47] and it sat there for over two years, and I literally remember neighbors that kept saying,
[1:44:53] This house is vacant, what, you know, can you make the developer do anything and it wasn't that the developer didn't want to act
[1:45:00] We actually have someone purchase it, they did, but the requirements to actually purchase it were very difficult to meet, and so it took quite a while, and it was over two years. Anyway, but I just want you to know that we really are truly doing everything we can to keep people housed, and then make sure that we are following the requirements of the law as well, and that thing.
[1:45:24] Appreciate the information.
[1:45:25] Thank you.
[1:45:25] Thank you.
[1:45:27] All right.
[1:45:27] Sorry.
[1:45:27] Any other questions or comments or discussion?
[1:45:31] Yes.
[1:45:32] W.D. Mayor.
[1:45:33] Just a question slash comment.
[1:45:37] So my understanding is since we haven't had this requirement on the rentals in the past,
[1:45:45] now that it's on there, then we will be creating more affordable units with the rental projects
[1:45:52] that come online.
[1:45:53] Is that a correct and to clarify this used to be the case.
[1:45:58] It was actually changed in 2009 in response to that case.
[1:46:03] The city had an inclusionary requirement prior to 2009.
[1:46:08] And against legal advice, it was actually changed in 2012 with a general plan update.
[1:46:14] So because we could just say that we were superseded, we figured it would be fixed.
[1:46:18] It was fixed by that time, the city had amended to undo inclusionary housing for residential units.
[1:46:28] So, this is essentially putting back what the city had before and was making some at least some progress on providing inclusionary units.
[1:46:38] But the thinking is this will give us more, correct?
[1:46:42] That's correct, it'll either give us more units if people choose to build the 15% or it will add to the inclusionary housing coffers for future projects.
[1:46:55] Thank you.
[1:46:56] Okay, any other discussion?
[1:46:59] Okay, it is a public hearing.
[1:47:01] Do we have a motion to, oh, any speakers?
[1:47:04] No, okay.
[1:47:06] Do we have a motion to close the public hearing?
[1:47:11] Okay, motion is second, all in favor?
[1:47:14] Aye.
[1:47:15] Any notes?
[1:47:16] Seeing none.
[1:47:17] Okay, it's an introduction of the first reading.
[1:47:20] I would move that we introduce.
[1:47:23] Did we have a second or do I have a second?
[1:47:26] Okay, motion and a second, all in favor?
[1:47:28] Aye.
[1:47:29] Any notes?
[1:47:29] Seeing none.
[1:47:30] Okay.
[1:47:31] Moving on to item number 22.
[1:47:35] Resolution.
[1:47:36] Okay.
[1:47:36] Okay, this is a big one.
[1:47:39] 2024, 93, 93, 93, 24, 93, 25 and 93, 26 and ordinance numbers 20, 24, 15, 47 and 15, 48.
[1:47:50] Specific, specific plan entitlements for a 228-unit residential development, including an environmental impact report and associated mitigation monitoring and reporting program, EIR 24-002,
[1:48:02] with findings of fact, a general plan amendment GPA 21-002, a reason are 21-002, a specific
[1:48:13] plan SP 22-001, I'm sorry, 001, a multifamily site development plan, MFSDP 24-001, and a tentative
[1:48:26] the subdivision map, TSM 24-0001, as recommended for approval by the planning mission by A-6-0 vote.
[1:48:39] Okay. Do we have a presentation?
[1:48:43] Yes. Thank you, Mayor Jones.
[1:48:45] Sima Korshi will be making the presentation along with Kairin Chua.
[1:48:52] Thank you.
[1:48:56] Good evening, councilmembers.
[1:48:58] The proposed specific plan project is a residential project consisting of 228 units and approximately
[1:49:07] 23 acres of natural open space that you are considering tonight.
[1:49:12] This project was originally submitted to the city as a 449-unit condominium and apartment
[1:49:18] project in January of 2022.
[1:49:21] In March of 23, the draft EIR for the project was released for public review.
[1:49:26] Comments for received from resource agencies including U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
[1:49:33] a California Department of Fish and Wildlife and evaluated by the staff in April of 2023.
[1:49:39] Many of the comments were related to impacts to sensitive habitat on the site.
[1:49:44] The applicant, city staff and resource agencies discussed alternative designs to protect and
[1:49:49] preserve sensitive biological resources on site.
[1:49:53] After discussions, the applicant revised the project plans and the specific plan, conducted
[1:49:59] additional.
[1:50:00] Environmental analysis and included a revised alternative project with the draft EIR. This revised alternative project is for 228 units and is the project submitted for approval by the applicant, and it is recommended by staff for approval.
[1:50:18] The applicant requests several entitlements, including certification of the EIR, approval of a general plan amendment and rezone, a new specific plan, multifamily site development plan intended
[1:50:31] of subdivision map.
[1:50:35] The project site is comprised of four
[1:50:37] weekend parcels, bordered by Pacific Street, Lamarada Drive,
[1:50:42] Las Posas Road, and Linda Vista Drive. Various commercial
[1:50:46] industrial and open space uses around the project site, including
[1:50:50] the Grand Plaza Commercial Center to the east and Bradley Park
[1:50:54] to the southwest.
[1:50:57] To develop the project site with the proposed
[1:51:00] multifamily project, the requested entitlements included a
[1:51:03] General Plan amendment and rezone from industrial to specific plan area surrounding land uses
[1:51:09] and zoning designations around the property include industrial, light industrial commercial
[1:51:16] and public institutional for Bradley Park.
[1:51:20] The General Plan amendment and rezone would amend the General Plan land use map and zoning
[1:51:24] map to the proposed specific plan area designation.
[1:51:27] The entitlements also include approval of a new specific plan called specific plan.
[1:51:36] This document will serve as the primary land use policy and regulatory document for
[1:51:42] the project by providing a development planning review process.
[1:51:46] This specific plan allows for multi-family residential, it up to 6.9 units per acre or on
[1:51:54] up to 40% of the project site.
[1:51:57] At least 60% of the site shall be preserved as natural open space.
[1:52:03] The specific plan includes development and design guidelines.
[1:52:09] And it is attached in the staff report in your packet.
[1:52:13] It's in a, you might have noticed it's in a strikeout and underlying format to show how
[1:52:18] the draft specific plan was revised to accommodate the 220-unit project instead of the originally
[1:52:25] submitted 449-unit project.
[1:52:35] A tentative subdivision map is requested by the applicant to create two development parcels
[1:52:40] and one open space parcel from the existing four lots.
[1:52:45] Lot 1 is approximately 5.5 acres and will have 116 units.
[1:52:50] Lot 2 is about 4.1 acres with 112 condominiums and Lot A is approximately 23.5 acres and will
[1:52:58] be preserved and managed as natural open space.
[1:53:00] Under
[1:53:04] the multi-family site development plan, the project design was reviewed for compliance
[1:53:13] with the development standards of the specific plan and the zoning ordinance.
[1:53:18] The SDP addresses the design of residential condominium units, associated private and
[1:53:24] common open space, and amenities on site, and the review of floor plans and architectural
[1:53:29] elevations.
[1:53:31] The two three and four bedroom units are spread throughout 32 three story buildings with
[1:53:37] row homes on lot one and Velas on lot two.
[1:53:41] The project includes amenities such as tart lots, play areas, a pool and spa and barbecue
[1:53:46] and picnic areas.
[1:53:49] Each unit is designed with an attached to car garage and 76 un-inclosed guest parking spaces
[1:53:56] are also provided throughout the site.
[1:53:58] The site is accessed by one driveway on Pacific Street and one central driveway on Lenda
[1:54:05] Vista Drive.
[1:54:06] An emergency access is provided at the eastern end of the project on Lenda Vista Drive
[1:54:11] as well.
[1:54:13] As part of this project, an existing bus stop on the project side of Flasposas will be enhanced
[1:54:19] and relocated slightly to the south.
[1:54:25] The falling slides show some of the renderings of the project which depict Spanish minute
[1:54:30] to train inspired architecture.
[1:54:32] The slide shows some of the colored renderings
[1:54:34] of the Rooms on lot one.
[1:54:37] Two different but similar color schemes are proposed.
[1:54:41] Exterior materials include colored stucco,
[1:54:44] and tile ropes, and enhancement includes
[1:54:47] fibers, cement, window trams, decorative shudders,
[1:54:51] part shelves, et cetera.
[1:54:55] This is a rendering of the Villa's product,
[1:54:57] which is gonna be a lot too.
[1:54:58] So, this, um,
[1:55:00] Product also has two different but similar color schemes with similar exterior materials and enhancements. All the buildings are three stories and 40 feet in height, which complies with this specific plan requirements.
[1:55:19] Landscaping throughout the project will consist of a mixture of trees, shrubs and ground cover to enhance the proposed buildings along the project frontage as well as interior to the site. A total of 275 trees will be planted,
[1:55:33] which includes 44 trees within the right of way.
[1:55:36] Three centrally located recreation areas are proposed,
[1:55:40] and an aggressive protocol access agreement
[1:55:43] between last one and two will be recorded.
[1:55:46] All onsite landscaping will be privately maintained,
[1:55:51] but landscaping within the city's right
[1:55:52] will be maintained by the city.
[1:55:57] A public workshop was held for the project on June 22, 2022.
[1:56:02] comments received regarding the project's compatibility with existing surrounding
[1:56:08] uses the desire to focus the project on the eastern portion of the site and
[1:56:12] potential competition for streets parking. In response the project is buffered
[1:56:18] from existing uses by existing roads and on-site open space. The project's
[1:56:23] location on the site is dictated and part by sensitive habitat and parking is
[1:56:28] provided consistent with the city's zoning ordinance and the proposed 45 foot height limit
[1:56:33] is equal to or in some instances lower than the height allowed on surrounding properties.
[1:56:41] In accordance with CEQA, an EIR was prepared for the project.
[1:56:45] The draft EIR was circulated for public review for 45 days from March 2 to April 17, 2023.
[1:56:52] The EIR evaluated the original project proposal of 449 units on approximately 46% of the
[1:57:00] project site. During the public review period a number of comments were received by the
[1:57:05] city and a full response to all comments has been provided in the final EIR. The majority
[1:57:11] of the comments focused on the sensitive habitat on site and suggestions that modifications
[1:57:16] to the project or mitigation measures be considered.
[1:57:23] The project site includes the largest remaining
[1:57:26] Vurnal pool complex in the city and the largest remaining non-conserved native grassland.
[1:57:34] The site is occupied with several special status plant and animal species.
[1:57:39] These include state endangered threat left, threat-leaved Bridea and Vurnal pools occupied
[1:57:45] with the federally listed endangered celliego shrimp.
[1:57:49] As you can see from the slides, reasonable development of the site will impact special status
[1:57:55] species.
[1:58:13] Sorry, I got ahead of myself. The US Fish and Wildlife Service commented on the EIR
[1:58:19] notice of preparation and the draft EIR that the final EIR include an alternative that limits
[1:58:25] impact to no more than 25% of the site and restricts development to the southernmost third of the site.
[1:58:32] Limiting development to this area and the size would avoid direct impacts to most of the
[1:58:37] The California Department of Fish and Wildlife commented on the EIR's notice of preparation
[1:58:42] and EIR and include at least one alternative, ask for at least one alternative design
[1:58:48] that limits development to no more than 25% of the site and prioritise impacts to
[1:58:54] vulnerable pools and protea.
[1:58:57] They also commented and made suggestions on the proposed mitigation measures.
[1:59:01] Given
[1:59:08] the biological constraints and in response to comments received from U.S.
[1:59:12] Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service,
[1:59:16] the applicant added a 220-28-unit alternative to the final EIR on approximately 29% of the site.
[1:59:25] This alternative is a modification to a reduced alternative provided in the draft EIR
[1:59:31] and it is identified as the environmentally superior alternative.
[1:59:36] The applicant revised the mitigation measures for clarity and to ensure appropriate mitigation
[1:59:42] will occur as a result of project impacts.
[1:59:45] Supplemental analysis for the 220-unit project is provided in the final AIR to justify
[1:59:50] that the environmental impacts are same or less than the 449-unit project.
[1:59:56] The SDP Subdivision Member F.
[2:00:00] In the specific plan were revised to reflect the proposed 228-unit project.
[2:00:06] The 228-unit project is consistent with the original 449-unit draft EIR project and the mitigation measures provided in the EIR for the original project are applicable and apply to the revised 228-unit project. Staff is recommending approval of this environmentally superior alternative, which is consistent with the EIR.
[2:00:31] as it eliminates impacts to vulnerable pools,
[2:00:34] occupied with San Diego Ferry shrimp,
[2:00:36] and conserves more open space
[2:00:38] by reducing the development footprint.
[2:00:44] The project EIA provides several mitigation measures
[2:00:47] to address air quality, biological and cultural resources,
[2:00:52] geology and soils.
[2:00:53] The mitigation measures for most of these categories
[2:00:56] are routine in nature, and all impacts have been determined
[2:00:59] to be less than significant after mitigation.
[2:01:02] The biological mitigation measures have been developed to provide appropriate mitigation
[2:01:09] specific to the unique nature of the site.
[2:01:12] These require the prior to land disturbance, several mitigation monitoring and management
[2:01:17] plans be finalized and approved by the applicable resource agencies during the regulatory permitting
[2:01:24] process.
[2:01:25] Including a translocation of BRDAS species to preservation areas of the site, occupied
[2:01:31] Varno Pooz will be avoided with the implementation of the 28-unit project.
[2:01:37] And additionally, the natural open space is required to be managed in perpetuity by developer-funded
[2:01:44] endowment or other funding mechanism as approved by the city.
[2:01:50] Next, Kairin, Chua with the city's land development engineering will discuss the project's transportation analysis.
[2:01:56] The
[2:02:03] project's transportation analysis consists of both
[2:02:05] double service analysis to ensure consistency with the city's general plan and
[2:02:11] vehicle miles traveled BMT analysis to determine transportation impacts for
[2:02:16] CEQA. The project's local transportation analysis concluded that the project
[2:02:22] anticipates to generate 1,368 average daily trips with 109 a.m.
[2:02:29] and peak our trips and 123 PM peak our trips.
[2:02:33] In accordance with the city's mobility element of the general plan and its goals, intersections
[2:02:38] and road segments should operate at a level of service of D or better, and per the city's
[2:02:43] transportation impact analysis guidelines.
[2:02:46] Improvements are needed if the project increases intersection delay by more than two seconds
[2:02:51] or increases road segment volume to capacity ratio by more than 0.02.
[2:02:56] 2. If the intersection or road segment already operates at an unacceptable level of service.
[2:03:04] For both near term 2025 and horizon year 2050, without project scenario, both of the intersections
[2:03:11] of Via Veracruz, Grand Avenue and State Route 78 Eastbound Ramps and Linda Vista Drive
[2:03:17] Pacific and Pacific Street, operate at an unacceptable level of service. The project adds
[2:03:23] That's more than two seconds of delay to these intersections and is required for the intersection
[2:03:30] of Viavera Cruz, Grand Avenue, and State Route 78 Eastbound Ramps to pay a fair share
[2:03:35] contribution to construct a dedicated southbound right turn lane.
[2:03:39] And for the intersection of Lindevista Drive and Pacific Street, the project is required
[2:03:44] to construct a traffic signal system, additionally to anticipate cumulative project traffic impact
[2:03:52] Citywide, the project will participate in the congestion management CFD.
[2:03:58] To improve the surrounding pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and to enhance connectivity,
[2:04:04] the project is constructing on La Marata between Pacific Street and Las Posas Road, a new
[2:04:09] sidewalk and a class for bicycle facility.
[2:04:13] The existing on-street parking will remain with these proposed improvements.
[2:04:21] On Pacific Street between Linda Vista Drive and La Marata Drive, the project will
[2:04:25] will construct a new sidewalk and a class to buffered bicycle facility, similarly existing
[2:04:31] on-street parking will remain with these proposed improvements. Lastly, on Linda Vista
[2:04:37] drive between Pacific Street and Las Posas Road, the project will construct a new sidewalk
[2:04:42] class for bicycle facility in addition to a class to buffered bicycle facility, these pedestrian
[2:04:48] and bicycle improvements enhance connectivity.
[2:04:52] In the project's VMT screening assessment, the project did not require a VMT analysis as
[2:04:58] the project is located in the VMT-based system.
[2:05:00] We did an A&N green VMT efficient area based on the VMT screening map. Therefore, the project's transportation impacts is less than significant.
[2:05:16] Since the project is proposing to change the land use designation from industrial to specific plan area for essential uses, fiscal and economic impact studies for prepared to evaluate the benefits and impacts of such a change. In the studies prepared by DTA, the proposed project was compared to a hypothetical industrial research and development project.
[2:05:37] project under the current industrial zoning designation.
[2:05:41] Generally speaking, fiscal impact studies look at cities' revenue such as taxes, licenses
[2:05:47] and permits, and also look at expenditures such as public safety, public works, etc.
[2:05:53] The fiscal study for the project estimates that the project would result in a recurring
[2:05:58] fiscal surplus of approximately $133,000 to the city's general fund as compared to approximately
[2:06:05] $536,000 if the site was developed with the hypothetical industrial project.
[2:06:18] Economic impact studies typically look at how much benefit the development would bring
[2:06:22] to the area based on economic output such as sales and employment.
[2:06:27] The study for the project estimates the recurring output to the city would be about $6.5 million
[2:06:32] compared to approximately $87 million for the hypothetical industrial project.
[2:06:37] The one time economic output resulting from construction of the projects are also indicated
[2:06:43] on this slide.
[2:06:45] The project site has not been developed under the current non-residential zoning and
[2:06:50] is unlikely to be developed with a non-residential use mainly due to biological site constraints
[2:06:57] and trending economic conditions where there is a greater demand for residential units than
[2:07:03] the need for industrial space.
[2:07:04] The city's consultant is available tonight if you have any questions specific to these studies.
[2:07:14] Prior to the Planning Commission hearing, additional comments were received by the city.
[2:07:19] A letter from California Department of Fish and Wildlife requests further revisions to the
[2:07:23] final EIR and mitigation measures. This letter in a specific response is provided in the packet
[2:07:29] and was presented to the Planning Commission. The response from the project's
[2:07:34] biologists outlines why the final EIR and mitigation measures address the comments provided
[2:07:40] by CDFW.
[2:07:42] This includes that the project is required to obtain approval of a rare plant, transplant
[2:07:47] plan, rental pools mitigation plan, habitat mitigation monitoring plan, preserve management plan
[2:07:54] and other regulatory permits from the resource agencies prior to project construction.
[2:07:58] The comments from the Western State's regional council of carpenters reiterated comments previously provided on local labor and training.
[2:08:08] New comments included that the AIR be revised and recirculated since the AIR lacks a stable and finite project description.
[2:08:16] And since alternatives added increased biological impacts.
[2:08:19] In response, the project analysed in the final EIR has remained consistent with the draft EIR.
[2:08:26] The alternatives added were modifications of the project or project alternative.
[2:08:31] No new significant impacts are identified with the added alternatives and the mitigation measures provided are appropriate and effective to mitigate impacts.
[2:08:41] The EIR project and alternatives to a level of less than significance.
[2:08:47] Furthermore, although the city does not require the use of local labor, the project has a condition
[2:08:52] that the developer first considers San Marcos workers and businesses for materials and
[2:08:56] labor.
[2:08:58] The letter from NCTD requested that the relocated and improved bus stop meet their standards
[2:09:04] and in response, the project is conditioned to require such approval from NCTD and the
[2:09:09] city.
[2:09:10] comments from a nearby property owner reiterated comments previously provided earlier in the project
[2:09:16] review opposing the land use change from industrial to residential and expressing concerns on traffic
[2:09:22] impacting truck deliveries to the industrial area, potential parking issues, loud noises and crime
[2:09:29] affecting industrial property values. In response, the project site has remained vacant under the
[2:09:35] existing industrial zoning and is unlikely to be developed with industrial use due in
[2:09:41] part to habitat constraints and market demand. The residential use would likely result in less
[2:09:48] average daily trips than an industrial one. Onside parking is provided for the specific plan and
[2:09:54] the municipal code and truck deliveries to existing and future surrounding businesses.
[2:10:00] We'll be able to continue with this residential project.
[2:10:08] The Planning Commission heard the project on June 17. A representative from the Western State's Regional Council of Carpenters spoke and requested the city require use of local force labor force and required training for a safe workplace. The Planning Commissioners asked clarifying questions related to requirement of local labor, accessible units, open space conservation, and resource agencies
[2:10:34] permitting process.
[2:10:36] Staff and the applicant answered the questions and then the planning commission voted six to
[2:10:41] zero to recommend certification of the EIR and approval of the project.
[2:10:48] In summary, the project is consistent with the general plan land use, housing and conservation
[2:10:53] open space goals and policies.
[2:10:56] It provides needed housing in the city.
[2:10:59] The vacant site would be developed with housing near public transit and employment opportunities.
[2:11:04] properties. The project will construct frontage improvements that include urban trails on
[2:11:09] La Marada Drive and Linda Vista. And finally, approximately 70% of the site containing
[2:11:14] high-value biological resources will be preserved and managed as national open space as a result
[2:11:20] of the project.
[2:11:23] Staff is therefore recommending that the City Council
[2:11:26] certify the final EIR and approve the requested entitlements as outlined on this slide.
[2:11:31] and this concludes our presentation.
[2:11:34] Thank you.
[2:11:37] Thank you so much, Seema.
[2:11:39] Do we have any questions of staff?
[2:11:41] We actually have a presentation also from the developer.
[2:11:47] Well, Sam, it's good to see you.
[2:11:50] You know, it's funny, I took a note here
[2:11:52] on the fiscal impact study and I ask this question
[2:11:55] every time we have on these projects.
[2:11:57] I always hit Joe up.
[2:11:59] We're talking about the potential and will the income
[2:12:02] that we assume we'll realize 133,000 versus the potential income if it was to remain in its current zoning status of 536,000.
[2:12:12] Is that estimate based on the percentage of the land, the 23 acres, that are going to be left open,
[2:12:20] or is it just that proportional amount that's going to be used, because then it would skew those numbers?
[2:12:25] And then I guess, the obvious question is, do we have anyone coming in with light industrial
[2:12:32] real plans that they could use the entirety of that property?
[2:12:37] To answer the end of your question first, no, we've had nobody come in, and even if
[2:12:43] someone did, they'd be in the same situation as the applicant, they wouldn't be able to
[2:12:46] use the entirety of the project due to the biological constraints.
[2:12:51] In terms of the analysis for the fiscal analysis, our consultant uses a hypothetical based on
[2:13:00] those constraints to come up with a rough square footage of what likely industrial type
[2:13:07] building would be located on the site.
[2:13:11] And I think it was something like 300,000 square feet and then parking garage, and that's
[2:13:17] kind of what they used to put together their calculations for those fees.
[2:13:21] So they use the applicants proposal effectively as the model for of the available acreage.
[2:13:27] This is what you're allowed to use.
[2:13:29] Yes.
[2:13:29] Right.
[2:13:29] Okay.
[2:13:30] Thank you.
[2:13:30] And just to follow up because I had a second part of my question on that, in that hypothetical,
[2:13:37] does it also include the monitoring and the preservation of the habitat space?
[2:13:43] No.
[2:13:44] That included.
[2:13:45] All right.
[2:13:45] So it's a, it would be a loss of the habitat space and it would not include the monitoring or I'm
[2:13:52] starting out the monitoring, but the actual care of that, the management of that space.
[2:13:58] Okay. Any other questions of staff? Okay. Deputy Mayor.
[2:14:06] Okay. Let's see. I was writing as you were talking. I was a little confused.
[2:14:11] Why did City of Curlsbad comment on page 4?
[2:14:19] They had questions regarding the transportation analysis in the study area
[2:14:27] And that they requested that the project expand the study area to see if there was any
[2:14:33] impacts to the city limits in Carlsbad.
[2:14:37] The city limits as out in I believe
[2:14:41] as a business park.
[2:14:43] Yeah, the St. Marklesville of Arta Palma Airport Road.
[2:14:47] Okay.
[2:14:48] Okay.
[2:14:50] And then the city landscape portion that was mentioned
[2:14:55] and that will be needed on some of the roadway areas.
[2:15:00] Will that be a CFD that we will be covered on that, or how is that going to happen? That's correct. The applicant will have to pay into a CFD. Okay. And then, let's see. And this wasn't mentioned, but I believe this is the case. Nothing can happen on that site until the applicant gets the environmental approvals. That's correct. Okay.
[2:15:30] And then who manages the open space, it's already been discussed.
[2:15:38] We're not managing that, correct?
[2:15:40] No, currently it's not being managed, and it's being degraded.
[2:15:46] Correct, but I mean, who will manage that?
[2:15:48] That'll be determined as part of the regulatory process,
[2:15:52] so there'll be a conservancy, like a San Diego Conservancy,
[2:15:56] your fallbook land conservancy and they will manage it in perpetuity and be paid through
[2:16:01] an endowment established by the applicant.
[2:16:04] Okay.
[2:16:04] What happens if that endowment runs out, or can it not run out?
[2:16:09] It can't run out because it is the way these funds are set up now.
[2:16:16] They're set up through like a banking system so the money isn't managed through the conservancy.
[2:16:22] It's managed through the San Diego Foundation as one example, so they will manage the money, fund it, and that money will remain in perpetuity.
[2:16:34] Okay. And then I think it mentioned 76 EV chargers, or I might not have that number right.
[2:16:44] Do you want to ask these questions of the applicant they might know?
[2:16:47] Yeah, I think it was 24, but yeah, the applicant can confirm.
[2:16:49] Okay. Are the garages pre-wired for EV chargers or just the 24 out?
[2:16:57] No, they would need to be pre-wired.
[2:16:59] They have to be.
[2:17:00] Okay. And then can you explain about the vernal pools because when you hear
[2:17:09] vernal pools you think water, and there's no water out there, is this just when it rains
[2:17:18] then if that's the reason to maintain and preserve the
[2:17:24] Vernal Pools? Yes, as a nonbiologist there's depressions in the ground there
[2:17:30] and when it rains they feel and and there's very shrimp that are in there
[2:17:38] and they're right now dormant but when it rains they come to life so to speak.
[2:17:43] So, I'll let the applicants, you know, biologists expand on that, but they can provide you a pretty detailed explanation of how those
[2:17:54] cavernal pools work and operate.
[2:17:56] And just to confirm, I think there was a comment made that the industrial or the R&D use would create a significant
[2:18:05] amount of more traffic than what we would experience with this project.
[2:18:11] We create more traffic.
[2:18:13] Okay.
[2:18:14] Thank you.
[2:18:17] Any other questions?
[2:18:20] Okay.
[2:18:20] All right.
[2:18:21] The applicant then now can come up.
[2:18:25] Pacific's strategically located walkable and filled development.
[2:18:29] Welcome.
[2:18:33] Good evening.
[2:18:34] My name is Greg Wait and I represent the applicant tonight.
[2:18:38] Mayor Jones, City Council members, I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight on behalf of this project.
[2:18:43] And I'd like to think a moment to recognize staff, both engineering and planning for
[2:18:50] all their hard work to get to this point.
[2:18:51] It's been a bit of a long road, as you can imagine, with the biological constraints and
[2:18:56] the input that we received, so we're appreciative of the efforts to get here.
[2:19:00] So thank you.
[2:19:02] What you see in front of you tonight is the result of an extensively examined and refined plan.
[2:19:09] and that's a result of input from the city,
[2:19:11] from the wildlife agencies, and from the public.
[2:19:16] The project is centrally located in San Marcos.
[2:19:20] It's adjacent to or nearby Highway 78
[2:19:23] and close to I-15 access.
[2:19:26] It's located within proximity to schools,
[2:19:29] colleges, restaurants, shopping, entertainment,
[2:19:31] public parks, it's basically the epitome
[2:19:34] of a perfect infill location.
[2:19:37] It's one of the very few projects and locations in the city that's remaining to be developed
[2:19:42] that falls within the VMT compliant area.
[2:19:45] So there's no overriding consideration requested for this project.
[2:19:50] Some of the barriers to development that we've encountered were known going in.
[2:19:55] The biological constraints are one of the reasons why this site has not developed.
[2:20:00] In the 61 plus years that the city has been incorporated, this has been an industrial site. It's been through probably 10, 11, 12 real estate cycles with no applications coming forward to the city as I understand it. Everyone that's taken a look at this project has basically seen the biological constraints and they've run, run away. It's a difficult project for an industrial developer to try to make sense of.
[2:20:27] They don't have the time or the patience,
[2:20:29] nor the financial fortitude to go through the process
[2:20:32] to be able to preserve 70 plus percent of the site
[2:20:36] for biological purposes.
[2:20:39] So that's one of the reasons why the development makes sense
[2:20:43] as residential, and it's been slowly deteriorating over time
[2:20:47] from a series of things.
[2:20:51] Trespassing, illegal dumping, off-road vehicle intrusion,
[2:20:55] and sometimes for the July viewers parking out there.
[2:20:59] And so, you know, the biological preservation
[2:21:03] is really important out here
[2:21:04] and it's something that we take very seriously.
[2:21:06] And it is one of the largest non-conserved areas
[2:21:09] within the city limits that we intend to solve that problem.
[2:21:14] And so, we're done a great deal of community outreach
[2:21:19] on this project.
[2:21:19] We've had a lot of meetings with the wildlife agencies.
[2:21:24] We began engaging with them in 2020.
[2:21:28] We've spoken with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[2:21:30] at length.
[2:21:32] U.S. Army Corps, we've touched bases with them.
[2:21:34] We've invited CDFW to a multitude of meetings.
[2:21:37] And we've communicated through staff
[2:21:39] through the entire process in hearing from them
[2:21:42] along the way.
[2:21:43] And we've engaged business leaders in the area
[2:21:45] to inform them of the project details
[2:21:47] and gain feedback from them as well.
[2:21:49] Well, San Mark has unified school district is obviously a great school system, but they've
[2:21:57] had declining enrollment recently.
[2:21:59] And our project will help to address the declining enrollment issue there.
[2:22:03] It will help to pay into school fees for the maintenance and ongoing health of the school
[2:22:10] district.
[2:22:11] And it will help with student generation rates.
[2:22:16] The development siding, as you heard from staff, was moved around a little bit as a result
[2:22:21] of our research and discussions with the biological agencies.
[2:22:26] And this is a pretty good map, and I want to address one of the council members' questions
[2:22:30] regarding vernal pools.
[2:22:32] So there are several different icons up there that are difficult to identify, but there are
[2:22:39] Our Vernal pools that are occupied with San Diego Ferris Shrimp, which is a federally endangered
[2:22:44] species, there are Vernal pools occupied with different ferris shrimp, which aren't necessarily
[2:22:48] federally endangered, and there are Vernal pools that have no species in them whatsoever.
[2:22:54] So we have an impact to a few Vernal pools, but those Vernal pools are not occupied with
[2:22:58] any of the listed species.
[2:23:01] So we will be seeking a permit through the CDFW, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service will
[2:23:06] not be the lead agency on the biological permits on this because of the avoidance that we've
[2:23:10] gone through. I think that's important. The other thing relative to the water question
[2:23:16] was this site is not receiving water from anywhere off site. So the only water that gets
[2:23:21] to this site is by natural rainfall. And there's been enough of it in recent years for us to
[2:23:27] go out and do extensive studies of this site. And we have exhaustively researched and followed
[2:23:33] protocol surveys to identify the species that are there and we're avoiding them to the extent that the US Fish and Wildlife Service requested that we do and move the proper project to the southern portion of the site.
[2:23:44] We started with 449 units and we are now nearly half that.
[2:23:51] So but in the process of going through that we have also continued to offer up the connectivity that the city wants
[2:24:02] to see in the in the form of trails and sidewalks and we've worked with city
[2:24:08] engineering to utilize the new city trail system design guidelines for what we're
[2:24:14] doing and we we want to address to the existing uses that are surrounding the
[2:24:22] site some of those are industrial we had one resident or one business owner
[2:24:27] write a letter to us regarding the surrounding uses and it's important to note
[2:24:31] that the buyers that this particular development will be receiving disclosures via the CCNRs
[2:24:38] and the purchase documents to ensure that the residents coming in are informed about the
[2:24:43] existing surrounding uses and that those those existing uses have the right to continue
[2:24:48] and they will not only be conveyed to the buyers of the first time but they'll be conveyed to
[2:24:53] additional buyers and perpetuity. So the public will be well informed regarding the existing uses.
[2:24:58] I'm standing.
[2:25:00] Half went through the public improvements, but I think it's important to touch on them again. The trail system and connectivity on all four sides is something that we value, and I know the city values also. We will be providing a four way traffic signal at Pacific and Las Posas. An enhanced bus stop, including a bench bus shelter in trash can where there's currently just a poll with a sign on it, and there'll be a turnout there too for the buses. And we'll be extending the median along Las Posas with
[2:25:29] landscaping in it, and that will help set up the turn pocket lane onto Linda Vista.
[2:25:37] And this site has not developed as industrial for a long time because of all these constraints related primarily to biology.
[2:25:46] And this project will bring substantial tax and sales tax revenue to the city.
[2:25:51] It will help the school district.
[2:25:53] It provides workforce housing within a three mile radius of some of North County's largest business centers,
[2:25:58] including San Marcos, Vista, and Carlsbad, and it's one of the last remaining vacant properties
[2:26:03] in a definable infill area. So it's very walkable. There's grocery and retail and restaurants across
[2:26:09] the way at Grand Plaza. You've got Bradley Park adjacent and then we've got ample amenities,
[2:26:18] recreation amenities on site. We're formally preserving the resources with long-term management
[2:26:24] and perpetuity. We're helping the city achieve its goals of bicycle and pedestrian connectivity.
[2:26:31] We're improving access to public transportation, providing that new four-way signal.
[2:26:36] It's going to have the high visibility crosswalks, which will make it safer for pedestrian access,
[2:26:41] bicycle movement, increased tax revenue to the city, more housing choices in a walkable area,
[2:26:47] and the prevention of illegal dumping and degradation of bile resources
[2:26:50] are all some of the reasons why you should support this project.
[2:26:55] This last graphic depicts the amount of open space, and it's really hard to wrap your head around what this means as a project to a developer.
[2:27:04] But it's very difficult to make projects work in California as it stands.
[2:27:09] And to set aside this much biological open space shows a true commitment by the developer to really work with the city to make something that can be viable long term.
[2:27:19] So we really look forward to seeing this project come forward and
[2:27:24] Just like to again point out the entrances the main entry is on the center of Linda Vista mid block
[2:27:31] And then the second entrance is on Pacific Street both of those of our full-term movement entries
[2:27:37] so
[2:27:38] I thank you all for the opportunity to speak tonight and if you have any questions
[2:27:43] All right, thank you any questions from the council
[2:27:46] Just real quickly and for disclosure we met yesterday with the applicant and the consultant and we did talk about and it kind of dovetails with what Carol Gandell asked earlier about in lieu fees versus the 15% housing.
[2:28:02] Are you able to discuss that the situation, but the project as proposed?
[2:28:07] Yeah, I think this graphic is really kind of tells a story about that.
[2:28:12] You know, we started out with a project of 449 units, it had a variety of different
[2:28:17] housing types and sizes and through the discussions with the wildlife agencies to whom we have
[2:28:23] to apply for a permit, it was made clear to us that that wasn't going to fly with them,
[2:28:28] that they weren't going to be able to allow us to move forward with that plan.
[2:28:32] And so we were strongly suggested and advised to reduce the project footprint and move it to the south.
[2:28:41] And in so doing, we opted for this plan to be able to do all the other things that the city was asking to do and to provide all the connectivity in the infrastructure improvements.
[2:28:54] So this project will be contributing just over $2 million in lieu fees to the city.
[2:29:00] and those fees will be married up with other fees and utilized to help the city's
[2:29:09] efforts to build new affordable housing. That money also gets expanded by
[2:29:13] grant money and matching dollars that makes it expand to beyond that initial
[2:29:18] total. So we feel strongly that this is a project that addresses the affordable
[2:29:25] housing concerns through that in Luffy and it's a great balance between all
[2:29:30] All of the things that are constraining the site and have constrained the site for 60 plus years.
[2:29:35] Thank you.
[2:29:37] All right, Council member, Tamella, sorry.
[2:29:41] Thank you.
[2:29:42] Thank you, Mr. Wait.
[2:29:45] This site, yeah, I kind of live kind of in that part of town and drive passes the site frequently,
[2:29:53] usually on the weekends, as I'm just out and about doing my errands.
[2:29:57] and traffic's not so bad there.
[2:30:00] On the weekends, but there's been a couple of times I've taken Linda Vista, right about time the high school is getting out. And I think one of the biggest benefits that you're bringing to this area is that is that traffic light. Because every single card currently has to stop. And that traffic backs up almost to Rancho Santa Fe when you're when you're heading east. And I think having a light that's controlling the traffic pattern in that area is going to make a huge difference.
[2:30:29] I really also like one of the aspects of this piece of property, this footprint, is missing today, is the walkability and the bikeability around the entire perimeter, and you're bringing that to an area that doesn't currently have that, and I think that's going to be a huge enhancement for the folks that ride there by some walk in this area, and it's going to open up the walking path between the park, between the residents on Rancho Santa Fe
[2:30:58] to bring a safer route for them to go to the shopping that you mentioned earlier at Grand Plaza.
[2:31:04] And it's all kind of coming together, right?
[2:31:07] There's so much to like about this project that, you know, the environmental piece of it.
[2:31:13] But it's very rarely that we have a project before us where it's a win-win.
[2:31:19] We're helping, you know, solve and meet our challenges with our housing needs.
[2:31:25] But the environment's winning in this situation.
[2:31:27] You can look at this graphic that you have up right now, and you can see there's
[2:31:32] unauthorized trail systems already established through there, right? And as you mentioned, there's folks that dump there, and they drive on the land there.
[2:31:41] And all of that is destroying the habitat, the protected habitat that's there, and you are proposing not only to not develop on it, I understand that that's not my choice.
[2:31:53] But you're you're gonna protect it and and you're gonna protect it forever and so this is really truly a win-win for
[2:32:00] our housing needs and the environment so
[2:32:03] Just I can go on but I really think this is the right project in the right area on the right piece of land
[2:32:09] So thank you for putting so much thought into this
[2:32:12] Development thank you and the bike lanes that are adjacent to the park to the new bike park. Yeah, that's a good park too
[2:32:19] Okay, deputy mayor. Yes
[2:32:22] Yes, a couple of questions.
[2:32:25] So I don't think this is, oh, I do want to disclose, I'm meant with the applicant and
[2:32:31] the consultant last week, so I want that on the record.
[2:32:35] I don't think this has been mentioned, but can you explain to us how you're going to preserve
[2:32:40] that open space so nobody can no longer walk on it?
[2:32:44] Yes, we attempted initially to have a trail that kind of worked with the existing sort
[2:32:52] of one of the ex-patterns that runs through it and the wildlife agencies really did not want that
[2:32:59] and they admonished us for trying but we tried. But the project will have a fence around it.
[2:33:08] So the development footprint that you see will be fenced from the open space and then the perimeter
[2:33:13] of the entire property will be fenced also with tubular steel fencing. There will be gates at certain
[2:33:19] points throughout the open space area for the biological management folks to go in
[2:33:24] and do their surveys and management and you know check up on the status of the habitat.
[2:33:30] And there will be likely a monitoring period that occurs after the mitigation has occurred
[2:33:37] to be sure that it has successfully taken and the mitigation was done appropriately.
[2:33:45] And then at some point in the future the agencies will buy off and the endowment will take
[2:33:49] over. The endowment gets funded early and so you brought up some questions about whether
[2:33:53] that would run out. Because the endowment is funded around the time of the final map
[2:33:58] issue and prior to ground disturbance, there's a period of time that occurs where that endowment
[2:34:03] fund is gaining dollars through the management company that's handling those funds that have
[2:34:09] been deposited. And so there's a lift there that occurs with no expense until the developer
[2:34:14] So that's another good contribution, if you will, to the endowment that is received while the applicant and while the developer are maintaining it.
[2:34:26] Thank you. I think it's good to mention about the fence because when you see open space and people are no longer able to walk on it and they see this fence go up.
[2:34:38] that's a little bit uneasy for some people.
[2:34:42] It's basically because of the wildlife agencies.
[2:34:45] Yeah, and this has been touted as one of the areas that the wildlife agencies really want
[2:34:51] to see preserved.
[2:34:52] They recognize that it's degrading.
[2:34:54] They recognize that there's a legal activity on it and they really know that there needs
[2:34:57] to be a development to be able to put forward.
[2:35:00] The endowment to, and the preservation and perpetuity to allow the, the species to endure. And that's what the, the project is proposing to do. I did want to ask if I answered the question appropriately on vernal pools that you would ask earlier. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And then I have another comment, maybe question. So I understand that the disclosure about nearby industrial area is going to be in the CCRs.
[2:35:27] I would really like them to be a disclosure in the HOA documents.
[2:35:33] Yeah, I mentioned it will be in the sales documents also.
[2:35:35] Okay, but I mean, when you say sales, I think sales to a buyer, but I'm talking about HOA documents for the community.
[2:35:45] So that when future buyers come in, it's obviously, it's obvious it's an industrial area, but issues come up with disclosure.
[2:35:54] So I think I think it should be in the HOA documents.
[2:35:59] Okay, we can definitely add that.
[2:36:00] Yeah, and I just really like, and I know this has already been mentioned, but I really
[2:36:07] like the walkability because you can go to the grocery store.
[2:36:11] You can walk to shop, you can walk to eat, you can walk to school, and maybe some of these
[2:36:17] people will walk to work nearby.
[2:36:20] Yeah, hopefully.
[2:36:20] I think that's a huge component of this, so I think that's all I have.
[2:36:26] Thank you.
[2:36:28] Thank you, Greg.
[2:36:30] Okay, so I actually agree with Deputy Mayor.
[2:36:34] I think having, actually having it in HOA documents and the CCNRs would be important.
[2:36:41] I, oh, when I did, for the record, I did meet with the developer and the consultant.
[2:36:47] So the bus stop, the NCTD bus stop, who's going to maintain that?
[2:36:53] And I'm glad that you're not just putting up that little tiny sign.
[2:36:56] Most people, if it's hot out, they want to sit.
[2:37:00] So who's going to maintain that?
[2:37:02] That's a public facility, so that'll be maintained by whatever the current city's public facilities fee is.
[2:37:09] But the project will be participating in the public facilities CFD.
[2:37:14] So we will be providing dollars for that, for trail maintenance, park maintenance, all
[2:37:19] of those things.
[2:37:20] I don't know exactly how the city currently funds the maintenance on those, but it's in
[2:37:24] the public right of way.
[2:37:26] And that would then be something that would be responsibility of the city or NCTD.
[2:37:31] I don't know exactly who manages those.
[2:37:33] Maybe Joe, you can answer that.
[2:37:34] No, no.
[2:37:35] Joe.
[2:37:36] It'll be NCTD who will take care of their shelter.
[2:37:39] Okay.
[2:37:40] All right.
[2:37:40] Okay.
[2:37:41] Good to know.
[2:37:41] And then, so I remember you guys told me that there is about two million dollars towards schools and
[2:37:50] that about 2.3 in Loufee's, which goes toward housing, and this is actually for staff and that is,
[2:38:00] so if it was industrial, it is a much lower amount towards schools, I think, and then no in Loufee's, correct?
[2:38:09] If it were to build us industrial.
[2:38:12] Yeah, that's my understanding. Definitely no in loofies.
[2:38:16] Yeah, okay. And then let's see, oh the management.
[2:38:25] Yeah, so you're going to fence it on the inside and the outside.
[2:38:29] So no one can get access to it.
[2:38:31] Yeah, the development side between the development and the open space
[2:38:35] will not have gates that go into the open space area.
[2:38:38] the gates will all be on the perimeter for the biologists to go through there so they're
[2:38:41] not coming in and parking within the community to do their surveys so and we're making sure
[2:38:48] that the residents don't just meander out there into the open space right that's really what the
[2:38:54] wildlife agencies want to see and and just for the public to on the habitat space it actually gets
[2:39:01] replanted. So all the shrubs that have been run over by cars and whatnot, it actually gets restored to a better state than it actually is today.
[2:39:12] So it'll look after.
[2:39:14] That's correct. There's enhancement. There's translocation of the species that are impacted by the development.
[2:39:20] We're anticipating that occurs on site in some of those areas that are currently run over and not currently occupied by some other biological
[2:39:30] you know, the species that we're trying to avoid also.
[2:39:33] So it's a very complex site from a biological perspective,
[2:39:38] but we have experts here that have helped us every step
[2:39:41] of the way and, you know, we do have to go through the process
[2:39:44] with the CDFW for obtaining the state permit.
[2:39:47] So that's a whole other thing that happens
[2:39:49] after tonight's action.
[2:39:52] And just wanted to iterate that too.
[2:39:54] You cannot build one, you can't build one thing
[2:39:59] if it's not...
[2:40:00] We'll actually approve by the wildlife agencies. That's correct. That's correct. And we're going to be seeking an early grading permit to be able to start the translocation and biological work ahead of time so that that can be, you know, get a jumpstart on that early as much as we are able to with the city's criteria. So once you do the grading, are you going to put up any fencing at all whatsoever? Just probably temporary. There'll be 10 fencing during construction. We'll probably permanently put up the fencing around the perimeter as soon as we can.
[2:40:29] And that will obviously depend on the improvements that are occurring on the perimeter.
[2:40:34] Well, I was going to say if you do any of the work with those biological plants and whatnot,
[2:40:39] you don't want to have people walking in there and making sure that's going to be a concern
[2:40:44] of the wildlife agencies when we go through the permitting process as well.
[2:40:47] Yeah, I would agree.
[2:40:48] Okay, all right, well, thank you, and then we have two public speakers on this item.
[2:40:53] Thank you for appreciate it.
[2:40:55] We have two public speakers on this item.
[2:40:57] So I will, Justin Gans, followed by Elisiar Roman.
[2:41:07] Welcome, Justin.
[2:41:12] Hello, council members.
[2:41:14] So I just have a couple questions.
[2:41:17] Even if this is approved by the city, it was tough to be approved by the state federal
[2:41:22] environmental agencies, correct?
[2:41:25] Yeah, that's a question I just asked.
[2:41:27] Okay.
[2:41:28] I was anticipating.
[2:41:33] To be specific, the project does require permits to be issued by the resource agencies.
[2:41:39] The project cannot proceed unless those permits are issued.
[2:41:43] Okay, great, thank you.
[2:41:46] And I would like to say personally, I'm excited to see high-density housing development.
[2:41:52] I think it's a really great thing, and I do like the walkability in the area and everything.
[2:41:57] I still am concerned about how this did used to include low income housing.
[2:42:05] I understand that there are difficulties with how this development has worked, but
[2:42:10] I think that considering the area that it's in being so walkable and
[2:42:16] bikeable and that it is a really great opportunity to build low income affordable housing in this area,
[2:42:22] I would like to see that included and that's
[2:42:33] really the main thing, I guess, but I'm excited
[2:42:35] to see high density housing. It's better than all the sprawl. It's ugly. It's bad for the
[2:42:38] environment. And we need more of this anywhere that we can get it. And I think just looking
[2:42:44] at the map the developers have been very conscientious about the area and sort of the destruction
[2:42:53] of it. I think it is good that I'll be conserved. And yeah, I just, I wish that there was
[2:43:00] low income for housing as a part of this development. Thank you.
[2:43:06] Thank you, Justin. Next up, Elias are. Welcome.
[2:43:15] Good evening, Madam Mayor,
[2:43:17] council and staff. My name is Elazar Roman. I am a member of the Western States
[2:43:24] Regional Council of Carpenters. I live in the local area. I live by work and I
[2:43:32] recreate in the vicinity of the project.
[2:43:37] I believe that we will be impacted by
[2:43:40] by the environmental impacts of this project.
[2:43:46] But I also think that the city should require the project to be built by contractors that will hire locally.
[2:43:58] Contractors that pay prevent the wages and utilize apprentices from the state apprenticeship,
[2:44:06] from a certified apprenticeship, also that they use, that the workforce requirements reduce construction related environmental impacts while benefiting the local economy and workforce development in recent, in the recent 2020
[2:44:30] In the report title put in California on the high road, a jobs climate action plan for 2030, the California workforce development board concluded that investments in growing the diversifying end of skilled in California's workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation, climate mitigation efforts.
[2:44:58] of
[2:45:00] The South Coast Air Quality Management District recently found that local higher requirements can result in air polluted reductions, and recently the state of California reiterated its commitment towards encouraging workforce development and housing affordability through the affordable housing and high road jobs act.
[2:45:30] of 2022, which requires projects to pay workers a prevailing wage in higher and higher from state certified apprenticeship programs for projects meeting certain seating,
[2:45:47] affordability and development standards as short and sweet, I hope you take this into consideration.
[2:45:57] Thank
[2:46:01] you.
[2:46:02] Okay.
[2:46:03] Any further discussion from the council?
[2:46:07] Council member, I'm not sure if no.
[2:46:09] Nope.
[2:46:09] Just moved to close the public hearing.
[2:46:11] Okay.
[2:46:12] All right.
[2:46:12] We have motion and a second to close the public hearing.
[2:46:15] All in favor?
[2:46:16] Aye.
[2:46:17] Any nos?
[2:46:18] Seeing none.
[2:46:20] Okay.
[2:46:22] Any further comments?
[2:46:25] No.
[2:46:25] Just make a motion to approve the project as presented by staff.
[2:46:28] Second go ahead. Okay, we have a motion and a second all in favor. Hi, and he knows. Okay motion passes
[2:46:36] unanimously. Board is zero.
[2:46:40] Okay
[2:46:41] Moving on to
[2:46:44] Oral communications. Do we have any we have a few? I'm sorry. What?
[2:46:54] Thank you
[2:46:55] No, he was on item 22
[2:47:00] I'm sorry. Are these? Yeah. These are public comments.
[2:47:04] Thank you for coming in. Yeah. Support team.
[2:47:06] Thank you. Okay. We've got Justin.
[2:47:11] Yeah. Justin, did you? Did you want to speak again?
[2:47:15] My apologies.
[2:47:19] Sorry. Wait a second.
[2:47:21] Wait a second. It should be in your for public comment.
[2:47:24] Public comment. Yes. Okay. All right. I'm sorry.
[2:47:27] My apologies. I was thinking, wait. He did talk on that last item.
[2:47:31] my thought you guys were trying to tell me on that item and I was thinking what just happened I don't
[2:47:35] think I messed that up okay um sorry okay you know I have you here okay sorry Shiro will be
[2:47:42] followed by Alejandra Coronado followed by Justin Gans and then Christina in that order sorry
[2:47:48] good
[2:48:12] evening
[2:48:14] Rebecca Jones you messed uh you posted uh you supporting uh Israel you went to a
[2:48:22] Israeli rally for a peace for Israel, you say pray
[2:48:34] for both peace in Israel and the
[2:48:36] release of the women, children and elderly that are being held hostage. How about
[2:48:42] the 45,000 Palestinians, civilians who are brutally killed though.
[2:48:50] It's not
[2:48:50] it's surely not a numbers game but there are 251 Israeli hostages and 45,000 dead Palestinians.
[2:48:59] This brings multiple things to the light that is going to stick with you, Miss Honourable Mayor.
[2:49:05] For one, you claim to not place a permanent and bilateral ceasefire on the agenda due to you not
[2:49:11] getting involved in foreign affairs, yet you visibly attend rallies for Israel. You choose not to
[2:49:17] So personally put it in the agenda due to your biased and strong stance on the situation
[2:49:21] with a certain side and that's the truth.
[2:49:24] You are currently using your position to ensure the city of San Marcos continues investments
[2:49:28] funding into companies who support Israeli's war crime.
[2:49:33] For two, it's sickening knowing that when one of our community members come up here to speak
[2:49:38] on the genocide, you act like you don't pay attention but it's really you not caring about
[2:49:44] a single brown casualty.
[2:49:45] Maybe that's why two brown women made you feel I quote you on this threatened by asking
[2:49:50] to have an educated conversation with you.
[2:49:53] Thank you.
[2:49:54] Thank
[2:49:57] you, Cheryl.
[2:49:58] Next up is...
[2:50:11] Hello. Today, I want to share with you the profound sadness and distress that grips Palestine, particularly Gaza and Rafa. Places that were supposed to be a safe place for displaced Palestinians, claimed Israel forces, but have instead become the complete opposite. Rafa, assemble protection for Palestinians is not relentlessly bombarded by Israel forces, leaving the children and Palestinians in constant fear and anger.
[2:50:35] I don't understand how you can accept this information and do nothing about it.
[2:50:40] I find it quite embarrassing Rebecca Jones that we have been coming to every meaning
[2:50:44] recently and you choose to ignore and not respond to us but yet two meetings ago you responded
[2:50:49] and corrected a speaker who claimed you flutter your eyelashes too much and you responded
[2:50:55] during the public comment and said the words actually it's because I have dry eyes.
[2:50:59] So you can respond to public comment.
[2:51:02] It's just embarrassing to find out that you can.
[2:51:04] In recent days alone, Palestinians and Gaza have been brutally killed by Israel forces.
[2:51:09] Israel has bombed refugee camps and schools fired upon refugees from helicopters and
[2:51:14] continuously raiding the homes of journalists.
[2:51:17] How can anyone, how can anyone especially Eurobeca Jones witness this and not see it as a tragedy
[2:51:23] of unimaginable proportions?
[2:51:26] Unfortunately, like Shadow said, we saw you participate in a pro-Israel protest, and now it's clear
[2:51:32] that it's a conflict of interest and you're choosing to ignore us due to personal opinion
[2:51:36] of this genocide.
[2:51:38] How pathetic to support Israel.
[2:51:40] The staggering toll is unbearable over 40,000 Palestinians, many of them children have
[2:51:45] lost their lives just from October, but this has been happening since 1948.
[2:51:50] Children in Gaza are searching for food because supplies are deliberately withheld by Israel
[2:51:55] forces.
[2:51:55] How is that okay?
[2:51:57] What did these children do to deserve this torture?
[2:51:59] The facts are undeniable, they're there for anyone to see if you care to look and educate
[2:52:04] yourself.
[2:52:05] We're just asking for one thing and to put this on the agenda, call for a permanent cease
[2:52:09] fire.
[2:52:10] There's just no justification for your silence that surrounds the suffering.
[2:52:13] Other nations have acted, why haven't we?
[2:52:16] Why haven't you Rebecca Jones?
[2:52:17] It's clear because you've chosen a side and it's quite pathetic because that's not how decisions
[2:52:23] of what should be put on the agenda.
[2:52:24] how should be made is because due to your personal opinion.
[2:52:29] I refuse to remain silent while others are suffering for no reason.
[2:52:33] This isn't about race, religion, or nationality.
[2:52:36] It's about basic humanity.
[2:52:37] If children's lives matter to us,
[2:52:39] at all they matter,
[2:52:41] equally regardless of where they are born.
[2:52:43] Children who have done nothing
[2:52:45] but exist are being killed by Israel forces every day.
[2:52:49] It's time to confront the uncomfortable truth
[2:52:50] and demand action.
[2:52:51] and please just consider to put it on the agenda
[2:52:53] on call for a permanent ceasefire.
[2:52:56] Silence only perpetuates the freeing.
[2:52:57] Let us not lose our humanity
[2:52:59] in the comfort of our own privilege and freedom.
[2:53:03] I don't get why you're not paying attention,
[2:53:05] but Palestinians are just people like us,
[2:53:07] especially children who have dreams like we do,
[2:53:10] families like we do,
[2:53:10] and a future they wish to continue.
[2:53:13] Thank you, Alejandra.
[2:53:14] Next up, Justin Gans, followed by Christina.
[2:53:22] Good evening, Council.
[2:53:23] Last week, the International Court of Justice
[2:53:26] rule that Israel's settlements and occupation of the West Bank and Gaza strip, both regions
[2:53:35] of Palestine, are illegal under international law, so not only is Israel not allowed to
[2:53:43] wage this genocide against the Palestinian people in the Gaza strip, but they're actually
[2:53:48] not even allowed to confine Palestinians in the way that they are and restrict their food
[2:53:54] and aid, not to mention that the over 40,000 confirmed Palestinians killed numbers likely
[2:54:01] far more is mostly women and children and that there's currently a polio outbreak.
[2:54:07] This is not even, it's reaching the point where it's not even just the concern of Palestinians
[2:54:12] like there's actually a polio epidemic happening in the midst of a genocide where we're going
[2:54:18] to see not just the amount of people that have already been killed as a result of bombs,
[2:54:23] but the long-term impact of what Israel is doing here is absolutely grotesque and illegal.
[2:54:31] Resolution is a very easy thing to bring forward over 100 communities across the country,
[2:54:36] have passed ceasefire resolutions that's according to NPR. I think it's fair to say that this
[2:54:44] is a atrocity that we can stand on the right side of history. Sam Marcus can make itself
[2:54:48] of a good, unrecorded given what the United States is currently complicit in, and it's really
[2:54:57] just a bare minimum.
[2:54:59] I mean, others...
[2:55:00] The other cities have passed resolutions that go so far as to divest from certain contracts or relations with companies that are directly complicit in Israel's occupation and genocide of Palestinians. So, I think it's only fair and quite easy to say that we could easily put a resolution at least on the agenda. Give us a vote. Let us actually feel like a democracy.
[2:55:26] and really have a discussion about this issue because the way things stand, it's horrific,
[2:55:32] over nine months of seeing a genocide before a very eyes.
[2:55:36] You know, if you want to ask yourself, what would you have done during the Holocaust,
[2:55:39] or the Armenian genocide, or any other genocide that's happened during our history, you're
[2:55:45] doing it right now.
[2:55:46] You have a platform that you can use to make a statement that will stay on the record that
[2:55:53] that will show that you stand for humanity,
[2:55:54] that you stand for human rights,
[2:55:56] that you respect international law,
[2:55:58] and that you want to see that Sam Marcos
[2:55:59] doesn't have a bad reputation for itself
[2:56:02] for the way that is treated
[2:56:04] both the dehumanization of Palestinians,
[2:56:06] some of which I know personally
[2:56:07] that have family members that have been killed
[2:56:09] in the West Bank,
[2:56:10] and as well as just basic human rights here and abroad,
[2:56:16] because what's global is local, thank you.
[2:56:20] Thank you, Justin.
[2:56:22] Christina, who is up next?
[2:56:34] Mayor Rebecca Jones.
[2:56:36] I'm trying to understand how you could go on social media and show sympathy for a convicted
[2:56:41] felon who has sexually harassed multiple women and has said many, many racist remarks.
[2:56:48] I'm sure no one asked you to do that.
[2:56:50] However, multiple people have asked you to show sympathy and stand up against the wrongful
[2:56:55] murder of more than 30,000 innocent civilians.
[2:57:00] And yet you have nothing to say.
[2:57:03] You continue to show blatant disrespect and how much you do not support minorities,
[2:57:07] and I'm wondering if you're aware of it.
[2:57:10] Do you know how discriminatory you have been and are being?
[2:57:14] You are in a position of power with so many privileges and the fact that you won't perform
[2:57:20] the simplest act of putting a resolution for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in the
[2:57:25] agenda is grotesque.
[2:57:27] I agree with the previous comment made that you should step down from your role as mayor.
[2:57:32] I think your viewpoints and skills could be better used for maybe structural development
[2:57:36] or something, but I don't think you have a safe option as someone that is supposed to
[2:57:43] look after a diverse group of people.
[2:57:46] Please reflect on the choices you make as community leaders and see how they are ripping at the
[2:57:53] of your perfect little San Marcos dystopia.
[2:57:58] Thank you, Christina.
[2:57:59] Okay, moving on to report, Sandag.
[2:58:02] Our last meeting, we actually talked about the Port of Entry,
[2:58:09] the State Route 11, Otay, Mesa, East Port of Entry,
[2:58:12] and the agreements.
[2:58:14] We did end up approving those.
[2:58:16] It's going to be quite good for the region
[2:58:20] because we are going to be moving forward
[2:58:22] in all of the trade that comes across from Mexico to the United States is really
[2:58:29] important for us to continue to keep moving that along. It's going to be, well,
[2:58:38] it's under construction now, but anyway, so it's the first agreement of its kind,
[2:58:42] which is good. We also spoke about the annual audit plan and moving forward the
[2:58:47] 2025 plan and all of the different audits that are going to end up
[2:58:50] happening, which are also good for the organization as a whole.
[2:58:56] And then we had a closed session that was about potential
[2:59:01] litigation, and that was about it.
[2:59:03] Did I miss anything?
[2:59:05] Councilmember Musgrove?
[2:59:06] I think you have it all mayor.
[2:59:07] OK, all right.
[2:59:08] Moving on to League of California cities, Councilmember Musgrove.
[2:59:11] We meet next month.
[2:59:12] Oh, next month.
[2:59:13] Oh, and Sandeg is also Friday.
[2:59:16] North County Transit District, Deputy Mayor Jenkins.
[2:59:20] We met last week, I believe, and we really had our regular business items, but we really
[2:59:30] had one main topic, and that was we had three individuals come from Sandeg, including
[2:59:36] the new CEO, and they discussed the big topic about realigning the railroad tracks off
[2:59:46] the Delmar Bluffs, as some people know, there's been a notice of preparation that has gone
[2:59:55] out of the draft EIR report.
[3:00:00] Which included three potential alignments. And there's nothing definite that it'll be one of those three. It could be something else. But it has stirred quite a bit of conversation. And so just a few things that were brought up from staff throughout the conversation. We have to remember that NCTD is the owner of the rail
[3:00:29] railroad right away. We are also designated as a rail common carrier.
[3:00:38] And so a couple
[3:00:40] other facts I won't discuss all of the items, but a couple other facts that came up is
[3:00:45] the Surface Transportation Board, which is federal. We'll have a role in approving the
[3:00:52] construction and they also want Sandeg to consider the potential impacts of each alignment.
[3:01:04] A couple other points to make we have to also consider the impact of this realignment
[3:01:12] on the coaster, the Amtrak Pacific surf liner and BNSF railway because of their freight
[3:01:19] operations.
[3:01:20] And so we have a responsibility to them also.
[3:01:24] There's also questions going on about the realignment
[3:01:29] who is going to control the operational aspects
[3:01:35] of that after construction.
[3:01:40] And if there's a tunnel, which is likely to be,
[3:01:44] there's issues with ventilation and control systems
[3:01:49] and that sort of thing.
[3:01:50] So, again, there's just a lot of discussion going on.
[3:01:54] There's nothing definite at this point, but North County Transit is going to be significantly
[3:02:00] involved in the discussions along the way, and we have to watch out for our partners
[3:02:07] and those that use the rail.
[3:02:12] One of the impacts of each alignment that has to be decided is the travel times and how
[3:02:20] much they might change because we can't increase the travel times for Amtrak and BNSF.
[3:02:28] So there's a lot of issues going on besides, yes, the tracks need to come off of Delmar Bluffs
[3:02:36] area, but there's a lot of consequences as to where they're going to be, so there'll
[3:02:41] be a lot of discussions about it, a lot of meetings, a lot of arguing, I'm sure.
[3:02:48] I did ask the question, so tell us realistically, is this really going to be done by 2035?
[3:02:56] And I think we all know that's not going to happen, so that's another situation everybody
[3:03:03] has to deal with.
[3:03:04] They're promoting that date, but they pretty much have said that's not going to happen.
[3:03:09] I would say it's definitely impossible.
[3:03:11] Yeah.
[3:03:11] And the other thing that was brought up by multiple people was the fact that depending on which alignment,
[3:03:21] there are significant amount of properties including people's residential homes that will probably have to go through some sort of imminent domain process.
[3:03:33] So there's a lot of external factors there, and as we all know, with eminent domain,
[3:03:40] that can hold up a project, especially when you're talking about hundreds.
[3:03:44] They don't even know how many homes.
[3:03:47] They can't give a number.
[3:03:48] No, and not to mention that they actually would dig under some of them, and we don't even
[3:03:52] know the health impacts of that.
[3:03:54] Right.
[3:03:54] So it's a continuing topic, but we were pleased that they came and gave a report, and NCTD
[3:04:02] We will be heavily involved with those discussions.
[3:04:06] All right, thank you, Deputy Mayor.
[3:04:08] No North County Dispatch, Councilmember Nunez had to leave a little early.
[3:04:13] Clean Energy Alliance, Councilmember Musgrove.
[3:04:15] We meet next month.
[3:04:17] Okay, City Council Business Visits.
[3:04:22] Does someone have a business visit?
[3:04:24] Yes.
[3:04:25] Chief Baron joined the economic development team and myself down at 100 industries.
[3:04:30] They're down on our business park area, off-diamond, and LaCostometto's area.
[3:04:35] We have a good script here, so I'm going to read from it because it pretty much highlights
[3:04:39] everything.
[3:04:40] So Hunter Industries is still a family-owned business and is the city's largest private
[3:04:44] employer.
[3:04:46] In the 1950s, Ed Hunter created a water-based system and created a company that he called
[3:04:51] the Moistomatic.
[3:04:53] He worked for Toro at the time, or excuse me, his company was acquired by Toro, and they
[3:04:59] he used his product.
[3:05:00] Product to help diversify their product line. When he joined their team in the 70s, it solidified a presence in San Marcos by operating or rather opening a remote, Toro research and development lab. By 81, his non-compete contract was up with Toro, he started his own irrigation company, Hunter Industries, focusing on a new line of products derived from plastics. So Toro, at that time, they were focusing on metal-based irrigation systems and he thought plastics would be a better way to go. By 83,
[3:05:29] Hutter introduced their proprietary PGP gear driven rotor and that's using the pressure
[3:05:35] from the water to actually cause a rotation on the output for the water coming up through
[3:05:41] the lines and it changed the industry forever and its product offering is now referred to
[3:05:46] as the rotor revolution. By 85 the demand for the PGP grew so much and Hutter opened international
[3:05:52] distribution channels in Australia and Europe and by 94 Hutter's catalog grew to include
[3:05:57] a wide variety of products, including long-distance rotors, sprays, valves, and controllers, and I
[3:06:04] would say probably all of the golf courses in our area use 100 industries larger scale irrigation
[3:06:11] systems. These are large. About the size of a microwave oven almost with the mechanisms that are
[3:06:19] involved in extremely high water pressures to get the reach. Still under the leadership of the
[3:06:27] They now have four facilities in Mexico, one in Florida and, of course, the President
[3:06:31] Sam Marcos, where they have their global headquarters.
[3:06:35] They do export all around the country, rather than around the world.
[3:06:39] The tour of their campus is fantastic.
[3:06:42] They have entire rooms dedicated to presenting what their products would look like.
[3:06:47] Not so much with irrigation, but with their lighting systems.
[3:06:50] They have theaters to offer presentations and people coming in from a lot, you know, desert
[3:06:57] areas in the Middle East that come by to say, hey, we want to develop this, but we can get the
[3:07:02] water in, but we need to be able to get it out to start growing. So they show them what they
[3:07:06] can do with their product line. Their engineers and automation team work and design all product lines
[3:07:12] in San Marcos. Most of the products that go out internationally, wherever they're built, come into
[3:07:17] San Marcos for final packaging and distribution. They work to vertically integrate by manufacturing
[3:07:23] manufacturing springs, injections, metal components, and after COVID, they now manufacture 60% of the metal components.
[3:07:29] So in addition to the plastics, and they've really kind of been at the forefront of the injection molding for the small parts,
[3:07:37] they actually have a machine shop now where they produce all their own brass, and the scrap brass gets
[3:07:41] sent to a recycler where it's melted down and formed back into the brass ingots and returned back to 100 to be used to get for more components.
[3:07:52] Their process was highlighted and show how it's made, and they have a focus on environmental
[3:07:57] sustainability and they work to recycle plastics, metal, and create water efficient products.
[3:08:02] They've increased solar power, their rooftops are phenomenal, to generate a significant amount
[3:08:07] of energy to subsidize their usage and allow for gas cogeneration if the power goes out and
[3:08:13] they generate so much, they resale power back to SDG&E.
[3:08:18] The last common here is their valued community partner and provide high quality, well-paying career opportunities.
[3:08:24] They are hiring right now, skilled, unskilled labor, engineering, just a variety of positions, staff positions, front office.
[3:08:35] And for those of us that have active engagement in the city, you can't go anywhere where there isn't a fundraiser for a nonprofit without seeing 100 industries.
[3:08:45] as one of the primary sponsors, they're just completely immersed in this community to help support the community because they know that as part of their sustainability, one of the things that caught our eye, the Chief Baron and I were looking at this as we're walking and from one building to another, you know, if you're looking at a company that builds irrigation systems, we saw a lot of water on the sidewalks and going through the gutters and they actually pointed it out to us that where their facility is located,
[3:09:15] It sits above an underground water, effectively an aquifer, so they get seep that comes up from out of the ground.
[3:09:22] And their entire area that they're landscaping and they have a very large area that they have set up that goes by the creek.
[3:09:29] Everything is irrigated through well water, so they don't use any portable water anywhere within their facilities other than for drinking.
[3:09:36] Just a fantastic group of people, very friendly, we didn't see half of what they have to offer, but
[3:09:42] If you get the opportunity to go down, they'll be worth it, and again, they are hiring right now.
[3:09:48] I made a joke, hey, I'll be looking for jobs for anybody, and this yet we're hiring.
[3:09:53] So if you can go online to 100 industries, you'll find their HR site, and maybe find a job.
[3:10:00] I think they're one of our largest or the largest private employer in our city. The first item mayor, hunter industries, familial, business, and the city's largest private employer. Hey, the university is actually the public largest. So they said university school district colleges, but other than that, it goes to hunter. Okay, San Marcos Creek project. Yes, thank you Madam Mayor. We continue to finish up the landscaping in the project and
[3:10:29] And a very close to finalizing it.
[3:10:32] I saw someone out there working the other day in planting plants and moving dirt around on these slopes.
[3:10:39] So that was good.
[3:10:40] Yes, looks like they're putting the finishing touches.
[3:10:42] Okay, anything else?
[3:10:44] Yes.
[3:10:44] I have a question on the creek.
[3:10:45] This is a conversation that Deputy Mayor Jenkins and I had during our briefing with Michelle.
[3:10:52] As we get, you know, we're really close now to completion and going to be doing a ribbon cutting here soon.
[3:10:56] and do we need to agenda is this item every meeting?
[3:10:59] Is it time maybe we take it off?
[3:11:02] Any thoughts on that from my colleagues?
[3:11:06] How about this?
[3:11:08] How about we remove it?
[3:11:10] And then if you feel the burning need
[3:11:11] to update us on something, you could just update us.
[3:11:14] So I'm speaker slip.
[3:11:15] I don't know.
[3:11:16] That sounds good.
[3:11:17] All right.
[3:11:17] With a speaker slip or no speaker slip?
[3:11:20] No speaker slip, she's our city manager,
[3:11:22] she's our CEO of our company.
[3:11:24] No, we don't need a speaker slip.
[3:11:26] Michelle gets to speak anytime she'd like.
[3:11:29] All right okay all right with that this meeting is adjourned
[3:12:23] Thank you very much.
[3:12:25] Thank you very much.
[3:12:27] Thank you.