City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Bye. Thank you. Thank you. PIANO PLAYS Thank you.

Welcome to the regular meeting of the Half Moon Bay City Council for Tuesday, August 18th, 2026. As a reminder, if you are joining this meeting via Zoom, you can still make public comment. During any public comment portions, attendees may use the raise your hand feature and will be called upon and unmuted when it is your turn to speak. If joining by phone, use star nine to raise your hand, star six to mute and unmute. Oopsie daisies. We also have Spanish interpretation services available in person and via Zoom. On Point Language Solutions is in the back left corner if anyone needs assistance with interpretation services. On Point will now provide information on how to receive those services if you are in need of them. Do we have Victor Nicholas here?

Hello. Good afternoon. Thank you, Madam Mayor, and Honourable City Council and the staff for giving me the opportunity to address the public. Miembros del público, las instrucciones para participar en la reunión de hoy se pueden encontrar en el orden del día que ya está publicado. Estas instrucciones dan información de cómo presentar comentarios tanto por escrito como por Zoom. Los miembros del público también se les proporcionará interpretación en vivo de toda esta reunión en español y para acceder al servicio de interpretación en vivo por Zoom, ya sea con una computadora o una portátil, haga clic en el icono del globo terráqueo, es decir, en el mundo, y seleccione el idioma español. Si usted está usando un teléfono inteligente o una tableta, busque el menú de tres puntos en la parte de abajo de la barra, seleccione interpretación, luego seleccione el idioma español, y por último haga click en donde dice done o listo. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you so much, Nicholas. Could I have a roll call, please?

Councilmember Brownstone?

Here.

Councilmember Johnson?

Here.

Councilmember Nagengast?

Here.

Mayor Reddick. Here, we have a quorum. Thank you. I'll rise for Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Wow, that was a hearty Pledge of Allegiance. Good group. Thanks for that. Okay, so the next item of business is to approve the agenda. Would anyone like to make a motion and a second?

So moved. Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. So the next order of business is going to be item 3A, which is the mobile crisis response team presentation. Good evening.

Hi, good evening. My name is David Sider. I'm the administrator for the Crisis Call Center Mobile Crisis Response Team. Thank you for having me present. I'm going to provide a very brief overview, and I have a packed agenda. So this evening, I can talk about the Crisis Call Center. We're a 24-7 call center. We're staffed by triage clinicians. We receive calls from the community, from individuals who are seeking service for themselves, family members, school counselors, community members, teachers, everybody. What happens, I'd just like to make you aware, is you talk to our triage clinician, we gather information, and we then deploy a mobile crisis response team. I'm in uniform, so we're the people, the purple people, meaning we come out in uniform, we're very identifiable. A counselor and a peer recovery coach come on scene, so we're 24-7, we work 365 the whole year. We're countywide, anywhere in the county. Excuse me. We come on scene, and we are supporting the individual and their family. Every single person within county limits is eligible for the service, so there are no barriers for the service. It's private insurance, Medi-Cal, uninsured. Every single person who needs service, we come and we aid them. We serve all ages, so we have individuals as young as elementary school throughout the whole lifespan, older adults. So in essence, we just want to come today that we are part of the community. We serve in this community. we have been doing the crisis call center for the last 10 months and it is a pleasure to serve your community.

thank you for coming down and presenting tonight. Any questions from council or comments? I would say I' m glad you' re here it' s a very important service. Our sheriff's deputies can' t be everywhere there' s lots of need out there and we' re glad you' re stepping up. Thank you purple people.

Okay, thank you for having us. Yeah.

I will take some public comment after we do both presentations. So the next one is Midcoast Community Council Update.

Greetings to you, Council, and the people of Half Moon Bay from the Midcoast Community Council. First, I want to go over a little housekeeping. At our August 12th regular meeting, the chair, due to personal issues that required her full attention, she resigned. A new chair, Scott Bollinger, was elected as the new chair, and Connie Santilli is now the co-chair. I'm Scott. So, I would like to talk to you a little bit this evening about the amendment of the San Mateo County local coastal program policy 1.23 D, which is also referred to as the LCP for the mid coast. If you don't already know, the mid coast currently has a policy of a 40 unit hard cap on new building permits as measured via rolling three year average. So, this represented the culmination of many years of study of the new characteristics of the coast side and extended negotiations between the county government, the Coastal Commission, the community, and the community of the coast side. The cap was never reached since it was implemented, and I'm going to talk about, as we go through this real quick, About 2013 and the unused permits from 2013. Okay. And we'll need that information for later. The Cypress Point housing project used 75 permits. That's obviously more than 40. That exceeded the limit. Exceeding the limit triggers a renegotiation of the cap with the Coastal Commission, which is a problem. So the county had a community meeting and presented a number of options to resolve this problem. So, you know, it could have been from do nothing to all the way to this, what I'm going to refer to as option E. So the council, the Midcoast Community Council, had already expressed its reservations regarding option E in our letter to the county dated June 29th. So, but however, okay, sorry. Okay, thank you. However, given the hand we were dealt, we chose the best path forward for the people of our community. And sometimes that means choosing the least bad option in a set of options. In our public discussion with the county government, it had become acutely clear to the council that the path that minimizes the impact on the mid-coast was to support option E, and I'll tell you what that is in a minute. Because of the triggering language in the housing element that the county was forced to accept, all other options would likely lead to the county having to petition the Coastal Commission to raise the 40-unit cap. which would drive even more growth into our area without any attendant responsibility to add infrastructure that would be necessary to support that growth. The scenario is demonstrably worse. That scenario of just renegotiating the cap would be a lot worse for the mid-coast than option E. which maintains the 40-unit cap. The community seems largely to agree with the MCC on this front, since option E received the most votes when all six options were discussed at the community meeting that I referred to earlier held at Mueller's pro-site office. Thus, the MCC wrote to express our qualified support for option E, which is the backward-looking average that banks all unrealized permits since 2013. So that's a brief description of how we're supporting the county with respect to the 75 permits that were used for the Cypress Point housing project. I'm going to add one more item, too. We're going to lose parking on 101, I mean, Route 1 up there. And so the Coastal Commission asked the GCSD to leave the dirt lot in place for parking for surfers. That's all I have. Thank you.

Do any council members have questions for Scott? Congratulations on your assent to chair. And thanks for explaining a very complicated issue.

That's a thorny one. I didn't want to just do a whole diatribe on that. It was very complicated, and it was a difficult situation to be put in, and it required a lot of explaining from the county to satisfy the community on what the best option moving forward was.

Well, you guys are pretty badass up there.

Oh, wow. Thank you. Good luck. See you.

Bye-bye. So if there's anybody in the room or online who would like to comment on the presentations you just heard, you can come to the podium or raise your hand on Zoom now. Seeing none, we will move on to item four, mayor's announcements of community activities and service, and I do not have any this evening. The next item is report out from recent closed session meetings. Council, do we have anything to report out this evening?

Thank you, Mayor. We met this evening in closed session on four items. There is no reportable action, but I do want to note that under labor negotiation, there are two items on tonight's agenda related to labor negotiation.

items 11 D and E which are the memorandums men Miranda's of understanding great thank you for that I'm hearing what was the noise we were hearing during Scott's presentation it's a little disturbing it's there's static coming through and our IT folks are working on it right now well I can hear them talking in the background too so that's also disturbing so item six do we have any Commission and committee updates none tonight we have none tonight. We're going to move on to city manager updates to council. As soon as he comes back to the dais we're going to start with coast side County water district tank update.

Good evening, madam mayor members of the council daily to your manner and public works director and city engineer and I'm just going to be a quick update on the by our friends at CCWD.

It might be off, Dale, on the side.

Oh. I got it. Thank you. So this project replaced two existing steel tanks at the site above the Half Moon Bay High School. A $13 million project added about a million gallons in total water capacity. This is a unique project for the district because it is the first pre-stressed concrete tank that the water district took on. All the rest of our existing tanks are steel tanks. The two tanks that were replaced were constructed in the 50s. They were past their life expectancy and didn't meet any current seismic or code requirements. The decision for the district to go with a concrete tank was a no-brainer. They're planning long-term for the future. Over the 80 to 100-year life expectancy for one of these tanks, there's roughly a 30% savings over steel tanks, which require ongoing maintenance. and painting. So this tank, the district is thinking about it long term. This tank will be in use by the district long after most all of us are here. design started in 2021 and went for three years and this project around 18 months of construction which culminated with a tank service and ribbon-cutting that we were gracious enough to be invited to at the end of July our mayor presented a beautiful proclamation to CCWD they served us a delicious lunch lunch and gave us some swag and we had a absolutely flawless ribbon-cutting ceremony I just have some pictures throughout the progress of construction. They had to construct a bypass before demolition of the existing tanks. Surprisingly, there's only about 1,200 yards of concrete in this structure between the slab and the retaining walls and the roof of the structure. The walls are poured in seven discrete sections. Each of these was, they have one piece of formwork that they set up and poured each section of wall. The walls are about 14 inches thick Construction of the dome roof is probably the coolest part of this job. I didn't get to see it, but it brings to mind the Pantheon in Rome construction. They had to build scaffolding and false work inside the tank and then pour the majority of the roof and then deconstruct the scaffolding from inside and remove it out through, what is it, an eight-foot opening in the top that you see there. And then once that work was done, they wrapped the tank in steel, steel cable, 21 miles of steel cable, which puts it into compression and holds it all together and then cover it with a shotcrete. So this is a really cool project to watch. We don't have a lot of heavy civil construction here. Being a civil engineer, it was great to see. This project benefited from a lot of great local labor. I was told this project came in on schedule and under budget, and it was great to see kind of local contractors and consultants that we're familiar with completing this work. I'm happy to answer any questions, and I'm joined tonight by Darren Sturdivant, who is an operations manager with the district as well. Thank you.

Is there anyone who would like to ask questions about the tank project?

Quickly, thank you, and I'm a geek, too, when it comes to concrete water tanks. Interesting to watch construction, but what is the source of the water supply? Do you know, or is that a blend? Crystal Spring.

Crystal Spring? And then local sources as well.

Is there some groundwater pumping, or is it mostly... All the groundwater is influenced by surface water, sir. thank you and this also provides fire suppression? it' s not just potable water it' s also fire suppression. thank you.

thank you for the presentation. we' re moving along to the business resource guide.

I think my slide is missing, but it's okay. I just wanted to provide a quick update and share that our newly redesigned Half Moon Bay Resource Business Guide is officially completed. And you will find that in front of you. And there are copies available in the front. and then also in the front counter. Over the past several months, we worked with departments across the city and our community partners to update and redesign the guide with the goal of making it more useful and accessible resource for both new and existing businesses. And we'll be distributing copies throughout the community including City Hall, the Library, the Chamber of Commerce, and there's also a digital version that is available on our website. But yeah, we just wanted to share this new resource with you all.

Thank you.

Great, thank you.

Moving on to Zip Trips.

Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. My name is Marijose Alvarado and I am the Communications Program Manager for Half Moon Bay. I am here to give you a brief update on KTVU's Zip Trips. KTVU's Zip Trips are live summer broadcasts that take mornings and two into Bay Area communities. KTVU Sip Trips is coming to Half Moon Bay on Friday, August 21st for a morning focused on the community and everything that makes the coast side special. The coverage will highlight local restaurants and businesses, nearby outdoor activities, community events, arts and culture, and the people who make Half Moon Bay what it is. KTVU is planning multiple live locations throughout town and connecting with a number of local community organizations, leaders and businesses. This will be a great opportunity to showcase Half Moon Bay to the Bay Area and beyond. All are welcome to stroll casually in the downtown area from 8 a.m. to 10.30 a.m., be it for a coffee run, for running some errands, or simply to witness how live TV is made. There's already a lot of excitement in the community, and we're ready for Friday's Zip Trip with KTVU. Thank you.

A question, Marie-José. Will this sort of be like the Today Show where everybody, you know, piles on on a street corner and waves and stuff like that?

Exactly. People are very excited, and we've gotten calls from people all the way even from San Jose asking, when is it happening? Where is it happening? And so, yes, the hope is that a lot of people are coming and strolling casually, and they're going to be part of the backdrop of this great event.

they want to be on tv yeah exactly great wonderful any questions for marie jose i just want to say that your your posts that you're doing for instagram and facebook are really really good on the photos and i'm just waiting for you when we do this that you're going to pull this off really nicely so i'm impressed with your work right now thank you so much thank you council member thank you marie jose thank you moving on to implement implementation plan update

Floors are very sticky tonight. Have you noticed that? Apparently there was a party here on Saturday. Good evening, council members and mayor. I wanted to give a little update on the implementation plan update because it's been a while since you've heard about it you approve the grant a while back in the consultants contract a while back. We are heading into a major stretch of public outreach. So first I'll take a step back and answer the question what is the implementation plan update the is essentially our zoning code. It is the portion of the local coastal program that implements the policy document, and that's the land use plan. So our implementation plan has not been updated since the 90s, I believe. And after the major update of our land use plan in 2020, we We have been using the LUP to implement many of the code changes, so this is a very needed update, and it is comprehensive. We are really overhauling the entire implementation plan to make it more transparent, more efficient, more easy to use and read. And we are also looking for public involvement. So there are business cards at the table with a QR code that takes you to our website. And once you get to the website, you can sign up to receive updates. Can you go to the next slide? I have it? Oh, hey. Okay. This is the QR code also that will get you to the website and the project timeline. So the outreach that we're starting right now is we already did some focus group meetings, some early focus group meetings in late June and July to sort of frame the update and On August 28th, we have our first working group meeting. The working group is made up of some Coastal Commission staffers and also two of our planning commissioners. And then on September 22nd, we have a joint study session with Planning Commission and Council. From September 3rd through September 28th, we have a roadshow. We're bringing this plan to different neighborhoods around the city. So we're going to nine different neighborhoods. And then we will also have one town hall meeting here at Ted Adcock Center. So look to the website for a future schedule of those events and Mari Jose will be helping getting the information out as well.

Leslie could you tell us like what are some of the issues that you will be dealing with during the course of this process you know a lot has changed in our community and in the world and in California the last 30 years you know we're dealing with climate impacts and you know efficiency and building codes and design standards if you could just discuss some of the issues that you'll be looking at.

We will be looking we So when we updated the LUP, we did include a lot of new policies along the shoreline to address sea level rise and erosion concerns, and those will be put into code as well. We also have a lot of rezonings to do in addition to the rezonings that you'll hear about later tonight, and so those will be put into the code. There's also... a lot of equity and environmental justice issues that have been raised that don't necessarily fit into the code but we are going to be developing some procedures to address them in a more effective way in the future moving on and then let's see in addition to that I think There are more sort of housing issues and workforce housing overlay code amendments to do as well. So those are some of the things that we'll be addressing. But also of importance to us as staff is that our code is easy for members of the public to read and not just staff. So that when someone comes to the counter and they have questions, we can walk them through a logical progression to get from needing a permit to actually getting a permit. So that's important as well.

I have one more update and that is on the ADU ordinance.

So as you're aware, we received a letter from HCD a while back saying that we were in violation of our ADU ordinance. And we pulled that out of the implementation plan update to work on it more quickly so that we wouldn't get in trouble with HCD or more trouble. And we have a website up and we're getting ready to, in the next couple months, bring that to council as well. So there's the letters from HCD are on the site. There's also some draft language that we sent to HCD and the Coastal Commission available on the site now. It's not necessarily ready as a public review and comment document, but we do want to give people an idea of what kind of amendments to expect. And if you have questions, you can email Paul Kite-Lahensy, and his email is up there, and also the website is up there. Thank you.

Thank you. So that wraps up the updates. If there's anybody in the audience or online who would like to comment or ask a question on the water district tank project, the resource guide, the zip trips, the implementation plan update, or ADU ordinance, you can let us know now by coming to the podium or raising your hand. Seeing none, we're going to move along. We're moving to item eight, which is public forum. And I only have three slips this evening. You will have three minutes to speak. And the first speaker is Joaquin Jimenez.

Good evening.

Excuse me, is somebody working on this? Okay.

Okay, try it again. Good evening, honorable mayor, council members, city staff, members of the public. My name is Joaquin Jimenez, Joaquin Murrieta on social media. And I'm here to give you a bit of an update about our vaquero days we had this weekend. First of all, I want to thank the city staff for the work, the support they gave us. The Sheriff's Department as well for the support they gave us on Saturday and Sunday. Also the sponsors, Seahorse Ranch, Feed and Fuel, Taqueria Tres Amigos. and many other organizations that supported us. As you know, we had a presentation by a local Oaxacan community, that performed on Sunday. Also Casa Circulo from Redwood City were here to present traditional dances from the country of Mexico and South America. And I want to thank everybody who was present. On Saturday, we had over 200 horses trailing around the coastline, Coastal Trail, the beach, our main streets. By the pictures and the videos that I took on Saturday downtown, we had over a thousand people witnessing, you know, the beautiful horses, listen to the music, you know, downtown. The event, the main event was at the Johnson House. We all had a lot of fun. You know, all the horses. We had a performer that came away from Washington. A young girl with her father that went on the trail ride. And it was a success. A success, you know, Saturday. Sunday was a different day. You know, Sunday was more... downtown, right on Kelly Avenue, where we had the performances, the live music. The singer at the event came all the way from the state of Sinaloa, Mazatlan, to perform for us. We had a lot of celebrities downtown, and everybody enjoyed the horses, the food, our local wines. They were also big supporters of the event. So from that, I want to thank everybody who supported us, everybody who was present. And I want to thank everybody for the comments that are going on social media. There is a big surf of comments and videos and photographs on social media. So we have a request. We would like the opportunity to do a presentation about Baquero Days to City Council. Thank you.

I loved seeing the longhorn strutting stuff down Poplar Street.

Yes, that was also a sight to see. While I was riding, it was also the beach, you know, in downtown on Galleon Main.

Amazing.

Thank you.

Thanks for the report.

Madam Mayor, we think we've found the issue, and we need a couple of minutes to fix it. We can either finish public comment, and then we're going to need a recess for a couple of minutes.

It's finished public comment. I just have two more slips. Great. Unless somebody raises their hand. So the next speaker is Anita Reese.

Not kidding, it is quite sticky. My name is Anita Reese. I'm with the Unhoused on the Coast Outreach Program of the Pacifica Resource Center, which is primarily funded by the San Mateo County Center on Homelessness. We provide outreach and engagement and case management services to unhoused folks on the San Mateo County coast from Pacifica to Pescadero with the goal of helping them return to housing. Outreach staff is available seven days a week, Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., and Saturday, Sundays, and holidays from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and we respond to outreach requests within three hours during those times. So if you see someone sleeping outside in a vehicle or another place not meant for habitation, please email us at ucoutreach at pacresourcecenter.org or call us at 650-452-6279. As of today, there are 31 individuals who are unhoused in Half Moon Bay. This is down 24% from the last time that I was here back in May. That went from 41 to 31. These folks are in four encampments. And in those encampments, there are three folks. We have to keep the 4 open and 28 others are not in encampments. These 4 encampments are part of the encampment resolution funding of the county. And since December 2024, which was the start of the encampment resolution funding or IRF, We have connected with 101 unhoused folks in those specific encampments and of those 54 have entered shelter or returned to housing so just over half and only three are remaining in the mapped encampments. One of the great parts of the IRF program is that clients stay with the program through the course of the IRF funding, which is scheduled to end December of 2026, although they are working on extending that due to funding delays at the start of the program. In comparison, folks who are not an IRF client, Once they enter into shelter or housing, the services from PRC ends. It doesn't mean that they won't get other services. It just means that we don't follow them while they're in the system. And then once the IRF program ends, clients will be absorbed into our general outreach work. And so I just want to thank you, the city staff, as well as the city, for your partnership with IRF and our general homeless outreach.

Thank you, Anita. Thanks for coming. I know that you come several times a year, and it's really important stuff. We appreciate it. Next speaker is Nancy Fontana.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council and members of the public. I recently attended the Planning Commission meeting on the housing element, and I'm not speaking about the housing element, just so you know, where the commission discussed state mandates extensively while recognizing... Excuse me, I express the hope that the Planning Commission would urge the council to have the city reach out to other cities and organize to contact the League of California Cities to address the concerns of cities on the state's one size fits all housing mandates, which takes away local control. and allows builders to have pretty much a free-for-all in small communities, big communities all over the state. I personally feel the league should hold a special conference or something to strategize with the goal of maintaining the city's rights. And I'm hoping that the city will be proactive in encouraging other cities to join it and encourage the league to take this subject on. I think it's really important. I believe the character of our city depends on it. Thank you.

Thank you, Nancy. I have no more speaker slips. Looking online, is there anyone who would like to speak on public comment online? If so, raise your hand now. Seeing none. So the next item is the consent calendar, but we're gonna take a short break of five minutes and see if we can't deal with this noise problem. Thank you for your patience.

Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you.

I'm going to read the items first. Item 9A is wave reading of ordinances and resolutions. 9B, approve minutes of the July 21st, 2026 special city council meeting. Approve minutes of the July 21st regular city council meeting. 9D is treasurer's report for the quarter ending June 30, 2026. 9E is a rental assistance program agreement, first amendment. 9F is accept the warrants for the month of July. item 9 g is authorization to apply for california infrastructure and economic development bank 9h is main street bridge rehabilitation project additional funds transfer Is there any council members who wish to public pull any items for discussion? Seeing none. Could I have a motion? Well, actually I better ask is there anybody? Here tonight who would like to comment on any of those items or online if you're online You can raise your hand now and we will unmute you seeing no one coming forward or, well, there's one person raising their hand, that's Dan Haggerty.

Yeah, I'm sorry, it's unrelated to the immediate, but you know, throughout the evening, even in the closed session, there was some level of poor audio, and I don't know if it's sensitive or voice-activated microphones. Mayor, your voice is pretty loud and clear to hear, but in other areas, it's been breaking up almost before it should be heard. but it seems like audio is very important and I'm sure everybody agrees to that. So I just wanted to make a notice that there was some, a little bit of breakup tonight. Okay, that's all.

Yes, we had a couple of technical issues tonight and we think we've addressed them. So hang tight. So seeing no other speakers, would entertain a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda.

I move that we accept all items mentioned in the consent calendar.

I'll second that.

Could I have a roll call, please? Council member Brownstone?

Yes.

Council member Johnson?

Yes.

Council member Nagginghast?

Yes.

Mayor Ruddick? Yes. Motion carries.

We're moving on to item 10A, which is introduction of an ordinance amending the municipal code and local coastal program to implement the sixth cycle housing element.

Good evening again, mayor and council members. I'm going to walk you through the presentation a little slowly tonight. It's not a short presentation. We want to make sure that everyone understands what's involved with the rezonings, what the context is, and how they affect each parcel.

Let me ask a quick question first.

Do we have any speaker slips on this item so far?

All right.

Could you proceed, please? Thank you. The recommendation from staff is to introduce by title only and waive further reading of an ordinance amending Title 18, the zoning, of the Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, IP, to implement zoning changes identified in the Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, LUP, and the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. So I'll step back a little bit and talk about what the housing element is and what it involves. The housing element was developed through a long process that involved a housing needs assessment, a constraints analysis, and then site analysis and selection, housing resources it's called here. A look at affirmatively furthering fair housing, so removing any hurdles to creating new housing. Extensive community engagement and then a section on the progress since the last housing element cycle. And then in the housing plan is where the goals and policies and programs reside. All of this together is the housing element. And where we have been stuck is here on HCD approval. HCD found that our housing element is consistent with state law, but held the city out of compliance until zoning amendments were completed. What we're bringing before you tonight are the zoning elements, the zoning amendments that HCD requires in order to bring the housing element into substantial compliance with state law. every local government is in California is required to satisfy a certain number of to build a certain number of housing units for each cycle of the housing element the sixth cycle increase the number of units substantially city of Half Moon Bay is required to build 480 units of housing. So far the city in the three years since the sixth cycle began, the city has completed 143 units and entitled 125. This puts us well on our way to achieving our goal of 480. These rezoning amendments provide additional capacity of 272 total units. So that's 143 very low income units, 100 low income units, and 29 moderate income units. Since May 2023, the housing element was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council six times. Council voted to approve and send the housing element to HCD four times. The fourth time was the charm and that was when HCD found the housing element to be consistent with state law. The rezonings that must be completed are in programs 1-1, which is for the provision of adequate sites, and 1-10, sites identified in prior planning periods. program 1-1 it requires rezoning in the town center from R2 to R3 to enable development on multiple housing sites and also to identify in the zoning code sites and densities where the workforce housing overlay can apply. Program 1-10 would modify the zoning ordinance so that parcels in the site inventory identified as reuse sites allow for by right processing or ministerial review for housing developments that propose at least 20% of the units be affordable to lower income households. So this means that a proposal where 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households would be able to exercise by right or ministerial permit process, but only in that instance could they exercise that process. The zoning code is part of the city's local coastal program, the implementation plan, all amendments to the zoning code require coastal commission review and certification. These rezonings require approval by hcd but first they require a certification by the Staff has worked closely with staff from the Coastal Commission and HCD and both agencies have reviewed the, have done preliminary reviews on the rezonings. Just for a little bit of history here, the zoning changes that increase the density from R2 to R3 are in the LCLUP, so the Local Coastal Land Use Plan, in Appendix A. That appendix outlines a number of zoning changes that need to take place. I talked earlier in this meeting about the implementation plan update, this specific parcels that need to be rezoned for the housing element are the subject of this update. Zoning changes that provide by right processing were added to the housing element by HCD during the first review period. So that was back in 2023. Now we do have tools available to us to address ministerial reviews like Buy Right or SB 35 reviews. City Council approved interim objective design standards in December of 2024 to address these. The Planning Commission, to get the objective design standards approved so that we'd have the tools we need for SB 35 projects and they will also work for buy right proposals. the objective design standards address setbacks, height limits, design features like massing and distribution and building articulation. In addition to the set of objective design standards that that were approved in December 2024 we also have existing standards in our code that are objective that we would apply and we have existing standards in our public works code that would apply that that are objective and would apply. I did neglect to mention that my colleague, our staff consultant from M Group is here tonight. He's gonna present on the details of the rezoning. His name is Asher Cohn, and he's a principal planner. And he has a long history here with the City of Half Moon Bay. He not only worked on the land use plan update, but he also has been working for a while now on the housing element as well.

Thank you, Leslie. Can everybody hear me okay?

Yeah.

Great. Thank you. And good evening, council members. As Leslie said, my name is Asher Cohn, and I'm a principal planner with M Group. I've been working with Half Moon Bay on various projects since 2020, including this housing element for the past several years. And tonight, I'm going to go into a bit of detail about these rezonings, and I'll be available to answer any questions. So first, that would be useful to clarify what the proposed ordinance means with by-right development. It goes hand-in-hand with the objective design standards that Leslie just described. Review of a by-right proposal may include design review, but ultimately approval of such a project must remain ministerial. Project review may not require a conditional use permit, a planned development permit, or any other discretionary local government review. For the rezonings we're discussing tonight, the proposed Chapter 18.44 includes by-right approval. This means the director would review such an application. The proposed application must be consistent with the objective standards that Leslie described, and this includes the city's interim objective design standards, the general plan, the development code, local coastal program and land use plan, as well as other objective cities, goals, policies, and standards. The director may impose conditions of approval on an application. Now I'd like to go over the proposed amendments in detail. there are four code amendments before the council zoning map amendments revisions to the existing chapter 18.20 regarding local coastal development permits and two new chapters chapter 18.43 higher density workforce housing and chapter 18.44 by right affordable housing development so first the zoning map amendments 10 sites are to be rezoned from r2 to r3 This is to provide sufficient capacity for the proposed Chapter 18.44 regarding buy-right affordable housing development. State law requires that such sites allow at least 20 dwell units per acre. The city's R2 allows a maximum of 17.42 dwell units per acre, whereas R3 allows 29.04 dwell units per acre. So this rezoning here allows the buy-right process to work. This slide shows the 10 sites and their APNs. I should add here that the land use plan or LUP calls for all 10 of these sites to be rezoned from R2 to R3. And this rezoning implements the LUP. Next, Chapter 18.20. This chapter covers local coastal development permits. The amendment here modifies the language of 18.20.055A and clarifies that a public hearing shall not be required for the by-right of formal housing development applications for Chapter 18.44. As noted in the staff report, this amendment is required by government code, which states that by right developments cannot require discretionary local government review. Next, this is the first proposed new chapter, 18.43, which introduces higher density workforce housing. This overlay is also part of the LUP and is being implemented here by applying to sites designated to meet RENA. It is required by government code. Here is 655.83.2 , which incentivizes affordable housing development type on certain parcels. Here it's being applied to four parcels. So what this overlay does, in essence, is provide an additional housing option to the site's property owner. The overlay applies to the four parcels shown here, along with their APN, the underlying zoning, and the overlay density. The first three sites, which are asterisked here and in the staff report, and also noted here with the blue block, are also identified for by-right affordable housing development. The fourth site, Zero Block Stone Pine, is not required by state law to be identified for formal housing because it was allocated for moderate housing in that housing element, which, as Lizzie said, has already been filed by HCD to have met statutory requirements. This map here shows in the orange circle the four sites in the higher density workforce housing overlay. The three blue sites are fairly easy to see. The yellow, the zero block stone pine is in between on the far north is a little bit trickier. The sites in this overlay are provided with an additional incentive for affordable residential development. Residential uses with at least 20% of the units deemed affordable are allowed, and a subdivision of a site would only be allowed if the housing site is deemed restricted to school district workforce housing. All other development standards are for the underlying public and quasi-public land use district. And finally, I'm going to discuss the proposed new Chapter 18.44 on Buy Right Affordable Housing Development. This applies to sites designated to meet the city's lower-income RHNA in the housing element, which, just to reiterate, was already been filed by HCD to met statutory requirements. This by-right process is required by government code, and it applies to 14 parcels. Similar to 18.43, this works by providing incentives for affordable housing development option for the site's owner. Now I'm going to go through these 14 parcels. First, we have 830 Stone Pine, 498 Kelly, and 300 Block Church Street. These are the sites that we already covered before in the proposed Chapter 18.43. And now there's an additional new site, 101 Kenyatta Cove. This site, which is shown circled in red at the top right of this map here, is currently zoned for mobile home parks. How this would work on such a site is that it would allow buy-write permitting process via this chapter if a proposed development with 20% lower income units were to come before the city. Such a proposal would be subject to the city's interim objective design standards and other objective development standards. Proposals would not be subject to discretionary planning review, but rather they'd be issued at staff level in the same way that building permits are issued. If such proposal did not involve mobile homes, it would require a use permit prior to converting the use from mobile homes. A use permit is discretionary, and this would go before the Planning Commission for review and approval. You can find a text that requires this in Chapter 18.30 of the Municipal Code. Next, here are 10 parcels. These are the same parcels that we showed a few slides ago that are being rezoned from R2 to R3. This map shows the sites where the proposed new chapter would apply. There is the three blue sites we've shown before and the new purple sites a bit south of that. And then way in the south of the city is the Kenyatta Cove site in green. Under this proposed chapter, by right or ministerial approval would be allowed for applications where at least 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households. And the site is developed at a minimum of 20 dwelling units per acre. I should note here that other applications for other projects could still be processed. They just would not be eligible for this particular ministerial review process. The language of 18.44 includes approval requirements. This development would be subject to an administrative... Great. Yes, this slide, thank you. The development would be subject to administrative coastal development permit. It would be approved, conditionally approved or denied by the director Any notice of decision and right of appeal would belong to the applicant. There would be no public hearing required. And again, the proposal must be consistent with the previously mentioned objective development standards. And just to go into those again, this would include the interim objective design standards, the general plan, development code, local coastal program and land use plan, as well as other objective city goals, policies, and standards. And again, the director may impose conditions of approval. and uh i've mentioned a few times these rezonings split the land use plan so we just wanted to flag a couple sections of the land use plans appendix a which goes over ladies planning station page a7 there's a reference the rezoning of sites from r2 to r3 as discussed and then an a9 there's description of how the workforce housing overlay would be implemented So thank you very much for giving me the time here this evening. I'm going to turn it back to Leslie to conclude.

Thank you, Asher. Thanks, Asher. So I know that there are a lot of people here this evening concerned about the site at 300 Church Street. So I wanted to address it a little bit. The site is already included in the adopted housing element. The proposed amendments do not change the underlying zoning. So the underlying zoning is still the zoning that would allow the building of a school or other public facilities and services type of use. that's consistent with that designation. The proposed amendments allow the church to apply the workforce housing overlay and use the buy-right option with 20% affordable housing, should they desire to do so. And along those lines, the Planning Commission recommendation in addition to the recommendation about the rezonings, they also recommended that after the housing element is certified, staff returns to the Planning Commission with an additional site or sites to offset the housing element unit requirements at 300 Church Street, and then seek an amendment to the housing element to swap those sites. I want to point out a couple typos. Most importantly, in the ordinance, the stone pine, in the second table where stone pine appears, the APN is listed incorrectly. The correct listing is 056-590-010. In the staff report, there's a government code citation that's a mistake and it's corrected here on this slide. And also in the staff report, the conclusion restates the recommendation incorrectly. So the recommendation is here on this slide and it's also at the top of the staff report stated the correct way. And that concludes my presentation.

A quick question. We had an email from a citizen requesting some changes to be made, correcting mistakes and references in the report. Have those been addressed with the citizen?

Will they be? Those were addressed on the errata slide just now. Okay. Yeah. There was one that I didn't address which was about the Planning Commission resolution. That resolution is still a draft. We didn't have time to have it signed before we got here. All right. Thank you.

Any clarifying questions? Council Member Nagincaste.

thank you and it's a lot of information I know it's a lot to consume my head is it still trying to soak it in I've only been on council gosh I can't say anymore almost two years now but the first time I've had ever seen the housing element or acted on it was last year I think October November 2025 And I had some concerns then. I did not vote for it. But I was trying to go back on because we talk a lot about buy right. And to me, it's the first time I'm seeing buy right. Maybe it's always been there. I don't recall it a year ago really discussing it. And I see there's some parcels tonight for buy right. And apparently there's some previous parcels. parcels or properties have already been designated as buy right Because I heard you've met with council six times four times were to approve the housing element. I've done it once So I'm trying to figure out when Council first approved the buy rights So on

August, well, this is supposed to say 2024. I guess I missed that. So on August 7th, 2024, that was the first time that the issue of buy-write came before So it was presented in a staff report, it was presented in a presentation, and it was presented in the letters that were included as appendices that came from HCD. It's comment number 30 in their letters. And I think, I mean, I think what you're getting at is, you know, Why didn't we clue into this, right? Because it was definitely presented. It was on a slide. This is just a copy of the slide. And then, yeah, and these were the letters from HCD. And this is actually what they said in there. So what this says is, sites identified in prior planning periods, if necessary, the element must include a program for vacant sites identified in two or more consecutive planning periods. housing elements or non-vacant sites identified in a prior housing element that are currently identified to accommodate housing for lower-income households. The program must be implemented within the first three years of the planning period and commit to zoning that will meet the density requirements for housing for lower-income households and allow by-right approval for housing developments that include 20% or more of its units affordable to lower-income households. So this was all covered for the first time at the August 7th study session, and then the August 30th, I know that's the letter, and then later in the month of August. So it's 2024, so we get the letter in 2023, it's 2024 before it comes back to council, and that's when it first gets approved. But I think the real issue here is that even though it was presented to council, we've had a lot of turnover. It was a long time ago. And I don't think everybody fully comprehended what buy right was going to mean. And if you're a planner working in a small town where you haven't you haven't encountered buy right yet, you're not necessarily going to be on top of that because SB 35 is really where buy right came into play and where planners started paying attention. That didn't get here, that didn't come here until 2025. So I think it was just something that wasn't on everybody's radar.

Well, it wasn't all mine, I can tell you that. And again, I've had a lot of questions come to me about the buy-right, as if it's the first time we're hearing this. And this is why I asked the question. So what you're saying, it's council approved the first buy-rights in 2024, August 2024. So they were in there, and I went to some of those meetings while I was running my campaign. I don't really remember discussion on those. Maybe they were in there, but like you say, it didn't mean anything at the time. But things are meeting. It's getting a lot of attention now, so I'm trying to understand what changed now versus why not then, or is it because there is now? What are these by-rights as if we've never seen them before?

I think it looks really different when you see how it plays out on parcels, on individual parcels, than it does as a policy or a program in a plan.

AND THEN I KNOW EARLIER I HAVE A COUPLE MORE. I KNOW I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS AFTER PROBABLY THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THE IEP IMPLEMENTATION PLAN VERY BEGINNING OF THE COUNCIL. AND REALLY IT'S JUST KIND OF EXPLAINING HOW YOU'RE ROLLING IT OUT NOW, WHICH IS FANTASTIC. BUT I THINK IT'S DECEMBER 2027. Is that when it's completion date now?

That is the completion date.

So what I want to make sure is, and I don't know if there's an answer to this, 2021 is when the lup was approved yes so it's almost like we're bringing the horse down in front of the cart the cart's been running along here for a while now we've got to get this because to me those two should have been in tandem right so we don't have this happen again what two should have been the ip and the uh when the lup make sure the implementation plan had all the correct zoning it was indicated in our lup right and that what we're trying to do right now to make sure our zoning catches up so so this doesn't happen again because i don't know how it's 2027 and i know i've asked previously because i've heard 2025 or 2026 and now it's 2027 and you know and the state is after us now because we don't have things finished so i just want to make sure it is 2027 we have everything is in place in case staff changes again or council changes that this thing is still moving it will be a priority and it will get done that' s what I want to ensure because we' ve heard moving dates on this before you mentioned quickly some of these legislative records or these corrections are going to happen to make sure whatever is said in a resolution an agreement or agenda report or stating the record correctly are all the same. Because I saw an interesting address. If 300 Church is the same as 515 Kelly, because they seem, because what's 515 Kelly Avenue? Is that the church address on Kelly? I don't know. You don't even necessarily have to answer that now, but I've seen them interchanged that sometimes that's shown as the church property, 515 Kelly versus 300 Church. The actual parcels are probably the 300 Church.

Yeah, I'd have to look at the APNs.

But those, to me, and I heard you say, we're going to make sure those things are correct. And just quickly, one last thing on the, make sure hatch, right? So I see a buy right for the hatch property, which is school property. DOES THAT REALLY CHANGE THINGS SINCE IT IS SCHOOL PROPERTY? SCHOOLS CAN HAVE DIFFERENT RULES, AND I DON'T MEAN TOTALLY DIFFERENT RULES, BUT TYPICALLY THEY NEED THIS COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, BUT THEY GET THEIR BUILDING PERMITS THROUGH A STATE AGENCY, RIGHT? NOT THROUGH THE CITY. So I'm trying to understand, having the buy right now for that school parcel, which is the hatch parcel, does that change anything materially or drastically than currently what typically would happen on the school property, its relationship with the city permitting process?

It doesn't change their underlying zoning. It allows them to use the buy-write process. To what extent they are subject to our zoning requirements, Now, I'm not completely certain about that. Some school districts will vote to exempt themselves from city zoning laws. I'm not sure about our school district.

I'm trying to follow up a little bit on that. I just noticed I did the school property. I know they can have different rules, especially in relation to the building permit, but I'm trying to understand how much different they are. Okay, thank you. That's all I have right now.

Can I respond to one of your comments? Your question, I should say. Your question was about why we wouldn't do the LUP and the IP together. I was not here for that. However, I would never take that on. That when you have a state agency that is overseeing your work, and commenting and making modifications and requiring different things. It's just way too complicated to bring both the policy document and the implementation document at the same time.

And you're referring to the Coastal Commission? I am, yeah.

We have a great working relationship with the Coastal Commission. I come from a jurisdiction where we didn't, but it's still difficult to get through. It's a very difficult process to get through, so I just think it's impossible. I have done updates to general plans where we did the zoning amendments at the same time, but those were just going before Board of Supervisors, not the Coastal Commission.

just because of the Coastal Commission? Is what happened this five-year lag or just a number of things that just all happened at once?

I don't know. I mean, I haven't been here for five years, so I really don't know.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Any other clarifying questions for Leslie from council members? Okay. I think we'll move to public forum. What I'd like to do, since the City Council I'm going to address that since the city council will need a significant amount of time to deliberate and we have other items on the agenda. If you have not fear in the room and have not filled out a speaker slip but want to speak I'm going to ask you to submit one now and then we're going to cut off any additional speaker slips. And if you are online and wish to address this item, I want you to raise your hand now. And when we're through the list, that will be it for online speakers. So we're going to do this to manage the flow and allow a sufficient amount of time for deliberation on this and the other items on our agenda. So if you want to speak and you haven't fell out a slip, please come forward now. And if you're online, raise your hand now.

Thank you.

Anybody else? Okay, we have a significant number of slips. So I'm going to ask that you keep your comments to two minutes. So Maggie, if you could set the timer for two minutes. And I'm gonna start with Mickey Hainer or Haines.

Hi, Mayor and City Council, thank you. I'm sure there are many others here who are ready to speak. I just wanted to say we moved to the city a year and a half ago, my four and a half year old. I've coached Little League, been involved in the city, but the lasting impression I've had of the city actually started with the school at Our Lady Pillar. It formed a lasting impression because it was very welcoming to us as a family without knowing us. It showed us the heart of this community. We've seen it as a diverse and representative group, one that we want to be a part of. We've also seen it as the best education opportunity for my child. We've looked at all opportunities. I wanted to address too that the public schooling around us was actually full when we went and looked at those options. I was very glad that this school is here. I do have a clarifying question that if the state is pushing for the redistricting or rezoning I just wondered if there were other permits for building low-income housing that were currently in process of review or approval. And if those units were built, would the requirements to rezone still be as they are? Thank you.

Thank you. Staff will collect any questions you have and we'll answer them after we take the full public forum. The next speaker is Reyna Diaz.

Good evening to everybody. I just want to talk about high density and the church, the 300 Church Street on the church. I'm asking if you could please drop it off the list because there are plans to build the school site and we really would like to have a parish school. As far as the high density, I know I have talked about it before, and I just thought that it would be good to actually survey the city to see how many people really need housing and is willing to move to a new development because some people may not want to do that. And also let's look forward to create something that can blend with what we have already, not a three or four storage buildings. at all. And the other thing is to focus more or give priority to people that live and work in Half Moon Bay and the other priority will be to those that come from outside to work and service the Half Moon Bay community. So I will be looking forward to see how I can explain or work better to address some of these issues or it goes to me, they are big, big issues, especially the one on Metzger Street.

Thank you. Thank you, Reyna. The next speaker is Joseph Calda. Sure, so Julian Calda followed by Ann Martin.

Good evening, my name is Julian Kulda. I've been a parishioner at Our Lady of the Pillar Catholic Church my whole life. I agree with the comments of the church lawyer, Steve Wilson. Steve? Yeah. Please remove our parish land from the housing element. Thank you.

Thank you, Julian. The next speaker is Ann Martin, followed by Nancy Clarkin.

Good evening. As a parishioner, coastside resident, and strong supporter of Our Lady of the Pillar Academy, I'm requesting that you remove the church parcel from the list of properties called out in your proposed ordinance to be rezoned. There are several compelling reasons. Number one, an urgent need for a faith-based educational option here on the coast. The Academy is unique in offering coastside parents a faith-based educational option for their children. The need for this is underscored by the fact that the school's enrollment has more than doubled over the last two years, from 24 to 60 students. To continue to grow and thrive, the Academy needs a new building. Second, the city has other options, other parcels for housing. The Academy has no other option for their school. There is only one parcel, the one owned and adjacent to the church where our school can be built. It's critical that the new building for the academy be adjacent to the church because students attend daily mass and participate in other worship and educational activities there. The city does have other options including land owned by the city on which to build housing to meet the state requirements. rezoning our church land will deprive the Academy of the only parcel on which its building can feasibly be built, a building that has been in the planning for years. I once again ask that the proposed ordinance be amended to remove the Academy parcel from the proposed list of parcels to be rezoned to high density housing, thank you.

Thank you, Ann. The next speaker is Nancy Clarkin. Excuse me, I'm going to ask you to refrain from applause or guttural sounds or anything like that. We're going to respect everybody in the room, no matter what your position, and respect our ability to hear you and to deliberate, so thank you. Nancy, followed by Cesar Sanchez.

Good evening. My name is Nancy Clarkin. I've been a resident of Half Boom Bay and a parishioner at Our Lady of the Pillar for 25 years. I've also spent 25 years serving the poor through the St. Vincent of Paul Society. In that time, I've come to know our community as a kind and generous one that, of course, wants to see low-income families receive adequate housing. but threatening Our Lady of the Pillar Parish to give up land owned and designated for our blossoming community does a disservice to the very people you claim to want to assist. Our parish community has developed plans to build an architecturally beautiful...

Excuse me, Nancy, can you speak more directly into the mic? Thank you.

Our parish community has developed plans to build an architecturally beautiful campus that will be open to all members of the community. Low-income families, as much as anyone else, deserve a beautiful place to worship, attend school, and build community. These factors are essential to building a strong, vibrant town. Please remove the Our Lady of the Pillar Church land from the housing element plans. It is not available. Thank you.

Thank you, Nancy. Cesar, followed by Steve Wilson.

Good evening. My name is Cesar Sanchez. Some of you already know me. Guys, I have to say this. I have lived here for 30 years now. And it's just sad to see that we're talking about the church land like this. Our kids need a school. Our future, it's them. If we don't give them the right path or the right tools for success, What are we doing? Remember that you guys are public workers. You work for us. We're not working for you. So we need to come together as a community. And I do not call myself, I am all for building affordable housing. A lot of you know me. Will be very happy to give you guys some of my properties to build high density I've been asking for years to build affordable housing my land. It's available for you guys and Anything that you want I own few properties here that are over two acres if you combine them together I I've been waiting for Scott, the planning guy, to give me a permit for seven stupid years. I'm sorry to say that, but it's annoying. I bought the property 14 years ago. I had a loan on it. I almost lost it because of the decision of these guys. And now you're coming and trying to destroy our children, our community. That's just not okay. And I hope... You understand that we need to work together. It doesn't matter if you're Hispanic, Caucasian, European, everybody's immigrant, and we need to make sure that our children have a great and set for success, just like my children had an opportunity. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Cesar. The next speaker is Steve Wilson, followed by Derek Kulda.

Good evening, Mayor Ruddick and Council. First, I want to acknowledge and thank the city attorney's office for the candid letter I received last week. This narrowed the issues. The point tonight is trust and accountability. Some of you were here two years ago on that dais when the housing element was last up for discussion. And of course, you remember the large turnout, vocal turnout, and objections to inclusion of this parish site from the parish and the community. that urged you to take the church parcel off the list of candidate sites for high density housing. You rejected that two years ago by a divided vote, tainted, unfortunately, by anti-Catholic remarks from one of your council members on the record that evening left deep mistrust felt by hundreds of your citizens. Many naturally concluded that the city had an ulterior motive more than just leaving the site on your list for convenience with HCD. Until tonight, there was no outreach, no contact from the city for two years. Not council, not staff. We were just ignored. Who does that? The single most important thing you can do tonight is begin to restore trust And you can do that by committing to take the necessary steps to remove the church parcel from the list of candidate sites. We expect this can be done reasonably within six months. The city may be tempted to say, oh, it's just a zoning overlay. You're not being rezoned to R3, nothing like that. Well, you know what? I've been in the San Francisco development game for 54 years. And what I see when things like this occur is that developers begin circling all these sites. They don't care who you are. There is pressure. There is political machination. People are bought. And don't tell me it doesn't happen. So avoid this please, take it off the list.

Thank you, Steve. Derek Calda followed by Juliet.

What's a city council member to do when caught between the demands of the state authorities and the clear voice of the local community? While the state requires 480 high density housing units, we your constituents are calling on you to safeguard our church property. This land is set aside for a beautiful master redevelopment vision, which encompasses an expanded sanctuary, a new community banquet hall, potential housing for clergy and educators, and an inspiring joyfully Catholic TK through eight classical school. The church's position has been firm, and consistent. In February 2021, our pastor formally communicated to the city, quote, it is our obligation to reserve the space for establishing a Catholic school. We are not interested in providing the space for any other use, end quote. That's in your records and I have that letter right here. In August of 2024, as you know, 650 parishioners asked to be removed from the list and the council voted unanimously to retain the church site, citing staff concerns regarding potential loss of state grants and the effort required to identify alternative sites. Now here we are in August 26 and staff is advising council to rezone our sacred grounds for the high density, high rise development that the church community explicitly opposes. I have here another petition with 596 signatures for you from your constituents asking to be removed. The sequent events raises critical questions. And has local leadership been deaf to its neighbors, prioritizing out of town staff members and consultants? Serving state imperatives over community desires? Has fear of the state enforcement obscured your value of Half Moon Bay's foundational and beloved institutions? Guess I'm out of time. I urge you all, all you council members tonight to direct city staff in respect for our town and adopt a resolution tonight requiring staff to designate a replacement site within six months of today.

Thank you.

Juliet followed by Blaze Hodel.

Blaze Huckle.

Huckle, sorry.

Good evening council members, my name is Juliet Kulda. I'm a parishioner at Our Lady of the Pillar and a parent and board member of Our Lady of the Pillar Academy. I'm standing before you tonight to ask once again that you remove Our Lady of the Pillar's property from the housing element sites. This is not a new request and our position has never wavered. In February 2021, five years ago, our pastor Father Jose wrote a letter to the city right here, which I'll give you in a minute, notifying our intention to build a school and opposed a suggested homeless encampment on this land, which would have been right next to where our children receive religious education. In early 2024, we were approached to consider using the site for mobile homes. We made it clear, once again, the church has an alternative plan for the property, specifically to build a school. Yet months later, we were placed on a list for high-density housing. Hundreds of parishioners, as mentioned, packed this room two years ago. And we've asked, now not only is our land still here, but now we're looking at rezoning it. We respect that the city has state housing mandates, but why force high density designation onto private property when the owner has repeatedly declared they have alternate plans? Why expose Half Moon Bay City to further unnecessary legal risks by including properties you clearly know are not going to intend to cooperate? Why not consider Half Moon Bay's own assets instead, specifically the land acquired in the Beechwood? As noted in Daily Journal, October 24, the silver lining is that the city now owns Beechwood and Glen Creek properties. It's a large piece of property and it can now do whatever it wants with it. bringing the total to nearly 35 acres. In that same article, council member Debbie Ruddock noted that while various ideas exist for this property, including housing, outreach is critical so the community feels heard on a site where it already has been a significant city investment in the settlement. We are not asking you to ignore this. We are asking you to consider your own land and respect the private property rights. In your own words, Councilman Ruddock, let your community feel heard tonight. Please make a motion this evening to immediately remove our Lady of the Pillar from the Opportunity Sites and relocate that designation to a more suitable location.

Thank you. Blaze, followed by Harvey Rarbach.

Good evening, I am Mr. Hodevil, or at least I expect that the students will start calling me that now. I'm Mr. Hockel, I'm the headmaster of the school. I don't have a lot to say this evening as I'm very new to the community. I'll first acknowledge that it's a wonderful place to be and I'm so grateful for the chance to be here. I will restrict my comment exclusively to the nature of the position that I hold as the cultivator of the community of Our Lady of the Pillar Academy. The predominant reason that I see, aside from potential risk that could come to the school through the state, which you already know the pressure and the weight of, is that our community faces this consternation. The biggest risk that we have with the zoning overlay is not even necessarily the rezoning element, but the confusion that it places upon our own community, our internal community, our students, our parents, our faculty, who, where they have this confusion forced upon them, have an undue burden and an undue strain. This is something that I would ask you to remove and clarify to them by immediately removing the property from the list and supplanting it with these other properties which you are already aware of. If it can't be done immediately, I would ask that within six months it be removed. Thank you.

Thank you. Harvey Rohrbach followed by Ruben Gallegos.

Good evening, Council. I'm not here to talk about the church property, but I am here to talk about another very important affordable housing project, and that's 555 Kelly. I want to read to you from the Attorney General's complaint that is currently in process, a court suit against the city, What they have requested is temporary relief, including but not limited to the suspension of the city's non-residential permanent authority and mandating the approval of certain residential developments. What do you think that means? It means 555 Kelly. If, and I'm not addressing the council as much as I am the public, who should be aware of the fact that if Measure Q, the referendum on 555 Kelly succeeds, the state isn't gonna immediately sue the city. It's gonna ask for the next level of fines, levies, penalties, costs, reasonable attorney fees. I was here when the Beachwood suit occurred and the city lost millions of dollars in the ensuing situation with the finances. So please, please vote yes on Measure Q and keep the city financially okay. Thank you.

Ruben Gallegos followed by Nancy Fontana.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, council members. I agree with everything that's been said. I'm not going to repeat that. I agree with this gentleman who left. I have kids that I wanted religious education for, been going over the hill for the last 18 years, 20 years, I don't even remember, wanted to be here. Look forward to this for the people that are still here. I think it's a wonderful thing to do and we should do it. So I'm in full support of that. The second thing, too, is even related to what he just said. High density housing. I don't know if you've been down there during church events, during just average events. It's the traffic in this area. I don't know if you've done an assessment of. of how bad it could be. I mean, even during mass, it gets crowded. And so just adding another, I don't know how many cars, et cetera, would just be, I think, just too much. And so I just urge you to consider that. And maybe I'd love to hear a response back about that kind of an assessment in terms of the crowd and traffic, especially at Kelly, at the light. It's just a mess sometimes. So that's all I have to say.

Thank you. Nancy Fontana, followed by Marius Calda.

I really made a mess about what I was going to say. I'm in trouble. I have been supportive of the church in their position on this issue, as you're well aware. I had hoped that, I went to the planning commission's meeting, as I said earlier, and I'm hoping the city council, if you didn't go or haven't listened to it, you should hear the discussion on, because they talked about that, is it at at right extensively and that sort of thing. And they also expressed a great deal of concern about the church's property continuing to be on the list. And as it was indicated, they are urging the council to commit to removing it once the housing element is certified. because the city attorney indicated that it would be difficult to do before that. So I was going to speak in favor of you approving this as long as you made the commitment. And when I say commitment, I mean a binding commitment, not just, oh, we'll do that. But it sounds like the church feels you could do it in six months. So if that's possible, that would be better. I have a problem with why this wasn't addressed after the May or whatever the month it was in 2024. When the church came out in force, one council pretty much publicly confirmed that he had a bias against the church. Concern of litigation was brought to you, potential litigation because of that bias. I mean, it's created a big mess for the city. All of that did. And then the state... coming down on the city's back and everything, it's awful. I was hoping that- Your time is up, Nancy. Okay, I was hoping that you could do an olive branch type of thing to the church. I think it would benefit both the city and the church. It could bring you together for future endeavors. Thank you. Thank you.

Marius followed by Jose Villarrobas.

Good evening, my name is Marius Kulda. I've been a parishioner of Related to the Pillar and lived in Halfon Bay my entire life. I agree with the comments of church lawyer Steve Wilson and my dad. Please remove or perish land from the housing element, thanks.

Thank you, Jose, followed by Mary Ellen Kulda.

Good evening, everybody, council. I've been a member here in Halfon Bay, or I've been living here in Halfon Bay since 1980. I'm a parishioner of Our Lady of the Pillars since that time. Now, I remember that we've been struggling to have a Catholic school here for over 30 years. And now that finally another group, you know, we tried it like three times and couldn't have it. Now finally that a group came up and tried to do it again and we got it approved and ongoing, now you guys come up and start putting, you know, blocking us from getting our dream to come true because this community, needs a Catholic school. Everybody, Anglos, Hispanics, we need a Catholic school, especially in the time that we're living right now with this, you know, all this phones and everything, you know? We need a Catholic school, that way we can teach our kids you know, do the right thing in life. So please, I'm asking you to please remove the zoning of 300 Church Street out of your listing. Thank you.

Thank you. Mary Ellen. Is Gabriel here?

Hello, I'm Gabriel Kulda. I've been a parishioner here for my entire life. Grew up here on the coast side. Plan to stay here in the future. I was very happy when the Catholic Church started this school here as I planned up kids in the future and I would love to send my kids to this school. I agree with almost all the comments in this room so far, especially Steve Wilson and Derek Kulda. Please remove the land from the housing element. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm gonna move to the online speakers at this point and call on Mike F. Mike, can you hear us? Okay, let's move on to Genevieve.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the council. My name is Genevieve and I have two children at Our Lady of the Pillar Academy. Two years ago on August 7th, 2024, I came and stood in that very room. Unfortunately, I could not be there tonight and spoke against this exact listing. So did more than a hundred of my neighbors and the council voted to keep us on the list. Two years have passed and not one thing has been done to correct it. Let me be direct where we stand. This land is not for sale. And understand that there is no substitute for us. A Catholic school exists besides its parish. This is not a preference. It is what the school is. Our children walk from the classroom to the church for mass, for confession, and for sacramental preparation. You cannot move us to a different parcel across town and call it the same school." So what is on your list tonight is not a vacant lot. It is where our school, it is where my children's education is, and it is my right as a parent to choose that education for them. So if I understand what is being proposed, this city is preparing to hand the state of California a parcel it knows will never become housing. This is not a compliance strategy. This is a paper number, and everyone in the room knows it. It produces nothing, not one home. And every month this parcel sits on your list is a month that we're not doing the actual work of finding land that will actually be built upon. So the ask is to put binding language in the record tonight, this parcel comes off and one or more viable sites goes on within the next six months. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you. The next speaker is Dan Haggerty. Dan, you have two minutes.

Yes, thank you. So this is wrong. Excuse me. The housing needs assessment is flawed. The State Finance Department audited the housing, the HCD determined number and it failed the audit. Therefore the housing element is flawed. Substantial compliance, what does that mean? What's next? This is a slippery slope. Ministerial approval is another unfortunate loss of local control. Sleepy August was chosen to bring this item to council. In no way has this been adequately shared with the general community for full understanding or allowing for intelligent alternative solutions. This represents fundamentals of poor city planning. What we have now is beautiful and should not be allowed to be destroyed. I think everyone can understand this in their hearts. Based on threats, once you need to make threats, you know it's out of control. Threats from the state. Once you start to make it okay, it yields to threats and it turns into a slippery slope with no real end in sight. Anyone that has raised a child knows that once tantrums start, you need to hold the line. Anyone that feels this should be thought of as normal business is essentially willing to give the store away. Overly dense housing will result in common double parking, further impacting the existing traffic issues. Yes, and generally create unhappy residents. Therefore, do not approve this. We have to look at another way.

Mike Ferreira.

Good evening, Mayor Rudnick and council members. To touch on a few things. There once was a time when it was thought that the Church Street property would be ideal for affordable housing development. But things have evolved since that time. And the property owners have made it pretty clear that they're not gonna do that. Now, I understand that the city has kind of a logistical problem So I think the Planning Commission was wise to resolve that go ahead tonight with this, but commit yourself to trying to find a substitute for that site. If not six months, whatever is a reasonable amount of time. I think it's the second paragraph from the end of the Planning Commission resolution. It was well thought out. And I think that's probably your best bet. Regarding, I do have a question about this new zoning. Does this new zoning blow our height limit on those properties? Especially if they use bonusing? That's just a question for staff. And then I'd like to talk very quickly about this whole ministerial approval business. If you think back at all the subdivisions in this town that have failed over the years, projects that have failed, all of those would have been stamped yes by the planning department. In fact, they were. So there's less in there. How do we control this? Thank you.

I have one last card, Mary Ellen Calda.

Good evening. My name is Mary Ellen Kulda. I've been a parishioner at Our Lady of the Pillar Catholic Church my whole life, and I'm a graduate at Our Lady of the Pillar Academy. I agree with the comments of the church lawyer, Steve Wilson. Please remove the parish land from your housing element. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary Ellen. That's all the speakers that we have on this item. We did have a couple of questions for staff during the course of comments. So I think we'll take staff responses to those first before moving on to additional questions and comments from council.

Okay, the first question that I have here is, if the state is pushing for rezoning, are there other permits currently in review, in the review or approval process? And if so, are they subject to rezoning? We have the main MedSker project that is currently we don't have an application yet but we have an intent to submit an application for that project and and we are also rezoning that project so that one is happening simultaneously we have the hilltop mobile home park which is almost through the permit process and I think that might be it. And the reason that's happening is because we have the land use plan that laid out these rezonings in advance and is the document that supersedes our planning code. So I hope that answers your question. This was less a question but more a statement from a speaker who wants a local preference ordinance. And I just wanted to say that this is something that we're beginning to work on that requires a disparate income analysis first. And let's see. There was a question about a traffic assessment for 300 Church Street. We don't have a traffic assessment for any specific development at 300 Church Street at this point. And then the last question came from the last speaker, which was does this new zoning blow our height limits on these properties? And the answer to that is no. That's why, in part, why the objective design standards are in place. They place a three-story height limit on any ministerial approvals for residential structures. That's it.

You said three stories. Yes.

Three stories maximum.

Yeah, three stories. Okay. Thank you.

Madam Mayor, if I may, I just would like to respond to some of the comments about amending the housing element. That is not, as stated during the presentation, that is not on the council's agenda this evening. So the council could not take any action this evening to amend the housing element. Thank you for that.

So I'll open it up first to see if council members have any additional questions they have for staff, and then we'll move on to comments. So we've heard at least one question from Paul. Patrick or Robert, do you have questions for staff? No? Okay.

So with this buy right and this new zoning overlay, Leslie, And we heard probably, I think it was two years ago, because I remember being in this room, and I remember the folks were here. And it was, if we rezone, and I don't remember exactly what the content of the discussion was, but I remember what we were, I know what we were talking about, but it was about this rezoning right now. And I think it was, and it was that it was coming down the pipeline. But let's talk currently now what it was. And what I got from the last time we heard was they could still build their school. They could still do whatever they want to do. They're just getting an added layer to their property rights. They could have buy right and 20% affordable housing if they wanted to if they choose it's not like they're being mandatory it's just that it adds another bonus to their property is that correct that is correct if they choose not to do it they don't have to do it they still have their property rights they own it they could build their school and they can move on from this and be happy is that correct

That is correct and we do have a substantial buffer in our housing sites inventory that could still get us to 480 units.

If we were to choose the planning commission's idea of trying to find an alternative, let's say do a little, I think I'm going to call it coconut shelling going on right now like this, could we do something like that? Is there something in your mind that we could? I mean, it doesn't sound like something I would want to do, just it seems kind of like we say we got it and now we don't. Is that something you thought about, what the planning commissions were talking about?

Yeah, I think I would clarify, I heard the six months mentioned a number of times. The Planning Commission's recommendation was six months after the housing element is certified, not six months from now. We don't have a timeline on when the housing element would be certified, so that would be a difficult commitment to make. I don't think it's a necessary amendment myself, but I understand where the church falls on this. So it is something that is potentially doable, The process of selecting sites is multi-step. It takes a while. My assumption is that we have records from when the housing element was being developed on the process that they went through and we could lean on some of those. So six months seems like a reasonable timeline.

Can I ask a quick follow-up question to yours? So, we might forego making a change until after it's certified, but we could begin the work right away to look at alternative sites so that when the time comes, we can move quickly.

There is a question of staff capacity in that. So we have We still have to get through the housing element process with Coastal Commission and HCD with the adu ordinance We have the safety element coming up and we're in the middle of the implementation plan update and we're bringing on a new staff member shortly so How soon we can get to it, that's, I'm not sure the work can start immediately.

Could a subcommittee of the Planning Commission, as a study group, look at it and take that off your plate, at least temporarily? Is that something that might work? Like the subcommittee we used to help draft the LUP amendment, freeing Jill,

for her craft but yeah yeah um i mean if they're willing to do that that that would be great and um uh we have a staff member who could probably supply them with the materials that could get them started okay thank you

So, I mean, we have like give up our land and so we're not really giving up, they're not giving up their land. They're just having an overlay that they could potentially do if they were to choose to do it, but they don't wanna do it. They wanna build their school. So they're not really giving up their land, correct?

No.

Okay. Can the school right now build, on the way it's zoned now, and can they build their school on the church property after this overlay?

They've already come in with a plan, and our staff has reviewed it with them.

It's beautiful. How did it look?

There was a little bit of housing, and it's really a lovely plan, and it's actually a plan that... I think Matthew used the term that it actually is a form of economic development for the city because it would really improve the way the city looks. You could see the tower from Main Street even.

So this overlay won't jeopardize or put a stop to this plan. I like the plan. I'm already hearing it. And that won't stop it?

I don't believe so.

Okay. You don't believe so?

I don't know how it would.

Okay. Okay.

Madam Mayor. Yes.

Councilmember Johnson. May I read you a paragraph from the letter that the city attorney's office sent to Mr. Wilson? I think it pretty precisely says, responds to some of the comments that were made. It says, the overlay does not require the church to develop housing on the property, impact to the church's existing use, or preclude the church from constructing a parochial school. To the contrary, the overlay merely provides the church with the opportunity to use the property for housing. And then it goes on, obviously, and I say, in conclusion, the city's adoption of the overlay does not compel the church to develop housing on its property, preclude the church from developing the proposed parochial school, or constitute any indication that the city is considering condemning the church's property via eminent domain. The city has no such intent.

And the underlying zoning remains public facilities?

Public and quasi-public land use, PS. So a school would be completely consistent with the... A school is a permitted use on that site.

Yep. Thank you. Council Member Nagengast?

Thank you. What's to keep us taking 30 seconds and just crossing it out right now?

You... I think HCD would not... Well...

We are currently being sued by the state and Let let me just director like let me just jump in and just say as I stated at the beginning It's not agendized to amend the housing element and that's what it would take to cross off this site But I thought we remove it as an opportunity site.

I

Yes, so that's not before the council this evening. What's before the council is the question of rezonings. And the ordinance includes as part of the rezonings the church. So the council could theoretically take the church site off the rezonings, but it is still part of the housing element. But I'm trying to is a CD making us keep this on the housing element So trying to understand this right as indicated this this is part these rezonings are part of the housing element programs They were contemplated as part of the housing element. They're required by the government code so these rezonings are all part of a statutory process and

So you're saying we can't remove this site from our housing element at all?

No, I'm saying if we want to amend the housing element, we would need to bring the housing element back to remove that site. But that's not what's before the council this evening. The rezonings are what is required. And because the site is identified in our housing element, it is included in the rezonings.

So in order to remove this site, it has to be a separate item to come back later.

Correct, as part of the housing element.

So it couldn't have been done two years ago.

I don't know, I wasn't there, so I don't know what was discussed about.

I asked a year ago and it couldn't be done either. So I guess nobody told me a year ago that it has to be a separate action. I was told it would take too much time. And now we're saying maybe six months is okay.

can I chime in? I think there' s a technical response being given that you asked tonight could we remove it from the housing element? The answer is no. Could we schedule an item on September 1st to do that? Sure. Then there' s the implications of that. We believe the implications of removing one, this item from the rezonings tonight, or two, and a separate item, removing it from the housing element, means that our housing element would be removed from compliance, or what's the term that they use?

We are currently- It would be found to be out of compliance with state housing element law. Right.

And so what is being proposed potentially is adopt the rezonings, including the 300 Church Street site, and then presumably HCD then, Coastal Commission certifies housing element, HCD finds us then in substantial compliance, and then we go through a process to identify alternative sites to propose to make the switch with HCD. Just removing the site we don't think is going to be something that HCD will approve of. Bringing alternatives, which is a process. It's not just putting it on paper. There's analysis that's required. There's a whole process involved. So I think that's the longer answer is could we do it? Yes. Not tonight. But the implications are we would be out of compliance with our housing element for an extended period of time, which is why I think the Planning Commission made their recommendation. Let's stay in compliance, let's get it finalized, and then we can explore through that process while we're in compliance, finding alternatives.

So if the city comes back with alternative sites, will HCD approve that or are they going to hold that? We don't know. We don't know. It's up to HCD to... Okay. Yeah. So HCD gets to dictate what sites we get to keep, even if we brought all... alternative sites?

Well, I think it depends on what we bring forward.

If we can bring forward viable alternative sites that meet all their requirements, I would hope that they'd be open to... Because at one point, it was talked about in the community that somebody could write a letter to HCD and have their property removed. It doesn't sound like that can be done. That you could... The church... It was suggested to the church to go write a letter to HCD and ask to be removed... from the housing element.

I think the church has written several letters to HCD.

And I can't see HCD doing that, right? Okay, so then at some point then a future council meeting has to bring back alternative sites Is the Podesta site currently in the...

The Podesta site is in the housing element as a pipeline project.

So that is in there already. Yeah. And the shopping centers, do you know? Like Safeway and New Leaf?

No, those are not housing sites.

So there's probably some potentially, some sites we could probably might, may or may not work better, but there's probably some things we could be doing... to come back and what I'm hearing has to be after something is certified.

Well, it doesn't have to be after something certified. But again, what I'm saying is if we try to change things before certification, we don't have the legwork to bring back alternative sites right now. So the only thing we could do is just remove the church site. And I would say they will not certify our housing element will remain out of compliance. And we know based on the lawsuit what that means for the city. which is, I think, why the Planning Commission made the recommendation that they did.

Okay. But when you make a recommendation like that, it doesn't show up in the approval of the HCD. Oh, by the way, we're coming back in six months to change it. you're saying it just be flat out certified and we have to maybe at the end of tonight's meeting say hey we have a future council agenda item and be seconded to come back and have a look at alternative sites post certification of a housing element.

Yes, council could ask as a future agenda item for that to be brought back it's just at this point in time I mean, it could be a significant time out because we don't know when the Coastal Commission is gonna certify. We don't know when HCD is gonna certify.

So it may be- So I mean, say six months now, that's probably not realistic.

Right, so it may be better to wait until those things have come into play. And then maybe as part of council priorities, planning, that could be brought up again as another issue.

So I just put the Planning Commission recommendation back up on the screen. I don't know if you can see it or not.

They have it now.

So where does that show up if what would counsel if counsel worked it into their? motion Where would that how would that be put in?

So it can happen in two ways it can be as part of the motion direction to the count to the staff as a future task or item and then it can also be brought back as a future item at the end of the agenda and

I would like to have some type of closure for the community or some plan that shows we It's trying, I get it, it's hard to do that. Okay, that's it.

Yeah, and we did have, I believe it was Cesar mentioned that he had properties that are developable. And I did see, I'm pretty sure I saw an email from Evelyn D'Souza asking if we could apply the Upsonings consistently across Poplar, including her own property.

Her property is designated as R3 in the LUP, but for whatever reason that it wasn't included in the housing element as a property that needed to be rezoned for the housing element. I don't know why, maybe because it's already developed.

But it could be, make an official change.

Yeah, I mean, we could do that, or we can just do it when we are updating the implementation plan, but her property is treated as R3 now.

And I do know that there's a property owner at the end of Mill Street that's interested in doing a multifamily, so we probably want to get that on our radar as well. So I just wanted to put that on our radar for tonight. I'm sorry, what street? At the end of Mill, near the creek. Thank you. Yeah. And I think some information will be coming forward about that soon. So yeah, I think as people become aware of this process, people are starting to come forward with ideas. And so I think there will be some interest in developing. I completely understand Steve Wilson's concern. You know, when you do rezone, We start hearing ka-ching, and developers do circle. And I've seen it myself in other places, so I understand the fear there. I think we have heard the community loud and clear tonight, and I think, you know, we will proceed with a motion that addresses your concerns to the best of our ability. and take some action to begin a process to look at these alternative sites. So I understand where you're coming from. I understand your fears about pressures. but you could submit an application for the school tomorrow and proceed and it would be okay. You could have your school. And I think what our council read tonight should be reassuring to you. Not sure about council member nagging gas, but yes, we want to reassure you this evening. If there are no more comments or questions though, I think we need to move forward with a motion. We can have further discussion after a motion, but I'd like to get that on the table and move this discussion forward. It is five of 10.

And just a reminder, Madam Mayor, if I may, when the motion is made, it should include the amendment to the APN recommended by staff in their presentation.

Can you put the recommendation to the screen, please?

Through the mayor? Yeah. If there are other, I don't know if they're simply called clerical fixes, but fixes for consistency to make sure we have the right locations. I've heard, and maybe it's just by parcel number, but I've heard 300 Church Street and 515 Kelly Avenue interchanged.

I think 515 Kelly, I think that's the abundant grace center.

That's not the church parcel? Okay. No.

All right. So I think the way to go about this would be the recommendation is on this slide. The errata is on this slide. If you'd like me to move from one to the other, I can do that.

I can combine them real quick, Leslie.

The motion doesn't need to include the amendments to the staff report, just the ordinance. Just the ordinance.

I do want to point out, though, to Council Member Nagy's question. In the staff report under 2-102, it's on page 10 of the staff report, Leslie, there is a reference to up to 40 units at the 515 Kelly Avenue Catholic Church.

Oh, that's strange.

So that needs to be corrected. Okay, thank you. Because 515 Kelly is Abundant Grace. I think there's a 565 Kelly address that is at least associated with the parcel at the church.

I think that might be the bell building.

Exactly. Yeah. So we want to correct that as well.

Thank you.

Leslie, I updated the slide. I don't know if it came through on your end, but let me know. If not, I can pop over there. We're here? Okay, I'm coming.

Okay.

But sometimes I would set the show. We should have started with her reading that response.

That's here. It doesn't preclude anything. That's okay. We can go for that one more time.

You just want the word. No, not that. That he has to ask you. Okay, Maggie's got the slide up for you. Okay.

The janitorial crew mopped the floors after events, but maybe.

Mayor Reddick, we have the corrected recommendation with the edit on the board screen.

So Robert has volunteered to make a motion.

Yes, I would like to move that we introduce by title only and waive further reading of an ordinance amending title 18 zoning of the municipal code and local coastal program implementation plan to implement zoning changes identified in the local coastal program land use plan and the sixth cycle housing element. Do I need to add any more time? ORDINANCE STONE PINE APN 18.44015 SHOULD BE PARCEL 056-590-010, NOT 056-260-180. GET A SECOND? SECOND.

Roll call, please. Council Member Brownstone?

Yes.

Council Member Johnson?

Yes.

Council Member Nagginghast?

No.

Mayor Ruddick? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you for being here this evening and having this discussion with us. But right now, we're going to take a five-minute break, and then we're going to move on to the next council item. Thank you, and good evening. Thank you.

Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . . . . . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

clerk tonight we are here to talk about the Parks and Recreation Commission and I just have a very quick brief history to catch anyone up here on what's going on what we have before us tonight so back in May of 2017 the Parks and Recreation Commission was reformed and then in August August 28th 2024 our bicycle pedestrian Advisory Committee modified their bylaws to include youth representatives and then soon after parks and recreation did the same in october of 2024 in march of 2025 there were two youth members appointed for the initial terms with our youth representatives their terms expired in june And we did some advertising, including e-news, social media channels, and the San Mateo Daily Journal, noticing these vacancies that were scheduled. And we had that application period open until August 10th, and then they closed. And during that time, there were four willing-to-serve forms that were submitted. one of those forms was from a youth representative in moss beach so they are ineligible for the commission and that leaves us with three applicants to for you to choose from so i have the three applicants here on the screen they're willing to serve forms were submitted to you with the packet And now I will leave it up to you for discussion. And we ask that tonight you appoint two of the three members to fill the scheduled vacancies. And I'll leave that up so you can see their names at the bottom. Thank you.

Okay. So does anybody want to make a nomination?

I reviewed, I haven't, I don't see any in the audience. That was any of the... Yeah, it's school.

It's back to school. Which is very good.

That was the first test. They all four passed the first test.

Yes.

And then, unfortunately, one of them's from Moss Beach. I kind of would like to try and keep it local, Half Moon Bay. So there's the three there. I'm wondering if Del Negro's related to our planning commissioner?

Based off of the addresses provided and the, yes, yes.

So I'm not, just things I'm- No, yeah, absolutely. Looking at this and not able- That is correct. Just Talia seemed to, is very, very outgoing. A senior, seems to be very involved in a lot of groups, committees wanting to do this. Yeah. And might be a very strong candidate. Anyone consider?

Talia was a graduate of our FLCA program this year. She was very involved. We were really impressed with her. She had great energy and very intelligent. And like you said, she's very involved. And you could tell she was really interested and involved in the community.

And I would recommend Talia is one of them. And if somebody else might want to look at one of the others.

Oh, yeah. Yeah, I'd like to nominate Simon Del Nogro. Yeah, very bright person, very motivated. I would move that we nominate Talia Meyer and Simon Robert Richard Del Nogro for the two positions on the Parks and Rec Commission.

Second.

Madam Mayor, we should check public comment before we vote. Yes, that's right. Is there anybody in the room who would like to address that? Anybody online? Don't see any. All in favor of the nomination say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Welcome Talia and Simon. Okay, we're moving on to 11B, which is consideration of amendments to city council rules of procedure and decorum. And I know that two people I heard from on this, one is watching remotely and I see that Kurt Bianchi is participating by Zoom. So, good evening Madam Mayor and council members this evening we are considering

So a little bit of background on these rules of procedure and decorum. They were adopted by the council first on May 17th, 2016 and the rules of procedure and decorum actually provide for periodic review as necessary and amendments as necessary. So consistent with that provision in the Council Rules of Procedure and Decorum, Council revised the rules on February 7th, 2017, December 5th, 2017, 2017 was a busy year, and then again on May 19th, 2020. So generally, the council rules of procedure and decorum provide specific guidance to the council on the duties and role of the mayor, the vice mayor, and council members during meetings and sometimes outside of meetings. It also provides guidance to the public about what the rules of the council members are and conduct during meetings and communications prior to meetings and after meetings so it's it's very helpful to everyone who reviews it to better understand the process that the council follows during its meetings and these types of rules of procedure and decorum are very typical for councils they are oftentimes have different names they can be different style differently, but they all provide guidance to the council on how to conduct themselves both at the dais and off the dais. So these rules of procedure and decorum are organized in chapters. There's chapter one for authority of the council, chapter two for duties. CHAPTER THREE, COUNCIL MEMBER CONDUCT. CHAPTER FOUR, OUR MEETINGS. CHAPTER FIVE, OUR MEETING AGENDAS. SIX IS COMMUNICATION AND SEVEN IS LEGISLATIVE. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BEFORE THE COUNCIL THIS EVENING RELATE TO CHAPTER 4 AND CHAPTER 6. SO FIRST CHAPTER 4 AMENDMENTS, WE ARE AMENDING THE SECTION 7 WITHIN CHAPTER 4 RELATING TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. The update is primarily to address some changes in law relating to how the council conducts its meetings consistent with Senate Bill 707, which was a recent revision to the Brown Act that requires that the council allow members of the public to participate remotely, either via two-way audio or two-way telephone. So language was added to address that provision of SB 707 to allow persons to participate via two-way audio-visual platform. There's also additional language about removing people for disrupting a meeting. And this is also consistent with changes to the Brown Act that specify the definition of disruption and then provide a process for removing somebody from a meeting, including removing them from teleconference meetings if they disrupt the meeting. And disruption is defined very specifically as engaging in behavior during a public meeting that actually disturbs, disrupts, impedes, or renders infeasible the behavior that uses physical force or presents a true threat of force. So it has to fall within the parameters of that definition to be considered disruption that would allow for the speaker to be removed from the meeting. Also, subsection C was revised to provide that speakers' time during public comment would be doubled, essentially, if they are in need of translation services. And that's consistent with the practice that the council uses currently. section 7 g within chapter 4 was is also being proposed for amendment this is just to update the language on the consent calendar to be more consistent with the actual practice of the council so previously the consent calendar section provided that if an item was removed from the consent agenda it would be moved to the end of the agenda calendar and the council has a practice of considering removed items just immediately after the consent agenda. So this is really just being more consistent with the actual practice. I've also added that public comment will be taken prior to any action on the consent calendar because that's also the council's practice. Section five within chapter six is being updated to add general correspondence, so it's clear that this is just correspondence that's received on any matter, not agendized at any time. I removed subsection B and moved that language to another section in chapter six, which we'll get to next. So I moved that language in subsection B above to subsection B in this section seven. And so this section is really clarifying and adding, clarifying the process for correspondence relating to council agenda items and also adding a specific deadline for correspondence to receive by, to be received by the city and provided to city council the day of the meeting so this provision provides that it will be received any communications received by 2 p.m on the day of a meeting will be compiled and provided to the city council And it will be attached or linked in the agenda and identified as late correspondence. And the clerk has a link in the agendas that does include correspondence. So if people look at the bottom of the agendas, they will see communications that have been received by the council either prior to or prior to a meeting, correct? Clerk Rodriguez, yes. So those are it for the amendments that are being proposed this evening. Council of course has the discretion to add amendments, remove amendments or make no amendments to the council rules. In terms of next steps, there have been some public comments about revising the agenda heading in our agenda package to be more current. There's some language that is sort of a holdover from the COVID days about teleconferencing. So bringing that language to be more current with the recent SB 707 changes and just generally more consistent with these revisions that are proposed this evening if they are indeed adopted by the council. And so with that, that concludes my presentation. The staff recommendation is to consider proposed amendments to the city council rules of procedure and decorum and adopt the resolution that's included in the package approving amendments to the city council rules. And I'm available for questions.

Thank you. I have one speaker slip. I'm going to ask if there are people. Yes, I see a hand raised on Zoom as well. So is it okay if I just go ahead and take a... All right, I'll start with Nancy Fontana, who's here. Nancy?

I'm... Thank you, Mayor and City Council. I... I was surprised that this didn't address the concerns that were brought up, unless it's a different document, policies and procedures, for councils to have. Let me read. It appears the proposed revisions don't provide guidelines for addressing misconduct by a city council member. The council and staff should recall one of the main reasons the rules and procedures and decorum were to be reviewed and revised were the result of two incidents of questionable council behavior that occurred in 2024 and 2025. I had urged the city And I urge it again to strengthen these rules to make it clear to all what is acceptable and actually legal. You know, the situation with the Catholic Church here tonight was an example of what the city could find itself in if a member of the city council displays a bias. Another incident was a city council member was almost Insinuating that members of the public were outright lying without saying that it was there were some disturbing things that could happen and It this type of behavior it doesn't it doesn't encourage the public to act behave well number one it it ruins a trust in the council and you should protect the city. And having a procedure of protocols and guidelines for the council to follow if they feel someone's out of order or doing something would be, a lot of cities have that in theirs. And I even provided examples. And the League of California Cities even had something about ethics and council things. So I tried to invite as much information as I could. I'm surprised that's just been like, because we've experienced it here. And that was a different council, I understand the first incident, but still, I think, I also suggested that it be included in perhaps the city attorney, I'm assuming, sits with the new council members and goes over some of these things, and that would be really good to have it there. Some of the protocols, I mean, just calling a point of order in the meeting and saying this isn't appropriate, and that would, probably hush it right there. But some cities, I think it was the City of Venture had some pretty good guidelines.

So anyhow, thank you. Good point. No, we still need to get to that at some point. Yeah. The next speaker is Kurt Bianchi. Kurt, are you there? Kurt Bianchi, we're waiting for you. We see your hand raised. Well, Kurt, we'll come back to you. There he is, okay. Kurt, you can speak.

Have you got me now?

Yes.

Oh, good. Okay. Well, thank you. Sorry I couldn't be there in person tonight. I sent you a letter, you, I think, referenced it, Mayor, about this topic. And first off, I'm fairly new to Half Moon Bay. Moved here in February of 2025. I love living here. Just want you to know that. And then regarding this specific topic, I think the modifications that the city attorney suggested in the written communication part probably pretty much covers what I was talking about, although I got... much more verbose, I suppose. But I think the main thing is that the public have an opportunity to provide written comment on agenda items between the time an agenda is posted. And the council meeting, and importantly, that those public comments be published in an amended agenda before the meeting so it can be reviewed by the public. And it looks like the changes to the rules indicate that a deadline of 2 p.m. on the day of the council meeting, which would imply to me that An amended agenda would be published that day, including all communication up to 2 PM, so that's that's one point. And then along the same lines, I think any kind of addition to the agenda packet leading up to the meeting should be published in an amended agenda. Maybe that already happens. I'm not quite sure about that. because I think the public should have an opportunity to review those materials the same as the Council. And the wording in the suggested changes says that Anything received by 2 p.m. on the day of the council meeting shall be compiled and distributed to the city council prior to the council meeting. And I think it should be made available to the public as well. That's my point. And then this is a little bit orthogonal, I think, to the rules document itself. And that was this idea of having a form on the city's website where people can communicate to the council just by filling out the form. It automatically gets sent to your emails. So those are my things, and thank you.

Thank you, Kurt. Thanks for hanging in there until 10.30. I SEE NO OTHER SPEAKERS. COUNCIL MEMBER NAGENKAST.

THANK YOU. QUICKLY MAY PERHAPS ONE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT ASKED ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER CONDUCT. IF I LOOK AT 3B, IT'S KIND OF IN THERE AND MAYBE WE CAN WORK ON MAKING IT A LITTLE MORE PREVAILANT. staff and members of the public with dignity, courtesy and respect. Now maybe that can be expanded upon so it's not disrespectful or punitive or to avoid potential conflict or some of the things that one of the member of the public had pointed out. So I think it's buried in there, but maybe we could You know, if it needs to be, I mean, I see it in there and I would, that's what it means to me. And then maybe if it's called for, the city attorney could say, pause or stop the meeting if there's something going on between a council member and a member of the public that needs to take five minutes or something.

that's a great point councilmember nagging gas there is this chapter chapter three councilmember conduct as councilmember nagging gas pointed out there's a subsection c that talks about treating everyone with respect courtesy dignity there's also agree to respectfully disagree present problems in a way that promotes discussion and resolution so yeah there's a lots of i think very good statements about how council members should conduct themselves during meeting and the speaker had mentioned something about parliamentary procedure that council and point of order the council does the council rules do identify rosenberg's rules of order as their parliamentary procedures and so that document is incorporated by reference into the council rules that process in rosenberg's does allow for a point of order if a council member wants to prevail itself or call upon the parliamentary procedure for a resolution of order okay and a couple more things i'm going to go quickly because we do have other items

When I did the agenda item tonight, maybe this was part of the plan. When I press red line of city council rules, there were no red lines. The first time I saw the red lines is when you just presented them tonight. I don't know, maybe I have a weird document or not. And then when I press attachment one, city council rules of procedure decorum, just had a resolution. Now, I don't know if maybe I'm... So...

You're right, it's not included in the package. Well, yeah, no, it's not.

The only thing that was lined out was 11 p.m. meeting.

That's what I just saw. That was removed a while ago.

Okay, but just so you know, so that to me then, how do we address something like that if none of the attachments were correct of what the agenda report said?

Well, the clerk can change the agendas to reflect that. It's kind of funny, it's this item that's happening. Yes, yes. But ideally, it would be the correct link. Right. Yeah. Yeah.

And then it's come to my attention, since City Hall is closed on Fridays, and the public cannot come through the front doors, you know, when we say closed, but there's still, we've been told there's folks still working at City Hall. Can somebody make a statement? Or maybe the city manager or city clerk needs to... I was talking about when we're closed on Fridays. Just so the community understands, just because our city hall doors are locked, if something is submitted, there's still people working on this and their comments will be taken in and, if need be, addressed immediately. Because I've had people ask, well, City Hall is closed. Just because the agendas typically come out on Thursdays, I've seen now. So Fridays, well, we lose a day on Friday. I'm going to assure the public we're not losing a day.

Yeah, so the doors of City Hall are physically closed. I work every Friday. I tried 410s once but realized that doesn't work well for a clerk. So I work Monday through Friday. I'm always available. I check my email regularly.

consistently throughout the day and anything that comes in we can add and change on the agenda as an addition and um also to address that um mr bianchi mentioned having an online form that people can just click on and have a comment and um have that you know collected for us to review too it should be pretty simple just to do an online form

Yeah, there's a couple of different ways we can address that. We can work on that. Part of our conversations earlier today, too, were around the publishing of these updated comments. And I do see issues with kind of ongoing updates because then people don't know if they have the most current version. There's no notification. Or we're notifying people every time we attach something. So one of the things we want to look at is Maybe, you know, the council is going to get copies of comments as they come, but for the public, probably we want to do one update before the meeting. So we have the publication of the original agenda Thursday. We try for Thursdays, if not Fridays, that meets our statutory requirements, but we try to do it earlier. And then before the meeting, and we'll want to talk about the timing, probably one update that includes all those comments attached. And the same notice that goes out when we publish the original agenda, that same notification goes out again. So people know, oh, there's updates to the agenda. There's new comments. And then we also talked about the fact that after 2 p.m. and even at the meetings, sometimes people will come and say, I want this entered into the record. I want this connected to it. post-meeting update as well so that when people go into our website and they look at say the meeting for tonight and Had we received some documents to include in the record which we do we've got a petition That will now be attached to the permanent record And that way we have some sort of like version control otherwise you know, there could be additional things added and a person doesn't even know it's there and then they find out at the meeting, right? So I think that's something we'll work on and probably bring back to you just as kind of an informational update. Here's procedurally how we're going to manage this within the rules that you're adopting.

Yeah, I would say maybe one update like at 3 o'clock or 4 o'clock in the afternoon before a meeting. But maybe have something on the top of the agenda that comes out Thursday or Friday that says a second updated agenda will be posted, you know, like at 3 or 4 o'clock on Tuesday, the day of the meeting. So that people... know that that's coming. But I'd like the idea to make that stuff transparent to the public and us too, without unduly burdening staff. So I think if we did one update, and then I'd like the idea of the post update too. I think that's good.

Two things. First, I just piggyback on Paul's comment about closed on Friday. I found that statement very confusing when I first saw it. I mean, that it would be confusing to the public. And it's okay to say, you know, like many cities in San Mateo County, city halls are closed down on certain days a week to catch up on all the work that's been generated in the other days, closed to the public only to catch up on work. So one sentence could explain that, something like that. In terms of the forum, an open forum, Before we even begin to consider that, I'd love to see, you know, if staff could show us some other models and other city council websites. The idea of a forum.

I think we weren't talking about a forum.

We were talking about a form.

Oh, form. Where people could enter their public comments into a web form. In a standard format.

I thought I also heard a forum and a forum. No, no, no.

I don't like the word forum. I don't think we went near it. Our own next door. Yeah, that would just, okay. Yes.

All right.

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Okay, because I, and I just want to make it clear, and council needs to remember this, is there was a data dump two minutes after our meeting started. I literally was going through data on my phone and we do not want that. Now I've been, and council has the opportunity to always continue the meeting. But a meeting like that though, that was a lot of pressure, intense. Their decisions had to have been made then. And I don't know how we get around when somebody dumps something five minutes after the meeting. But again, we have the, to continue that meeting, right?

So that's always... One thing I'll share about that particular instance, and maybe we do want to think about some language here, that information had been shared earlier in the day. We ran into technical issues trying to compile it and getting it to you. So... we didn't address it that night because it was a crazy night, right? But the information that you're referring to had been received, I don't know if it was received by a 2 p.m. cutoff, but it had been received earlier in the afternoon, and we had issues where the PDFs wouldn't link and send out. I'm not sure how we addressed that, but I think having the earlier cutoff is part of it, right? If people know, look, You send it after 2 p.m. Don't expect it to be part of what the council sees, and that encourages people to get it earlier. That can account for technical issues we might run into, but I know that's part of the impetus for this discussion, and I think the 2 p.m. cutoff helps to address that because that gives a bigger window for us to try to work through those issues.

Council Member Johnson?

Yeah, that's, because that was one of my concerns, and that was when the mayor was at a meeting with me, and I think we made a mistake, and you were there, and I was there, and we ran into the, I think the mayor of South City, Eddie is his name, right? And I was talking about this incident, and then the mayor came in maybe a couple minutes later, and I said, I brought her into the conversation, and he said, we have a policy in place, and I think it was very similar to what we're doing now. So I'm glad that we're doing this, And I'm glad that I heard another council member or mayor saying we have the same problem. So that means that the problem that's not just us, it's everywhere. And so we're doing something that's creative.

I'd like to draw attention to, I've received an email from Jan Hansen. I meant to, it was only to me, I meant to share it with staff and just... spaced it, but she had raised this issue previously about the disruption of meetings. So like say that there's a technical, remote access is disrupted. Her question to me was, well, should we keep trying every five minutes? Did we give up? What should we do? So maybe something, at the top of the agenda that addresses what happens and disruptions. It talks about a one hour shutdown. She was going like, well, what do we do? Do we just check after an hour? Is somebody gonna let us know it's fixed? So she would like to see something in the text at the head of agendas discussing what happens then. And I think I discussed it with you, Denise earlier today. How do we get at that problem? But then Jan took issue And I get what she's saying here that we mentioned when we discuss hybrid meeting participation protocols, we say remote participation is provided as a supplemental way to provide public comment, but this method doesn't always work. So she feels as an attorney, not this kind of an attorney, but that takes it out of compliance with SB 707, which is really trying to create more robust, you know, public participation. And that, you know, what if you're elderly or disabled or you're watching kids, you can't get out of the house, you know, you want to participate remotely and that we should, as long as we are required to do both, you know, we should treat them the same and not say things like, the public is encouraged to attend in person to ensure full participation. But to take out remote participation as supplemental and then take out the public is encouraged to attend in person. You should be able to participate either way that works for you basically. So, She asked me for a response to that and I said I would bring it up to this meeting.

Yes, so Madam Mayor, as we discussed, I think those edits are acceptable. I mean, they're just minor amendments that would be consistent with what is being changed in the council rules of procedure.

Robert, did you have any additional?

One last thing, because I think, and I don't want to be too long, the issue when Paul was trying to get on, and we were trying all these A, B, Cs, and Ds, we need to have like a checklist of like, okay, do this, do this, do that. I know it doesn't, just like when you check your water heater, you check here, you check here, you check here. If we can have a list from an IT guy that says, all right, this is, we're going to try to do this, and then we'll result to this, and then the last thing will be a phone call. So we have like a one, two, three, four kind of a thing.

Are we to give direction on this? Or do you have the direction you need? Okay, right, yeah. So could we pull that up and then somebody make a motion?

Yes.

Let me pull up attachment one, city council rules and procedures and decorum for the resolution.

Hopefully the resolution's there.

Of course I'm not able to pull it up now.

I'd like to just add one more thing. I forgot, I was gonna address like what Nancy brought up in terms of conduct, council conduct. I would like to just add a sentence that says, council members will come to meetings prepared, having read the council packet and be prepared to have an informed discussion.

So are you? I pulled up the rest. Attachment one. Okay. Labeled something else, but.

I think, Madam Mayor, so did you want to add that language? Yes. Okay, so.

And I don't know. I sense from Nancy that maybe we're not being... assertive enough on the issue of council conduct. I'd actually like to look at what other cities do and maybe bring that back in the future for a finer resolution discussion. So I think we should.

So I would recommend that we add that sentence about council members coming to the meeting prepared, potentially under the duty section for council members?

You will read the packet and come to the meeting prepared for an informed discussion.

Under chapter two duties, section three duties of council members, A is arrive on time for all council meetings. B is review all meeting materials in preparation for council meetings. C, to fulfill the liaison assignments to legislators, external agencies, and the city's boards and commissions.

Well, maybe that's good enough then, but yeah. Maybe we just need to emphasize it more.

I'll underline it.

All bold in all camps, maybe. Yeah.

I move that council adopts the resolution of the city of Huffman Bay approving the amendments to the city council rules of procedure and decorum as received tonight's meeting with the added amendments. or the added additional language was kind of helped me out here in the last bit of it.

we decided there wouldn't be an additional language to the duty. So I think it's just as proposed. And if you want to include direction to staff regarding changing the agenda headings to be consistent with the policy rules, that would be acceptable too. But that's, I think.

Yes, I'd like to add to change the agenda headings, be consistent with the policy rules.

Okay.

Second.

all in favor say aye aye aye any opposed motion carries um item 11c is highway 1 north project design agreement amendment number eight

Good evening again Madam Mayor, members of the council. This item is going to go quick. It is an amendment to our design contract for Mark Thomas and the design team for the Highway 1 North project. You are all familiar with the project. primarily new intersection at Terrace Avenue, Class 1 trail on the east side of the highway, as well as some frontage improvements on both sides. This will be the eighth contract amendment for Mark Thomas. This project has been ongoing. They're a design contract since 2019. I was actually here about a year ago with amendment number seven we've actually made some great progress since that time in the end of July we heard from Caltrans that they have finally approved our 100% design drawings for the project. we got a letter says it's approved so that's great news and then they gave us a list of several additional items we needed to go through including right away certification certification of our swdr which is our stormwater permitting as well as a couple of other items so this amendment includes kind of the last small more they're not design changes anymore these are more just administrative actions to finalize the permitting with caltrans we also in the last year we also acquired additional funding through the ta's office we had another 13 million dollar grant which they awarded us to help fully fund the project so um i i say this with some risk it at my own peril, but we are tentatively planning to for construction in the spring of 2027. That gives us time to finalize permitting, advertise roughly sometime this winter, and break ground once the ground dries out.

I would be remiss if I didn't bring up Jimmy Benjamin's comment about the

Yes, I spoke with Jimmy today. And so his concern had to do with just the long-term development on either side of the highway and impact to existing wetlands. And he was exploring whether or not this project would, I guess, legitimize improvements that, in his opinion, were done without permits, which I confirm this does not legitimize any existing improvements. It doesn't. It doesn't waive any of that concern or risk. He also asked whether there was an opportunity to incorporate additional improvements into this project to help with some of that mitigation that he was looking for, which at this point in time, because of the way... So this project is funded primarily through the TA. They've put something like $20 million into this project, and I told him I would have concerns about... additional delays that we may lose grant funding as a result. That being said we are committed to addressing concerns we've continued negotiations on other projects to focus on those issues. currently we're tracking around 22 million dollars in construction costs including all the soft costs for design and everything else this is based on a July estimate from this year and we went through constructability review earlier this year we're actually able to make some adjustments and save save a little buddy went a little bit of money so despite escalation and costs we're actually in a pretty good we feel pretty comfortable with with pricing today Last, I just want to thank the TA for all of their support working through this project. And I think that was a recommendation to amend our design contract.

Is there anybody in the room who would like to address this project? Okay. Anybody online who wants to address this project? Raise your hand right now. Dan Haggerty.

Yes, if it's the same project that I'm thinking of, I've seen photos, and from the photo, it appears that it's essentially gonna turn Terrace Avenue into three lanes southbound, three lanes northbound, and then the, all that green space in front of, you know, where they sell pumpkins, all that's lost and then another two lanes. So almost turning it into essentially like eight lanes of pavement. And, you know, here's that, just gonna be an incredible great loss of, You know, the essential, you know, small town, you know, country road, turning it into just a vast, wide spread of pavement. Very sad, in my opinion. I'm assuming that, you know, everything that I saw in a photo of, you know, I don't know what it was, or an illustration of years ago, this is what we're talking about here. I'm sorry. Caught me off guard. You know, I think that, you know, your average... person in the coast side community is completely not aware of this. And it seems to me like, you know, okay, yeah, you can put a light here. Okay, well, you can put a light there. You can put a light down there. Then before you know it, there's, you know, a thousand lights and a thousand eight lanes. And then our two-lane highway is gone. Our scenic highway is just lost and it turns into a freeway. I'm a bit sad to hear that it's gone this far. And I'm a bit sad that there hasn't been like real communications within the community of another way to look at this to solve the problem. So I'm a bit shocked, to be honest. I'm a bit shocked that that we're talking about this tonight. There must be another way to solve the problem without so much damage.

Thank you, Dan. Part of the problem is this project in development for so many years, maybe 10 years, you know, people like forget about it. And every now and then, you know, people go, oh, where's that signal at Terrace Avenue, right? And then it comes up again. But I think we need to start communication like soon about this project coming to completion and do that notifying. Yeah, maybe years ago, if we'd thought of it, maybe a roundabout or... you know, whatever, but you know, the horse is out of the barn.

Are we talking about two lanes each way with bike lanes? That's correct. So yeah, so just for anyone else listening, have no fear. We're talking about two lanes with some bike lanes on the sides.

So I can just to clarify from Mr. Hageny's comment. So this project also includes extension of the frontage road to the south and Grand Avenue from the I'm sorry frontage road from the north and Grand Avenue from the south which will tie into that intersection. So and we'll provide that access east-west across that signalized intersection for access to bus stops and the bike route on either side so there's a number of Accessibility and safety issues that are addressed by this project What's up

I move that we adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute amendment number eight to the professional services agreement with Mark Thomas and Company Inc. For an additional amount not to exceed $120,000, it covers supplemental design, permitting, certification, and bid support services for the Highway 1 Safety and Operational Improvement Project North, CIP project number 0538. Roll call please.

Council Member Brownstone.

Yes.

Council Member Johnson. Yes. Council Member Naggingas. Yes.

Mayor Reddick.

Yes. Motion carries.

Item 11D, Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Half Moon Bay and the International Union of Operating Engineers, Stationary Local Number 39 for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2030.

Good evening Madam Mayor, Council Members, and members of the public. So I'm Ken Stiles, your Interim Administrative Services Director, and I'll be reporting the Memorandum of Understanding with one of our labor groups, the International Union of Operating Engineers, Stationary Local Number 39. So Local 39, for short, is one of our unions. We have four employee groups. Two of them are actually organized. And one of the unions is called Local 39. They represent about 17 positions or about 36% of our staff. So these are our frontline staff, our maintenance workers, our admin assistants, our accounting technicians, our permit technicians. So people that the community interact with on a day-to-day basis. The agreement expired this past June. It was signed originally in 2021. It was a five-year deal. It expired in June. So we were due to re-up it. Some of the framework that we went into this agreement was managing fiscal sustainability, trying to encourage recruitment and retention, but also how we compare with other agencies in San Mateo County. So council knows the process, but for the people watching at home, the bargaining process starts off with several sessions between the city and representatives from the union. We receive their proposals, what suggestions, changes they would like to see in the new agreement. The city on our side, we look to see how that proposal compares with other cities, come with our counter proposals, and somehow meet in the middle. The good news is that we came to a tentative agreement with Local 39, meaning that their labor group voted on it and agreed to it. So the final step here is council approval. The approval that we're asking for tonight is approving the city manager to enter into agreement and sign off and implement it. So what are the changes? So the big things are listed here. The staff report has every item that has changed, including the red line document. But the big things is, of course, the salary adjustments or cost of living percentage changes. You can see on the left-hand side the percentage for each year. It's a four-year deal 5% in the first year and in three and a half and then three point two five in the last two years There is a one-time distribution payment of twenty five hundred This is comparable. Sam is our sewer authority bitco side Did one for two thousand we did one the last time a deal was signed. So this is this is seen in other agencies as well and Other economic changes have health contribution. So we had a previous structure that was a fixed amount that employees were allowed to use, and we're now switching over to contributing up to the Kaiser premium amount. So employees will be able to enroll with any of our CalPERS medical options, which include Kaiser, Blue Health, but the city will contribute up to the Kaiser amount. And this is also very comparable with the cities in San Mateo County. We have some small adjustments and differentials for various select classifications for specific circumstances. One example is if we have to call in a maintenance person to come in and work on the weekend, is that part of their regular shift? Is that overtime? There's a little bit of a differential to recognize that. And of course, another one is the expansion of the service recognition eligibility. So those are the terms, how this fits into the broader picture for the city. So the fiscal impact of it all. It's no secret that the city is still facing a structural deficit. And this was always in the back of our minds as we try to manage these long-term costs carefully. in the first year the impact is about $140,000 more and then over the length of the four-year deal is about $500,000. It does increase costs tangibly but it avoids issues in other areas that have more visible costs that can be more costly. Issues in recruitment, vacancies, turnover and of course that all just kind of bleeds into service delivery. That my recommendation is as follows authorize the city manager to execute the memorandum of understanding between the international union of operating engineers local number 39 in the city have been made for the period of july 1st 2026. June 3020 30 and approved applicable salary schedules. With that I would love to take any questions.

I'm gonna ask first if there's anybody in the audience who would like to address the item of the labor MOU or online, you can raise your hand now. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to city council for a motion and a second.

I move that we authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding between the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Number 39, and the City of Half Moon Bay for the period of July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2030, and approve the applicable salary schedules.

Second.

COULD I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? COUNCIL MEMBER BROWNSTONE?

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON?

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER NAGENGAS? YES. MAYOR RUDDICK? YES. MOTION CARRIES.

THE NEXT ITEM IS MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY AND THE REPRESENTED MANAGEMENT TEAM, THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLANS FOR NONREPRESENTED CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES AND UNREPRESENTED EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2026 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2030.

Okay. So very similar presentation. So as I mentioned earlier, we have four employee groups. Local 39 is one union, and then representative management team is the other union. This union represents 19 positions, about 40% of staff. This includes supervisory and management staff. Their agreement also ended in June 30th, so we like to keep all of our groups aligned, and we follow the exact same bargaining process. terms are essentially the same, same salary schedule, same health and again in this staff report has the entire detail along with the red line document but we really strive to keep both agreements relatively aligned. The only thing that' s different in this agreement is the opportunity for staff to cash out accrued leave as of right now staff accrue vacation time or admin leave and they have the opportunity to cash it out once a year. The change here is to twice a year and the ability to cash out a little bit more hours. As far as the other employee groups, so we have two additional groups that are non-represented. These are the confidential employees. These are classifications that are in management or supervisory roles that touch very sensitive or confidential areas of the city. The management analyst in human resources is one, the city clerk is another, the finance manager, classifications like that. And then finally, the executive employees, which is your department head team. The recommendation there and then the historical practice is to extend the agreement with RMT to those other employee groups just to keep equity and alignment across staff. And with the fiscal impact here, the first year cost would be about 300K. It would come down over the following years, and the four-year total across all four years is about 900K. So two recommendations here, authorize the city manager to execute a memorandum of understanding between the city of Half Moon Bay and the representative management team for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2030 and approve the applicable salary schedules and approve the compensated and benefits plans for the non-represented confidential employees and unrepresented executive employees for the same period and approving the applicable salary schedules. And I think we also have oral report that needs to be read. That would be done by our city attorney.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I can read the report now or after public comment.

I'll take public comment first. Is there anybody in the room who would like to address this second MOU? Is there anybody online who would like to address this item? Please raise your hand now. Seeing none, I will bring it back to our city attorney to report.

Okay, so I have to read this oral report. It's required under government code section 54953D3. I am providing the oral summary of the recommended action for the unrepresented executive EMPLOYEES AS DEFINED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 3511.1 D. THE ITEM BEFORE THE COUNCIL TONIGHT IS TO APPROVE A 5% SALARY ADJUSTMENT FOR THESE CLASSIFICATIONS EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2026, ALONG WITH A ONE-TIME 2,500 LUMPSUM NON-PENSIONABLE PAYMENT. The total annual salary increase for the affected classifications is $40,754, plus corresponding increase in payroll taxes, retirement, and fringe benefits, which are a function of payroll. In addition, the anticipated benefit cost will increase by $8,006. As the city manager and department heads also received the same set of benefits afforded to the unrepresented executive employees, the total annual salary increase for the city manager position is 14,057 plus corresponding increase in payroll taxes, retirement and fringe benefits, which are a function of payroll. In addition, the anticipated benefit costs will increase by $13,514. Additional details regarding this item are set forth in the agenda and resolution associated with this item Concludes the oral report Thank you very much Could we have the recommendation on the screen again, please?

Could somebody make that motion Sure

I move that we authorize two, actually two items. I move that number one, we authorize the city manager to execute memorandum of understanding between the City of Half Moon Bay and the representative management team for the period of July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2030 and approve the applicable salary schedules. And two, approve resolution approving the compensation benefits plans for non-representative confidential employees and under-representative executive employees for the same period and approving the applicable salary schedules.

Second. Could I have a roll call, please?

Councilmember Brownstone? Yes. Councilmember Johnson?

Yes.

Councilmember Nagingast?

Yes.

Mayor Reddick? Yes. Motion carries.

Item 11F, Sewer Authority and Coastal, excuse me, Sewer Authority Midcoastside Fiscal Year 2026-27 Operations and Maintenance Budget Mid-Year Adjustments.

Good evening again. So this item is a request to adopt a resolution approving the mid-year adjustment to the SAM fiscal year 26-27 operations and maintenance budget. So the budget was presented to council back in May. I think our second meeting in May which was approved. At the time we noted that a big that meeting was the cost of the Montero force main project. So we now have a cost associated with that and approval from the SAM board which leads us to tonight's meeting to adjust the budget to incorporate that project. a quick background our operating maintenance budget is based on our sewer flows from the prior year and so this year our sewer flows are based on last our share of the cost is based on last year sewer flows which puts us at sixty one point one eight percent of the total sam operating and maintenance cost that includes capital improvement projects for sam. The Montero project is a two and a half mile replacement of the existing force main from Moss Beach from Los Amigos restaurant roughly to El Granada in front of Spangler's Market essentially along the Highway 1 corridor. that works could be done through open trench directional drilling and casing under the highway works plan to occur outside of the paved edge of the road through most of it so there's not going to be any impact to the brand new pavement that we have out there today. And this work is being done as a result of a consent decree that was settled between SAM and Ecological Rights Foundation back in 2019 for which included a series of projects to modernize and improve SAM and prevent sewer overflows. SAM entered a progressive design contract with McGuire and Hester several years ago to start developing this project back in 2023. the cost was estimated at $10 million. We knew going into this year's budget that number was going to significantly rise due to cost escalation as well as the recent war in Iran and oil prices. And we've seen that cost grow as a result, including costs of HDPE pipe. There's also been some additional requirements added on the project from Caltrans, including how they deal with the existing pipe being abandoned and backfill of the new lines going in. budget. We started saving money for this project in sam' s budget last year but a lot of those funds ended up being spent on other necessary improvements at the plan. Today we don' t have a current fund balance from sam' s but we' re starting with the worst case scenario which is essentially just looking at this project in its entirety of cost. and they were presented with two options. Option one would be a June 2027 completion. Option two is a June 2028 completion. The 2027 completion, that's the deadline that's currently set by the consent decree with ERF. and there's a lot of concern over that project with this upcoming winter, dealing with wet weather, scheduling challenges, and just it's a very tight time frame where we're at today to get that project completed. And so you see a very significant difference in the cost associated with completion next June and June completion in 2028. The SAM board approved option two contingent on the member agencies also approving a mid-year adjustment incorporating the SAM budget. currently Sam is working through all their final permitting that's required they may have their encroachment permit from Caltrans they have most of their environmental permitting needs and they're wrapping up encroachment permits with the county I've been told that they've had positive feedback with ERF over the over the extension of the consent decree to the 2028 calendar year Yeah, so they're hoping to give contractor notice to proceed. I believe it was in September of this year. So completion in 2028 would not delay start of the project. They'd still get started as soon as they could in order to work efficiently and get the work done. what this does to our budget that option to go back really quick so that option to has a price tag of roughly 17 million dollars on it and that's over the next two fiscal years. In this fiscal year how that impacts the Sam budget it raises a Sam budget roughly Eight and a half million dollars and on the city's budget because we have that 61 point 61 percent share of cost it would raise our opera our share of the operating budget roughly five point five million dollars, so we're growing from a roughly sorry, a $6.9 million budget to a $12.2 million budget. Not quite 5.5, but... so questions come up how are we going to pay for this project so currently we' re paying for capital improvements at sam out of the sewer budget we currently do not have this project built into our rates obviously we' re moving forward with a rate study which will be out next year but in the meantime sam' s expectation is that the city starts paying for this project with our next bill that we' re going to receive from sam so which would be our September invoice from Sam. Staff has reached out to both the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and California iBank or the Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank. And they both have pros and cons. Those are both great programs. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund, it sounds like we would get lower rates, but those loans take much longer to get in place, roughly a year. to 15 months in order to acquire those funds, whereas iBank, the rates are a little bit higher, but we can get funding in as little as 30 to 45 days. We're also exploring whether there's a way we can take advantage of both if it's something that we can capture funding for in the short term and then recover down the road. iBank also allows us to recover funds that are spent prior to getting a loan with iBank and that was one of the consent items that was presented earlier this evening was getting that approved in order to basically start that clock and I believe it's 60 days prior to that approval that we would be able to so any expenses we accrue now would be would be eligible for iBank financing And that's it, and I'm leaving you with the recommendation.

So is there anyone in the audience that would like to address this item? Anybody? Anybody online? Raise your hand now. Seeing none, I will bring it back for a motion and a second.

I move that we adopt a resolution approving the Sewer Authority Mid-Coast Side FY2026-27 Operations and Maintenance Budget Mid-Year Adjustment and incorporating costs for the Montara Force Main Replacement Project, including the City of Half Moon Bay's associated increased assessment consistent with option two approved by the SAM Board of Directors on August 10, 2026. Second.

Could I have a roll call, please? Council Member Brownstone?

Yes.

Council Member Johnson? Yes. Council Member Nagengast?

Yes.

Mayor Ruddick? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. We're moving on to number 12, items for future discussion, possible agenda items. Council Member Nagengast. Yes.

I got a couple here. First one I'd like to, we talked a little earlier this evening about once the sixth cycle has been certified, the housing element, that we come back and remove 300 Church Street and add alternative sites. I don't know, we talked about there's not really a time period to put on that because we don't know when it would be approved.

But we're putting a flag in the ground for it. And I would second that.

Okay, and the other one is I would like us to consider an ordinance to give preference to existing Half Moon Bay residents in affordable and below market rate housing.

Okay, are we already working on that?

We are working on that, and what we talked about is we can bring an item back soon that just provides an update, lets you know what we're working on. Leslie mentioned there's a disparate impact assessment that needs to happen first and foremost.

I'll second that. Any City Council reports? It's been kind of a slow summer, fortunately. All right. We can adjourn this meeting. Thanks everyone for your forbearance and your ideas and your comments.