City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you.

to the city council meeting of september 17th 2026 i'm calling this meeting to order at 6 34 p.m please join me in the pledge of allegiance 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

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM A, REMOTE ATTENDANCE UNDER THE JUST CAUSE PROVISIONS OF THE BROWN ACT. MAYOR MACKIN IS ATTENDING THE MEETING REMOTELY UNDER THE JUST CAUSE PROVISIONS OF THE BROWN ACT. AND MAYOR MACKIN NOTIFIED THE COUNCIL THAT SHE'S UNDER THE WEATHER. AND SO I GUESS I'M SUPPOSED TO ASK MAYOR MACKIN IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER PRESENT IN THE ROOM AT YOUR LOCATION. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO REPORTING OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION.

NEW SPEAKER Good evening. A CLOSED SESSION WAS HAD ON THE TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND NO ACTION WAS TAKEN, NO REPORTABLE ACTION.

NEW SPEAKER GREAT. NEW SPEAKER I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE ROLL CALL.

NEW SPEAKER OH, I JUST BREEZED RIGHT THROUGH IT.

COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS? HERE. COUNCILMEMBER KOERN?

HERE.

COUNCILMEMBER LENS? HERE. COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL?

HERE.

AND MAYOR MACKIN?

HERE. THANK YOU, CITY CLERK. AND I JUST WANT TO NOTE IF WE WILL BE DOING roll call voting because we have somebody attending remotely. Okay. Great. So that moves us to adoption of the agenda. Staff has asked to pull item H to authorize approval of San Mateo County Smart Corridor Ownership Operation and Maintenance Agreement for consideration at a later meeting. And I would like to move up item L to WHICH IS THE DATA CENTER DISCUSSION. AND HAVE THAT BE AFTER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. IF THERE'S ANYTHING PROCLUDING US.

BEFORE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. OR AFTER CONSENT. We can do it after consent.

Well, Mayor Pertem, what we were going to suggest is that we have a number of firefighters here tonight to make a formal announcement about the new chief.

Yes, yes, yes. We can do it after consent.

Great. I just want to make sure that oral communication was... Yeah.

Thank you. Yeah, oral communications and then consent. And then we'll have item L. I'll make a motion to approve.

I'll second.

Okay, roll call vote.

Council Member Davis.

Aye.

Council Member Kern. Aye. Council Member Lents. Aye. Council Member O'Connell.

Aye.

And Mayor Mackin.

All right. Fantastic. That brings us to item B, San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement and Vector Control presentation. And tonight we have with us Rachel Curtis-Robles, Communications Director, San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control District, and our Brisbane rep on the board is Michael Goldman. And so I'll invite you two to come up and make your presentation.

Thank you. Do we face you or do we face? You face us. Thank you. Thanks. It's a continuing pleasure to serve as this city's representative to the Board of Trustees of the San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control District. And I'm very happy today to introduce Dr. Rachel Curtis-Robles, who will give us a slide presentation on that. I've also given the council very late in the game a brief written report. And there's nothing there you have to have read before you hear today's report. But I do want to say that I've been very impressed at the way the organization has responded in difficult situations or unexpected things coming up. And I've given at least one example of that in the report. So I think we are generally in great hands. So Rachel, if you'd like to speak. Thank you.

Thank you. And also, we really appreciate having Dr. Goldman on our Board of Trustees. He offers very thoughtful and balanced commentary on all the district matters that the trustees are handling. We are the San Mateo County Mosquito Vector Control District. We exist. We work throughout the county. Your taxes pay for us. Next slide, please. We offer a variety of services. So behind the scenes, we're doing a lot of mosquito control work throughout the county. We use an integrated pest management strategy. We offer mosquito fish for folks that might have a small fish pond or a decorative water feature in their yard. Those mosquito fish can eat the baby mosquitoes in the water so that there are fewer adult mosquitoes flying off. Our staff, our entomology laboratory staff, can do insect and tick identification. Our operations technicians can do rodent inspections. This is for private homes as well as commercial facilities. We also do yellow jacket control, which I know Caroline featured in the weekly e-news this week because city staff were getting... STUNG AND THEY CALLED AND THE NEXT DAY MY COWORKER STEPHANIE WHO HAPPENS TO BE PICTURED HERE DOING HER MOSQUITO WORK CAME OUT IN HER BIG BEE SUIT AND WAS ABLE TO GET RID OF THAT NEST. WE DO COMMUNITY EDUCATION A FEW YEARS AGO. I HAD THE PLEASURE OF VISITING THE BRISBANE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND TALKING WITH A BUNCH OF KIDDOS THERE. And then we do quite a lot of disease testing and surveillance for mosquitoes and ticks from throughout the county. And all this is paid for by property taxes, so there's no additional cost if somebody would like to request a service. Next slide, please. This is just a snapshot of Brisbane for 2025. The most popular service type request is those yellow jacket and wasp nest removals or treatments, but we also, you can see, do rodent service requests, or if somebody notices standing water that they're concerned might be breeding mosquitoes, we can come check on that as well. The good news in Brisbane is you had zero West Nile virus positive dead birds. Although we would like to remind folks that if they see a dead bird, they can always call and report it and we'll pick it up and test it for West Nile virus as long as it's sort of freshly dead. But we are doing a lot of work behind the scenes. So over 350 visits to various sites throughout Brisbane throughout 2025 alone. Next slide, please. Our catch basin treatment program is critical in the summer. So you can see these catch basins or storm drains, we might call them. They are designed in such a way that they help collect some trash that might flow during the rainy season down there. But in the summer, those areas that usually collect trash can also hold a little bit of water that's just enough water for mosquitoes to breed. And those mosquitoes are the best spreaders of West Nile virus in our county. So we have a fleet of right-hand drive Jeeps. that we use throughout the county. And you can see the map in the middle here is just all the different places that we're checking and treating those drains every two weeks in the summer, the dry months. And then some of them we'll check at the start of the season. If they're dry, then we'll just check them periodically throughout the summer. Next slide, please. In Brisbane, we have a few unique places, and so we do check and regularly check and sometimes need to treat the baylands just to make sure that mosquitoes are not flying out of there and bothering folks. We do have a drone that we are using the past few years for this. The drone does not fly over any homes. It's used only over natural areas, and it's used to deliver the pesticide in a very precise manner. Next slide, please. And then the Main Street ditch as well. So there's some really dense, heavy vegetation there. And so we're keeping an eye on this place because it's really easy for mosquitoes to grow there in the water. And the dense vegetation can make it a little trickier to prevent that. So we have our staff, Stephanie, who's the current technician for Brisbane, is always doing a great job out there in the field. Next slide, please. So please do report dead birds. And we like to remember everyone, remind everyone to dump standing water and even tiny water sources can breed mosquitoes. Next slide, please. And then to also report biting mosquitoes. And I always say even just a couple bites is enough to report to us because you might be getting a few bites, but your neighbor might be getting eaten alive and not know we exist. So please do call to save yourself and your neighbor from all those bites. Next slide, please. And we're always happy to answer questions from council members now or later or from the public at any point. You can give us a call or go online or stop by our facilities in Burlingame. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone with a burning question? No? Thank you so much for coming. These presentations are always entertaining, and we appreciate all the work both of you are doing to protect us from things that bite.

Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Michael. Thank you.

Okay. We will now be moving on to oral communications number one. And there is a statement I'm supposed to read before we start taking comments. We welcome speakers providing public comment, but please be advised this is a limited public forum. It is therefore important for speakers to stay on topic, whether speaking to a particular agenda item or speaking during general public comment. ON TOPIC MATTERS ARE THOSE THAT ARE WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY. SPEAKERS, WHETHER DURING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OR ON AGENDA ITEMS, WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES. SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE FOR OUR FIRST BALANCE HEARING. OUR BALANCE HEARINGS WE'RE DOING FOUR MINUTES. BUT ALL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS WE ARE STILL MAINTAINING TWO MINUTES. SO FOLLOWING THESE RULES HELPS ENSURE THE CITY COUNCIL CAN GET TO ALL ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, INCLUDING HEARING PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ITEMS. IF A SPEAKER FAILS TO FOLLOW THESE RULES, THEY ARE DISRUPTING THE MEETING AND WILL BE WARNED. AND IF A SPEAKER CONTINUES TO IGNORE THE RULES OR IS OTHERWISE DISRUPTIVE, THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WILL BE ENDED AND THEY WILL BE PRECLUDED FROM SPEAKING ON OTHER ITEMS TONIGHT. So I do have some slips, and we really want to encourage people, if you have something to say, whether it's at public comment or at any point in the agenda, we ask you to use slips. It just helps us keep track of how many people are going to be speaking and allows us to have a more orderly meeting. So taking public comment, my first slip is from North County Fire.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MACKIN, MAYOR PROTEM DAVIS, COUNCIL MEMBERS KERN, LENTZ AND O'CONNELL. I'M THE CITY MANAGER OF DAILY CITY AND I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE TONIGHT TO INTRODUCE THE NINTH FIRE CHIEF IN DALEY CITY'S HISTORY AND THE SECOND IN NORTH COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY'S HISTORY. BEFORE I INTRODUCE THE GENTLEMEN STANDING NEXT TO ME, I'LL JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS THROUGH AN EXTENSION, AN EXTENSIVE NATIONWIDE RECRUITMENT THAT BEGAN WITH A RECRUITER. WE NARROWED THE FIELD DOWN TO 30, AND THEN FROM THERE ON WE HAD ASSESSMENT PANELS. WE WENT THROUGH A RIGOROUS PROCESS, NARROWED IT DOWN TO SIX, NARROWED IT DOWN TO TWO. WE HAD A, WELL, I'D SAY THAT THIS GENTLEMAN WAS NUMBER ONE THROUGH EVERY STAGE AND IT WAS PRETTY EXTENSIVE. WE NARROWED IT DOWN TO TWO. I WAS ABLE TO INVITE YOUR CITY MANAGER. AND THE CITY MANAGER OF PACIFICA, AND WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO A CONCLUSION, THE THREE OF US, THAT IT WAS UNANIMOUS THAT THIS WAS THE NEXT CHIEF FOR THE ORGANIZATION. AND THIS IS NICK GRAZIA, AND I'M PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE, AND I THINK HE'S GOING TO DO A GREAT JOB, VERY QUALIFIED. I COULD GO THROUGH HIS QUALIFICATIONS, BUT I THINK HE COULD DO THAT BETTER THAN I, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. BUT I'D LIKE TO GET HIM ON THE MICROPHONE TO TALK TO YOU DIRECTLY. SO THANK YOU. AND I'D LIKE TO THANK JEREMY FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS, TOO. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. NEW SPEAKER NICK GRACIA.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU, TOM. IT'S BEEN AN EXCITING WEEK. WE'VE BEEN TO DAILY CITY, PACIFICA, AND NOW BRISBANE'S COUNCIL MEETING HERE. You know, coming into this whole year, it's been a big year of transitions. There's been a lot going on. It's been a fast pace, a big acceleration. So I've been very thankful to have such a supportive team. Just a little bit about myself. You know, I'm someone that's local. I actually grew up in Daly City. And my parents, my happy parents, are back here to come to another ceremony here, Dan and Annette. They raised me in Daly City. They're still in Daly City. But I actually have a lot of community ties beyond that. I grew up there. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THE WATER AS A KID. I SURFED A LOT AND FISHED A LOT, SO I SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN PACIFICA AND EVEN OUT HERE. I MEAN, MY DAD MIGHT HAVE EVEN BEEN OUT IN THE BAY TODAY OR NO, I DON'T KNOW. YES, WERE YOU OUT IN THE WATER TODAY, DAD? NO, NOT TODAY. BUT ANYWAY, MY POINT BEING VERY LOCAL, BROUGHT UP HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME IS TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF THREE THINGS, THE CITY, THE COMMUNITIES, AND THE CULTURE. BECAUSE ALL THOSE THINGS MATTER IN THE FIRE SERVICE. THE FIRE SERVICE IS VERY FAMILY ORIENTED. IT'S REALLY LIKE A SECOND FAMILY. SO ALL THE PEOPLE THAT YOU SEE IN THE BACK THERE SITTING BEHIND ME, THAT'S LIKE MY SECOND FAMILY BECAUSE I'VE WORKED WITH ALL THESE PEOPLE. AND TONIGHT I'M JUST GOING TO ALSO POINT OUT WE HAVE ONE OF YOUR NEWEST FIREFIGHTERS, PROBATIONARY FIREFIGHTER SLASH RECRUIT BRADLEY JONES. NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BRADLEY, BUT TAKE A STAND UP HERE. HE'S OUR NEWEST MEMBER. JUST GOING THROUGH A QUICK IN-HOUSE TRAINING, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO WELCOME HIM HERE. AND THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER RECRUIT IN THE SAN MATEO COUNTY ACADEMY, BRIAN, WHO'S GOING THROUGH AS WELL. SO YOU'LL HAVE SOME NEW FIREFIGHTERS HERE IN BRISBANE. AND BACK TO MY POINT OF THE FAMILY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT I VALUE. I VALUE RELATIONSHIPS. I VALUE COLLABORATION. I'M APPRECIATIVE OF THE OPPORTUNITY. I'VE SPENT A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME WITH JEREMY WORKING THROUGH SOME CHALLENGES, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO working through more challenges and continuing to be present, accessible, and clear in what our direction is. And so I look forward to the opportunity. I'm very thankful and I'm happy to answer any questions or hear comments or whatever you're needed. I'm here for it.

Well, I would just say congratulations. We're excited to see all the things that you do in your new role and it I'M REALLY THANKFUL THAT WE WERE ABLE TO PROMOTE SOMEBODY WITHIN. SO HAPPY TO HAVE YOU CONTINUE SERVING NORTH COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING.

WELCOME ABOARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEAH, CHIEF. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THE LEADERS THAT YOU'VE SERVED. Yeah. Jeremy just speaks so highly of you. And the thing is that I can confirm what he was telling me because we've worked together since I've been on the council. And it's always been collaborative and fair. And you want to do right by all three of our cities. That's right. And that's so important for a chief who's representing the JPA. Tom, you couldn't pick a better guy. I know you said it, but yeah. Thank you so much for wanting to have this next chapter of your service being our chief. So congratulations. Thank you.

Chief, I'd like to wish you good luck in your new role and to say that all of the interactions I've had with North County Fire and our Brisbane staff here have been excellent and as personable and well thought out and well done as could possibly be imagined. So you've inherited a good crew here and good luck with moving forward. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm not seeing a hand from Colleen, so I'll assume she doesn't wanna say anything. Excellent, thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Thank you.

All right. All right, my second and last slip I have is, I hope I'm reading your handwriting correctly. Lark Craddy? Okay.

Hello.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MACKIN, AND I HEARD IT'S BRISBANE, NOT BRISBAN, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LARCRADI. I'M A RECENT MEMBER OF BRISBANE. I MOVED HERE IN FEBRUARY 1ST. AND I'M HERE TO REQUEST THAT THERE IS A REVIEW OF THE CITY'S POLICIES REGARDING THE TOWING AND THE LEGAL PARKING. BELIEVE THAT RESIDENTS AND VISITORS SHOULD HAVE A CLEAR VISIBLE NOTICE ABOUT THEIR PARKING VIOLATIONS AND WHEN A VEHICLE WOULD BE TOWED. SO ON APRIL 23, BETWEEN APPROXIMATELY 1130 P.M. AND 1 A.M., A REPORT WAS MADE TO THE POLICE THAT MY CAR WAS PARKED ILLEGALLY. MY CAR WAS TOWED. I RECEIVED NO NOTIFICATION OF WHY THAT TOW OCCURRED, NO PARKING CITATION, NO NOTIFICATION. AT 3 A.M., I WALKED OUT AND MY CAR WAS COMPLETELY MISSING. AND AT THAT TIME, I WAS TAKING MY FRIEND TO THE AIRPORT. IT WAS AN URGENT SITUATION, AND MY CAR HAD ONLY BEEN PARKED THERE FOR MAYBE THREE HOURS. AS A NEW RESIDENT OF THE CITY, I was completely unaware of why this occurred. There was no signage anywhere. There was no curb colored. I was not in any illegal parking situation. I then had to go to the police station. I had to go report this, meet with the police officer, which was a very harrowing situation. Everyone has a different relationship with police force. And this was at 4 a.m. in the morning. I was then charged $800 in total to get my car out of this tow yard. I've never had even any parking violations, never had my car towed. And this was extremely stressful. And as a new resident of the city, I feel that the parking situation is unclear. And I'm asking that the city reviews the regulations of when you tow a car and when you notify a local member that the car is illegally parked.

Thank you.

Also, if there's any signage you could include, that would be helpful for the residents as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Is there any other members of the public wishing to speak on an item not on the agenda? ANYONE ONLINE? OKAY. SO WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WHICH IS ITEMS C THROUGH G. AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR C THROUGH G. I'LL SECOND THAT.

Council Member Davis. Aye. Council Member Kern.

Aye.

Council Member Lents. Aye. Council Member O'Connell. Aye. And Mayor Mackin.

Aye. Excellent. And we are now going to discuss item L, which is data centers. So we're going to be getting an update from the planning issue subcommittee and a discussion of next steps. And we can start out with a staff report, please.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. CHRISTINA FERNANDEZ, YOUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. TONIGHT STAFF IS PROVIDING AN UPDATE ON THE PLANNING ISSUES SUBCOMMITTEE'S DISCUSSIONS REGARDING DATA CENTERS. THE SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERED THIS TOPIC AT THEIR JULY 21ST AND AUGUST 25TH MEETINGS AND DIRECTED STAFF TO BRING THE MATTER TO THE FULL COUNCIL WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION. STAFF IS REQUESTING THE COUNCIL RECEIVE THE UPDATE AND PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING THE CITY'S PREFERRED POLICY APPROACH. ATTACHED TO YOUR STAFF REPORT TONIGHT ARE THE TWO PLANNING ISSUE SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF REPORTS WHICH GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ON THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF DATA CENTERS. THE CITY DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A PENDING DATA CENTER APPLICATION. THIS DISCUSSION GIVES THE COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH POLICY BEFORE AN APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED. SO WHY IS THIS ISSUE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COUNCIL? DATA CENTERS ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN BRISBANE'S M-1 MANUFACTURING DISTRICT AND T-C-2 SOUTHEAST BAYSHORE TRADE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE CURRENT DEFINITION DOES NOT FULLY REFLECT MODERN DATA CENTERS, PARTICULARLY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, HYPERSCALE AND MID-SIZED FACILITIES. OTHER CALIFORNIA CITIES ARE CONSIDERING OR HAVE ADOPTED MORATORIUMS, BANS, CONDITIONAL USE REQUIREMENTS AND OPERATING STANDARDS IN RESPONSE TO CONCERNS ABOUT WATER, ENERGY, NOISE, AIR QUALITY, INFRASTRUCTURE AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY. SO TO SUMMARIZE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD, SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS WE HEARD AT THE SUBCOMMITTEE LEVEL, MODERN DATA CENTERS CAN REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF ELECTRICITY AND WATER, PARTICULARLY FOR COOLING. POTENTIAL IMPACTS INCLUDE CONTINUOUS NOISE, EMISSIONS FROM BACKUP GENERATORS, AIR QUALITY CONCERNS AND INCREASED DEMAND FOR ELECTRICAL WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE. LARGE FACILITIES CAN HAVE SUBSTANTIAL BUILDING FOOTPRINTS AND LIMIT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. CONSTRUCTION CAN REQUIRE SPECIALIZED INFRASTRUCTURE AND MAY CAUSE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC, NOISE AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS. DATA CENTERS MAY CREATE SIGNIFICANT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION JOBS BUT VERY FEW PERMANENT JOBS. AND DEPENDING ON THEIR LOCATION, THEY MAY ALSO COMPETE WITH OTHER BUSINESSES FOR INDUSTRIAL LAND AND CONTRIBUTE TO HIGHER RENTS. TO SUMMARIZE SOME OF THE POTENTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS DISCUSSED AT THE SUBCOMMITTEE, DATA CENTERS MAY PAY FOR ELECTRICAL SUBSTATIONS, GRID IMPROVEMENTS, WATER SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS, TRANSMISSION UPGRADES AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO SERVE THE PROJECT, THEIR PROJECTS. THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THE CITY MAY SEEK INVESTMENTS IN LOCAL ENERGY RELIABILITY, SOLAR AND BATTERY SYSTEMS, HOME ELECTRIFICATION, ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING AND OTHER COMMUNITY PRIORITIES. THE CITY MAY ALSO CONSIDER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO CLEAN ENERGY PROCUREMENT, ON-SITE BATTERY STORAGE AND PARTICIPATION IN DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS. THESE BENEFITS WOULD NEED TO BE NEGOTIATED OR REQUIRED THROUGH APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS. THEY WOULD NOT OCCUR AUTOMATICALLY. THE SUBCOMMITTEE WENT INTO GREAT DETAIL ON THESE ISSUES AND REQUESTED STAFF BRING BACK POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO PROVIDE A BALANCED PERSPECTIVE AND A MATRIX OF POLICY OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATIONS. SOME POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS MAY INCLUDE REVENUE THROUGH UTILITY USERS TAX, PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES AND OTHER LOCALLY APPLICABLE REVENUE SOURCES. REVENUE VARIES SUBSTANTIALLY BASED ON FACILITY SIZE, ENERGY DEMAND, LOCAL TAX STRUCTURE AND WHETHER THE CITY OWNS ITS OWN ELECTRICAL UTILITY, WHICH OBVIOUSLY WE DO NOT. SANTA CLARA REPORTS THAT ITS 55 DATA CENTERS ACCOUNT FOR APPROXIMATELY 13% OF ITS GENERAL FUND REVENUE. HOWEVER, SANTA CLARA DOES OWN SILICON VALLEY POWER AND HAS INFRASTRUCTURE ADVANTAGES THAT DIFFER FROM RISBAYNE. San Jose estimates that a fully operational data center may generate approximately 3.4 million to 6.8 million annually for facility and utility and property taxes. A 99 megawatt facility is estimated to generate approximately 5.6 million annually in utility users tax. Gilroy estimates that a planned data center could generate approximately 1.6 million during its first phase and approximately 6 million annually at full build out. THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH ESTIMATES THAT ITS PROPOSED PERSEUS DATA CENTER COULD PROVIDE APPROXIMATELY 2.6 MILLION ANNUALLY TO THE CITY ONCE STABILIZED. SO THESE ARE SOME EXAMPLES THAT DEMONSTRATE POTENTIAL REVENUE, BUT THEY SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS ESTIMATES FOR BRISBANE. THE FISCAL IMPACT OF A BRISBANE FACILITY REMAINS UNKNOWN AND WOULD DEPEND ON SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT. SO UP ON THE SCREEN, STAFF HAS PREPARED A MATRIX WHICH IS A SUMMARY ESSENTIALLY OF THE MATRIX SIMILAR TO THE ONE IN YOUR PACKET WITH A VARIETY OF POLICY OPTIONS. OBVIOUSLY THE FIRST OPTION WOULD BE TO TAKE NO ACTION. DATA CENTERS WOULD REMAIN PERMITTED IN THE M-1 AND T-C-2 DISTRICTS UNDER THE EXISTING UNI CODE. THIS OPTION REQUIRES NO IMMEDIATE STAFF WORK AND IT WOULD LEAD THE CITY'S OUTDATED DEFINITION AND EXISTING REGULATORY FRAMEWORK IN PLACE. THE SECOND OPTION WOULD BE TO ADOPT A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM. THE MORATORIUM WOULD PAUSE DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT WHILE THE CITY STUDIES POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND DEVELOPS A COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK. THIS OPTION PRESERVES COUNCIL FLEXIBILITY AND AVOIDS COMMITTING THE CITY TO A PERMANENT POLICY IMMEDIATELY. A MORATORIUM IS TEMPORARY AND COULD DELAY POTENTIAL INVESTMENT AND REVENUE. ADOPTION REQUIRES URGENCY FINDINGS AND A COUNCIL VOTE. THE INITIAL MORATORIUM COULD POTENTIALLY BE EXTENDED FOR UP TO AN ADDITIONAL 22 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS. THE NEXT OPTION IS TO BAN DATA CENTER CITYWIDE. A BAN WOULD PREVENT FUTURE DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT AND ELIMINATE THE ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND LAND USE RISKS. IT WOULD ALSO ELIMINATE POTENTIAL REVENUE, CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYMENT AND NEGOTIATED COMMUNITY BENEFITS. THIS OPTION REQUIRES A ZONING AMENDMENT, PUBLIC HEARINGS, PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND COUNCIL ADOPTION. THE NEXT OPTION WOULD BE TO UPDATE THE MUNICIPAL CODE DEFINITION. THE CITY COULD MODERNIZE THE DEFINITION TO ADDRESS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, HYPERSCALE AND MID-SIZED FACILITIES. A CLEARER DEFINITION WOULD HELP APPLICANTS AND STAFF UNDERSTAND WHICH PROJECTS QUALIFY AS DATA CENTERS. IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW THE CITY TO REGULATE DIFFERENT TYPES AND SIZES OF FACILITIES APPROPRIATELY. THIS ACTION WOULD REQUIRE STAKEHOLDER INPUT, ANALYSIS OF AFFECTED ZONING DISTRICTS AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT. ANOTHER OPTION IS TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS AND IMPACT REQUIREMENTS. THE CITY COULD ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS GOVERNING WATER, ENERGY, NOISE, AIR QUALITY HEIGHT, FOOTPRINT AND OTHER OPERATIONAL IMPACTS. THE CITY COULD ALSO CONSIDER IMPACT FEES AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW. THIS APPROACH WOULD PROVIDE PREDICTABLE STANDARDS FOR APPLICANTS WHILE PREDICTING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. DEVELOPING DEFENSIBLE STANDARDS WOULD REQUIRE TECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS Requirements that are overly restrictive or costly could reduce project feasibility. Let's see. WE COULD ALSO REQUIRE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THE CITY COULD ALLOW DATA CENTERS IN SELECTED DISTRICTS ONLY THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THIS APPROACH WOULD PRESERVE THE CITY'S AUTHORITY TO EVALUATE EACH PROPOSAL INDIVIDUALLY AND IMPOSE PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS. A USE PERMIT COULD POTENTIALLY BE REVOKED IF THE OPERATOR FAILS TO COMPLY WITH ITS CONDITIONS. THIS APPROACH RETAINS POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS BUT DOES NOT ELIMINATE ENVIRONMENTAL OR INFRASTRUCTURE RISKS. THE CITY COULD COMBINE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESSES WITH UNIFORM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND A DEVELOPMENT LASTLY, WE COULD PERMIT DATA CENTERS BY RIGHT IN SELECTED ZONES. THE CITY COULD IDENTIFY SPECIFIC DISTRICTS WHERE DATA CENTERS WOULD BE PERMITTED WITHOUT DISCRETIONARY USE PERMIT APPROVAL. THIS OPTION MAY PROVIDE THE CLEAREST PASS FOR ATTRACTING INVESTMENT. IT WOULD PROVIDE THE CITY WITH THE LEAST DISCRETION OVER INDIVIDUAL APPLICATIONS AND THE GREATEST EXPOSURE TO POTENTIAL IMPACTS. THE CITY COULD STILL APPLY OBJECTIVE DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT, BUT HOPEFULLY THE MATRIX KIND OF HELPS LAY IT ALL OUT. SO IN TERMS OF FISCAL IMPACT, THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL POLICY OPTIONS ARE CURRENTLY UNKNOWN. ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS, TECHNICAL STUDIES AND ZONING WORK WOULD BE NEEDED FOR STAFF TO DO. ANY POTENTIAL REVENUE WOULD DEPEND ON THE SIZE AND THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A FUTURE PROJECT AND THE CITY'S APPLICABLE TAX AND FEE STRUCTURE. SO IN CLOSING, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL DISCUSS THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING THE NEXT STEPS, INCLUDING WHETHER STAFF SHOULD RETURN WITH A MORATORIUM, ZONING AMENDMENTS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OR ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

OKAY. SO I WILL ENTERTAIN COUNCIL QUESTIONS. COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ, DO YOU WANT TO GO FIRST?

SURE. You know, I'm just going to say straight up, I mean, I would be in favor of a temporary moratorium. I hear what you're saying. I get it. I just wanted to put that out there. Because I do think that, you know, that we need more information. I'm cool with, you know, potentially having one. But it depends upon the size and the location. So my question is, Ms. Fernandez, so if the council did move forward with the moratorium, what is that process? How long would a moratorium be? Are there extensions?

The initial moratorium is 45 days. We have the option, depending on how we initially adopt it, in total, we can extend it by, was it 22 months and 15 days? And depending on how we adopt it, it varies whether or not we can extend it IN ONCE OR EXTEND IT TWICE. BUT REGARDLESS, THE OVERALL EXTENSION IS 22 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS. AND WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE FINDINGS IN THE MORATORIUM. IT'S CALLED AN URGENCY ORDINANCE. SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE STANDARD PROCESS THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES, MEANING IT DOESN'T NEED TO GO TO YOUR PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION. IT DOESN'T NEED A HEARING AND THEN A SUBSEQUENT MEETING FOR ADOPTION BEFORE THE COUNCIL. WE JUST DO IT AT ONCE. in one meeting before the council. We would need to make findings in that moratorium saying that the moratorium is necessary for the health and safety of your community. And then it requires four-fifths vote of the council to pass.

Got it. Got it. Okay. So from what you just said, it doesn't sound like the requirement is a very high bar except for the four-fifths of the council to approve.

You need to make findings that it supports, that it's important for the health and safety for the community. So I would never say that those are easy findings to make. But certainly if the council directed us to research those findings, we certainly could. People pass moratoriums all the time.

Yeah, I guess maybe that's really where I'm getting at. I mean, other cities have done something similar and it seems to have passed legal muster.

YES, AND THIS IS A SOMEWHAT TYPICAL USE OF A MORATORIUM THAT YOU HAVE AN ISSUE THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND USE THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN CERTAIN AREAS OF YOUR COMMUNITY AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO STOP THAT IMMEDIATELY, SORT OF FREEZE ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHILE THE COUNCIL TAKES THE TIME TO STUDY PERMANENT ZONING REGULATIONS. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF A MORATORIUM.

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN AT THIS PRESENT TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN OR HAVE THERE BEEN ANY, LIKE, KICKING THE TIRES OF, OKAY, SO, OKAY. THAT'S IT.

COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL?

DOES STAFF FEEL THAT THE 22 MONTHS, 45 DAYS would be sufficient to get more data to holistically determine what the risks and profitability might be for data centers?

Yes.

And in the results that the cities have provided where they've mentioned how much money and taxes and utility charges they are taking in, did they give any indication of what the impacts were to the rates for the normal rate payers in that community?

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A LOT OF THE RATES FOR COMMUNITIES ESSENTIALLY PRETTY MUCH STAYED THE SAME BECAUSE OF THE UPFRONT INVESTMENT IN A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED FOR THE DATA CENTERS. SO IF THERE WAS ADDITIONAL ELECTRICITY THAT WAS NEEDED FOR A PROJECT, THEY WOULD DO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD PAY FOR A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE UPFRONT, LIKE AN ADDITIONAL SUBSTATION OR TRANSFORMER OR WHAT HAVE YOU, AND THAT WOULD HELP WITH SORT OF OFFSETTING THE NEED FOR TO INCREASE RATES FOR THAT SORT OF UPFRONT INVESTMENT. SO THAT'S HELPED WITH THAT. AT LEAST THAT WAS WHAT I'VE READ.

NEW SPEAKER AND WERE THOSE CITIES ALREADY HAD EXISTING STANDARDS AS FAR AS IMPOSING THESE FEES AND TAXES ON THE DATA FACILITIES BEFORE THEY WERE STARTED?

I'M NOT QUITE SURE AT WHAT POINT THEY INSTITUTED A LOT OF THIS, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF THE REVENUE STREAMS WERE BASED ON THINGS THAT WERE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE, FOR INSTANCE, UTILITY USERS TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, A LOT OF IT WAS NEGOTIATED THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, AND WHILE NOT PRIVY TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT A LOT OF THE BENEFITS THAT COMMUNITIES SEE WHEN THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS COME ON BOARD ARE NEGOTIATED THROUGH D.A.s.

As in Brisbane, where data centers are allowed in certain districts, by right, we would not have the ability necessarily to have a development agreement with a facility. They could just come in and build it without giving any assurance of community benefits other than the required property taxes.

That's my understanding, yes. Thank you.

Okay. Council Member Gern?

I SIT ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE WITH MAYOR MACKIN. I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

I THOUGHT AS MUCH. JUST WANTED TO CHECK IN. AND MAYOR MACKIN, ANY QUESTIONS FROM YOU?

NO QUESTIONS. ALL HAVE COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

OKAY. FANTASTIC. I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. I WOULD LOVE JUST SOME MORE FEEDBACK FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE NOT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL.

IS THAT A QUESTION TO ME OR THE MAYOR?

EITHER. I MEAN, YOU CAN BOTH WAY IN.

WE HAD DISCUSSED MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL. WE DECIDED THAT SINCE THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS WERE HELD IN THIS ROOM, IN MAIN CHAMBERS, AND IT WAS FULL, THAT IT WAS A VERY, VERY HOT ISSUE FOR THE PEOPLE OF BRISBAYNE AND WE WANTED TO BRING IT BACK FOR FULL COUNCIL DISCUSSION.

OK, Mayor Mackin, anything to add to that? I think that says it all. Okay, I will now be taking public comment. And as a reminder, if you want to speak on this item, please fill out a card. Can you actually swap out this pen for me because it's no longer working? Thank you. And so my first slip is for stores and my second stores home and my second slip is for Linda Salmon. Thank you.

Hi, Council. Thank you for allowing me to speak on this topic. First of all, let me start by saying I would like to see a moratorium on this until a good set of ordinances are in place. In particular, things like the allowable distance to residential homes, the allowable noise levels at residential homes, the allowable light levels at residential homes, and assurances that there'll be no effect on residential water and energy rates. The current locations, oh, also considerations on the effects on wildlife that a building of this size that's operating at all times would have. The current locations for which data centers are allowed would likely meet some of the first requirements on noise, but it's not clear that they would satisfy the remaining requirements. And for this For this reason, I would really like to see a moratorium until we've really got it nailed down. Thank you.

Thank you. And can staff actually bring up the timer? Because I don't think speakers can see it. Okay. Next, I have Linda Salmon.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS. WE ACTUALLY ALREADY HAD SOMEBODY PROPOSING A DATA CENTER HERE IN THE QUARRY. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME BECAUSE THEY STILL WANT TO BUILD. AND RIGHT NOW I THINK WE REALLY NEED A MORATORIUM FOR AS LONG AS WE CAN DO IT. AND THAT IS SO THAT WE CAN REALLY SORT THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT what's possible and what, you know, we have so many problems. The main problem is the heat that's produced and the noise, the light, the all nights, the all days of such a center. And you might be able to have data centers, quote unquote data centers, that are not intrusive in that nature. And then we can divide it, what's a data center, what's a bad one, what's a good one, et cetera. But it's going to take some time. And right now the council has I think they're plateful. And so it would be probably a good idea to put a full moratorium on any data centers at this point in time until we do have time to sort out how we want to deal with this in the future. The land that we have is pretty precious. But I remind you that Crocker Park is built on a marshland, subject to liquefaction and other things. And we really don't have, I think, a place that's safe at all. Anywhere near the mountain is fire risk. It's not worth it. It's just not worth it. So I think that's pretty much all I have to say about that. Moratorium, please.

All right, my next slip is Dashiell Leeds and following that will be Michelle Salmon. Hello.

My name is Dashiell Leeds. I'm conservation coordinator for the Sierra Club Loma Prieta chapter. I hope my volume isn't too loud for all the folks in the room in person. I really think a moratorium makes sense. It buys you time. It gives you time to review, to do more community consultation. You'd be in good company. On the 14th of this month, the City of Gilroy unanimously adopted a moratorium and so recently has the City of Morgan Hill. Beyond that, unfortunately, there really is no such good thing as an AI data center. So ultimately, I do believe that a citywide ban is necessary to protect the health and well-being of Brisbane residents and the environment. Just a couple of examples here while I have the time. Data centers use diesel backup generators. It's just a fact of life for this industry. These backup generators spew nitrous oxides, toxins in our air. According to the Air District, they can run an unlimited amount of time during an emergency run, and that is defined by the data center operator. So if and when there's a power outage or a brownout, we'll have to reckon with a massive amount of diesel backup generators all firing at once, spewing toxic nitrous oxides into our air. And just in terms of scale, like a single small, quote unquote, small AI data center is like 40 megawatts, which is absolutely massive. It's like 40% of the power of like a city of a million people. Um, regarding recycled water, uh, you know, the people, you can't really use recycled water without extensive treatment because these chips are so precise. So it's really energy intensive and even in closed loop systems, uh, there is water loss and it skews a lot of chemical and mineral, mineral pollution that needs to be treated. So it actually puts a lot of pollutants into the wastewater system. Um, If you use an air-cooled system, it exacerbates the heat island effect for nearby communities. Infrasound can't be mitigated with sound walls, so that's a huge issue. And the sound characteristics of Brisbane, from what I understand, makes sound a particularly sensitive issue for people here. And also the economic benefits, they're not even a sure thing. If there's a market contraction, then we've wasted our space and precious land and resources. Thanks for your time.

Thank you. Next, I have Michelle Salmon.

Michelle Salmon, Brisbane resident. I certainly agree with what Storrs said and what Dasho said. And I think we really do need to have a moratorium and work towards a permanent ban. One of my concerns is the quarry is not yet in the city of Brisbane. So the only allowing data centers in the areas that are zoned right now would not cover that. And, you know, we talk about how much Santa Clara and San Jose and all the money that they make. They're huge areas. Brisbane is 3.1 to 3.5 miles of land. A lot of that is steep. Some of that is in preservation for habitat. This is really not the place to build a data center. And you think about the Baylands, and they are already having an issue meeting their energy requirements as outlined by the sustainability framework, what's putting a data center out there going to do? Yeah, not good. And so I think we should leave it to the wide open spaces to deal with that and save Brisbane for... the areas and the development that really will matter in this precious space. And I really appreciate your concern over all of this in depth. And I want to say a special thank you to Ingrid that I'm not looking at this big, giant circle of death up there. Instead, there's a nice little number that I can see and say that my time is running out. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, next I have Bob Detmer. That's the end of my slips. Oh, no, more coming. So we have Bob Detmer, and then after Bob Detmer is Mary Rogers.

Hi, I'm Bob Detmer, a longtime resident of Brisbane. And I just want to give us a little visual on the power consumption of a data center. Just think about what a megawatt is worth. A megawatt is what it takes to illuminate an NFL stadium at night for a football game. So each megawatt that we're going to be consuming will be like having that stadium on 24 hours a day for 365 days a year. I'VE SEEN THE FIGURE OF ALMOST 50 MEGAWATTS FOR ONE PROJECT. SO THAT'S WE COULD DO 50 OF THOSE STADIUMS ON ALL THE TIME, 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR. THAT'S MY VISUAL. THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. MARY ROGERS.

Hi there. Good evening. I was hoping that you guys would take a look at banning data centers as your first option, and this is why. The discussion we had the other night about the Baylands, we don't even know who's going to be providing water for the Baylands project, let alone even think about a data center. So just with that alone, to me it's a no-brainer. I would ban it. But if you don't go down that road, a moratorium is the next best thing. But you have to remember that's only a maximum of what, around 23, what, 23 months? What if you don't have someone signing on the dotted line for water? Who's going to provide water? THAT'S A BIG CONCERN. AND THEN WHILE I APPRECIATE THE REVENUE THAT WAS PUT UP THERE, THOSE ARE ESTIMATES. IT LOOKS GREAT, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST BRISBANE, RIGHT? THE INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU CAN'T MAKE A DECISION JUST BASED ON 3 MILLION, 2 MILLION, 1 MILLION, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. YOU DON'T HAVE IT MODELED OUT. THIS IS A BIG CONCERN. YEAH, THOSE ARE MY TWO COMMENTS FOR TONIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. MY NEXT SLIP IS CHARLES SPENCER, AND THAT'S THE LAST OF MY SLIPS, SO AGAIN, IF YOU WANT TO TALK Please submit a slip. Yes.

Hi. My name is Charles Spencer. I'm a Brisbane resident. And I want to thank the council for giving us the opportunity to speak on the data center subject. Due to the staff report, we know that data centers do bring undue risk and potential injury to our community. We also know that San Jose and Santa Clara are geographically larger and very different than the city of Brisbane. THE DATA CENTER CONVERSATION IS IMPORTANT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO THINK IN ADDITION TO THAT CONVERSATION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POLICY OR PROCESS TO EVALUATE ANY BUSINESS THAT COMES INTO THE CITY THAT PRESENTS HARM TO HEALTH OR PROPERTY. I THINK THAT AT THIS POINT IN ADDITION TO A MORATORIUM WOULD BE THE BEST COURSE FOR THE COUNCIL TO TAKE. THANK YOU.

Okay, thank you. City Clerk, do you have any more slips for anyone online wishing to speak?

No, Mayor Pro Tem.

Okay. We will go ahead and move to council discussion. I know it's customary for the mayor or the person running the meeting to speak last. However, since I'm in the driver's seat this evening, I'M GOING TO SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE I ASKED THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER REVIEWING DATA CENTERS. AND MY POSITION IS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE AN OUTRIGHT BAN. I THINK THAT THERE'S NO INFORMATION THAT I COULD REALLY LEARN. that would make me change my mind about that. I've already researched data centers. I've looked at what they've done to communities, to resources. Plenty of those elements have been outlined in the staff report. I think, you know, the only upside you could possibly have is money. And I just think I would never sell the soul of Brisbane for money. So for me, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST COMPLETELY BAN THEM. WHEN I THINK ABOUT OUR LAND THAT WE HAVE TO OFFER, WE'RE UNIQUELY POSITIONED in between San Francisco and SFO, and we already attract a lot of industry that serves us through business license taxes and other means. So we aren't a city who needs to attract industry to pay its bills. We already have unique qualities that make it easy to attract businesses that won't put a strain on our resources like a data center would. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD ENTERTAIN A COMPLETE BAN, AND THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE THIS EVENING. I WILL GO AHEAD AND ACTUALLY TURN IT OVER TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU SPENT A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT THIS AND MEETING WITH RESIDENTS. SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND LET COUNCILMEMBER KEARN SPEAK NEXT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THOSE THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS.

I JUST WANT TO THANK CHRISTINA FERNANDEZ, OUR SUPERSTAR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, FOR THE LEVEL OF WORK THAT SHE PUT IN. YOU SAW FROM THE GRID THAT SHE PRESENTED TONIGHT, MAYOR MACKIN AND I WERE VERY, VERY FIRM WITH STAFF, AND WE PUSHED THEM EXTREMELY HARD TO DO A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THAT. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT MAYOR MACKIN AND I REALLY DID DO A DEEP DIVE ON THIS. And one of the big questions that we kept asking and kept bringing forth, not only of our citizens, which we had plenty of them, this room was full and I see many familiar faces that were here for those meetings as well, but we kept trying to narrow down what the benefits might be. You know, it's very easy when you do a cost-benefit analysis on anything from remodeling your kitchen to buying a boat, any of those sort of things, it's very easy to do that kind of lift. It was very difficult for data centers. Determining on what the value is to a community depends on the size, the type, the development agreement. It's almost all unknown. So we weren't able to come up with a figure to say, you know, this might be what it would be worth to Brisbane. So with that being said, Mayor Mackin and I were about to come forth with a suggestion to council. As I mentioned a few minutes ago, we had such a turnout from the community, we thought it would probably be better to have every council member weigh in on this. And I think it's important to point out that we get two bites at the apple in terms of a moratorium. Number one would be the first 45 days, which would put us at November 1st, 2026, meaning data centers would not be allowed through November 1st, 2026. At that point in time, we could extend the moratorium for another 22 months and 15 days, which would take us clear through August 1st, 2028. Now, what that means is that we could put that moratorium in place. The subcommittee could reconvene COME UP WITH AN APPROPRIATE MODERN I'LL STRESS THE WORD ONE MORE TIME MODERN DEFINITION OF WHAT A DATA CENTER IS TO EXECUTE A FULL BAN SO WITH THAT BEING SAID MY POSITION TONIGHT IS TO HAVE THE COUNCIL VOTE AS A REMINDER NORMALLY TO GET SOMETHING PASSED THROUGH COUNCIL YOU NEED THREE OUT OF FIVE VOTES TO GET A MORATORIUM PUSH THROUGH TONIGHT WE'LL NEED FOR IT'S DIFFERENT So my recommendation here tonight is for a moratorium. Thank you.

Council Member Kern. To enact the moratorium, it's actually an ordinance that I would need to draft and bring back to the council. So tonight you just need three, you just need to give me direction to do that. And I would take a moment to talk to the city manager about timing, but I could bring that back probably in pretty short order. And for that you would need four.

Thank you. And I apologize for the miscommunication on that.

Mayor Mackin, would you like to go next?

Yes, thank you. I would like to thank all of the citizens. We had two meetings and the room was packed every time. And as is the case with Brisbane, all of our citizens came and had done tons of research. And I think across the board, we've all been trying to do a lot of research. I'd like to thank Dashiell Leeds. You kind of laid out a lot of the concerns that we went over in these meetings and pointing out some of those, the health risks, because there are diesel generators as backup. And as Dashiell said, they have to run them so many times per month to make sure they're operating. That's by state law. And if there's a power outage, they can run them continuously for several days and there are proven health risks from the greenhouse gas emissions and the particular. There's also electrical usage and electrical usage is a hot topic right now, because they're now saying some in some communities, the electrical usage is more of a problem than the water. You already know about water. Noise in Brisbane, parabolic bowl, we went over that. Is it possible to mitigate the noise of generators and cooling fans on the rooftops in Brisbane? We don't have an answer to that. The other point that had come up in our hearings were the difficulty of enforcing parameters of agreements. And other cities have found you can write a whole host of different criteria that a data center has to follow and try enforcing it. The other was infrastructure. And you can write into an agreement for a data center that they will pay the infrastructure up front. That's fine, except PG&E has to connect them. And there's no accounting for how much PG&E will pass through of the costs of that connection. And that is not written into the agreement with a data center directly. So as council member Kern had recounted to you, we wanted to bring it to the full council. If you'd asked us for a recommendation, I think across the board, our concern was doing something with expediency, that would be a moratorium. But I have another suggestion and you need YOU JUST CUT OUT THERE. CAN YOU PLEASE GO BACK AND START BACK A MOMENT? One of the important things that you need to consider in weighing this is that data centers are not just what we all envision as giant warehouses. They can be everything from a business in one warehouse that has one room in the entire facility that has some computers, commonly known as servers. It can be something even smaller. It could be a business where all they have is a closet with some servers in it. And it can be two buildings, maybe two warehouses. It could be five warehouses, or it can be like in Arizona, New Mexico, where they have acres and acres. That being said, the definition of a data center is very broad right now. And that was part of our urgency for a moratorium. But I would also like to suggest that instead of going into an outright ban, which may actually hurt some small businesses. And going forward in the future, there's so much that's not known about how to effectively create guidelines and guardrails for data centers. Instead of banning completely, all we need to do is have zoning that doesn't allow it in any zone in Brisbane. We can change zoning at any... Anytime so, in the future, if we, we nail down definitions, we might want to allow the 1 room. In a building or in a closet instead of banning entirely and it gives us time to do that. Zoning can be changed by the council at any time. So if we simply say we have no districts in Brisbane zoned for data centers, we're not banning, but effectively we are. But we're sending a message instead of that we're against everything, that we are waiting for the technology to catch up with what protections we need for our city and for our residents' health. Thank you.

Okay, Council Member O'Connell.

So, I believe at this moment we should enact the moratorium, but have a two-pronged approach to doing the moratorium so that someone can't come in with an application and surprise us. and also work on designating what a data center is and isn't and getting modern language so we're not including things that we would be in support of. So it would give us two years basically, close to two years, to come up with a more robust description and to have those safeguards in place rather than just saying none. And I think that that's the way we should proceed. I mean, at this point with the classical What we're seeing in the news of these huge data centers, I would say, yes, ban them. We don't need those here. But that's not what we're really looking at if we do a total ban. So I think we need to do the moratorium and come in with a smart ordinance to control what we do and we don't want.

Council Member Lentz?

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, JUST TO KIND OF GET THAT CONFIRMATION ON THE TIMELINE. SO IF THE COUNCIL DOES THE MORATORIUM, IT'S 45 DAYS, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE THAT EXTENSION. SO WHAT WOULD BE KIND OF AN ESTIMATED DATE IN THE FUTURE? AUGUST 1, 2028.

Well, we would not decide in advance that the council is going to adopt an extension because that may be a future council and you certainly wouldn't want to say what decisions they will make.

Yes, if that was the pledge.

But feasibly, if that were the council's vote, the longest amount of time, the more time would be in place would be until Council Member Kern, I'm sorry, can you say again? August 1st, 2028. Correct.

Okay. All right. Do you want to say something, sir?

I had a follow-up question from a question from the community. There is a project that has submitted an application at our quarry. Would an emergency moratorium, if passed, affect the proposed quarry project as a data center is not part of their project description at this time? To my knowledge.

I think you mean if they submit for a data center at a later date?

Well, because I wanted to reassure the public that there's not a data center in the proposal at the moment.

Okay.

And so because if we have an emergency moratorium, that would apply to this project because it has not been submitted. AS A PROPOSED USE?

YES. IF I AM FOLLOWING YOUR QUESTION, YOU ARE CORRECT ON BOTH COUNTS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE IS NO CURRENTLY SUBMITTED APPLICATION FOR A DATA CENTER IN THE QUARRY, AND YES, IF AN APPLICATION WERE SUBMITTED AFTER A MORATORIUM WAS IN PLACE OR FRANKLY EVEN BEFORE A MORATORIUM WAS IN PLACE, IT WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY BE COVERED BY THE MORATORIUM. OKAY.

THANK YOU. YES. I'M JUST QUESTIONING WHAT COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL JUST BROUGHT FORWARD, WHICH IS FANTASTIC, AND THE COMMENT WAS FANTASTIC. TODAY THE QUARY IS NOT WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF BRISBAYNE. So can you revisit that answer? Is there more you can add to that?

Sorry, that's a good point. I wish we had someone from planning here.

Do we have anyone from planning?

That's correct. We cannot implement a moratorium that's effective in other jurisdictions. So likely not. But if the permit that it was requesting was from another jurisdiction.

But if a project goes forward in the quarry, it needs to be ANNEXED, THAT PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE ANNEXED BY BRISBANE SO THAT OUR CURRENT ZONING WOULD APPLY TO IT.

CERTAINLY IF THEY WERE ANNEXED, THE ANNEXATION WOULD TAKE A WHILE. SO BY THAT POINT, EITHER IT WOULD BE ANNEXED UNDER THE MORATORIUM AND THEY WOULD BE BANNED OR IF IT TAKES A WHILE TO ANNEX, IT WOULD BE ANNEXED UNDER FUTURE ZONING REGULATIONS.

OKAY.

THANK YOU. I SEE JULIA ON HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING

Julia, please correct me if I botched anything too.

Nothing to correct.

Hopefully I'm being heard. No, so yeah, the quarry is presently in unincorporated San Mateo County. It is within the city's sphere of influence established by the Local Agency Formation Commission or LAFCO. So any change in use beyond what they are presently doing under their their active mining permit that they're conducting under the county zoning regulations would come before the city just as their current proposal is being considered by the city because they're in our sphere of influence, because our general plan does address future development of that site and annexation would certainly be a part of any change in use of that site. But yes, just to also confirm again, there is no data center PROPOSED AS PART OF THE CURRENT PROPOSAL. NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER ONE MORE QUESTION. GO AHEAD.

NEW SPEAKER I HAD A QUESTION FIRST OFF WHICH WAS SO HOW QUICKLY DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE MORATORIUM LANGUAGE FOR US?

I WAS JUST TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER. I THINK WE CAN HAVE IT PREP BY THE FIRST. THAT'S THE NEXT MEETING, YES? OCTOBER 1ST? WE CAN HAVE IT PREP BY THE FIRST. IF THERE'S ROOM ON THE AGENDA.

IF THE POINT IS TO BUY TIME TO JUST CLARIFY WHAT A DATA CENTER, THE APPROPRIATE DATA CENTER DEFINITION IS. BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S REALLY BROAD AND THAT'S MAYBE WHAT'S HANGING SOME PEOPLE UP. HOW LONG, LET'S SAY WE DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MORATORIUM IN FAVOR OF AN OUTRIGHT BAN OF THE DATA CENTERS, THE SCARY KIND OF DATA CENTERS, HOW LONG WOULD STAFF OR THE SUBCOMMITTEE THINK THAT THEY COULD COME FORWARD WITH A REFINED DEFINITION?

THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE TO YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE. SO I WOULD LOOK TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR THAT. I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT THAT CHANGE TO YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE HAS A MORE ELABORATE PROCEDURE. SO IT WOULD TAKE, BEFORE IT GOT TO THE COUNCIL FOR A VOTE, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A NOTICED HEARING AND THEN IT WOULD COME TO THE COUNCIL FOR A NOTICED HEARING AND THEN IT WOULD, YOU WOULD HEAR IT ONCE AT ONE MEETING AND YOU WOULD ADOPT AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING AND THEN IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE 30 DAYS LATER. SO BY THE TIME IT GOT SAY IT TAKES X AMOUNT OF TIME TO GET TO COUNCIL, FROM THE TIME IT GETS TO COUNCIL, YOU'VE PROBABLY GOT 45 DAYS BEFORE IT'S EFFECTIVE AT THE QUICKEST.

AND IT WOULD TAKE A WHILE TO GET TO COUNCIL?

AT LEAST CALL IT A MONTH TO GET THROUGH THE COMMISSION AND THEN STAFF PREPS IT BEFORE THEN. SO I'M THINKING AT LEAST THREE MONTHS IS MY GUESS.

YES, I AGREE.

NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, I DO WANT TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT THERE OBVIOUSLY ARE SIGNIFICANT PLANNING ISSUES GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY, THE CORRI PROJECT WE'VE BEEN DESCRIBING, AND SOME PERSONNEL ISSUES THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS. SO I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT WHAT WE CAN PROMISE AT THIS POINT.

One more question.

So this question is for Sam. I'd like you to keep me honest on this tonight. So if this council did a 3-2 vote tonight on a moratorium, what day is the moratorium effective?

So you're not voting on a moratorium tonight because there's not one before you.

We're voting on giving you direction or you're just going to take direction?

Yeah, you would give me direction. And so let's call it the soonest it would be effective is October 1st. BECAUSE I WOULD BRING IT TO YOU ON OCTOBER 1ST. YOU WOULD NEED A FOURTHEST VOTE, WHICH IS FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO ADOPT IT, AND IT WOULD BECOME IMMEDIATELY EFFECTIVE. BECAUSE IT'S AN URGENCY ORDINANCE, IT BYPASSES THE USUAL 30 DAYS FOR EFFECTIVENESS.

AND THEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD HAVE THE FIRST 45 DAYS, WE'D BE VOTING ON THE FIRST 45 DAYS FOR THE MORATORIUM, YES? TO EXTEND.

NO, TO EXTEND, IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL. EVERY EXTENSION HAS TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL.

OKAY, SO 45 DAYS WOULD BE DECEMBER 15th, SO IT WOULD BE THE FIRST MEETING IN DECEMBER, IT WOULD COME BACK?

I ASSUME SO. OKAY, THANK YOU.

AND THEN EVERY 45 DAYS AFTER THAT?

NO. IT COMES BACK THE FIRST, IT'S 45 DAYS, AND THEN DEPENDING ON HOW WE ADOPT IT, AND I I SUSPECT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO NOTICE IT AND GET IT ADOPTED IN THE WAY THAT WE WOULD NEED TO TO ALLOW YOU TO ONLY TAKE ONE EXTENSION FOR THE FULL 22 MONTHS. SO I THINK WE WOULD DO, YOU WOULD HAVE ONE EXTENSION FOR 45 DAYS, THE NEXT EXTENSION I THINK IS FOR 10 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS, AND THEN THE NEXT EXTENSION IS FOR 12 MONTHS. I DO NOT KNOW HOW THEY COME UP WITH THESE NUMBER OF DAYS.

So you have a question?

No, but I'd like to give my comments, please. So I think we're all in agreement with the moratorium. I mean, part of the reason why I'm in favor of the moratorium is that I don't really know a whole lot about these data centers, except for what I see on the news. And of course, what we see on the news is this is really awful, and it is these giant data centers. But as Mayor Mackin had said, and I've gotten feedback from other members of the community too, there's different types of data centers, like small ones. And so getting the definition makes sense. And I want to say thank you to the subcommittee and Christina. I mean, this is awesome, right? This gives us... information and to make good decisions, we need information. And we got too much on our plate. It's obvious that we shouldn't be making a decision either way, because there is a process that you have to do. And so delaying it all the way till sometime in 2028, to me, makes sense. unless something comes up that makes us change our mind about, because we've done the work. So anyways, that's my thoughts.

Mayor MacKinnon, I see your hand raised.

Thank you 1 other thing I just wanted to add is that there's a lot of research being done into. What would change with the large data centers? Because of course, they're being touted as being economic benefits. They don't really provide a lot of jobs, except for. The front end of construction, but the other concern on Wall Street, if you haven't read about data centers on Wall Street is that within 10 years, they will be obsolete. And that they're being overbuilt and so all the hype. And all the economic benefits may actually just dissipate. And all the agreements you have some people that built them will just walk away. So that's also an important consideration if you're thinking that we're just bypassing an economic benefit. That's why I would rather see us wait and see, let some other big cities figure this out before we start investing in this for our future. Thank you.

So it sounds like there's a majority. I will say that I am happy to support a moratorium. I think if there is the intention to clarify the definition around data centers and so that big operations that harm our wildlife and create noise and put a strain on our electrical and put a strain on our water resources, that we completely ban the ability for those types of businesses to move in. And I hope that we would do this expeditiously, I think, to run the moratorium all the way out to 2028 to me doesn't make a lot of sense. So I would hope that we could get something finalized. I think that when you have a moratorium, you're leaving the ability for something to happen and you're kicking the can down the road. And I think that with the level of engagement of our residents and them wanting to see us put regulations around here, I think WE OWE IT TO THEM TO REALLY FOCUS ON THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I MEAN, THERE IS A LOT ON THE COUNCIL'S PLATE WITH THE BAYLANDS AND THE COREY, SO KEEPING THAT IN MIND. BUT I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE US RUN THE CLOCK COMPLETELY OUT AND BE LOOKING AT THIS IN 2028. AND I SEE MAYOR MACKIN'S HANDS RAISED. Do you want to get 1 more?

Thank you. I would just suggest once again. Instead of banning, because. In the future, what might today be considered large might be scaled down and you've then made an outright ban. The technology is changing, which is why they say in 10 years. A lot of these big ones are going to be just totally obsolete. What you can do is clarify the definitions for the smaller ones and and allow that in your zoning. but not allow the larger ones in your zoning. Because then if something changes and we want to allow certain things that we don't deem to be noisy or excessive water or electricity, all we have to do is change the definition in the zoning later. It gives us more flexibility than an outright forever ban. That's all I'm suggesting. Thank you.

They complicate the same thing. And that sounds like a conversation we'll have at a later date. So what I'm hearing at this moment is whether there's support for an emergency moratorium that we can bring, an urgency moratorium that we can direct staff to bring to us at our next meeting for consideration. Do I have a motion for that?

I'll make a motion. I will second it.

And roll call vote, please.

WE NEED THAT?

YEAH, BECAUSE SHE'S ONLINE.

OKAY.

OH, IT'S JUST GIVING DIRECTION. OKAY, COOL.

NO, I THOUGHT IT NEEDED TO BE A 3-2.

OH, YEAH, SHE DID SAY THAT IT NEEDED TO BE A 3-2.

I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT YOU HAD SAID, FRANK.

NO, A 3-2 NOW AND A 4-5 LATER.

CORRECT. OKAY.

SO ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS?

AYE.

COUNCILMEMBER KERN? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ?

AYE.

COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL? AYE. MAYOR MACKIN?

Great. Moving on. We are now at old business item J, the silver spot one-year check-in.

We can't hear you.

May I pretend the public hearing item goes first? Oh, wait.

Yeah. Sorry. We moved it. My bad. WE HAVE ITEM I, PUBLIC HEARING, INTRODUCTION OF THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 16.24 AND ADDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.90.

I'M JUST WONDERING IF MAYBE THE COUNCIL WOULD ENTERTAIN MAYBE MOVING ITEM I BEHIND ITEM J.

CAN WE DO THAT AT THIS MOMENT? OKAY. I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT. I'LL SECOND IT.

COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER KERN? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ? AYE. COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL? AYE. MAYOR MACKIN?

AYE. YOU'RE BACK ON.

Good evening honorable mayor members of the council for over 23 years. Silver spot has operated its cooperative preschool program on the city on property located at 4 Solano street. During that time silver spot has become a valued part of the community and has continued to provide. Early childhood education and programming to Brisbane families. In late 2025, the city council considered an amendment in an extension of silver spots lease agreement to allow the organization to continue operating. Following its consideration, the City Council approved a two-year extension of the lease agreement and requested that Silver Spot return to the Council after one year to provide an update on the organization's operations, enrollment, financial condition, and overall program health. The purpose of this update is to provide the City Council with an opportunity to assess the continued viability of the program, understand any significant changes or challenges affecting the organization, and to ensure that Silver Spot remains well-positioned to fulfill its mission while operating on City property. So, with that, I will turn it over to Diana and the silver spot team board members that are there this evening to share any highlights from the past year and to respond to any questions that the council may have.

Hi, good evening council members. I'm Diana G and I am. DIRECTOR AND TEACHER AT SILVER SPOT NURSERY SCHOOL. I AM HERE WITH TWO BOARD MEMBERS, JESSICA AND MELISSA. WE SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE CITY TO JEREMY EVERY SEPTEMBER, AND I SENT THAT OVER TO HIM. BUT JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, WE ARE ON OUR SECOND YEAR OF BEING FULL. WE ARE LICENSED FOR 24 FAMILIES, BUT WE CONSIDER OURSELVES FULL ENROLLMENT AT 20 FAMILIES. This year, we are 20 families, but 22 students. We have two families who have siblings. And our report to the city breaks it down how many Brisbane residents and non-residents. We do have a 50-50 split this year. So 11 students are in Brisbane, and we have 11 students who are non-Brisbane. But out of those 11 students that are non-Brisbane, three of them are alumni families who are returning back with their second child, which they get priority to do. but we had 14 returning families from last school year. We took a lot of two-year-olds last year. TK is definitely taking a toll on us. We are losing our older kids, but Some families choose to stay with us until they go to kindergarten. So we still offer all the way from two to five in nine months. We did bring in six new Brisbane residents this year for enrollment.

And then we had two non-Brisbane residents.

But other than that, we're doing really good. We're thriving. We have a great board. We're just having a good time, and we have so many things planned as far as fundraisers in the community this year, and we hope to see you guys there. Pass it on to my board president.

Hi. Jessica here, board president. I've been the president at Silver Spot for about three years now, and I agree with Diana. I think that we are doing wonderful, better than we were my first year there with my son, Jace, and that was fantastic. I think following that year is when we came to ask for some help and some for advice. And I can say that we are out in the community. We are... doing a bunch of fundraisers. We were at the back to school picnic. So thank you guys for inviting us to that. It was great. And I'm just excited to see how the year plays out. We don't really have any concerns at this time. TK, I want to say is not a concern. We're taking in a lot of two-year-olds. Yes, some of our older children are kind of transitioning out, but I think that they are ready to. And I see that a lot of the new families coming in are are really taking to our style of teaching and co-parenting or, you know. So, yes, cooperative parenting. I will pass it on to Melissa. She will introduce herself. She's our secretary.

Hi, Melissa. I am one of the, or I'm the mother of two children, one who will be enrolled. And all I can say is that there is a reason why I have my children here and not in San Francisco. We love it. They love it. It's a great community.

Thank you. Okay. With that, I'll turn it over to council members for questions, starting with council member O'Connell.

No questions.

Mayor Mackin. No questions. Keep up the good work. Council Member Lentz.

You know, I don't have any questions. However, I just want to thank you for doing what you've been doing to get out into the community. You know, that effort not only strengthens and put a bunch of energy into your school and your program, BUT IT ALSO HAS A RIPPLE EFFECT IN PROVIDING SOME FUN STUFF FOR THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY. AND, YEAH, I'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE FLYERS ABOUT YOUR EVENTS HERE OR THERE. YOU HAVE ONE THAT'S COMING UP, DON'T YOU? DAY IN THE PARK. I SAW THAT FROM THE BLAST. SO, YEAH, JUST KEEP IT UP. GREAT JOB.

THANK YOU. NICE. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER KEARN?

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. DIANA, YOU'VE BEEN HERE THREE TIMES SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL, AND THE REPORT OUT TONIGHT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHERE YOU STARTED. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THE HARD WORK. I'M REALLY PROUD OF THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.

I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO TAKE A MINUTE TO TELL US ABOUT YOUR UPCOMING EVENTS.

Okay. So we have day in the park, which is a citywide event. Um, first weekend in October. And then right after that, what are you doing at day in the park? Um, we're doing, we're going to have a booth selling mini pumpkins and we have, um, um, glitter tattoos, body art, body art, body art.

You guys got a face painter this year and we didn't have the capacity for that. Um, there's going to be a lot of kids there. So we were, kind of afraid to have one person face painting um but the body art is going to be pretty quick and fun and uh kind of cheap so yeah it'll be a donation base so we think it'll be a great addition

So that is in October. And then in November, I believe we have a cozy beverage bar at one of the farmer's markets on a Thursday. I can't remember exactly what day that is, but that's going to be in November. And then December, we will be our usual Santa photos at the BDW Craft Fair. And then the very next day is the Festival of Lights, and we will have our beer and wine booth there.

Yeah, no, that was awesome. I have to say, that was awesome. I don't want to say that was the best thing. It was one of the best. There you go.

It's a nice treat for the adults. Yeah, it was. They loved it. Not only the kids get to have it, but the adults.

Our parents had a good time doing that booth. And then in January, we will have our pancake breakfast, which is going to be its third year. So fun. And we're adding a new element to our pancake breakfast. We're going to have raffle baskets. Cool. Or opportunity drawing baskets.

Nice. Yeah. Love it. Okay. So is there anyone with public comment on this item?

I do want to remind our council that there are three preschools in our beautiful town of Brisbane, but we are the only school that takes in two-year-olds who do not have to be potty trained. So it is a very important fact and that we need a school like us in this community. Absolutely.

Yeah. Absolutely. Thank you. You're welcome. And now I just will see if anyone else, is there anyone from the public wishing to make a comment? No? Okay. And I don't know that there's really much discussion, right? We're just, you're coming here. You're telling us how it's going. We ask questions. So I don't think there's really much to say at this point other than keep up the good work. Thank you for coming. Can't wait to see you at some of your fundraisers. And is there anything you're looking for from us? No. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Now backtracking to the public hearing. There you go. OH, OKAY. AND THAT IS INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 16.24 AND ADDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.90 TO ESTABLISH AND UPDATE PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND ESTABLISHING establishing the development impact fees and supporting nexus studies and capital improvement plans to support the development impact fees to fund public facilities for library, fire department, police department, and general government facilities to parkland, park improvements, recreation facilities, open space and trails, and three transportation facilities. And we have a staff report.

Mayor Pro Tem and Madam Mayor on the screen, I wanted to introduce, I believe, Michael Barrett, who's in the machine. Is Michael Barrett in the machine? I think he is. Michael is with my office. He is truly incomparable and knows more about fees than anyone you will ever meet, and he has been working with the city on this issue.

Great.

Welcome, Michael.

Yes, also online. Sorry, go ahead, Michael.

Just make sure that everybody can hear me. Sounds like you can. Yes.

I echo Sam's sentiment. We would not be here today without Michael's guidance and assistance. So thank you, Michael. With me tonight, I also have Nicole Kissam and Joe Colgan from NBS and Matt Ghosn from Farron Pierce. SO THOSE FOLKS ARE ONLINE TO HELP WITH QUESTIONS. SO TONIGHT STAFF IS PRESENTING A COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM FOR PARKS AND RECREATION, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION. THE RECOMMENDED FEES ARE SUPPORTED BY UPDATED NEXUS STUDIES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS REFLECT THE POLICY DIRECTION COUNCIL PROVIDED EARLIER THIS YEAR AND REMAIN WITHIN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNTS LEGALLY JUSTIFIED BY THE NEXUS STUDIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. STAFF IS ASKING THE COUNCIL TO INTRODUCE THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE, UPDATING THE CITY'S PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION. JUST A QUICK RECAP OF A FEW THINGS THAT WE COVERED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS. CURRENTLY THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM SO THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY ESTABLISH THAT PROGRAM. IMPACT FEES ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT FUND THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF CAPITAL FACILITIES. THIS IS GOVERNED BY AB 1600 OR THE MITIGATION FEE ACT WHICH REQUIRES CERTAIN THINGS LIKE NEXUS STUDIES TO ESTABLISH, INCREASE AND IMPOSE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. THOSE IMPACT FEES MUST SHOW A NEED, A BENEFIT, AND PROPORTIONALITY, AND THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET THROUGH THE ANALYSIS DONE IN OUR NEXUS STUDIES, WHICH WE'LL GET TO IN A BIT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND. THIS HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR A WHILE NOW. IN 2023, COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO PURSUE IMPACT FEES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION, AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORTATION, AND PUBLIC FACILITIES. A COMPARATIVE OR BENCHMARKING STUDY WAS DONE IN LATE 25. THE REMAINING NEXUS STUDIES WERE THEN WHAT WE THOUGHT WERE DONE IN LATE 25. COUNCIL THEN MET IN JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND MARCH OF 26 TO DISCUSS THE BENCHMARKING STUDY, NEXUS STUDIES AND TO PROVIDE DIRECTION ON FEE SETTING. AND FROM APRIL THROUGH SEPTEMBER, STAFF REVISED THE STUDIES BASED ON RECENT LEGISLATION AND HAS ALSO PREPARED AN ORDINANCE, A RESOLUTION, A FEE SCHEDULE AND AN IMPACT FEE CIP. DURING THIS TIME, STAFF REALIZED THAT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS DONE IN 23-24 WAS OUTDATED AND IN NEED OF A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE. THIS WILL TAKE PLACE IN 2027 AS A PART OF A COUNTYWIDE EFFORT AT A SIGNIFICANT COST SAVINGS TO THE CITY. THEREFORE WE ARE BRINGING FORWARD THREE OF THE FOUR STUDIES TONIGHT AND THREE OF THE FOUR FEES AND WE HOPE TO BRING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS STUDY IN 27. NEXT SLIDE. SO PREPARED BY NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP, THE PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE STUDY ANALYZES THE IMPACTS ON NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S SPECIFIC TO PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS. THE STUDY CALCULATES THE IMPACT FEES AND REFLECTS THE ACTUAL BURDEN IMPOSED BY NEW DEVELOPMENT. A REMINDER THAT THE NEXUS STUDIES PROVIDE A MAXIMUM OR A CEILING THAT WE MAY CHARGE PER DEVELOPMENT TYPE. The NEXUS study may be found as Attachment 6, Exhibit B in your packet. Next slide. SIMILAR TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE STUDY THE PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEE STUDY ANALYZES NEW DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING LIBRARIES, GENERAL GOVERNMENT, POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS. PER RECENT LEGISLATION THE RESIDENTIAL TYPES ARE TIERED BY UNIT SIZE SO YOU'LL SEE THEM BROKEN DOWN BY SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE STUDY AND ON THE FEE SCHEDULE. THE STUDY IS DESIGNED TO RECOVER ONLY THE SHARE OF COSTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT, NOT EXISTING DEFICIENCIES. This study may be found as attachment seven, exhibit B. Next slide. THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE STUDY PREPARED BY FAIR AND PEERS ADDRESSES MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ARISING FROM ANTICIPATED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH. THIS STUDY IS A BIT DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS TWO IN THAT IT DIVIDES THE ANALYSIS ACROSS THREE DISTRICTS OF THE CITY. THE BAYLAND, SIERRA POINT AND WEST BRISBANE. THE FEES ARE BASED ON TRIP GENERATION RATES FOR VARIOUS LAND USES WITH COSTS ALLOCATED ACCORDING TO EACH DISTRICT'S SHARE OF PROJECTED TRIPS. AND THAT STUDY IS ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT EIGHT EXHIBIT B. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS MAP IS IN THE NEXUS STUDY AND ESSENTIALLY ILLUSTRATES THE THREE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICTS. OUTLINED IN GREEN YOU HAVE THE BAYLANDS. IN BLUE YOU HAVE SIERRA POINT AND IN ORANGE YOU HAVE WEST BRISBANE. NEXT SLIDE. BEFORE WE GET TO THE FEE SCHEDULES, I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON A FEW KEY POINTS OF A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. FIRST, THE PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM IS TO PROVIDE A LEGALLY STRUCTURED WAY FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO FUND ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF CAPITAL FACILITIES TO SERVE GROWTH. WITHOUT THESE FEES, THE CITY MAY NEED TO REDUCE OR DEFER IMPROVEMENTS OR RELY MORE HEAVILY ON EXISTING PUBLIC REVENUES. THE FEES RECOMMENDED ARE BASED ON THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED IN THE NEXUS STUDIES, BENCHMARKING INFORMATION AND FEESETTING FEEDBACK RECEIVED FROM THE COUNCIL EARLIER THIS YEAR. AND LASTLY, THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE BALANCES INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING WITH REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS. AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE SCHEDULE, MORE FEES ARE IN THE AVERAGE OR LOWER THAN AVERAGE RANGE FOR MOST DEVELOPMENT TYPES CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL DIRECTION. NEXT SLIDE. THE PARKS AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE IS SET AT SLIGHTLY BELOW THE REGIONAL AVERAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TYPES. THE FEES ARE RECOMMENDED AT THE AVERAGE FOR COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AND HOTEL DEVELOPMENT TYPES. THE PARKS AND RECREATION FEE IS SET AT ABOVE AVERAGE FOR LIFE SCIENCE RND AND OFFICE DEVELOPMENT TYPES. AGAIN, THESE FEES PROVIDE A BALANCED APPROACH TO INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING WITH REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS WHILE MEETING CITY PRIORITIES. NEXT SLIDE. THE PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEES ARE ALSO SLIGHTLY BELOW AVERAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND AT THE COMPARATIVE AVERAGE FOR COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AND HOTEL DEVELOPMENT TYPES. OFFICE AND LIFE SCIENCE RND ARE ABOVE AVERAGE. AGAIN, THESE FEES ARE BALANCED APPROACH AND COMPLY WITH THE MITIGATION FEE ACT. NEXT SLIDE. AS MENTIONED EARLIER THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES ARE DIVIDED BY DISTRICT. IN THE BAYLANDS DISTRICT THE FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ARE SET BELOW AVERAGE. FEES FOR HOTEL DEVELOPMENT TYPES ARE SET AT THE AVERAGE AND AT SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN AVERAGE FOR OFFICE DEVELOPMENTS. IN THE SIERRA POINT TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT, HOTEL DEVELOPMENT TYPES ARE SET AT THE AVERAGE. OFFICE AND LIFE SCIENCE RND ARE SET AT ABOVE AVERAGE. IN WEST BRISBANE, IMPACT FEES ARE SET AT THE AVERAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND AT THE AVERAGE FOR WAREHOUSE QUARRY DEVELOPMENT TYPES. PER PREVIOUS COUNCIL FEEDBACK, THE MAJORITY OF THE FEES ARE SET AT AVERAGE OR SLIGHTLY BELOW AVERAGE FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT TYPES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LIFE SCIENCE RND. NEXT SLIDE. SO IF APPROVED, THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE EFFECTIVE 60 DAYS AFTER ADOPTION. THE CITY WOULD COLLECT FEES AT THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WHICH REQUIRE COLLECTION AT THE TIME OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THE FEES MAY NOT BE COMMINGLED WITH OTHER ACCOUNTS AND MUST BE DEPOSITED INTO SEPARATE CAPITAL FACILITIES ACCOUNTS. SIMILAR TO OUR AB 1600 REPORTING EVERY DECEMBER, AN ANNUAL REPORT WOULD BE NEEDED TO BE RECEIVED BY THE COUNCIL SHOWING THE TYPES OF FEES COLLECTED, MONEY EXPENDED, AND THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURES ON EACH APPROVEMENT, INCLUDING THE PERCENTAGE OF FUNDED BY THE FEES. THE MITIGATION FEE ACT ALSO REQUIRES THAT WE UPDATE OUR NEXUS STUDIES AT LEAST EVERY EIGHT YEARS. NEXT SLIDE. SO IF APPROVED, STAFF WOULD BRING THIS BACK FOR A SECOND READING IN OCTOBER, WE WOULD PUBLISH THE MATERIALS UNDER THE MITIGATION FEE ACT, WE WOULD SET UP THE REQUIRED FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS, WE WOULD WORK TO TRAIN STAFF ON FEE APPLICABILITY AND COLLECTION TIMING, AND WE WOULD ALSO BEGIN ADMINISTRATIVE WORK TO UPDATE APPLICATION CHECKLISTS AND FEE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. NEXT SLIDE. WITH THAT, JUST THANK YOU, AND THE TEAM AND I WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

Thank you. Council Member Lentz, any questions?

Thank you, Madison. All right. So in regards to residential, if it's affordable housing, does it still have to pay the fees?

It's my understanding that there isn't a blanket exemption and that any sort of decrease would need to go before the council. I would welcome Michael's thoughts on that. Any thoughts on affordable housing fees?

Oh, you're muted.

You need to unmute Michael. Yeah, he's doing it. Got it.

Sorry about that. Generally, I don't really have anything to add. I agree that there's no sort of like blanket statement that the fees will or will not apply to an affordable housing project because it depends on the project that comes before the council. And so that's a decision that gets made at the time that the project is analyzed. And so in general, the fees would apply unless there's some state law exemption that would apply to an affordable housing project.

All right. So what you're saying then is that the council has discretion to apply the fees?

Well, The discretion, there is discretion for the council to not impose or reduce a fee. So in other words, the fees that we're talking about today and that are recommended that the assistant city managers just summarized, would be the maximum amount that the city could charge. The other issue for the city to consider and for the council to consider if there's a question for council in the future to impose or not impose or reduce potentially a fee for a particular project is that, you know, generally the city council, the city council merely needs to identify a rational basis for the decision. In other words, not discriminating against some class of protected class of people. And otherwise, a reduction in fee means that you're not receiving the revenue from the development, which means that the city has an obligation to replace that revenue somewhere else. In other words, you can't charge one developer to pay the impacts from another development.

Sure. No, that makes sense. All right. And then West Brisbane. So that is does that also include the quarry? I mean, the Crocker Park. Yes. Did it show on the map? Okay, I'm sorry. My bad. And then, so I was just curious, so the TDM one, you know, calls out the three areas. I was just curious why the other two didn't call the other three areas.

I have Matt Goen from Farron Piers online, if maybe you wanted to speak to that, Matt.

Yeah, thanks. Yeah, Matt Goen with Farron Piers. The State law requires for transportation fees that they are allocated based on the, you know, what benefits would be provided those future land uses. And so there is a lot closer nexus to the location because that's where people will be using those infrastructure.

All right. No, that makes sense. All right. Thank you.

Okay. And Council Member Kern?

Thank you so much. Christina, I just want to say this is the all Christina show tonight. She is amazing. Thank you so much for all your hard work on this. Thank you so much to all of our consultants as well. So it's my understanding that in San Mateo County, we may be the only city that does not have impact fees. And if we panicked, if council panicked, can we roll back the fees and go back to zero no fees?

Yes.

Thank you so much. My next question is, what is the process for adding a fee? And my example would be for childcare.

We would essentially go through the same process. We would do a nexus study and figure out what the ceiling would be. And then we would work with all of you to sort of look at sort of what the comparisons are regionally. We would essentially do the same sort of process, but this specifically just for the childcare impact fee.

And what would be... Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. And last question is, if we were to give you the green light to do child care, like roughly how long would that take? A year? Two years? Not a year. This took a year.

We can't hear you.

I don't even think this took a year, and this is much more extensive than adding one fee. I think it would depend on how long it takes to have a nexus study done and then getting it to council. I have no idea how long a nexus study would take, but I don't know, six months? Is that my goal?

I'm a little bit at a loss not knowing what it is that the council has in mind as far as child care fee is. Presumably it's talking about creating facilities. But in general, I mean, in broad strokes, six months is generally relatively fast to get an impact fee from start to council action. And somewhere between six months and a year is, I think, sort of the average, something along those lines.

Thank you so much.

Council Member O'Connell.

We've talked about this a lot. I have no questions.

Council Member Mackin. Thank you. Since we have found in Brisbane, sometimes time gets away from us and we're remiss in raising fees. And since we are watching the economy by leaps and bounds and the value of money going down, how fast, assuming we pass this, how fast would we be able to raise the fees if we needed to do so just because of inflation? Are there restrictions on, you know, you have to wait two years before you change them?

Yeah, if Michael could speak to this, because I know he did write this into the ordinance and the resolution.

Right. As Christina mentions, there is a provision that's in the resolution. So the recommended action to adopt the resolution is to adopt the schedule of fees, which, of course, are, you know, in the Exhibit A. But it also includes a clause that the council delegates authority to the city manager to adjust based on inflation, you know, specific formulas and resolution based on engineering news report. So the city manager would be authorized to adjust for inflation each year based on that, you know, inflation formula.

Okay. Thank you.

And as a quick supplement to that, that is built in so that that annual adjustment that's delegated to the city manager would be for a maximum of eight years because the state law requires the council to update the nexus studies and the fees after eight years.

So can I just ask you why you hinged in on the city manager making that prerogative decision rather than just building in that we would use the CPI to account for changes?

The reason that I recommended that approach is based on my experience in jurisdictions that don't include that sort of specificity about how the inflation adjustment is implemented leads to confusion and, well, confusion if it's not documented clearly. So the idea is that The city manager clearly can delegate authority to a designee to do the work of the annual update, but it's a document that's approved by city staff and published so the public knows on this date the inflation adjustment was implemented and here's the impact on the fees and the fee schedule is updated and published so that everybody sees and everybody knows on day one, the old fees applied. On day two, the new fees apply. So it's a matter of just clearly documenting the implementation of the adjustment.

Okay. I guess my concern there is we've had different things in Brisbane that we have one staff member making decisions, and that has not always met with everyone's approval. So that's why I asked the question. Thank you.

ALL RIGHT. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BECAUSE AS COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL MENTIONED, WE'VE NOW DISCUSSED THIS ITEM SEVERAL TIMES. SO WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. I SEE A SLIP IN THE AUDIENCE. MICHELLE SALMON? SURE. WE'RE RUNNING A TIGHT SHIP OVER HERE THESE DAYS.

I'm all in favor of impact fees. But as I'm reading this, it specifies public facilities for library, fire department, police department, general government facilities, parkland, park improvements, recreation facilities, open space and trails and transportation facilities. And let's add child care. But what about infrastructure like our sewer charges and our stormwater charges? Those are really high and they impact everybody in Brisbane. And every time you build another house or build another project, you cover up more ground, less groundwater can seep in, there's more sewage, there's more runoff. And those of us who, you know, have really high bills for very small houses and very limited families are really taking a hit hard. And I think that's one of the number one complaints that I hear around town about how high our sewer bill is, how high the infrastructure is. Oh, my water was only like $20 and the rest was $300. So I would like to see some of these impact fees not go to necessarily all recreation, childcare, and yeah, yeah, happy, happy. I'd like to see it take care of infrastructure that's been neglected for the last 40 years and that we're now paying through the nose for. So please add that. I really feel that that's important, especially with all these ADUs you're building and all of the development further and further up the hill. I mean, the average family THAT DOESN'T HAVE KIDS IS PAYING THROUGH THEIR NOSE JUST TO FLESH THEIR TOILET. THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. DOES STAFF WANT TO COMMENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE

Yes, thank you so much. I agree. We actually do have other mechanisms for connection fees for utilities, for water and sewer. Those are actually done as part of the utility rates. So it wouldn't be an impact fee. Impact fees, remember, are towards new facilities and expansion of services. Utilities have something similar to that that is charged through a different type of connection charge. And that's known as part of the utility rates study, which we will be undertaking in the coming months. So it's something that's accounted for and something that we will be looking at. It's just different process under the utilities fees separate from these impact fees.

And to Christina, who's done a lot of work on impact fees, have you seen, say, additional impact fees like the one Michelle is describing?

Well, impact fees essentially cannot go towards existing deficiencies, so it would have to be for new development. And I think that's maybe where some of the difficulty is, is we want to use these impact fees to obviously better our community and improve our community. But if it's for, like, operations and maintenance or any existing deficiencies, it's an ineligible cost for impact fees.

Thank you. Through the chair, if I may also add, with respect to utility capacity increasing projects, we do require developments to do that at the time of construction. So it's defined specifically for what those impacts are. We will look One example is if we have a new development somewhere and it needs to extend to sewer main, they would do that improvement. If they're somewhere down the line that needs to be upsized, that would be something that we would look at as part of the development review and require the upgrade specifically for that project.

Thank you. Well, you might want to get clarification from us.

I don't understand why you could use it for childcare, for children that are already born.

Wait, Michelle, you've got to come to the mic.

I guess I don't understand how you can use it for recreation and child care and children that are already born and all of that, but you can't use it for infrastructure. I mean, isn't that a form of infrastructure also? I just don't understand why utilities it's not so much individual utilities, but the capacity that the city of Brisbane is doing is, you know, for sewer and water and maintenance of the system that now has more pressure on it because you've built more land, there's more runoff, there's more everything, and yet there's more children You can use it for children, but you can't use it for systems. I'm not understanding that. And using it for utility hookups, that's a one-time fee. Now you're hooked up, but now you're contributing every day to the system. So I just don't understand the separation of church and state there. It doesn't make sense to me. Thank you. Thank you.

I think just to clarify, what I'm hearing from staff is that impact fees can't be used for maintenance. They have to be used for new So like a new playground, a new daycare, something new that has been necessitated by more people, more businesses, putting a stress on what we currently have that requires us to expand a new library. We have new residents, new businesses. WE CAN NO LONGER, WE NOW NEED A SECOND LIBRARY, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, VERSUS MAINTAINING EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A WHOLE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, BUT IF YOU WANT MORE CLARIFICATION, I'M SURE STAFF WILL PROVIDE IT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. ANYONE ONLINE? OKAY. SO WITH THAT, CAN I GET A FIRST AND SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?

SO MOVED. SECOND.

Call vote, please. Council Member Davis. Aye. Council Member Kern.

Aye. Council Member Lenz. Aye. Council Member O'Connell. Aye. And Mayor Mackin.

Aye. Great. We're going to move on to council discussion, and I'm going to have Mayor Mackin go first.

I would move ahead with the... with the measure. Great. I think we've looked at this a long time. Yes. I think it's been vetted about as best as it could. Yes. And I appreciate all staff's work on this and the consultants. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Kern.

I agree with Mayor Mack and I came prepared with a full list here. I'm going to go through it anyhow because it's kind of fun. So our new website, which is amazing, the city's website, if you go out there and you do research on impact fee discussions, the first one I could find is June 1st, 2023. And we've been having them every year since then. The primary research has been complete. The secondary research has been consumed. Nexus fee studies are done. Consultants have been hired and weighed in. We did a benchmarking exercise with all of our cities in San Mateo County to look at what their fees are. Christina Fernandez sent out a voting matrix to all the council members to weigh in on what they thought the fees should be. Low, medium, high, what we thought. She's taking that into account. And this was one of the first projects I worked on when I joined up with the council. So all seven of those things, I think we need to move forward tonight.

Thank you. Council Member Lentz?

YEAH, I WANT TO THANK STAFF, ESPECIALLY CHRISTINA. SHE'S BEEN WORKING HARD ON THIS. AND, YES, WE HAVE WORKED ON THIS FOR A REALLY LONG TIME. AND LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THOSE IMPACT FEES BENEFIT THE CITY OF BRISBAY.

COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL?

WE'VE WORKED ON THIS SO LONG THAT SOME OF OUR NEXUS STUDIES EXPIRED. AND WE HAD TO REDO THEM. So I am really happy to move forward. But keep in mind, unless we have a project that comes forward, there's no money. So it's not that this is a golden stick that is we're waving over the city that is going to instantly bring us money to build parks and new recreation centers and a new pool and a new library. That may come with time. But at this point, it's just making sure that when that development comes online, that we have a mechanism to get what we need to provide the same type of services the rest of the community enjoys. So I thank you for all the work that you've done. And I would want to move forward with this as it stands.

I'm in agreement with all of you. So with that, I will take a motion.

If I could, please, before someone makes a motion, could you kindly add to the motion that you are waiving full reading of the text of the ordinance that's being introduced? So the motion would be introduced for first reading only, waiving full reading of the text and ordinance, et cetera.

So moved.

I WAS WAITING FOR SOMEONE.

I THOUGHT YOU WERE DOING THE MOTION THERE.

DO YOU HAVE THAT LANGUAGE, MADAM VICE MAYOR? I DON'T. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.

I CAN READ THE MOTION, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO STEAL ANYONE'S THUNDER.

CAN I GET A FIRST AND SECOND TO INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 16.24 AND ADDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.90 TO ESTABLISH AND UPDATE PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND APPROVAL RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND SUPPORTING NEXUS STUDIES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES TO FUND PUBLIC FACILITIES FOR LIBRARY, FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE DEPARTMENT, GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES, TWO, PARK LAND, PARK IMPROVEMENTS, RECREATION FACILITIES, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS, AND THREE, TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE WAVING.

YOU COULD JUST SAY IN WAVING FULL READING OF THE TEXT, THEN YOU'VE MADE THE MOTION.

FULL READING OF THE TEXT.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

Councilmember Davis.

Aye.

Councilmember Kern. Aye. Councilmember Lentz. Aye. Councilmember O'Connell. Aye. And Mayor Mackin.

Aye. Nice. And now moving on to item K. Thank you for staying with us. I think there are some people in the audience for this item. So apologies for the wait. We're going to try to do this expeditiously. That is consider approval of an amendment to a reimbursement agreement with parties who constructed San Francisco Avenue extension. WE CAN START WITH THE STAFF REPORT, PLEASE.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU, MAYOR PROTEM. COUNCILMEMBERS, MADAM MAYOR, THIS NEXT ITEM IS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO AVENUE EXTENSION IN 2007. THE DEVELOPERS OF THE LOTS AT 90 SANTA CLARA STREET AND 29 SAN FRANCISCO AVENUE NEEDED TO COMPLETE CERTAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO DEVELOP PROPERTIES. AT THEIR PROJECT REQUEST, THE CITY CONSIDERED AND ESTABLISHED A REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM TO ALLOW RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD ALSO BENEFIT THE LOT AT 80 SANTA CLARA STREET. THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT IS SET TO RUN FOR 20 YEARS AND IS SET TO EXPIRE IN MAY OF 2027. TONIGHT'S AMENDMENT WOULD EXTEND IT ANOTHER 10 YEARS TO 2037 WITH NO CHANGES IN THE UNDERLYING TERMS. TONIGHT'S ACTION IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL. 20 YEARS IS A STANDARD TERM FOR THIS KIND OF AGREEMENT. IT RUNS WITH THE LAND RATHER THAN WITH ANY INDIVIDUAL OWNERS. IN THE PAST AND PRESENT, LEGAL HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE TERM CAN BE EXTENDED IF THE COUNCIL CHOOSES TO, BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO APPROVE OR DENY. WE'VE USED THE SAME TYPE OF MECHANISM BEFORE IN BRISBANE, INCLUDING ON KINGS ROAD AND SAN DIEGO COURT. THIS ITEM WAS ORIGINALLY HEARD BY THE COUNCIL, SORRY, THIS ITEM WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR THE AGENDA ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, BUT WAS CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF ONE OF THE PARTIES, WHICH IS WHY IT'S IN FRONT OF YOU AGAIN TONIGHT. AND THIS IS A CONTINUANCE OF AN ITEM FROM JULY OF 2025. SO FINALLY, I WOULD JUST WANT TO STATE THAT THE PARTIES IMPACTED BY TONIGHT'S ACTION ARE HERE TONIGHT AND ARE WELCOME TO COMMENT AT THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION. THAT'S THE END OF MY REPORT. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR DEFER TO PUBLIC COMMENTS FIRST, WHICHEVER YOU PREFER. THANK YOU.

NEW SPEAKER THANKS. I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. YOU SAID WE'VE DONE THIS ON KINGS ROAD AND SAN DIEGO COURT. DID HAVE ANY OF THOSE EXPIRED? HAVE THEY ALL BEEN DID ANY OF THOSE EXPIRED WHILE THERE WERE STILL UNDEVELOPED PARTIALS?

NEW SPEAKER THAT I DO NOT KNOW.

I think that did happen.

Because that's really important. I mean, I feel that I need to know what the city has done. I feel that that sets precedent for how we would handle this situation if we already have had other situations where this has happened on Kings, this has happened on San Diego. And I think that information would be key to inform how the council maybe should operate in this instance.

I think what had happened was that the property owner that did the construction that widened the street or put in the parking space didn't notify staff when the term ran out. Because it sounds like if the property owners who paid, if they didn't say anything, it would just expire and then that would be it, correct?

Correct. The request comes at the party that would be benefiting from the reimbursement. Correct.

And then after that term expired, he then came to the council and pleaded his case. And I think there was some kind of arrangement that worked out with him and the the other property owner who built a home across the street from that property owner. It was, the city did, you know.

I think the staff answered about this property, not about the property you're talking about.

I think you're on two different pages.

No, that was my question.

It was Councilmember Davis' question and trying to get clarification because Maz is new, right? So, and we were there when we addressed that issue.

I don't know if I was, but Kings Road, just because staff mentioned Kings Road and San Diego Court, this is where previous arrangements. And I was just curious, how were those arrangements? Did everyone pay and it was all good? Did anything expire? Are there undeveloped parcels still that are subject? I just think it would be good to know, like for consistency purposes, what's happened elsewhere in town. Can I-

CAN I ANSWER WITH A LITTLE RESEARCH THAT I DID? YES. ABSOLUTELY. WHEN THIS CAME BEFORE IS IN JULY OF 25. IS THAT WHAT I HEARD, MAZ? CORRECT. SO OUR PRIOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, RANDY BRIEAU, WAS STILL WORKING AT THAT TIME HERE. AND OUR PRIOR LAW FIRM WAS STILL IN PLACE. and I asked them to do research and determine how many of these type of agreements the city of Brisbane still had active, and the answer was zero outside of this one here. But they had been done in the past. We don't have any affected parcels today outside of this.

MY QUESTION WAS MORE WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST WITH THE OTHER PURSUALS. SO WITH THE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS.

NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY WERE EXTENDED. BUT I WASN'T SURE IF THERE WAS ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE YET TO BE BORN AT THE TIME OF THOSE AGREEMENTS EXPIRING. SO IF THAT CLARIFIES THAT QUESTION. BUT I HAVE HEARD FROM MY PREDECESSOR ABOUT ONE APPLICATION WHERE THERE WAS SIMILAR TO I THINK WHAT COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ JUST MENTIONED.

NEW SPEAKER OKAY. SO LET'S OFFICIALLY GO IN QUESTIONS IN ORDER. SO COUNCILMEMBER KERN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

NEW SPEAKER NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

NEW SPEAKER OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL?

NEW SPEAKER NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

NEW SPEAKER COUNCILMEMBER MACKIN?

I just have a question for staff. Is there a reason why the city does an agreement of this type versus just putting a lien on the property where you wouldn't have an agreement that would have to be extended over and over and over and over?

I don't know. Great question.

Because the lien would stay with the property until something was done or was sold.

I don't even know the legal mechanism by which we would do that. Usually I see a lien as a remedy in a lawsuit, and I don't know. I would have to research that, but

NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, MAYBE I COULD ADD THAT. AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE THE LEAN WOULD GO WITH AN UNDEVELOPED PARCEL. THE PURPOSE OF THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WOULD BE TO CAPTURE THE COST AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT. NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, YEAH. NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, I THINK THAT'S WHY THIS IS WHERE I'VE SEEN THIS MECHANISM USED MORE OFTEN THAN A LEAN. LEANS ARE USUALLY MORE PUNITIVE. NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, YEAH.

NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER LENTZ. NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, NO QUESTIONS. I ASKED MY QUESTION ALREADY. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO HAVE A SLIP HERE FROM AMY CHENG.

NEW SPEAKER Hi. GOOD EVENING.

COUNCIL MEMBER AND CITY STAFF, WE ARE ASKING YOU NOT TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED TEN YEARS EXTENSION. OF THIS REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT AND LET IT EXPIRE AS SCHEDULED ON MAY 7, 2027. HERE'S WHY. SENATOR CLARA STREET IS A PUBLIC ROAD. IT'S OPEN FOR EVERYONE, EVERY WESTERN, EVERY VISITOR, EVERY DELIVERED DRIVER USES IT. IT'S MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF BRISTOL SPAIN USING PUBLIC FUND. A ROAD THAT BELONGS TO PUBLIC SHOULD NOT TREAT IT AS PRIVATE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF ONE PROPERTY OWNER WHO NEVER AGREED TO PAY FOR IT. OUR PROPERTY WAS NEVER SIGNATORY TO THIS AGREEMENT, NEVER NEGOTIATED. WE DID NOT SIGN IT FOR 18 YEARS. 29 AND 99, THEY TOLD US NOT EVEN PARK IN FRONT OF OUR OWN PROPERTY. It is important to understand why this road improvement exists first place. This section of the roads is not built for general public or our property. It was built because two individuals, a father and son, construction two new homes on this section of the road. The improvement exists to enable their private development. They have now used this road built for their own benefit for 20 years. The people who benefit for this for two decades are precisely THE TWO WHO ARE REALLY PROPERTIES TO THE AGREEMENT. NOT THIRD PROPERTY THAT WAS NEVER PART OF THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AND HAS ONLY EXPERIENCED RESTRICTIONS, YET WE'RE BEING ASKED TO HELP FUND IMPROVEMENT THAT WE NEVER FOR US IN THE FIRST PLACE. Meanwhile, it's selective enforcement. 100 Santa Clara Street was built six years ago and pay nothing toward the same street. This is not consistent. It's not fair. If the role was truly private benefit improvement requiring reimbursement, the property should have been assessed too. WE UNDERSTAND THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT CHANGE THE REIMBURSEMENT FORMULA, BUT IT DOES ADD OUR PROPERTY ON AN EXHIBIT, EXTEND THE WINDOW DURING WHICH WE COULD BE BUILT FOR ANOTHER FOUR DECADES. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS EITHER REMOVE 80 SENATOR CLARIS FROM THIS AMENDMENT OR LET AGREEMENT EXPIRE ON MAY 7, 2027, AS ORIGINALLY WENT. THANK YOU. Thank you.

I have a question for you, if you don't mind. When did you purchase this property?

Or if you're speaking on behalf of the owners, when did they purchase the property?

I cannot exactly have the date. It was in 2000-something.

So was it before 2007 when the property... WHEN THIS ARRANGEMENT WAS CREATED? NO, IT WAS AFTER. SO YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE THAT THIS ARRANGEMENT EXISTED AT THAT TIME?

NOT IMMEDIATELY. WE FIND OUT LATER.

SO IT WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO YOU, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

YES.

OKAY. THAT SOUNDS LIKE A SEPARATE ISSUE, BUT OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WANT TO OPEN IT UP IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING. THANK YOU.

Just really quick, not to get any browning points here, though, but I am an alum of Kids and Things, which was a preschool before Silver Spot, and it's nice to see that they're here and that there's still a school there. Beautiful location. Class of 81, by the way.

Can you speak up just a little bit? Sorry.

I'm just saying I was an alum of Kids and Things. I don't know if people remember that preschool, and it was nice to see the Silver Spot staff here and that school here in such a great location. I'm here on behalf of my parents, who own 90 Santa Clara Street, I THINK THE KEY CONSIDERATION HERE IS THAT ALL THREE PARCELS FROM 29 SAN FRANCISCO AVENUE TO 90 SANTA CLARA STREET WHICH SANDWICHES 80 SANTA CLARA STREET WERE SEPARATELY OWNED BEFORE THE STREET WAS CONSTRUCTED. AND THE STREET CONSTRUCTION WAS NECESSARY TO SUPPORT AND BENEFIT THE THREE PROPERTIES. THE ASK IS FOR REIMBURSEMENT AT THE TIME OF HOME CONSTRUCTION, NOT NOW. AS PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, MY PARENTS HAD TO OBTAIN FINANCING AND PERSONALLY FUNDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STREET. THE INTENT WAS THAT THE COST WOULD ULTIMATELY BE SHARED FAIRLY BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES THAT BENEFIT FROM THEM. THE EXPIRATION OF A TIMELINE SHOULD NOT RESULT IN ONE PROPERTY OWNER BEARING THE COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT BENEFITS ANOTHER PROPERTY. Importantly, and not to step on Maz's toes, but when Randy was in office last year, he indicated that amending and extending an agreement like this would not be a deviation from city practice or policy, and that similar extensions had been approved previously, as you discussed earlier. Our understanding has always been that the expiration date provided a milestone for the city and that parties to revisit their agreement if reimbursement had not yet occurred. Not that it would eliminate the underlying reimbursement simply because the other parcel had not taken action before that date. THERE'S ALSO NO FINANCIAL WINDFALL TO US FROM AN EXTENSION. THE REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT DOES NOT ACCRUE INTEREST. GIVEN HOW MUCH CONSTRUCTION COSTS HAVE INCREASED, THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER IS ACTUALLY BENEFITING FROM REIMBURSING A PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS RATHER THAN PAYING WHAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD LIKELY COST TODAY. ULTIMATELY WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING THE COUNCIL TO ALLOW THE AGREEMENT TO BE EXTENDED SO THAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT CAN BE PRESERVED. THAT THE COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE BENEFITING THE PROPERTIES IS FAIRLY SHARED. WE DO NOT BELIEVE ONE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PERMANENTLY FUND THE PORTION OF A PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENT THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANOTHER SEPARATELY OWNED PARCEL PRIOR TO THE STREET CONSTRUCTION, SIMPLY BECAUSE THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT REACHED ITS EXPIRATION DATE. ON BEHALF OF MY PARENTS, WE ASK THE COUNCIL TO PLEASE CONSIDER AMENDING EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION DATE FOR REIMBURSEMENT. THANK YOU.

I have some follow-up questions for staff. So just to get back to some of the history, if you know it, at the time, it sounds like there was three parcels that benefited and two are relatives one is not um but at that time did all did all property owners need to sign on to this or they were just kind of the third property was just kind of roped in or was there an agreement at that time

THE AGREEMENT THAT THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS ESTABLISHED ORIGINALLY INCLUDED THE SIGNATURES FROM 29 AND 29 SAN FRANCISCO AND 90 SANTA CLARA STREET. 80 WAS NOT PART OF THAT SIGNATORY OF THE ORIGINAL REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. NEW SPEAKER Why was that? NEW SPEAKER THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF THE REASON FOR THAT.

And Amy mentioned 100 Santa Clara Street. So why would 100 Santa Clara not be included in this?

THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 100 SANTA CLARA STREET IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF WHERE THE EXISTING SANTA CLARA STREET TERMINATED. SO I BELIEVE THE REASON AT THAT TIME FOR THE ORIGINAL REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WHY 100 WAS NOT INCLUDED IS BECAUSE THEY WERE CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE DEAD END OF SANTA CLARA STREET.

SO THAT'S WHY THEY WERE.

CORRECT. THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEVELOP WITHOUT ANY EXTENSION. CORRECT.

So is 80 Santa Clara only developable now? Like you can't develop it from, I guess it would be San Francisco, right? The property is essentially increased in value because prior it was not developable without this. I just want to make sure you couldn't develop it from another angle.

THIS LOCATION WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A STREET EXTENSION FOR IT TO BE ACCESSED. AND I MEAN, IT'S NOT JUST THE STREET ACCESS. THERE'S ALSO FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES. SO IT'S A COLLECTIVE DECISION ON ACCESS TO A SPECIFIC PARCEL. AND THAT WOULD HAVE NEEDED TO BE DONE IF THIS IMPROVEMENT WASN'T DONE PREVIOUSLY.

NEW SPEAKER OKAY.

I have additional question. So besides the road, it sounds like that there are additional benefits to 80 Santa Clara, such as some utilities that you know, that are in the road that are much more easily accessed by that property as if, say, those two properties that, you know, the father and son, if that didn't occur, that they would also bear those additional costs, correct?

NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER.

NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER.

NEW SPEAKER. NEW SPEAKER. So the property at 90 is a vacant lot at this time.

80 Santa Clara.

80 is a vacant lot.

Correct.

Thank you. One final question from this end too. If we were to approve this tonight and we were to extend this for an entire additional decade, this council here tonight might not be here at that point in time. What would stop someone from coming forth, let's say, a child of the family, a grandchild of the family, a great-grandchild of the family? For how many years could this continue to be extended?

As long as the council voted to extend it.

Thank you.

Mayor Mackin, do you have any last burning questions before we get into discussion? I do.

Okay. When this agreement was memorialized in 2007, was the property, the then property owner prior to the current property owner, were they notified of this agreement? Do we have any record of that?

I UNFORTUNATELY WAS NOT ABLE TO FIND ANY RECORD OF ANY COMMUNICATION IN THAT TIME PERIOD.

Okay, because I was going to suggest that the current owner should have had a disclosure, a real estate required by state law of any encumbrances on the property. And the recourse might be to go back to the realtor that they purchased the home from. And the previous owner, but if we have no record of of the. Original 80 Santa Clara property owner being notified that there was an agreement that involved them. That's pretty tenuous ground.

I will reiterate that the agreement was recorded with the county, and for any purchase of property, if it was after that date of the agreement, would be available for disclosure.

Okay, that's good. Thank you for that. That makes a big difference. Thank you.

Can I ask AD Santa Clara, when did you become aware of this agreement? Come to the mic.

My sister and her husband purchased this property, and I think when they were aware of this agreement, when they were trying to develop the place, and city staff brought up this agreement, and we got a print of it.

Do you have an estimate of an estimation of the year that that might have been?

That would be maybe roughly 10 years.

So has your sister not proceeded in building because she's waiting for this to expire?

Well, we have been in quite a bit of difficulty getting approval from the city, the planning. And so we never gotten to a point that got approval. Otherwise, we... would considering develop this property. And at this point, we have waited for a 18 plus years. And as we expire in May seven, I would just say, you know, 20 years is enough to hold on to. They have benefit over 20 years.

Thank you. Okay, any other questions before we move into discussion?

I do have one more question. I'm so sorry to belabor this. I'm looking at page 254 of 303. This is for Maz and Sam. Steve Waldo was the former mayor of Brisbane? Yes. And it says he personally appeared on a California all-purpose acknowledgement of this agreement. Am I reading this correctly?

LET'S SEE, IS THAT 254? THE NOTARY. THE NOTARY STAMP OF C. WALDROP.

OKAY, OKAY, YEAH.

I'M SURE THAT WAS... SO THE MAYOR WAS AWARE THAT THIS WAS THE AGREEMENT HERE? YEAH. HAROLD TOPPLE WAS THE CITY ATTORNEY. IT WAS THE CITY ATTORNEY. OKAY, THANK YOU. THAT MAKES SENSE. YOU DON'T NEED TO ANSWER THAT. THANK YOU.

WHO WANTS TO START?

I'LL START.

OKAY.

It seems that there's two sort of items here in my thought process. One is a typical agreement of this nature runs for 20 years, and that's what has happened. Extending it is out of the ordinary under a typical agreement of this nature, per the staff report. And then it seems that the property owners that would need to pay a portion of this have benefited to make their property more buildable with the road that went through. And it also seems like they are holding off doing the development until the property agreement expires. And so they get sort of the best of both worlds, even though they've waited 10 years, and I don't know what the other issues would be. But I do think that the overriding consideration for me is that a typical agreement of this type, even if they were signed on to it, and it may have been that they weren't the previous owners, knew about it, or maybe they didn't. We have no confirmation either way. But a typical agreement of this nature is 20 years, and that's about to expire. And I would be more prone to let that expire even with the other conditions than to extend it.

Who wants to go next?

I'll go next. I agree with you, Council Member O'Connell, that, you know, Usually these agreements are 20 years. But I also look at fairness. And to me, you know, the property could not be developed without the road. And people, the other two property owners, they built the road. There was an agreement. you would think that that property would be developed within 20 years. That's why they make it 20 years. But sometimes that doesn't happen. And as was said, there's no interest. I mean, the cost to do that construction would be crazy expensive. And so to me, I think it's fair. I would approve moving forward with an additional 10 years

Council Member Kern.

I think 20 years is sufficient, and I am not voting to approve this.

Council Member Mackin. I would extend the agreement. I think that the party at 80 Santa Clara, whether today or tomorrow, is going to benefit. And the first two parties would not have agreed to this had they not projected that somehow that cost would be born also by 80 Santa Clara. I think that's fair. Thank you.

Well, this is a tough one because I see both sides completely. And so I'm really torn between both things. I think that the property is absolutely increased in value because this infrastructure was put into place. the street was put into place by another property owner. And so there's a benefit that 80 Santa Clara has received from that. And again, if that property ever wanted to develop at any point in time, they would have had to do this. So in today's costs, it would be a lot higher. I'm satisfied with the city's response about 100 Santa Clara. I'm glad that you cleared that up. It seems like these three parcels are really the parcels that would have been affected by extending the street. I do think that, you know, I understand that it's standard for 20 years. And so that also kind of pulls at my heartstrings too. And how long do you keep extending, keep extending, keep extending? It's disappointing to know that the buyers of 80 Santa Clara weren't MADE AWARE OF THIS, I ABSOLUTELY WOULD HAVE BROUGHT A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE PEOPLE WHO SOLD IT TO YOU, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT IS A MAJOR DISCLOSURE, AND I THINK THAT THE ENERGY REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THAT DIRECTION IMMEDIATELY WHEN YOU FOUND THIS OUT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ARE, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE, I MEAN, THAT'S A CONDITION THAT RUNS WITH THE LAND AND THEY SHOULD HAVE DISCLOSED THAT TO YOU, AND I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A STRONG CASE FOR SOME KIND OF REIMBURSEMENT FROM THEM FOR THAT.

Or from the title company.

From the title company. Somebody. I mean, do you know if that was ever pursued? You found that out? And did you ever pursue any recourse?

No, we did not go after the agent or the title company because we have seen the city put in a 20 years of agreement, and it's an agreement by the city notarized, and it's official. So it's 20 years that we just swallow it for this agreement. Like, we can't do anything about it. And after close to 20 years, and then we have to come to the stand again. And for, like, we have, we can't do anything about, but having faith on the city council to end this agreement.

Okay, you can sit down. Thank you. I mean, I think that it bothers me that there's clear intention to run out the clock to avoid paying what I believe is 80 Santa Clara's fair share. I mean, would I do it if I was in your position? Probably. But I do think that. KIND OF LIKE WHAT'S FAIR IS FAIR. BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU DO ANOTHER TEN YEARS, AND THEN ANOTHER TEN YEARS. AT SOME POINT, THERE HAS TO BE, LIKE, THERE HAS TO BE AN EXPLORATION TO THIS, TOO.

THAT'S FOR A FUTURE COUNCIL, IF THAT'S THE DECISION WE DECIDE TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, TEN YEARS FROM NOW. NOT FOR US.

I'M IN FAVOR OF EXTENDING BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S FAIR. AND I THINK TO PUT THAT TO PUT THAT BACK ON THE CITY TO AS, YOU KNOW, IN SOME WAY OUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FACT THAT I MEAN, ULTIMATELY I THINK THAT THE RECOURSE HERE IS EXTERNAL TO THE CITY. IT REALLY IS TO THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T DISCLOSE THIS TO YOU. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD EXTEND.

All right. So I'll make a motion to extend the agreement for the reimbursement agreement for another 10 years.

I second that. Roll call vote, please.

Council Member Davis. Aye. Council Member Kern.

No.

Council Member Lentz. Aye. Council Member O'Connell. No. And Mayor Mackin.

Aye.

THE MOTION CARRIES.

THE MOTION CARRIES. I WANT TO CHECK IN ABOUT EVERYONE'S BANDWIDTH AT THE MOMENT. WE'RE MAKING GREAT PROGRESS. I DO WANT TO BE COGNIZANT THAT MAYOR MACKIN IS UNDER THE WEATHER. DOES ANYONE NEED A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO COUNCIL MEMBER COMPENSATION?

SHORT-TERM RENTALS UPDATES. THERE'S A SHORT-TERM RENTALS UPDATE.

OH, SORRY, SHORT-TERM RENTALS. YEAH, SO WE HAVE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, AND THEN WE HAVE COUNCILMEMBER COMPENSATION, AND THEN THE REST OF OUR USUAL ITEMS THAT ARE REPEAT.

YEAH, I'D BE FINE WITH A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK, BUT I COULD ALSO POWER THROUGH, TOO, WHATEVER WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. OKAY. THANK YOU.

Thank you.

I feel like that's probably been five minutes. So just ask everyone to return to their seats and city clerk, let us know if we need to do a countdown or if we just roll with it.

We're ready, Madam Mayor Pro Tem.

Okay, excellent. We're now moving on to item M, which is receive the annual report on short-term rentals. Staff report, please.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. TONIGHT I'M PITCHING FOR ANGEL IBARA ON SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROGRAM. TONIGHT STAFF IS PROVIDING YOU AN UPDATE ON BRISBANE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROGRAM, INCLUDING THE REGULATIONS CURRENTLY IN PLACE, PERMIT RENEWAL AND COMPLIANCE PRACTICES. AS YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL ESTABLISHED THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROGRAM IN JUNE OF 2020 THROUGH AN URGENCY ORDINANCE. THE REGULATIONS WERE MADE PERMANENT THROUGH ORDINANCE NUMBER 655 AND ARE NOW CAUTIFIED IN CHAPTER 17.35 OF THE MUNI CODE. THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, BRISBANE PERMIT SHORT-TERM RENTALS ONLY IN A LIMITED FORM. ONE OR MORE ROOMS IN AN OWNER-OCCUPIED SINGLE-FAMILY HOME FOR FEWER THAN 30 CONSECUTIVE DAYS. IN FEBRUARY OF 26, THE COUNCIL DISCUSSED ANNUAL FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY INSPECTIONS AND DIRECTED STAFF TO COORDINATE STR INSPECTIONS WITH PERMIT RENEWALS, WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS UNDERWAY, AND AFTER THE INITIAL PERMIT PERIOD A RENEWED PERMIT GENERALLY MAY BE ISSUED FOR TWO YEARS. THE CITY MAY SHORTEN THE TERM BASED ON COMPLIANCE HISTORY, NOTICES OF VIOLATION OR SUSPENSIONS. THE CITY HIRED IN DECEMBER OF 24, WE HIRED DECKARD TECHNOLOGIES FOR ITS RENTALSCAPE PLATFORM. THE TOOL SCREENS ONLINE LISTINGS INCLUDING LISTINGS ON PLATFORMS SUCH AS AIRBNB AND VRBO TO HELP IDENTIFY POTENTIALLY UNPERMITTED STRS AND COMPARE MONITORED RENTAL ACTIVITY WITH OWNER REPORTED DELAYS OR I'M SORRY, RENTAL DAYS. SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE FOUR LICENSED AND PERMITTED SHORT-TERM RENTALS. APPROXIMATELY EIGHT PROPERTIES CURRENTLY HOST LONG-TERM RENTALS OF 30 DAYS OR MORE. THOSE RENTALS ARE OUTSIDE OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL DEFINITION DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT. THE CITY HAS COLLECTED A REPORTED TOTAL OF $66,139.20 IN TOT AND BUSINESS LICENSE REVENUE OVER THE PAST FOUR FISCAL YEARS. IN SUMMARY, BRISBANE CURRENTLY OPERATES A SMALL HOSTED ONLY STR PROGRAM WITH FOUR PERMITTED RENTALS. THE CITY HAS ESTABLISHED PERMIT, TAX INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND USES RENTALSCAPE TO SUPPORT COMPLIANCE MONITORING. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL RECEIVE THE REPORT AND PROVIDE ANY DIRECTION ON FUTURE MONITORING, ENFORCEMENT, PERMITTING OR POLICY PRIORITIES. THANK YOU.

Council questions. I'll start with Council Member O'Connell.

Thank you. On the $66,139 that's been collected, what period is that for?

So I have that as the total for the past four fiscal years. So fiscal years 22 through 26. So those four fiscal years.

And what was our cost for monitoring?

That I don't know. I'd have to get back to you on that. OKAY, THANK YOU.

TO THE CHAIR, I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT AMOUNT, BUT I BELIEVE IT TO BE MINIMAL TO USE THE RENTALSCAPE SOFTWARE. THANK YOU.

OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ.

YEAH, JUST TIGGYBACKING ON COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL'S QUESTION IN REGARDS TO, LIKE, COSTS, DON'T WE, ISN'T THE CITY UNDER CONTRACT WITH A SOME COMPANY THAT MONITORS THESE TYPES OF THINGS?

ASIDE FROM THE RENTALSCAPE MONITORING SYSTEM, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A SECONDARY.

WE DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE. I THOUGHT WE HAD HIRED.

WE HAD GRANICUS. WASN'T IT CALLED GRANICUS?

AT LEAST SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE A LITTLE AFTER I'VE BEEN HERE, WE'VE BEEN USING THE RENTALSCAPE PLATFORM ONLY.

It's much more robust than previous, okay, thank you Mayor Mackin What do we pay for that platform? Do we know?

As I just previously mentioned I don't recall the exact amount but I do believe it to be minimal meaning that you know We're not talking $5,000 a year something less than that.

I

And are these business operators of short-term rentals, do they pay business license or taxes for their business?

They do, yes.

Okay. Thank you.

Council Member Kern?

No questions at this time.

No questions for me. We'll go ahead and move on to public comment. Is there anyone from the public wishing to speak? Anyone online?

No.

Okay. So we'll move on to council discussion. Is staff really looking for, you're just giving us a report, are you really looking for?

It's just an update.

Yeah. Yeah. So does anyone have any burning things they want to say?

I just want to say that we believe that we are getting the full coverage of the people that are doing short-term rentals with this company.

I THINK ANGEL IS REALLY CLOSER TO IT THAN I AM. I THINK SHE LOOKS FOR ANYTHING THAT LOOKS A LITTLE WEIRD AND THEN SHE'LL FLAG IT AND ASK THAT RENTALSCAPE LOOK MORE INTO IT. BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FOR THE MOST PART OUR PROGRAM IS PRETTY SMALL AND SHE HASN'T SEEN, SHE MAYBE SAW ONE OR TWO THAT MAY, THAT THEY PROVIDED COMMENTS INDICATING THAT THE STAY WAS LONGER OR SHORTER THAN THE 30 DAYS, RIGHT? THEY HAD LISTED THEMSELVES AS SORT OF A 30-DAY RENTAL, AND THEN THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS SAYING, OH, THANK YOU FOR THE GREAT, YOU KNOW, THREE DAYS I HAD AT YOUR PLACE OR WHATEVER. SO THERE WERE THINGS LIKE THAT THAT HAD HAPPENED THAT ANGEL KIND OF FLAGGED. SO TRYING TO DIG A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THAT.

HAVING THIS PROGRAM, WE'VE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS FROM CITIZENS AS FAR AS HAVING COMPLAINTS OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

NEW SPEAKER THROUGH THE CHAIR, IN MY TIME HERE, I DON'T RECALL A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER. CERTAINLY IN RECENT THE LAST YEAR, I DON'T RECALL ANY THAT CAME TO MY DESK.

Good, because that's a change from where we were before. And then I guess I should have asked these questions before. But the amount of TOT has been collected. I know we did have a problem with one of our short-term rentals about collecting the TOT, but we have resolved that issue. Great. Thank you.

Mayor Mackin, has your hand raised?

Thank you. I don't recall for sure if this legislation passed, so maybe you will have to come back or maybe you can answer it. I believe there was a law pending where a, and I thought it passed, where a municipality could contact short-term rental companies and ask for an accounting of what the rentals were in order to verify that the TOT amounts being submitted were correct. Have we pursued that?

You're correct. There is a piece of legislation that was passed last year. We haven't pursued it yet, but we do plan to bring that forward for council consideration.

Why do we have to bring it for council consideration?

Mayor, we're checking now, but we believe that there's a provision in the law that requires cities to do something to execute it, so to adopt either an ordinance or a resolution.

Okay, because I think that's an important facet of this, that we have some accountability, because anybody could report anything. That's the reason that legislation was introduced.

We'll check, and if we need to bring something back, we will.

IF THERE'S MORE INFORMATION, COULD WE GET AN ANSWER? WITH THE NEXT MEETING, PLEASE?

OF COURSE. WE MIGHT HAVE IT IN THREE MINUTES. CERTAINLY BY THE NEXT MEETING.

SO FOR JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. If you look at the back of the staff report, there's a screenshot of Rentalscape. It shows four 6-1 Kings with three possible violations. What do we, what does staff do when they see something like that?

I WASN'T LISTENING TO YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE WE WERE CHECKING ON MAYOR MACKIN'S QUESTION. MAYOR, THAT STATE LAW DOES APPEAR TO NEED AN ORDINANCE BY CITIES IN ORDER TO USE IT. SO THAT'S ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. I AM SORRY. CAN YOU PLEASE ASK YOUR QUESTION AGAIN?

SO IT SAYS 461, IN THE SCREEN SHOT, IT SAYS 461 KINGS. Possible violations three. That's just a little bit of the screenshot that I can see. So what does staff do when they see something like that? It looks like 296 Humboldt. That one's red. So I bet you that's worse. But I can't tell from the screenshot. So three possible violations.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WHEN THERE IS A COMPLAINT, PER OUR MUNICODE, IT IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE, SO WE WOULD SEND CODE ENFORCEMENT OUT.

SO IS THIS A COMPLAINT OR ARE WE BEING PROACTIVE WHEN WE SEE THREE POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS? I'M THINKING THAT THE SOFTWARE IS IDENTIFYING MAYBE A REVIEW THAT SOMETHING IS HAPPENING WITH THE SOFTWARE THAT'S ALERTING US THAT SOMETHING IS GOING ON WITH THAT PROPERTY. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD BE A COMPLAINT, RIGHT? THAT WOULD BE US.

RIGHT. I MEAN, I THINK IF THERE'S A POSSIBLE VIOLATION, WE WOULD SEND CODE ENFORCEMENT OUT TO TAKE A LOOK AND SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON, REGARDLESS IF THE COMPLAINT CAME FROM A CONSTITUENT OR IF IT CAME FROM CITY STAFF JUST SORT OF LOOKING AND SEEING THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE. IT LOOKS LIKE THE SCREEN SHOT, SORRY, IT'S PARTIAL. YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S THAT ONE RED DOT, RIGHT, AS A POSSIBLE VIOLATION.

NEXT ONE SAYS 461 KINGS, IT SAYS POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS THREE.

OH, OKAY.

ARE WE ABLE TO look at the portal like are we able to pull it up and put it on the screen so we could see what no okay sorry anyway one of my favorite pastimes is looking at Zillow at any hour of the day and so because I'm on there all the time I see 461 Kings on Zillow constantly listed as a stays over 30 days for the whole house and it's got a ridiculous price for the monthly rental price. There's also one on Kings that's like that. I think it was listed for $29,000 a month, which gave me a really nice chuckle. Anyway, so it looks like they're advertising the whole house for rent, at least one on Kings. And they're managed by the same company, HomeAway. They're managed by the same company. So But it's like for stays over 30 days, right? But it's the whole house. But here I'm seeing the same property registered as a short-term rental also. And based on what I'm seeing in our staff report, it has to be owner-occupied unless it's less than 30 days. I MEAN, YOU CAN ONLY DO 30 TOTAL DAYS IN A CALENDAR YEAR, OR IS IT JUST FILL ME IN MORE ON THAT?

NEW SPEAKER Right. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT HAS TO BE OWNED OR OCCUPIED IF IT'S A SHORT-TERM RENTAL LESS THAN 30 DAYS. IF IT'S OVER 30 DAYS, I DON'T BELIEVE IT NEEDS OR IF IT'S OVER 30 DAYS AND IT'S EXEMPT FROM SORT OF THE SHORT IT'S NOT CONSIDERED SHORT-TERM RENTAL. SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE THOSE SAME SORT OF CONDITIONS.

It just seems a little fishy to me that it's like actively being advertised. I'm sure.

Yeah.

A long term stay for the whole house. Then it's also registered as a short term stay. And I wonder what the likelihood that in a short term stay, it's only two rooms and the owner is there. IF AT ANY TIME SOMEONE COULD BOOK 30 DAYS, WHERE WOULD THAT OWNER GO? AND THERE'S TWO PROPERTIES IN TOWN THAT ARE DOING THIS ACTIVELY. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THIS ONE'S DOING IT. I WOULD THINK THAT 150 KINGS, WHICH IS KIND OF CUT OFF, MIGHT BE THAT OTHER ONE. I JUST THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO DO A LITTLE INVESTIGATING.

WE CAN DO A LITTLE RESEARCH.

A LITTLE RESEARCH. There's really no action to take. I appreciate the staff's update. Mayor Mackinac has her hand raised. Go ahead.

I was just going to say that if we had reports from the listing online companies, we would know when it had a short-term rental and a 30-day stay. which might be part of the house, because sometimes those listings separate the short-term rental from the rest of the house. And in this case, that would be possible. So if we were getting those reports, we would know. It helps with the enforcement. But I also would say if that person is caught, what are the consequences? Do we revoke the permit?

YEAH. I WILL JUST SAY FOR STAFF I'M LOOKING RIGHT NOW, THESE BOTH HAVE UNDISCLOSED ADDRESS LISTED ON ZILLOW. BUT IT'S THE SAME PHOTO. SO I KNOW THAT THAT ONE ON KING, 461 KINGS, $6,154 A MONTH, TWO BEDS, ONE BATH. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT'S ON KINGS. i know that it's on kings even though the address is not there 18,499 a month for four beds three baths um so yeah that one was that one was purchased and immediately used as an airbnb and was one of the properties that kind of started this whole conversation. There was one on Humboldt and there was one on Kings. And I would just think we should do a little bit of ongoing investigation. Anyway.

Through the Chair, do we have an answer for Mayor Mackin? What is the consequence if they are caught?

SO ACCORDING TO OUR MUNICIPAL CODE, A RENTAL PERMIT MAY BE SUSPENDED OR REVOKED IF THEY ARE IN VIOLATION. SO EITHER WAY, WE COULD SUSPEND OR REVOKE THEIR PERMIT IF IT'S FOUND THAT THEY ARE NOT ADHERING TO THE GUIDELINES IN THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL.

Thank you. Also on the go forward, we talked about the software costs tonight. According to their website, small municipalities start at $2,500 a month. Jeremy, can you verify what we're paying, please?

A month?

I'm sorry. Annual. That's annual. Okay. Are you asking me right now? I'm asking you to bring it back at some point. Yep.

Yep.

Thank you.

Great. I want to go ahead and move on from this item since it's just informational. Now we're going to move on to item N, consider introduction of an ordinance amending Brisbane Municipal Code section 2.02.010 related to city council member compensation. Staff report, please.

Good evening. This will be fast. Currently, as you know, the Brisbane Municipal Code sets council member compensation at $400 a month. That provision was adopted in 2015. There have been no increases to council compensation since that time.

In 2023, I should have said next slide, but I'll just go through it.

In 2023, the state legislature enacted new legislation increasing the maximum compensation for council members. The reasons that the state gave for increasing the compensation were number one, to compensate council members in a way that kept pace with inflation, and number two, to broaden access to service on the city council. THAT LEGISLATION CHANGED A COUPLE THINGS ABOUT THE LAW. ONE, IT INCREASED THE MAXIMUM OF COMPENSATION FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS DEPENDING ON THE POPULATION IN THE PARTICULAR CITY IN WHICH THEY SERVE. BRISBANE IS A CITY THAT FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY OF FEWER THAN 35,000 PEOPLE. SO THE COMPENSATION, THE MAXIMUM COMPENSATION FOR BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS IS $950 A MONTH. THE SECOND THING THAT THE LEGISLATION DID WAS PREVIOUSLY THE STATE LAW ONLY ALLOWED COMPENSATION TO BE INCREASED BY 5% PER YEAR TIMES THE NUMBER OF YEARS SINCE THE LAST INCREASE. SO THE INCREASES COULD BE BANKED BUT THEY COULD NOT BE COMPOUNDED. NOW THE NEW LEGISLATION CHANGED THAT TO ALLOW THE COMPENSATION TO BE 5% OR AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO INFLATION WHICH IS NOT, CANNOT BE MORE THAN 10%, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. SO DEPENDING ON THE RATE OF INFLATION, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL HAVE A HIGHER INCREASE IN 5% PER YEAR. BUT FOR THIS YEAR, THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL WOULD INCREASE YOUR $400 A MONTH COMPENSATION TO $950 A MONTH. ALL FUTURE INCREASES WILL COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL AND NEED TO BE APPROVED BY ORDINANCE. MAKE SURE I DIDN'T MISS ANYTHING BECAUSE I DID THAT KIND OF FROM MEMORY.

THAT'S IT.

ANY QUESTIONS?

WE'LL START WITH COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ. I DON'T HAVE ANY. COUNCILMEMBER KEARN.

YOU CAN COME BACK TO ME.

COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL.

I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

MAYOR MACKIN.

Yes, I have a question. Okay. The proposed increase amounts to $46 per council member per month. For five council members, that's $230 more per month. That's $2,760 per year. Does the city have money to accommodate this increase? I don't know if those figures maybe are correct.

No.

No, it would be monthly compensation, not per council meeting. And so the monthly compensation would be $950, which is the maximum permitted by the statute. If the council wants to set it lower, the council can do that. IT WOULD NOT BE PER MEETING. SO THE INCREASE WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 550 PER MONTH FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER. AND WE DID ACTUALLY COST OUT THE INCREASE, YES, AND I CAN PULL IT. IT WAS MORE THAN 2700 PER YEAR. BUT AS FAR AS WHETHER THE CITY CAN AFFORD IT, THAT'S MAYBE AN EXISTENTIAL QUESTION.

IF YOU DID 550 TIMES 5, THAT'S 2750.

THE CITY HAS RESOURCES TO FUND THAT.

SO YES, THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

Thank you. Looks like about $33,000 in additional pay. It is $33,000.

And it'll have some kind of rollout cost because your benefits will be slightly adjusted. But in general, yes.

Any other questions? I have a question, but I just want to let anyone else. Did you want to jump in now?

I do want to jump in. So I've been on council for almost two years. This did not come before the council last year. Anyone, reasons, thoughts?

I can say why I brought it at this time was that in the past, before I found out that the law changed, it could only be enacted when there was an election for a new council member. and seeing how we will have an election. And I was not going to be a beneficiary of this action. I felt it was very important that we take this action so that it can be more inclusive and reflect the amount of time. It still is not compensating for the amount of time that this role takes. But I think that to be able to have people want to come in and serve and give up so much of their life that they would need to have a little more compensation than what it works out to be like 25 cents an hour.

And I hear you and I agree with you.

But then I found out the law changed. So my rationale was not even necessary.

So Sam, is it possible? TO STEP THIS UP OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FEW YEARS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, COUNCIL MEMBERS GET $100 RAISE THIS YEAR, $100 RAISE NEXT YEAR, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. I JUST KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO BUDGET FOR THINGS WHEN THEY COME OUT OF LEFT FIELD LIKE THIS. SO I'M JUST SAYING I KNOW FOR A FACT WE DIDN'T HAVE A $33,000 INCREASE FOR COUNCIL BUILT INTO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. JEREMY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

THAT IS CORRECT, BUT WE ARE INTENDING TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH A MID-BUDGET UPDATE IN THE COMING MONTHS THAT WOULD INCLUDE THIS AMONG OTHER ITEMS THAT THE COUNCIL IS EITHER AUTHORIZED OR OTHERWISE PUT FORWARD ON. GOT IT. THANK YOU.

NOT TO PUT EVERYONE ON THE SPOT, BUT I THINK THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION. JUST DO YOUR BEST. I'D LOVE TO KNOW FROM EACH OF YOU HOW MUCH TIME YOU THINK YOU SPEND If it's easier for you to calculate per week or per month, council related spending, coming to meetings, reading your packet, phone calls with city staff and other council members, phone calls with the public, attending meetings outside of Brisbane as Brisbane's representative, AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAVE OUR REGULAR, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS, WE HAVE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING, WE DON'T REALLY TALK ABOUT IT, OF HOW MUCH TIME THIS RULE IS REALLY REQUIRES OF EACH OF US. SO IF THERE'S ANYBODY WHO FEELS LIKE THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO, I CAN START. THIS IS MY QUESTION. I WOULD SAY ON LIKE A SLOW YEAR, whatever that means now is maybe at minimum 10 hours per week. And I'd say that that's like pretty conservative. And in a intense period of time, like what we are in right now, I would say, actually, wait, do we need to vote to extend the meeting? Because we are at 935. This meeting started at 630. Do I need to make a motion to extend the meeting?

I make a motion to extend it till 10 p.m. SECOND.

ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS. AYE. COUNCILMEMBER KERN. AYE. COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ. AYE. COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL. AYE. MAYOR MACKIN.

AYE. SO JUST THIS WEEK, WE HAD WHAT WILL BE, YOU KNOW, ALMOST, WELL, WE HAD LIKE A SIX AND A HALF, SIX-HOUR MEETING EARLIER THIS WEEK, AND THIS IS TURNING OUT TO BE SIMILAR. So anyway, I would say in a, in a heavy, heavy time is probably 20 to 25 hours a week, conservatively. I'm not tracking things closely, but it really is like having a second job. And so I'd just love to know from each of you, and a lot of you are, I mean, I'm on a ton of Brisbane subcommittees, but a lot of you are on subcommittees that are outside of Brisbane. You have to drive. You have whole other packets you have to prepare. And I'd just love to know from you, what do you think your time commitment is like?

don't everyone jump in at once you know like for today today i probably put in nine hours just today yeah yes i had a meeting commute.org meeting at eight o'clock this morning yeah looking at a five, five hour stint, uh, for here. And then, um, you know, had other phone calls, you know, preparing for this. And well, yeah, no. And then there's also the studying too. So, but it's not always like that, but it's, it's been like that recently and probably will be like that for a while. Um, I, I hear what you're saying, you know, like, uh, when it's not so intense, yeah, it can, it can get down to maybe 10 hours during the week. So, especially when you don't have a council meeting during that week, but yeah.

So what do you think on it right now? Like, what do you think you're putting in per week per week?

Oh, you know, if today was close to 10 hours, I mean, that's, You know, and you work on the weekends, too. So, but again, you know, you don't do it for the pay. You do it for the love of community. And so, but, you know, like you were saying, Terry, you know, the last time we had a raise, Ray Miller was not running for re-election. And he was the one that brought it up. And it's kind of like a... like a gesture, you know, of say, hey, I'm going out, but I'm not being compensated. And yeah, council members work hard and don't get paid very much money. And that's a nice thing to do. And I appreciate you bringing that up, Terry. But yeah, you know, um, I'M FINE IF WE LEFT IT THE SAME, TOO.

WE'RE IN QUESTIONS. YOU'RE RIGHT.

WELL, YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT COMMENTS. IT WASN'T SO MUCH A QUESTION. YOU'RE ASKING ME A QUESTION, BUT THAT'S USUALLY A COUNCIL DELIBERATION, RIGHT? I'M ASKING A COUNCIL QUESTION.

SO HOW ABOUT YOU, TERRY?

IT REALLY, REALLY VARIES ON HOW MUCH TIME I SPEND. AND PART OF IT IS ON HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE. I would say the 10-hour light week when everything's going smooth and easy and you can just go through it and we have nice couple-hour meetings instead of long meetings. So I would say 10 hours minimum per week, so 40 hours a month. And I would say it goes up to 100 depending on what you're involved in. And that's not including some of the personal time that you expend doing some of the outreach and the other things that, you know, you go to day in the park, you're not there as yourself. You are still putting in time. You're still putting in your effort. You're still listening to people. So it's really hard to quantify. And I wouldn't say that you could really quantify it. And I will say that a lot of times I'll be reading an agenda and something will pique my interest. And I go down that and look for the squirrel. And four hours later, I'm still looking at toxins that have been found at a site in South San Francisco that had a similar business to what I'm reading about in my agenda. And I've gone down this rabbit hole. Is that my fault or is that the job's fault or is that doing research that I should or shouldn't be doing? So, you know, some of it is if you have the time to do that, you do it. If you don't have the time to do that, You're more limited to what the staff provides you.

Council Member Kern, what would you say?

I'm not sure. Like this week, Cliff was calling out, or Council Member Lentz was calling out. This week I've had two county assignments at night and then one early morning library meeting. So there's just a lot more than I think what people see here. Are we asking other council member questions at this time?

IF YOU WANT TO.

OH, OKAY. I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE I KNOW COUNCILMEMBER LENTZ IS CELEBRATING, IS IT 17 YEARS ON CITY COUNCIL, 18 YEARS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WE GOT COUNCILMEMBER O'CONNELL HERE WHO'S RIGHT AROUND 15. YOU'RE DOING 10 OR 12 AT THIS POINT.

11.

HAS THIS CHANGED?

I'VE NEVER HAD A PAY INCREASE.