Remarks by Jonathan Coffman
119 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 5
- Play at 3:10:41
“But not life safety. But not life safety, right.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:10:49
“AND BY LIFE SAFETY, MEANING? THAT'D BE, TO COUNCILMAN ROTTER'S POINT, FIRE CODE, BASICALLY.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:13:51
“i mean there's and obviously this this feels like a very vital service to our community it certainly is and i guess part of what part of what bothers me about this particular situation is that to your point the organization and city staff have been working together for months now on this um i know how long is long enough correct on the other hand they're gone by october 31st anyway So in that scenario, right, we literally are talking about an extra 30 days, right, or 45 days.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:14:42
“And it's kind of to my point is they have been trying to do what's right by their neighbors.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:15:30
“That's true. Maybe that's the ask. We open Food for All back up and we say, hey, we'd love to consider a potential policy.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:17:26
“So I think that's part of where in this particular scenario, Again, I'm aware of efforts to help that. And I've even heard from neighbors, clearly not the ones that complained, that said, hey, we have noticed less traffic because they're operating fewer days and fewer hours on those days. And so my understanding is that, again, it's a good faith effort, for lack of a better term, is what I'm what I'm trying to describe, right? There was conversations with their new landlord, there's conversations with the organization, conversations with the neighbor, conversations with the fire marshal, and…”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:37:51
“I appreciate that I think there's some good improvements in this that will allow for better discourse and questioning and sort of further refine the lessons we've learned over the last six, nine months now, maybe longer than that, under the policy.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:38:49
“Oh, I wonder if we should say out loud what we're talking about. So basically this, sorry, no one else.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:38:57
“Knows what this is doing, yeah. Right, we've had the document, the public hasn't. So basically the proposed, yeah, actually James, do you want to just give us the 30 seconds?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:40:33
“And this is saying we have until the Monday of the meeting, basically, to submit questions. So it's not necessarily changing our time frame. If anything, it's reducing the time that we have.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:45:04
“So, Council Member Ryan, I want to... You know I...”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:45:45
“So this is where, sorry, I want to take just a second here. I wanted to talk about my own experience with the current policy and the proposed new one. Sure. And Councilmember Ryan, you know I love like 80% of your questions, right? At least 20. I'm just giving myself some wiggle room.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:46:10
“We do, and that's great. But what I wanted to add to the conversation, though, is I think what you probably don't realize, and I don't know if other people on the council feel similarly, is like I don't submit all the questions that I really want to ask because I'm thinking about how much time staff is working on questions that I know someone else has submitted. And so what I like about this new plan is that we're kind of making it more equitable. Like I have to be more choosy about what I'm going to ask, but I know I've got an hour. And if I don't have a question about the agenda, I'm going…”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 3:49:48
“I THINK WE COULD AGREE TO THINGS THAT WE WANT TO SEE CHANGE IN THE TEMPLATE. I think they're pretty good at that.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:01:00
“And I've seen a couple of these go up already, and they're nice. You have one at Heather Wild at the underpass.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:06:24
“Yes. The current one. Yeah, the current one.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:09:45
“I actually read through some of the scope in there too because you outlined for Justice Center, right, has quarters and daily. And like you said, PAWS has biohazard.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:13:13
“And we previously approved this. That's all I needed to know. Thank you.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:17:54
“So the confusion is also that Google Maps is different than GIS data.”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 4:21:26
“Can we move to approve contingent on the contracting update?”
City Council · Sep 22, 2026
- Play at 13:34
“I did have a couple other comments as I was going through this, because if there's one thing I'm a little bit more nerdy about than water, it's probably land use. And so in looking through this, There were a couple of things that stood out to me. One, specifically thinking about redevelopment and infill. So all these neighborhoods, legacy neighborhoods that are SFR today, not in this new code, as far as I saw, not allowing things like a duplex to go in. I know we are pretty good about ADUs, but especially for redevelopment and infill, I think that adding that extra step in order to convert it…”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 14:48
“I think where it makes sense, we should be opening it up some. Yeah. I don't know exactly what the answer is, but basically, so think about our existing neighborhoods, our old town with the overlay, right? We've had cases come through before where somebody wanted to do a perfectly reasonable duplex and they weren't able to, for example.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 18:43
“Yeah, definitely. One other. Oh, go ahead.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 23:13
“Yeah, I had just two others. So one, I was curious about speaking to the feasibility of actually building less expensive homes. I noticed that our smallest lot sizes are only proportionally allowed to be like 25% of a subdivision or a neighborhood. And so I'm curious because that would imply that you're incentivizing larger neighborhoods with a section over here with small lots. instead of saying, hey, I've got this land that's not giant, and I can do smaller setbacks and smaller lot widths, and don't have to just put it off to the side. You could actually have a neighborhood designed around…”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026
- Play at 24:50
“I mean, I wonder if even for SFR, if duplexes should be by right for new neighborhoods, right? If we're allowing smaller homes on smaller lots, why not allow a duplex in that same area? Yeah.”
City Council · Sep 8, 2026