Remarks by Kelly Ramirez
94 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 4 of 4
- Play at 2:45:09
“LEVEL OF THE PROCESS, RIGHT? SO IF IT'S DENIED AT THE STUFF LEVEL, IT MOVES, AND THERE'S AN APPEAL, IT MOVES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF IT'S A DETERMINATION IS MADE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL AND THERE'S AN APPEAL, IT GETS MOVED UP TO 2,000. YES. OKAY. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO OPEN? DO YOU HAVE, LIKE, A ROUGH IDEA? IS IT $100,000? IS IT $100? NO.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 2:45:53
“So it differs between projects based on the size of the permit?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 2:46:05
“But it's, you know... it's pennies to a developer to submit an appeal, and if residents want to appeal, it's more expensive for an individual, but a group of people could bring the money together to appeal, as long as the dollar amount is there. Yes. Okay, thanks. That's it for my questions. Thank you.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 2:56:49
“So can I just clarify, because we wrote the fair memo, it is, correct me if I'm wrong, But it is intended to do that if it does have significant, how is it? And unavoidable. And unavoidable impacts.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 2:57:12
“I don't care if it's 500 feet or 1,000 feet, but it's not- It's with projects that have these unavoidable, significant and unavoidable impacts. And we didn't want to narrow it to a data center or a battery or something like that because new emerging technology two years from now, who knows what it is? And then the developer says, well, it's not in your zone. We can do it without doing all of these things. We wanted to make sure it was broad enough so that it was any kind of an industry that came in that had these impacts. So it's not, correct me if I'm wrong, it's not, you know, if I'm going…”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 3:36:53
“So I appreciate all the input, especially by the council members here before me. Just to clarify, I did not mention anything about time. So that was not ever an issue. So as far as whether the things, I agree that there should not be six separate conversations separated by districts. If there is a concern about a project, everyone should come to the table. Everyone should speak together. Having people at the same table makes for a better conversation. What is said at one meeting might not even be brought up at another meeting, and it's not even considered then. So I would not support six…”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 3:46:26
“Planning Commission recommendation is we are notifying the whole city right to that so The other thing is in its minor in a sense that it's perhaps supportive of this is the Link to the project page. I think it should be just at the bottom of every newsletter that goes out and STANDARD THING THAT IS ALWAYS ON EVERY NEWSLETTER SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SEE THE STATUS.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 3:48:38
“To determine the proposed ordinance is statutorily exempt from the California Environment Quality Act pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15061 , the common sense exemption for the adoption of an ordinance relating to architectural and site review permit process and to enhance public outreach.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 3:49:23
“Motion to read the ordinance by title only. and waived further reading of the ordinance and... Oh, stop, stop.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 3:50:32
“And number three, I move to introduce an ordinance amending Chapter 30 zoning, Article L, planning department applications relating to architectural site review permit process.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:08:19
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:31:11
“Just for clarity, Is it a condition of the agreement that AWS will pay 100% of all costs associated to build the pump station, the wastewater treatment facility, including design, construction, and any improvements?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:31:28
“And a storage reservoir that they are building on their dime, will that be used only for AWS?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:31:52
“Okay. And in regards to, you know, we've already established that the SCRAW staff out at the treatment facility, they will be OVERSEEING THIS AND PROVIDING THEIR EXPERTISE. IT'S NOT AWS STAFF THAT IS ACTUALLY DOING THE CONSTRUCTION AND MONITORING. BUT WHO WILL MONITOR, LIKE, ON THE PIPELINE, THE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION AND UPKEEPING OF THAT?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:32:41
“And I know that you spoke about if, for some reason, they decide to pull out. But what if they fail to comply with something within the MOU? I don't know. I can't even think of anything. But we're monitoring it. They fail somehow to comply with it. Then what?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:33:25
“So we've pretty much safeguarded ourselves. Yes. You referred to the 23 AFYs. Who monitors, what happens if they go, First of all, who monitors that?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:34:31
“OKAY. SO LET'S SAY THEY WENT TO 100. COULD WE SHUT THEM OFF?”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 4:34:36
“SO WE CAN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THE AGREEMENT WAS 23 AFY, YOU'VE GONE OVER. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO SHUT OFF WATER. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026
- Play at 5:10:30
“So just in regards to the comments by Council Member Fugazi, I agree 100% with what you said, especially with regards to Glen Lomer. I do want to point out, though, I believe every single leadership position in the city has changed since then. And so I don't anticipate that we're going to run into the same situation. there's a number of watchdogs sitting up here. So I have the confidence that this will be monitored.”
City Council · Aug 17, 2026