Remarks by Nick Richardson
106 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 3 of 5
- Play at 9:15:10
“Would that then push it to a less public process? Because the director's determination process is very public. Would that then make it a less public process for an application to be submitted? Because I don't want it to be less public. That seems like going backward.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:17:33
“Yeah. I don't think notification would require a CEQA investigation or anything. I think that's fair to notify us. Yeah.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:18:07
“But I think notification, if that's the amendment you'd like, I'm down, and I think your successor will appreciate that as well. My successor, yes.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:24:46
“Director, if I can piggyback on that too, Council Member Perea, it seems to me that the descriptions, the definitions that are put here in the legislation, it's kind of like dropping a magnet into a box of nails that currently there's nothing, no type of business like the dog food, cat food example to associate a data center to, so it's not gonna happen. This gives a description that even if it doesn't meet it word for word, letter by letter, still gives a use that could be comparable to somebody who makes an application for maybe something smaller or with less megawatt capacity. which would…”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:34:48
“Director, quick housekeeping note. Council Member Vang, I appreciate your proposed amendment. I just want to smell test and test the necessity of this. Without adopting the SEDA-specific plan, would we have any way of preventing these from being built in the sphere of influence area currently considered by SEDA?”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:35:37
“somewhere in the vicinity of the SATA area, what would that standstill look like if we were ready to move on and now there's a data center in addition to all these rural developments there?”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:35:57
“Would we be able to then annex that as a city if we had a prohibition on that?”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:36:05
“So really there's no way to guarantee that it's... doesn't get built in annexable property unless you approve SEDA.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:36:41
“So I think what this boils down to is, as the city of Fresno, we can make laws that pertain to the city of Fresno. As a city, we cannot make laws that pertain to the county.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:36:51
“I mean, it sounds like I was asking a question. I'm not. I think that's kind of what this boils down to. I appreciate your amendment. but it sounds like that's outside of our jurisdiction, unless I'm reading this wrong.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:37:33
“Well, if I understand, it's not necessarily that you're trying to make sure they're not built in county area that then becomes annexed by the city, but rather when we pass this saying no land in the city of Fresno will support this use, at least for the next 10 years and then infinitely, that when we do, the city does take on property on one side or the other, annexation takes place, that it still applies to that land. Is that what you're saying? That it can't then be a new use? That's correct.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:38:41
“Is that something, one, is it necessary, two, is it within our jurisdiction to say that, and three, does it get in the way of the spirit of this adding that at all?”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:40:03
“I think, were there any other amendments? My colleagues, or has not everyone spoken yet who's punched up? No? Okay. Planning Director, with the understanding that that would be redundant, but not contradict the spirit of the plan, nor be outside our jurisdiction, I would make the motion... Well, I guess I didn't pull it, so. But I would be open to two amendments. One, that would apply to land in or that becomes part of the city of Fresno. Council Member Richardson, it's your item. Even though I pulled it, I'll defer to you on the motion. I appreciate that. First one, applies to land in or…”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:41:41
“This is on the PD step, motion to approve. Council President, I have my questions answered. All right, second that.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:41:59
“This was brought forward by Council Member Arias. I just wanted you to explain, I've never done this, so I want you to explain kind of what this process is, please.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:43:06
“It's out of your district's infrastructure budget to your districts operation budget Yeah, and then one last thing”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:56:16
“Being that it was my item, I'd like to call the motion, Council President.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:56:22
“I'd like to motion for the approval of item two November with the two added amendments. We're not there yet.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 9:57:45
“Yep. Council President, motion to approve item 2N with the two added and recorded and previously accepted amendments. Second that.”
City Council · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 17:08
“Bernard, what was the one pulled by Council Member Arias? Again, can you say that? I missed that.”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026
- Play at 54:37
“Thank you, Council President. It was a warm day in District 6 this morning. Okay, so first I wanted to point this out. This wasn't actually in my comments, but I wanted to point this out. You may not be able to see this from here, but this is a Starbucks cup. I got it this morning. On top is a hole where you drink the coffee. And right here in front of the spot where you drink the coffee, there's a gigantic hole right in the front of the lid. It's sabotage. This means when you go to drink your coffee, what happens, it all spills down the front of your nice shirt your mom bought for you for…”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026
- Play at 4:57:23
“I did, and thank you. So I appreciate this being pushed off and reheard at this meeting for a few reasons, but I think overall it shows that there's a desire right or else we would have pushed it harder than last meeting the desire to get to a better solution here right a more accurate a more tailored solution to the problem that we're trying to fix and i think both of you in your own right spoke to the problem that we're trying to fix uh or the problem that we're trying to address rather in very well i think that YOURSELF, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU SPOKE TO TOBACCO BEING TAKEN OFF THE SHELL.…”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026
- Play at 5:14:10
“So math for Marines real quick. That's $817 multiplied by the number of tobacco retailers equals roughly the amount of the grant that we receive minus staff hours. Is that the correct algorithm? That is correct. Okay. Thanks. If you smell anything burning in the room, it's my brain trying to work through that. Okay. Okay. Appreciate that. Is that all you had for me?”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026
- Play at 5:16:15
“The square is a rectangle, a rectangle is a square. Exactly, yep.”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026
- Play at 5:16:46
“The definition of a smoke shop, again, a smoke shop is a tobacco retailer. A tobacco retailer is not a smoke shop. But there are also, within the category of tobacco retailers, there are more categories. You've got a Save Mart. And somebody asked me what the Save Mart down the street from my house is. My response is not a tobacco retailer. It's a grocery store. Yes, they do happen to also sell tobacco products. But I think that's an important distinction, too, that in here it does not make. If we look on page 5 of 24... Correction, six of 24. It talks about tobacco retailers. No distinction.…”
City Council · Aug 27, 2026