City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. Next, we are going to turn to our public forum. And this is a time for the public to speak to the council and any item that is not on tonight's agenda. If you would like to speak on a matter that is on the agenda, please reserve your comments for when that agenda item is called. The purpose of public forum is to provide the public with an opportunity to be heard. However, if your comments do not address a topic that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city, or if your comments are disruptive, I will provide a warning. If the warning is not followed, I will direct the city clerk to cut off the microphone. Each speaker is usually given three minutes. This time may be adjusted at my discretion based on the number of speakers or number of items on the agenda. If you ask questions during public forum or during public comment with respect to an agenda item, those questions will not be answered during your allotted time. However, a member of the council may, at the conclusion of public comments, direct your questions to staff for a response. Pursuant to state law, the council may not discuss issues brought up at public forum. The council members or staff may provide brief responses to statements made. So I'm looking at our city clerk, Anna Brown. Do we have any cards in the room or hands raised online for our public forum this evening?

I have no public comment cards and there are no hands raised online.

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close public forum and turn our attention to tonight's presentation, which is a proclamation honoring our former city clerk, Susan Ann Swift, who went by Ann Swift. And I'm so grateful this evening that her daughter Susie Swift is here with us, as well as our former city clerk, John Tulloch. And we are going to go ahead and read the proclamation and then present it. And if you want to share comments... You're more than welcome to. You don't have to. I don't want to put you on the spot. But we're going to go ahead and read this proclamation and really hold close in our hearts Ann Swift. Okay. City of Piedmont Proclamation. Whereas... Susan Ann Swift, who served as Piedmont City Clerk for over 20 years, passed away in May of this year. And whereas Mrs. Swift carried out her duties and responsibilities with extraordinary devotion, professionalism, and care, contributing to the publication of over 500 city council packets. And whereas in addition to her duties as city clerk, Mrs. Swift was also Piedmont's first municipal information systems manager, that's a mouthful, guiding the introduction of computers into the city's daily operations. Whereas Mrs. Swift also served as the city's de facto communications manager, directing the work at KCOM TV, working with all departments to introduce the city of Piedmont's first website, and ensuring that the city spoke with one voice. And whereas Mrs. Swift served as the city's historian, keeping our city's history alive through writing and exhibits, as well as managing Piedmont's centennial celebration in 2007, for which she penned the perennial favorite, Cottages and Castles, the Centennial Houses of the City of Piedmont. Now therefore, be it proclaimed, I, Betsy Smagle Anderson, Mayor of the City of Piedmont, on behalf of our community and city staff, together with my fellow council members, honor the life and the profound contributions of Susan Ann Swift. We extend our deepest gratitude to her and to her family for her exemplary public service, and we also offer our most heartfelt condolences to her family and loved ones. Thank you.

Good evening, members of council and staff. Thank you very much for honoring Anne in this way. She spent many, many years helping the council be prepared to do all of its work and this honor is tremendously fitting. So I really appreciate the time and energy that staff put into this and that council has chosen to do this at this meeting. So thank you very, very much.

Great. Thank you so much. Any council members want to share any recollections? I guess what I would share at this time is I actually didn't really know Ann Swift. I only know of Ann Swift. But I believe I've heard her voice on KCOM. Did she actually do, she did the narration for many of the videos that have been published by online videos by the city over the years. And I just have so much appreciation for her ability to articulate and engage the audience in telling the Piedmont history. And I just am so appreciative. I know she did much, much more, but that's just how I know her. and really value everything that she did for the city of Piedmont. So thank you so much. At this time, oh, go ahead, Vice Mayor.

I would just add to that. For those of us who didn't have many one-on-one interactions with her, the assumption was you did know Ann Swift, so you would never say you didn't know her. So I would agree. She was very appreciated, and her name was beloved and repeated, and we all knew her.

by reputation. So thank you. Yeah, thank you. So we're all going to get up and if it's okay to take a picture all together with the proclamation. Thank you.

You can maybe shift. Beautiful. Smile. Thank you so much. Thank you.

Okay, we are moving on to tonight's consent calendar. It's items one and two. The first item is approval of the minutes from our city council meetings of June 15th and July 6th. And the second is acceptance of improvements for the Grand Avenue paving and pedestrian safety improvement project. Do any of my colleagues want to pull either of these items from consent? I'll move consent. Great. Oh, thank you. So we have a motion and a second, but we should check and see if there's any public comment.

I see none from the audience and there's none online.

Okay. Wonderful. We can go ahead then and vote on the consent calendar.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Consent calendar passes unanimously. We are now moving on to our regular agenda. Our first agenda item, number three, is considerations for an action related Related to the appointment of Piedmont Planning and Building Director Leslie Mendez.

Thank you, Mayor Smeagol-Anderson. So tonight we have an action item before you to appoint to a very important role in our city, which is our planning and building director position. And as you know, with the advent of the six cycle housing element, the responsibilities of planning and building have grown quite significantly. And as we wished our former director, Kevin Jackson, well into retirement, we launched the search for his replacement. And are so excited to be presenting to the public a new hire, which is Leslie Mendez. Leslie comes to the city with a great deal of experience. She's a graduate of UC Berkeley with an MA in city and regional planning. And possesses more than 20 years of experience in the public sector in planning. And so we are deeply grateful for the work that came before her and the work that is yet to come and ahead. Leslie will be joining us after she leaves the city of Albany where she served as the planning manager. And she is unfortunately, well, maybe not unfortunately, she is on a much deserved, a well-deserved vacation today. So she's not here to join us for this action item, but we do have a brief message from her to the community. That's wonderful.

That's so great. Yeah, thank you, Leslie, for sending us a message. This is great.

Good evening, Mayor Schmiegel-Anderson, members of the city council, members of the public, and my colleagues. My name is Leslie Mendez, and I am honored to have been selected for the position of planning and building director for the city of. I'm looking forward to working with you all to implement and continue to move forward with city council strategic plan goals. I'll start at the end of this month and I look forward to seeing you all in person at the next council meeting in August.

Great, what a lovely message. Anything else at this point?

So the item before you tonight is to take formal action on her appointment, and if you have any questions, I'm here to answer them.

Great, okay, I'm looking to my colleagues. Are there any questions we have about the appointment before us? No, okay. Do we have any public comment, either in chambers or online?

There is none.

Okay, I would just say we all got a chance to meet Leslie Mendez through the interview process and are so completely impressed by her and by her professional background and think she's a great fit with our community and really looking forward to working with her and having her be part of our amazing city team. So at this point in time, let's entertain a motion. I'll move her appointment. Great. So moved by the Vice Mayor. Second. Seconded by Council Member Long. Let's go ahead and vote.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. The vote is unanimous. Welcome aboard. Okay, we are now moving on to regular agenda item number four, which is our second reading and consideration of adoption of ordinance 792NS, retitling and amending chapter 20, article 4 of the Piedmont City Code to provide for an increase of the real property conveyance tax, aka the transfer tax, to $17.50 per $1,000 of sales price, and that is 1.75%. And that is before us this evening. Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Anderson. So included in the backup is there are two action items that are part of tonight's agenda. The first pertains to the second reading of the ordinance. And what we would like to do is point out specifically some date changes. And I will look to our city clerk to highlight the date changes that were part of the package here this evening.

So the argument, the city attorney's impartial analysis and the direct arguments for or against the measure are due on August 3rd by 4 PM. And then the rebuttal argument, should any be filed, are due within ten days after that. So that would be, sorry. August 13th by 4 p.m.

So as a companion to those proposed revisions, when council last considered this item, you were considering both ballot language as well as the ordinance. Between last meeting and today, the city has gone to revisit the criteria that had been established by the Alameda County Grand Jury Association. We did a cross-check. against some of that criteria, listening to the direction from council that we are mindful of dimensions of further transparency. So what is presented to you this evening in both items five and six are staff efforts to improve the language in a manner. Oh, excuse me, items four and five, five and six. These proposed changes are meant to strengthen the language and improve upon it from the last version before council.

Great. Thank you so much. And I appreciate the reference here. I think that we first started talking about this specific ballot item on June 15th. So that was over a month ago, and ample time for members of the public to weigh in if they wanted to weigh in about this proposal. I'm looking at our city attorney to acting city attorney. We should consider agenda items four and five separately, right, in terms of?

Correct.

Okay.

okay correct sorry that's okay um okay so number let's turn to number four first do we have any public comment on agenda item number four oh we have no public comment okay uh bringing it back to council we've had ample time to think about this in our last several meetings are there any remaining questions we have for our city staff at this time okay um The only thing I wanted to highlight in the staff report, because I actually physically highlighted it, was thinking about average and medium home prices, which we had talked about last time. And I do appreciate and just wanted to call attention to the fact that staff did highlight that when applied to average home sales prices, that our current transfer tax rate is much lower than the neighboring cities of Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, and Oakland. and that an increase in the amount that we're discussing this evening and have discussed previously would still be below or on par with these neighboring cities. So I just wanted to highlight that, and I'm looking at our finance director, Karen Bawa, in case you had anything to add about that.

Madam Mayor, I wanted to provide an answer to your question from last meeting, and that was, what is our median? So for the last two fiscal years, it was around 2.5 and 2.6, and this year it's 2.8 million. Okay, so your explanation still holds good with what Trey said.

Great, okay. And as we discussed, our immediate neighbor, Oakland, as well as Berkeley, has a tiered system, so it doesn't line up directly with our current flat rate system and our proposed continuation of the flat rate system. But when you compare those, average and medians to where they would land on those tiers in Oakland and in Berkeley, it's significantly higher. I'm not looking at those numbers right now, but I want to say 2.5 and above.

That's Berkeley's is 2.5 for properties that are 1.6 million and above and Oakland. is 1.75 for 2 million to 5 million. Great.

Okay. Great meaning that we would still be below. Right. Okay. And then my other question is, you know, that's important to know where our peer communities are. I also want to just take a moment, if people are just tuning in, to talk about what the need is. And I don't know if that's something that our city administrator wants to talk about or finance director, but the need of this additional funding that if passed, this measure would generate, we think, approximately 1.5 million in additional funds each year for the general fund.

Correct. And the timing of this request is directly related to the presentation of both the five-year CIP to budget advisory and city council through this last budget cycle for fiscal year 26-27. And was the conclusion as the projections for facility maintenance were determined to be well beyond existing city resources at the end of next year closing. So as a result of the unfunded CIP, a recommendation came forward from the Budget Advisory Committee to consider revenue generating options. Today, the transfer tax funds are core services, police and fire, as well as public works. And the intent with the additional revenue that would be generated from an increase should the voters approve it would allow for us to address projects that are within the CIP.

Great.

And so we've talked about it at prior meetings. So these are sort of, as I call them, like little C capital projects. not you know 1.5 million in additional funding years not going to get us a new police station it's not going to get us a new i don't know what people want gymnasium but it would help us with a myriad of projects that we need new roofs hvac roads and sidewalks window replacement um the the

bare bones maintenance that are associated with city operations. And in the absence of the funds, what would occur is we'd simply address those most urgently in need of attention. So the intention is to be able to expand the number of basic maintenance projects that can be performed citywide to address community needs.

because the list is always longer than the available dollars. And so it's just, and we're constantly, and we all know this, that we're constantly kind of reprioritizing and re-trying to figure out, okay, how many projects can we accommodate with the dollars that we have available?

Can I add one follow-up to that? So if we continue to delay maintenance on the buildings, I think Daniel has spoken to this in the past, is it going to end up costing the city and hence taxpayers more money in the long run versus doing the maintenance up front?

So the city currently faces a deferred maintenance reality and the horizon as it becomes greater into the future, the costs naturally rise with delay. So yes, we do anticipate that the longer it takes to access revenue to complete the projects will result in a higher cost of completing those projects in the future.

And then just one kind of nuts and bolts question. When does this real property convenience tax, when does it occur? If you could talk about, I'm a resident in Piedmont, when would this happen in my world?

So yes, this happens when a property is sold. And it's currently 1.3% of the sale price. And the request at this point is 1.75%. It is a one time. It's not an annual. It does not impact every resident. It only impacts the seller of the property and the buyer because it's split. But it only happens at the time. So just to give a perspective, in 2025, 26 fiscal year, we sold about 136 properties. So that's, and we've been around that number 115 to 130 in the last few years after COVID. That's the number of transactions that it would, so it's transactional and that's the number of transactions it'll impact in a given year. Versus more than 4,000 parcels that we have. So just to put a parameter around.

And I think that is good because we have a good comparison or good kind of framing because we also, we do pay a parcel tax in Piedmont, both for the schools and for the city. And that's something that every homeowner, resident, a property owner pays every year. Whereas what we're talking about is only incurred, as you mentioned, when a property changes hands. And it generally comes out of the cost of sale, right? It's kind of part of that transaction bundle with your title fees and all the other things that kind of are bundled up in that cost of sale. And as you mentioned, in Alameda County, I think, I mean, I'm not a realtor, but I think it's typically split between the buyer and the seller. Okay, any other questions about how, yes, Vice Mayor.

Not a question, but I just want to point out on the ballot language, Oh, that's item five. Oh, did I scroll too far? I beg your pardon. Okay, we'll get there. Thank you.

Yes, yes, yes. Okay, so we've done public comment. There's no public comment. Yes?

Sorry, Madam Mayor. I just wanted to add for clarification for the council and the public that the ordinance requires a four-fifths adoption by the council. So this is an ordinance that's being adopted tonight. It requires a four-fifths vote by the council. I also wanted to make clear for the council and the public that that if the ordinance is adopted and put to the voters, it would need a majority vote by the voters. And then if it's adopted by the voters, then it would become effective on July 1st, 2027. That's the effective date of the ordinance if it is passed by a majority of the voters. Simple majority. Okay, thank you.

I do appreciate that context. So if passed, this would come into effect next July 1st, right? So a year later. a little bit less than a year from now. Okay. And, again, only on properties when they are conveyed. Change hands in terms of ownership. All right. Any other questions, comments, thoughts at this time before we entertain a motion? Nope. Okay.

Okay. I'll go ahead and move that. Would you like a motion? Yes, thank you. We adopt Ordinance 792-NS on the second reading. Do you want me to read the whole thing, or is that good enough? That's sufficient.

Thank you. So moved by the mayor and seconded by Council Member Fleming. Let's go ahead and vote.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Passes unanimously. Okay, so now we're moving on to item number five, which is related. And I'm going to turn and look at our city administrator in case she has anything she wanted to add about that. This item, which is covering the topic of the 75-word ballot question that we would be putting before voters.

So as previously stated, we have revisited the content contained or the draft version of this ballot language from our last council meeting with a focus on examining the criteria from our Civil Grand Jury Association and have made some proposed changes to strengthen the language contained in that valid language referenced on page two. There are some other procedural details that are laid out in the resolution. If council has any questions on either the proposed draft language or comments or recommendations. We're here to answer any questions you may have.

Great. I had one question right off the bat. There was a typo, but I might not have the corrected version. The typos in the printed version, the electronic version has been corrected. Okay.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. And then does anyone have any questions? Because I did have a question. Any questions? Do you have some comments?

I have a couple of suggested comments, but I can hold them.

Before we get to that, I just have one question. So I do appreciate the timeline that's set forward here in the agenda report talking about the impartial analysis that would be coming from our attorney's office, as well as the direct argument pro and con, if there is one, and the rebuttal arguments, again, if there are rebuttals. One point of clarification, I think in the rebuttal argument it talks about five, no more than five authors, and I'm led to believe that's the case for all of the follow-on arguments, is that right?

Yes, that's correct. Five authors for all arguments.

Okay. Five signatures. Five signatures. And traditionally, the way we have done prior measures, at least while I've been on council, is the signatories have been mayor, vice mayor, and then, oh, can we not?

Oh, no.

You're shaking your head. I'm like, is that not right? Mayor, vice mayor, usually the chair of budget advisory because the suggestion came out of budget advisory, as well as potentially one to two other community members who may have association with the topic kind of thing. So I'm looking at head nods if that is maybe the way to proceed. But that is not what's before us. But what's before us is the language. So I don't know if our attorney wants to weigh in on that.

So the resolution before the council this evening already provides that the city council authorizes but does not require all members of the city council individually or collectively to file written arguments in favor of or against the city measure. So if the council, so that is authorized as part of the resolution. What council can do tonight is indeed give direction on who from the council, either individual members or the full council, to write the arguments. So if traditionally the mayor and the vice mayor write the arguments with other members of the public, that direction could be given this evening on that particular issue.

Yeah, I have a question about that. So is it possible if we took on that role, are we allowed to run the language past our proposed language for argument, past our colleagues on council, or is that prohibited by the Brown Act?

it would need to come back to the council at a meeting. And I think the timing requirements, so if the measure, the primary arguments are due August 3rd, I don't believe we have a council meeting between now and then.

Okay, that's right, because we're not meeting on August 3rd. Okay, and so those are my questions about that, and I know you had some questions.

I think that answers my question by default, because when you said the whole council could author... that would require a meeting, because there's no way to do that without a meeting. Correct. But I was wondering whether the council took up those five signature people, and then you wouldn't be able to involve anybody else.

Well, the council would be, that's separate from the five-person limit. That applies to individuals and council members. So if we're talking about the council writing a primary argument, it would be the council that gets to write the argument.

and then there would not be any other individual signatories to it, is what my question was.

Right. If the council wants to appoint individual members and members of the community, that is appropriate, and that would be the five-person limit. Does that make sense?

Maybe we're getting more complicated. I think so.

And it doesn't, I mean, it's kind of a moot point because we're not doing it right now.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I guess my other question is, if it's mayor, vice mayor, could the council give us the autonomy to go find the other signatories, or do we need to identify those people this evening?

I think it would be best to have those people identified. If the argument will be on behalf of the council, then the council should approve who is going to write the arguments. So in other words, the council should know.

I see. So maybe that's the nuance. Maybe in the past, the arguments have not been written on behalf of the council. They've just been arguments.

That could be. So council members could write arguments. an argument as an individual, not on behalf of the council with other members of the community. I think that's how we've done it in the past.

And you're identifying yourself as mayor and vice mayor. Correct. Yes.

Yes, you can identify your title, but you would need to specify that you're not writing it on behalf of the entire council. Gotcha. So that could be an alternative, and that doesn't need to be approved by the council as a body because the argument isn't being submitted on behalf of the council. Right.

Right. It's the committee to pass the measure, whatever.

Right. Or individual council members who wanted to get together with somebody in the public, a group or association. Is that as clear as mud?

Now we're going down a rabbit hole.

But the limit is still five signatures, regardless.

Yes. Council doesn't neatly count as one. We're still five people, even if we're doing it as council.

It's just there's no limit on the council itself because the legislative body is the council, and the council would write the argument. So the five-person limit wouldn't apply to the council. Gotcha. The five-person limit would apply if, say, the mayor and the vice mayor write something individually with three other members of the public. I see. Okay.

Okay, and that's the model. Council Member Long, do you have a question? That's the model I'm familiar with, just because we typically, I don't remember ever bringing an argument back to council for adoption.

So then we wouldn't need to give them authorization.

Right. If they are going to write it individually, not on behalf of the council, then the council does not have to give authorization. Okay.

Yes. I suggest that we just follow whatever process we followed before and let it go. Great. Move forward.

Okay. That seems like the most expeditious way to proceed at this point in time. Okay. So Council Member Plinyet has been very patient because I think you had a question at the beginning that then I kind of took us down this line of questioning.

I think, I mean, I have suggestions to the ballot language. Oh, suggestions, okay. So let's go to public comment. My question I already asked and it was about the 5%. Awesome.

Okay, we'll come to you then after public comment. I don't think we've been, I want to be sure we get to public comment. There is no public comment. Okay, public comment is closed. Council Member Plinyet, the floor is yours.

Thank you. I just had a couple of suggestions that I think mostly came about when we made the couple of edits that we did last time that made the grammar syntax a little bit off on the ballot language. The first, and I think this was probably there last time, but I didn't notice it, but the clause that talks about what the funding is going to be used for is a is two lists that are joined by the word and. So there are three ands in a row and only commas. There should be a semicolon before the middle and to make the lists understandable.

That is an awesome suggestion. I have no idea how semicolons work, so I trust you.

I was saying the government loves to run on semicolons.

So where would that semicolon go?

The semicolon goes after the word response instead of the comma.

OK.

And then, and I have submitted this in writing to our city administrator, so you don't need to worry about catching all the details.

There's a printed copy next to you there, Patsy.

And then my second suggestion is that the phrase that is kind of new about being in line with neighboring cities, which is different language from what we had the last time, no longer makes grammatical sense. That B doesn't fit grammatically. So there should be a 2TO before it. And I would remove the comma because it doesn't need to be separated, opposed by a comma. So it's from 1.3% to 1.75% to be more in line with neighboring cities and to generate approximately blah, blah, blah. So I would add another two T-O before the word generate also to make it parallel and more easy to read for the community. Thank you. Those are my suggestions.

I like that. How are we doing? Okay, I do appreciate the attention to punctuation. That is not my forte, so I appreciate that. Adding two twos, what is that?

Okay, I'm going to do the word count.

No, it's enough. It was at like 66, and now it might be at 68, I think.

Yeah, we were at 66 to start for sure. Let's see. Just one second. I think we have more than enough room. Goodness, let's see. It does not look like that's an accurate 67. I think it says 67. I'm sorry, the print is very small. 67 with the changes.

So we're good. Okay. I'm sure our city attorney would want to validate that before...

Yes, I think that the word count is going to be under 75 words, so I think that would be good. But when we do make the motion, it might be wise to include language in the motion that you approve the language as modified and allow the city administrator and the city clerk to make any required changes that may be necessary. to bring the ballot question into compliance with the word count, if necessary. I'm for that. But I did want to clarify something. So, Council Member Plumiere, the... To be more in line with neighboring cities, comma, and to...

My suggestion was to remove that comma. Okay. And you have two clauses. You're saying to be more in line with neighboring cities, and you're saying to generate approximately this amount of money. Those are the reasons for doing it, is to do this and to do that.

Right. Okay. So strike the comma, but leave the and. Yes. Okay. Yes.

And I would strike, so you're striking two commas. Yes. The one after 1.75. And the one after cities. Got it. Yeah.

Okay.

All right. Thank you. I think we have it.

That makes sense to me. I'm not a, as I said, I'm not super great with semis. As soon as you said semicolon, I was like. I don't know about those semicolons. What is that, the Oxford comma? I do know what that is.

There are Oxford commas in here, which is a good thing. I think I am a fan of the Oxford comma.

Okay, okay. So we're in alignment.

We're not eliminating the Oxford comma. We're leaving it.

We're in alignment on the Oxford comma. We're banishing two other commas, and we're adding a semicolon. All right. Any other questions? Thank you. Any other questions, thoughts, concerns at this time? This is what will appear on the November ballot. It will be a very busy ballot. And I don't know that there will be any other measures on for the city of Piedmont. So this would be the only measure for the city of Piedmont. As discussed, we do have three openings on city council and two on school board. So there will be other things to vote on locally.

Okay.

Okay, great. Because I just, I know, I don't know. I should look at our city clerk. I think the local stuff comes at the end of the ballot, right? So we're just going to have to encourage all of our residents to read all the way to the end. Yes, that's correct. Don't give up. Yes. Hang in there until the end of the ballot. There's some really important stuff happening at the end. Okay, great. That's all. It sounds good to me. So any other last? Thank you. I want to appreciate staff and appreciate our legal staff. I know DEPA worked on this. and others and city clerk for all the work that she's doing for all of the election, not just this matter, but for everything with the candidates and whatnot. I know it's a busy time for you, so thank you. Okay. At this time, entertain a motion. We did public comment already.

I move approval of the ballot language as amended in today's meeting.

And?

And.

Authorize. Authorize.

and authorize the city administrator to verify the word count and make edits as necessary. Second.

Okay. We have a motion by Council Member Plumier. We have a second by the Vice Mayor. Let's go ahead and vote.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Measure passes. And we now have an item on the ballot. This is exciting. Okay. Okay. Thank you again, everyone, for that. And we are now moving on to our last item of this evening, which is item number six. And I'm looking out at our senior planner, Pierce McDonald, who did a lot of work on this. Thank you. This is a receipt of the 2025 Annual Progress Report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development regarding the implementation of the sixth cycle, that's the one we're in, from 2023 to 2031, housing elements. We have Jeff Bond here as our Interim Planning and Building Director to give us this report. Thank you.

Yes. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Jeff Bond, you're planning and interim planning and building director the action before the City Council this evening is to receive the state mandated annual progress report on the implementation of the city's housing element I'm joined as the mayor pointed out by my colleague senior planner Pierce McDonald who can help answer any questions that you might have so this is a brief presentation annual reports have been a requirement of state law for many years But in recent years, reporting requirements have expanded significantly in scope and detail. And we expect them to continue to expand in scope and detail in future years. All this information is required to be tracked using a complex pre-established spreadsheet developed by HCD, which we then upload to a HCD portal for eventual public posting by the state. The City Council is well aware of the housing element process and content, but for members of the public that may not be familiar with the housing element, I thought I'd provide a very brief summary. Basically, state law requires all cities and counties in California to prepare a housing element. It's essentially a standalone chapter of the city's general plan, and it establishes a long-range plan to meet a community's shared regional housing needs. The acronym that's frequently used is RENA. It's the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. The city's current housing element covers the planning period 2023 through 2031. It was adopted by council in 2023. It has arena of 587 housing units, which was an extraordinary increase compared to previous planning cycles. Many cities did see significant increases in their allocation. I think Piedmont's was quite a bit more than most cities.

That's almost 1,000%.

Yes, it is. It'd be interesting to see if any other... I imagine there may be a handful of other cities that are in that range, but... other cities I'm familiar with, like two or three or four times, you know, two, three, 400%. The city's housing element was found in compliance with state law by HCD in 2023. And in addition to identifying opportunity sites for housing development, it included a series of goals and policies and programs that were required to pursue and required to report on annually. the details of the spreadsheet other than to say there are a series of tabs that are all interlinked that detail quite a bit of information. In our case here in piedmont a number of the tabs are not applicable at least at this point in time but in the future some of those tabs may have some content in them as different projects emerge. We've done our best to create a PDF that highlights the key elements in that, and that's one of your attachments. The spreadsheet itself does not lend itself at all to any sort of PDF. It wasn't designed to be something that you could PDF and print easily, unfortunately, as hundreds of columns and rows is a part of it. the key part of the Annual report and the primary metric of interest is the number of building permits issued that the table on the screen here highlights that You can see in 2025. We're reporting a couple of different key metrics the building permits issued is that middle row of 15 units? for 2025 and you can see how that compares with previous years and the the current housing element process requires us to report a variety of other milestones in the development process beginning with the date and address of when a planning application is submitted when that application is approved the building permit application date the building permit approval date and then ultimately the final approval of the actual construction again to summarize that here in this in this table on the screen in 2025 16 housing units were approved through the planning process. You'll see the building permits for those 16 projects reported in future years, and then 14 projects completed construction in 2025, and those building permits, most of them almost certainly were approved in prior years. We're also required to report the affordability of the various housing units that are developed in Piedmont. The table here on the screen again shows the breakdown of that affordability. This breakdown was developed using a combination of a local rental survey and some regional planning methodologies that were provided to cities to help essentially give a an educated estimate of what the types of households that could afford different types of units here in Piedmont. And as you can see, there's a mix ranging from four units very low income all the way up to three units that would be above moderate income, which is essentially market rate. Another part of the annual report is to report in and to briefly give a summary of the status of the different programs and policies that have been adopted by um in the housing element and that we're working on i'm not going to go through all 77 of those but we can say that there's progress being made on all either completed or progress being made on all of them this next slide highlights some of the the the most important progress made in 2025. You' re familiar with the Moraga Canyon specific plan implementation. There' s also been some code amendments the council has taken action on and we' re working on bringing forward to you some future code amendments to expand housing options in the community. The context of a 587-unit RENA allocation, 15 units may not seem like much, but taking into consideration the range of actions that the Council has taken in 2025 and the relatively challenging real estate market conditions in this past year, I think 2025 can be considered a productive year. So thank you for the opportunity to make a presentation. And as I mentioned, Pearson, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Great, thank you so much for this very important check-in, and appreciate the reporting and the details. There's a lot of details in this that have been supplied to us in our staff report. Do we have any questions at this time? Council Member Pommier?

I had a couple of questions. One was, can you talk a little bit about the determination of the affordability?

I'm going to ask Pierce who could go into more detail. She did the detailed analysis.

Great. Welcome. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Anderson, members of the council. As the director pointed out, we did a slightly different methodology for this housing annual progress report. We used both a memo from ABAC MTC that was the result of a study they did of ADUs. And so this was a memo just for ADUs. And it said that based on this research and their conclusions, 30% of ADUs are going to be affordable to very low, 30% low, 30% moderate, and then 10% above moderate. We adjusted that breakdown to match our actual ADU unit sizes and number of bedrooms just to be a bit more conservative and sort of ground that methodology in what we're actually seeing come forward.

So my second question was about the difference in the numbers. It was slide six. The difference in the numbers for the years 21 to 23 versus the past couple of years. And if you have any insight into that.

It's interesting. I feel like I would have to speculate about a whole range of potential variables that might account for the change in the numbers. So perhaps the director can answer that one.

More than anything else, I think it's a reflection of market conditions. Mortgage rates probably play a role in it. Construction costs play a role in it. And just the evolution of the demographics of the community. A lot of these ADUs are being constructed for family members, extended family members. So whether it be young adults or aging adults. That's sometimes the case in communities like Piedmont. So I think it's just the vagaries of the marketplace more than anything else. It's not anything that we're doing differently. If anything, we've opened the gates a little bit more than in the past in terms of the processes due to state law. So it's external influences that are driving the change.

Thank you. Okay, Council Member Ramsey.

Thank you for putting this together and it shows that this is an ongoing task. It didn't end when we completed the first draft, so thank you for this. How are we doing compared to other jurisdictions? What do you hear from your colleagues? Are we middle of the pack? Are we doing pretty good? How are we doing?

So that's a question that the planning directors in alameda county ask each other every year after these reports are prepared it's hard to compare piedmont to other communities because we just have a different housing mix i would say that in alameda county generally multi-family housing kind of the traditional new apartment building that development with exception of maybe berkeley is slowing down dramatically so there's you're just not seeing a lot of new construction there are a few that are were approved a few years ago that you'll see going on now, but in terms of new starts, there's not a lot of new starts in multifamily housing, Berkeley being the exception because of the university. ADUs, I think we are here in Piedmont are generating a greater number of ADUs than other communities. And again, I think that probably has something to do with the demographics of the community and the ability to that financing rates may not be as people may not be as sensitive to financing rates here as they might be in other communities where the second mortgage is at six five six seven percent whatever they've been could could be a real drag on on building an adu whereas a few years ago at three or four percent it was a little bit easier to pencil out that's

And could you also talk a little bit about the effects you're seeing on the streamline approvals? Any feedback you're getting on that, or do the numbers speak for themselves just because of the numbers?

I think this, and Pierce can jump in if she wishes, I think the streamlining is, the word is out. I think people appreciate that, that they can get permits a little bit more quickly, and the process is a little bit easier. It's less intimidating to if you don't have to go in front of a planning commission for approval. So kind of anecdotally, I've heard people appreciate the state legislature's action. Now, people who are surprised by a project going on near their home may not be as appreciative, acknowledge that, because it doesn't go through a public hearing process. But I believe the state laws are making a difference. And incrementally seeing not only more properties put ADUs on their property, but in some cases doing multiple ADUs, which a couple years ago wasn't allowed by state law.

And I got one more update question. So it was mentioned in here, one of the parts of the... housing element is the Moraga Canyon specific plan, and we're right in the middle of the RFP out on the streets. It seemed like you had a good response to the sidewalk. Could you give us an update on that?

We don't really have anything more to add to that quite yet. The submittal time frame is in August, August 10th, and I think there will be, you know, this is, we just don't know But I know that's of interest to the council and community and we'll certainly be reporting into that as appropriate.

Are you getting a lot of questions?

We had good attendance.

It seemed like that list that there's a lot of people on that.

There was a significant distribution list. We had a good number of people who attended our walking tour. Don't know how many people are clicking on the webpage that are planning to respond. So it's a little bit of a... Who knows? It happens with these processes. We don't really know. People don't necessarily tell us if they're going to submit. So we'll see.

And if I could, Mayor Anderson, I would just like to clarify it was a request for qualifications, and we didn't issue a request for proposals.

Oh, RFQ. Yeah, RFQ. That's important.

Yeah.

Thanks.

Great. Thank you.

Right. Can you remind me, I think I'll put a pierce on this. We put in our housing plan, did we project 60 ADUs? Am I remembering that correctly? In this housing element?

160. 160, okay.

So are we on, it seems like we slowed down a bit.

Microphone, please.

We're one less than we were last year. Are we slowing down a bit?

We're targeting 20 ADUs a year, and so we're falling a little bit short of that goal.

And again, it's because of the circumstances. Right. It started out pretty strong, and now it's flattening a little bit, slowing down a little bit.

Okay, I'll ask a question. Do we know, I mean, we talked about the forces beyond our control with economics, both mortgage, but also interest and cost of construction. Do we have any sense of how HDD is going to respond when and if cities, we don't have to pick on Piedmont, fall short in this six cycle housing element?

Any tea leaves? So HCD is gearing up an enforcement division, and every indication is they're going to be taking enforcement seriously. That's why we took preparation of this annual report seriously, to be able to demonstrate what we're doing. There are a handful of cities that are getting a lot of attention in the news. They're quite a ways behind in where Piedmont is, the cities that haven't completed their housing element. or cities that have completed a housing element but didn't follow up with the policies and programs that they made a commitment to. So that's really where HCD is. I would expect them to focus their enforcement attention. And their enforcement is serious stuff. They're referring matters to the Attorney General for legal action. And there was, I think, just the other day in the headline of a couple of cities in the Bay Area that have gotten attention from HCD and the Attorney General on this.

Okay, appreciate that perspective. Do we have any public comment on this item this evening, either in the chambers or online?

I see no public comment.

Okay, bringing it back to Council. Do you need us to take action on this item tonight? Do we need to formally receive this and vote that we've accepted it, or is it informational?

I would recommend that the council take a motion to receive and accept the APR, the annual progress report.

Great. Okay. Any other comments before we entertain a motion? Just gratitude to our staff, both to our interim director and to senior planner, Ms. McDonald.

She's hiding over there.

Thank you so much. I know it's a lot of work, not only... to put together this report, but also all the work that's reflected in the report, right? All of the programs that city staff is hard at work on. So very much appreciate the heavy lift that this six cycle housing element is and continues to be. Okay, motion.

I'll make a motion that we receive and accept the report.

Great, motion made by Council Member Ramsey.

Second.

Seconded by Council Member Pommier. Let's go ahead and vote.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Report is accepted. Thank you very much. Okay. We are now moving on to announcements, reports from Council Members, and discussion of future agenda items.

Announcements. This Thursday is a public safety meeting here in the chambers at 5.30. And then PRD hosted its first food truck Friday on July 17th, and it was a hit. I'm sure folks have seen pictures if you weren't there. So PRD has done what it always does is it added three more Fridays. So August 17th, September 18th, and October 9th will be food truck Fridays. And then the 2026 fall activity guide will be posted this Friday with registration opening on August 4th.

Great. Thank you. Any other announcements, Vice Mayor? No? No? Okay, I have some. So I wanted to announce, I think National Night Out is coming up on August the 4th. And which makes me remember that we are not meeting council city council is not meeting on August 3rd. So if you show up here for the meeting, you'll be all on your own because we are not going to be here. We will resume our regularly scheduled meeting schedule at the second August meeting, which if I can do math in my head is the 17th. And then I also wanted to allow the city clerk if she wanted to make an announcement about the

Period for candidacy now if you want to make any announcements to the public about that Nomination period the period to pull city council and school board nomination periods opened this past Monday and It closes on August 7th So if you're interested in running for council or school board please contact the city clerk's office to make an appointment to pull your nomination papers and

Great, and appreciate all the time you're spending with our candidates or potential candidates to talk through the process and the paperwork involved and the steps involved. I also wanted to note that school, back to school, starts on August 10th, so that will be before we meet again as a body. And I guess while I ask offline, because I do have a question as to how we're communicating parking changes, because we do have quite a few changes that have been made to Areas adjacent to our school properties. I should look to our city attorney. Can I ask that question at this time about announcements to school families?

Yes, you can ask that question. There can be a brief response. The council can't deliberate because it's not an agenda item, but you can definitely ask the question. No deliberation.

So, yeah, question is about communicating to schools. our public about the changes both with respect to parking and also Bonita, the block between Vista and Oakland Avenue is now one way. For those of us who've been in town this summer, we have already observed those changes, but folks might be returning to town who have not yet observed those changes.

Great, thank you for asking, Mary Anderson, communications officer. We are working with Public Works and our police on robust push of public information for leading up to the start of school. So we'll be pushing out on our city channels and then working directly with the school district to have them help us get that information into the hands of.

PUSD families great because I think the school sites might have individual newsletters for each of the school sites that would be great to get that information Yeah, so we'll get it out.

And of course you've seen the physical signage. Yeah, which we've been leveling up.

Yeah hard to miss I like it Okay, great. Thank you so much for sharing that and then I'm gonna check with our city minister to see if there's any other announcements at this time that since we have this kind of gap coming up between meetings and Not at this time. Thank you. Okay. Great. Okay. Super. Well, that's terrific. And we're going to go ahead then and adjourn tonight's meeting at 7. Hold on. 7.07 p.m. Meeting's adjourned.