City Council - Special Meeting

progress. [clears throat]

Good evening and welcome to the City Council special meeting this Monday evening, April 6th. Uh before we begin, I'd like to share pursuant to California Government Code, Deputy Mayor Fernandez will participate in this meeting remotely. Thank you for being here, Deputy Mayor, despite being out of the area. City Clerk, can you please call the roll? Certainly. Council Member Diaz Nash. Here. Council Member Sfircoci. Here. Deputy Mayor Fernandez. Here. Here. Mayor Lorraine. Here. Council Member Newsom. Here. Thank you and welcome. We're excited to be here in person with options for those who choose not to be in person to still participate virtually. There are several ways to participate. For those attending in person, please complete a yellow request to speak slip if you wish to give public comment and hand it to the City Clerk. If you're participating remotely, use the raise your hand feature in Zoom and you will be called on at the appropriate time. If calling via phone, press star nine to raise your hand and when you're called upon, please press star six to unmute. These options for public comment will remain available until I close public comment periods for each specific item. And for members of the public who may be watching us on YouTube, just note if you wish to provide live public comment, we do not currently have that option available in YouTube. You must join the meeting through the Zoom webinar. Please use the access information listed in our agenda, which can be found on our city's website, www.cityofsanmateo.org.

[clears throat]

Thank you. Uh we are going to begin tonight with a few closed session items, three. Item number one, conference with legal counsel, existing litigation, and items two and three are both called conference with labor negotiators. Uh before we convene to closed session, uh there's an opportunity for public comment. City Clerk, do we have any requests to speak on e- any of these items? Mayor Lorraine, there are no requests to speak on the closed session agenda items. Okay, I'll close public comment on the closed session items and we will convene to closed session and then return for the study session item number four afterward. Thank you.

[music] [music]

Hey.

Oh.

[music] [music]

and And we will now move on to our next item of business, item number four, electronic billboard policy direction. And we have a presentation from Economic Development Manager Jennifer Chan. Welcome, Jennifer. Good evening, Mayor Lorraine and Council. I'm Jennifer Chan, the city's economic development manager, and joining me today is Joanna Winters, the planning manager from CDD. Tonight is a policy discussion. We're here to present information and get your direction on whether you'd like staff to explore an electronic billboard program, [music]

and if so, how. There's no action requested tonight. The policy question asked of Council is, do you want to, one, allow billboards on public and or private property in one of the following ways? A, incorporate design, development, maintenance, and operational standards to address issues such as location and distance from residential zones, illumination standards, structural maintenance, graffiti removal, and periodic inspection to the municipal code to allow billboards on city-owned or city-controlled property with Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator approval of a land use permit along with a lease agreement. If so, do you prefer Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator? B, incorporate design, development, maintenance, and operational standards to address issues such as location and distance from residential areas, illumination control standards, structural maintenance, graffiti removal, and periodic inspection into the municipal code to allow billboards on city-owned or city-controlled property without Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator approval of a land use permit and only a lease agreement. Two, continue to prohibit billboards in San Mateo. Or three, do something else. In December 2025, Council approved the three-year economic [clears throat] development work plan where Council identified non-tax revenue strategies as a priority. Electronic billboards are one option that could generate ongoing revenue, provide public messaging and branding as a community benefit, and staff is returning to Council to determine whether this is a policy

direction Council would support and if so, how. Prior councils have looked at this before in 2020 and 21. At that time, there was interest in revenue generation, but there was also concerns about billboards visual impacts, community character, and proximity to residential areas. It considered prior City Council feedback suggested billboards should be on city-controlled lands, located along major transportation corridors, and avoid impacts to residential areas. Ultimately, Council took no action and the prohibition on billboards remain today. If Council wants to move forward, the city would need to amend the ordinance or use a lease space approach to allow billboards, or use both the ordinance amendment and a lease space approach. Staff has spoken with several neighboring cities and there are a few consistent things about their programs. One, billboards are typically limited to city-owned or controlled lands. Cities enter into lease agreements with private operators. Operators handle construction, financing, and and maintenance. Cities receive revenue share with minimum guarantees. Cities negotiate public benefits and messaging or branding. And staff in the cities that uh did not report any major operational issues. Staff will now provide a brief overview of the billboard programs across neighboring cities. For the City of San Carlos, they have

four billboards along Highway 101 generating about 200K each site annually plus revenue share. The total expected revenue is about 26 million over 20 years. The billboards are still prohibited on private property. They require land use approval from design review and planning commission. Final lease approval is subject to City Council hearing. The city The City of Belmont has one billboard along Highway 101. They generate about 150K plus revenue share totaling about 7.2 million over 30 years. The billboard is prohibited by ordinance still. The city used a state-authorized relocation agreement to remove an existing print billboard in exchange for a new electronic billboard on city-owned land. They require City Council for approval of a lease. The City of Millbrae has one billboard along 101 and one at their water pollution control plant. They receive about 200K annually per site with revenue protections. They collectively generate about 10 million revenue over 20 years. The billboards are prohibited on private property. They require sign and land use permits subject to design review and planning commission. The lease approvals are subject to City Council hearing. This is program is similar to City of San Carlos. The City of Redwood City, Council approved a pilot program in June of 2025. The preliminary terms are 200K annually plus 100K initial payment. The terms are still under negotiation. The billboards are prohibited by

ordinance. Council is revalua- evaluating several locations along 101 on city-owned property. They're using the lease agreement approach and it's subject to City Council approval. The City of South San Francisco uses a relocation model requiring the removal of older billboards and focusing on freeway corridors. They have four billboards. Under this model, each is estimated to generate about 6 million over 30 years. It requires a council-approved location agreement in a two-to-one removal of existing billboard faces for each new digital billboard. If there are not enough faces to remove, the city can require fees or other public benefits through a development agreement. Projects must be consistent with general plan and they're limited to non-residential areas along Highway 101. There's no land use permit required. Standards are set through ordinance covering design, location, and operations. Final approval by City Council for both the relocation agreement and lease. So, under the state uh federal and municipal code contexts, billboards in California are regulated at all these levels. They They must meet Caltrans standards for visibility and lighting and require CEQA and in some cases potential FAA review for height and location. At the state level, the outdoor advertising act allows for relocation agreements which gives cities a path to permit billboards even when they're otherwise prohibited. In San Mateo, our municipal code currently precludes billboards on both public and private property under the sign and zoning ordinance codes.

Currently, San Mateo has one existing print billboard on Amfi Avenue. You can see the photo of it. Under the state law, the city could consider a relocation approach removing that billboard and replacing it with an electronic billboard at a new location. Based on prior City Council discussions, there's likely a community support of this if Council is interested. If Council elects to move forward, amending the municipal code would establish a clear process and allow for standards to to allow for a limited number of billboards. This approach is intended to protect the public interest, minimize impacts, and provide a public benefit. Revenue would vary based on the number of structures and billboards that is ultimately authorized. And planning has created a map of the possible locations within the city on city-owned or leased parcels.

[snorts]

And this ends my formal presentation. Uh I'm leaving the final question, the policy considerations for City Council direction. One, allow billboards on public or private property in one of the one of the following ways. A, incorporate design, development, maintenance, and operational standards to address issues such as location and distance from residential zones, illumination standards, structural maintenance, graffiti removal, and periodic inspection into municipal code to allow for billboards on city-owned or city-controlled property with planning commission or zoning administrator approval of a land use permit along with a lease agreement. If so, do you prefer planning commission or zoning administrator? B, incorporate design, development, maintenance, and operational standards to address issues such as location and distance from residential zones, illumination standards, structural maintenance, graffiti removal, and periodic inspection into the municipal code to allow billboards on city-owned or city-controlled property without planning commission or zoning administrator approval of a land use permit and only a lease agreement. Two, continue to prohibit billboards in San Mateo, or three, do something else. Thank you, Director Chen. Uh at this time, I'd like to open up for public comment. So, if you are in chambers, please hand your request to speak slip to the city clerk. And if you are on Zoom, please raise your hand. City Clerk, how many public comments do we have? Mayor Lorraine, we've received three requests to speak on this item which per Council adopted rules and procedures sets the uh speaking time to 3 minutes per speaker. And we'll call the names of the next uh three speakers. If I call your name, if

you could please line up to my right. Our first speaker will be Lori Watanuki followed by David Light and Kevin Simpson. Um if I may through the mayor, it's 6:50. So, are we going to need to extend this meeting to 7:15 maybe? Let's shoot for 7:10. How about that? I'm okay with that. Yeah, I we will have to go a bit longer, but we want to make sure we get Council questions and deliberation. Thank you. Go right ahead. Good evening, Mayor Lorraine and members of the City Council. My name is Lori Watanuki. My comments this evening are directed toward the new electronic billboard policy in Sam and Hal. Over the years, we have been before the city council regarding the older billboard on private property on the 600 block of South Amphlett in the Central neighborhood. This billboard has impacted the quality of life in our for our residents over the past 40 years. According to the California Outdoor Advertising Act, this billboard can be removed and relocated to a city-owned or city-leased property that does not impact the residential areas and provides a community benefit to the city. Please do not place an electronic billboard at this South Amphlett location. All the older billboards in North Central and the Marble Bay Townhome uh neighborhood at Bay Meadows have been removed by the city. We would appreciate it if you could give this billboard removal request your strong consideration for our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker will be David Light, followed by Kevin Simpson. Thank you, Mayor Lorraine and members of

the city council. My name is David Light. I live in the Central neighborhood and Amphlett um [clears throat] Amphlett Avenue is on the eastern border of Central neighborhood. And I I really think it needs a a makeover for a lot of different reasons. Um [clears throat]

uh my preference would be housing like like we did when the when the uh newspaper offices were uh taken down and now there some nice townhouses there. Um but I I just I'm here to support uh Lori Watniki. The the billboard is a eyesore. It's in the middle of of this this whole area that I think should be uh re- redone. And so I I support the removal of the old billboard on South Amphlett, finding a new replacement location for an electronic billboard on city-owned, city-leased property. And this would provide a community benefit. And there are 12 city-owned or leased properties uh that could be explored further. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker will and final speaker will be Kevin Simpson.

[clears throat]

Hello, Council. Good evening. Um I'm speaking I don't know these folks, but we sort of agree. Um if that old billboard can come down, great. There's not one person living in this city that wants to see another billboard of any kind anywhere in our city. And we definitely don't want to live in neighborhoods that are blighted by overly bright, sensational electronic billboards. We're advertised to death. I can't go from a parking lot to a store entrance without somebody trying to get in my face to sell me something. And it's that way in every aspect of my life. We don't want any more billboards. But if this is the only way we can get what rid of the carbuncle that's blighting that neighborhood, then maybe that's an expedient to do one electronic billboard. But for the love of God, make sure it's not visible from anybody's home. Nobody wants to look at these things. I cringe every time I drive up and down 101 and we see beautiful mountains that are hidden by billboards. They don't [snorts] do anybody any good and we don't want them. And I think the revenues that come from them are paltry in the grand scheme of life. So, I hope you will think carefully about what we do with this policy. If if it's surgical and gets rid of one billboard and puts an electronic one up somewhere else, great. But if we suddenly have 15 or five or three electronic billboards in the city, I'm not in favor of it. Thank you. Thank you. Uh Mayor Lorraine, that concludes public comment. Thank you. Uh Council, do you have any questions or comments? Councilmember Newsom. Thank you. Through the mayor.

[clears throat]

Um who am I directing the questions to? You, general? If if it's zoning, um Joanna will likely jump in. Thank you. All right. So, first question is is one thing contingent on the other? Meaning if we look at putting in an electric billboard, do we need to remove the existing billboard? I don't think that is true, but I'm going to look to the attorney to kind of clarify that. I don't believe that's true. Uh that's correct. You don't need to remove a billboard to allow for a electronic billboard. That is a mechanism in state law. Uh state law does provide for what are called relocation agreements to remove a static or print billboard and replace it with a digital billboard. Um but that's not the only option at the council's disposal. Okay. So, it would be helpful, however, to remove one for one. That that could help us or conceivably. Well, I mean that's a that's a policy choice for the council. I mean uh that's an option, but again, it's not the only option. Okay. Um do we have an idea of how many advertisers advertise on a sign and what the rotation is like? Meaning are there 12 advertisers at any given time or is it So, the advertisers go out and get these bids for them. So, they basically have a website and people bid on times and that's how they procure the advertising revenue. There are three producers. There's Clear Channel, Outfront, and then um there's another there's no a third clear Is it Clear Channel, I believe? Something like that. Um that pro- that constructs and builds them. Okay. Um that's all my questions. Do you want me to go into my comments or Sure. I'll just roll right into Unless anybody else has questions, I'll roll right into my I I think it's okay. We can we can give

questions and comments. Sure. Yeah. Uh I would support uh a pilot program for one electric billboard. I would support removing the existing billboard on Amphlett in Central. And I would also try to make sure that we look for sites that are very um non-disturbing to residents. Uh I did make a couple suggestions to the city manager for some less sites on the west side as well as the east side. And one west side location that comes to mind is the very end of Lori sorry, of Fiesta Gardens Meadows uh because that that site would not be intrusive on any neighbors. It meaning it wouldn't have any lighting effect on any neighbors. It would be buffered between the end of the field and and the the residential district. So, I I hope that when we look at potential sites, we try to find things that are as less intrusive to the neighbors as possible. And with that, those are my suggestions. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone like to go next? Councilmember Diaz Nash. Thank you very much. And uh Councilmember Fernandez, I'm sitting in your seat tonight. I can't see over very well, so that's it's hello out there, audience. Um so, general comments, questions. When we define a billboard number one, thank you for the presentation. Uh do How do we define the billboard? Is it just what's up top? Does it include the pole? Because San Carlos is an example as an ad up top, but then there's a big advertisement for San Carlos the whole way down. That is a public benefit they negotiated with the provider. Okay. And Millbrae, it looked like they had They had touch screens.

ads in one. They had a little sign and then they had a welcome to Millbrae. So, that's also something that you can negotiate as part of the public benefit. They had like two or three ads or it looked like there were more There was more than just one. There is some printed It's part of a Let me just They're like static backlit signs. Yeah, but there were like four three or four different subjects. Anyhow, the the the reason why I was asking was I think um public benefit, that that's great. Um but having lots of different messages in your face vertically is just as bad as having them horizontally one after another after another. Um [clears throat]

so, I would not be in a favor of that. Um let's see. Looking at where we have our parcels. I I would be fine with doing it on just city-owned land. That's answering one of the questions. Where would we get the best return on investment? Probably locations close to 92 and 101. That's probably where we have um all There's lots We may be able to, depending on who responds, get a little bit more dollars in that area. Because 92 is the only section that we have a um control and there's no other billboards. Okay. Uh I thank you very much for that. I absolutely agree with everything Councilmember Newsom has to say. I would love to, though, s- look at how we rank that yes, we want to avoid the impact on the neighbors, but if we can find something that meets that, but is higher up on the ROI, I I would I would go for that first. Um and I would say, you know, in terms of planning commission versus zoning administrator, I would be fine with a zoning administrator. Someone's going to know how to do this. Uh that would be my my thought. Um and yeah, doing a pilot whatever the the period is, it would be fruitful to actually get some learning out of it. Mhm. Um Yep, I think those are my comments and questions. Thank you, Mayor. Of course, Council Member Sifuentes. Yeah, um thank you for the presentation. Just to be quick, um plus one to Rob's comments on pilot, um limiting to one electric, um removing the existing billboard in the Amplate community, um and plus one to Lisa's comments on zoning admin and impact on neighboring ROI. Thanks. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Fernandez.

[snorts]

Oh, I think you're still muted. Still muted. Here we go.

Jinx. Can you hear me now? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. I'm not sorry. Um so, I am in favor of the pilot, um to echo Rob's comments. I'm also in favor of the removal of the the old billboard at Amplate um in the central neighborhood. I would like us to request um uh to have the built-in city promotion as Millbrae and San Carlos had when negotiating the lease. Um and I would echo uh Council Member Sifuentes uh Council Member Diaz Nash in making the administrator the zoning administrator. Um on my end. Thank you. Thank you. I just have a question or two, I think. Um I feel like I'll just cut to the chase and say I'm I'm generally with my colleagues on on direction here. Um I'm just curious cuz I've heard the word pilot a few times and uh what do we mean when we say pilot if we're talking about the prospect of replacing a print billboard with a digital one? I would say a pilot is is that we're going to limit it to one billboard probably to start off and see how that goes before we move forward with any additional billboards in the future. Okay, that sounds great. Um Uh Jennifer, do we if we were to do that, do we need to you know, incorporate design, etc., everything that's um listed here in in 1A and or or B? That would provide Council with the most amount of control over the type of illumination, number ads. It would just give a lot more um standards and provides a clearest path. I see. Okay. Um I think I am generally with my colleagues on that one.

So, uh let me just see if I had any other questions. Nope. I think Oh, uh sure, Council Member Diaz Nash. Sorry, what last question. Microphone. Sorry. Couple of the cities had 100 100,000 dollar one-time payments and some didn't. Obviously, it would be great if we could get that. Sure.

Um and also there were couple of cities that had We may not be able to do it if it's a pilot, but they had built-in escalation of fees over time. Anything that we can do to think about the future and being really, really strict about maintenance and, you know, making sure that whoever the operator is is taking care of it, getting rid of the graffiti, the you know, whatever's not working gets fixed. Uh that would be really important. Okay, thank you. We have the direction we need. Thank you. Thank you. And uh at this time I will adjourn our special session. We will uh return for the regular meeting in about 10 minutes' time. Thank you. That sounds fantastic.