Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Are we ready? Yeah. The planning commissioner meeting of February 18th, 2026 will come to order. All rise for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. The secretary will will call roll. Commissioner Man here. Sorry. Commissioner Tullson. Commissioner Rice

here. Vice Chairperson Kennedy here. Chairperson Chrisman here. We're going to proceed to the election of officers. Deputy Director Sean Gibson.

Good evening, Planning Commission, members of the public. This is the time and place set for nomination and election of the planning commission chairperson and vice chairperson for 2026. The semi value municipal code provides that prior to any vote for the office of chairperson, the deputy director, city planner, myself must take all nominations for the office of chairperson. All nominations must receive a second. Anyone receiving a nomination may vote for themselves. The floor is now open for nominations for the office of chairperson. I'd like to nominate Lee Kennedy for chairperson. I'll second it.

We're going to call for Are there any other nominations? Seeing none, is there any discussion you'd like to address? No. You want to tell us your platform or Yeah. Yeah. What is your platform? My goal is to make every meeting this year.

You got my vote. Okay. We have a uh motion and a second for Lee Kennedy for chairperson. Can we please take a vote? Motion passes unanimously. Tulsson abstaining and not abstaining absent. So chairperson for the planning commission for year 2026 is Lee Kennedy. Thank you. Now that well now the floor is now open for nominations for the office of vice chairperson. Can I ask for nominations?

Nominate Ken Rice. I'll second it. Any discussion? What is your platform? My platform is for Lee to make every meeting.

Okay. Okay. And the recording secretary now poll the commission on their vote for office of vice chairperson.

Okay, the motion passes. John Tullson absent. Congratulations on that. So now is the time for the new chairperson to take his or his place at the dis and we will rearrange your uh name plates. So it'll be brief brief pause here in the meeting.

Sure. You don't want to finish up. like musical chairs for adults. Yep, we're good.

Yes. Okay. Uh, I hope you all read the agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? A motion to approve the agenda. I'll second that. Okay. Motion. I'm new at reading the script. Motion was made by Commissioner Mann and seconded by Commissioner Rice. Unless there are any objections, the agenda stands approved. All right. Next step, approval of the minutes. There's no minutes today.

All right. All right. Now is the time for the uh declaration of conflict. The secretary will read the declaration of conflict. If any member of the planning commission may have a conflict of interest or add any reason why that the member must abstain from consideration of any matter on this agenda, he or she should declare this at this time. Are there any uh declarations of conflict?

All right. Uh seeing none, we'll move on. Uh this is the time allotted for public statements or comments on all the items other than the public hearing items. Is there anyone in the chamber wishing to be heard? Oh, is this for the speaker?

James McGillis would like to make a comment. Thank you. I'm come before you tonight to address the issue coming before you shortly regarding short-term rentals in Semi Valley. On December 15th, 2025 with a motion by council member Rocky Roads and a quick vote, Semi Valley moved forward to regulate and legalize short-term rentals or STRs. Last month, the neighborhood councils received 117 pages of material for review. buried in that packet were municipal code changes redefining and allowing hotels throughout the city. Also, there was a question as to whether the city should ban all short-term rentals. At NC 1, 2, and 3, the executive boards and the public voted to deny the code changes. At NC3, they also voted to ban STRs. At NC4, the executive board voted unanimously to ban STRs and to deny the code changes. Subsequently, at the January 26 council meeting, there were no councilmen comments regarding the overwhelming neighborhood council votes. Even so, Mr. Rhodess got an agreement from the city manager to prepare an amended code package for the planning commission. When the amended code package is complete, there will be a three-day information dump on both the commission and the public. The planning commission will have 72 hours to review and make a far-reaching decision in this regard. The code changes redefine any STR as a hotel and would legalize them throughout the city. By voting no to the proposed code changes, the planning commission could advocate for a ban on STRs. If so, only a city council vote could override your vote to legalize STRs. 80% of the residents of the residential sales in San Frernando Valley are now to limited liability corporations. If we the people do not stop the proposed code changes, dark money and corporate ownership will become the norm in this city. And like

me, you may end up with a transient hotel next door to you. Soon, the planning commission will be asked to vote against the express will of the people. If you support the idea of human beings owning and occupying residences in Seami Valley, it is time for action. You can attend and make public comments at the city council meeting on Monday, February 23rd at 6:30. As residents, you should demand that each city council member recognize last month's overwhelming neighborhood council votes. Additionally, if anyone on this dis or any of your immediate household family members uh has a financial interest in a rental property or a rental property owning company, you must recuse yourself from further discussions and decisions regarding this matter. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Are there any other public statements I don't have cards for? Okay, we'll move on. Correspondence. Is there any correspondence from the deputy director or city planner at this time? Chairperson Kennedy, we have no correspondence tonight other than what we have on the agenda.

Thank you. Uh next on uh is the consent calendar. Are there any items on the consent calendar? Yes, Chairperson Kennedy, we have we have one item on the consent calendar and it is either recommended that you approve the consent calendar or ask questions or take other action. Okay. Are there any questions on the consent calendar? I have no questions on the consent calendar. Commissioner Man, no questions.

All right. Uh, may I have a motion for approval of the consent calendar? Do we need that by vote? Move to approve the consent calendar. Second. I'll second it. Ladies first. Of course. I'm going to second. Second. I have a motion and a second. Can we have a vote, please? This side's better. Anyways,

all right. We have a unanimous vote with John Tullson, not present. Commissioner Toulson. Okay, we move on to continued business. Is there any continued business? No items.

Items. No new business. Go straight to new business. Item 12. All right. So, any new business?

Yes, Chairman Kennedy and members of the commission. Under item 12 12B1. We have planning commission training tonight. We have um city attorney staff here today to kind of do a two-prong training. Our first portion of the uh presentation will be by senior assistant city attorney Stephanie Gutierrez on planning commission 101. So I'll turn it over to Stephanie and I think our presentation's up. We could proceed with that.

Thank you. Good evening commission. Um my name is Stephanie. Thank you for the introduction um deputy director. So before you tonight, we were asked to just basically go over a really big picture of planning commission and everything that maybe the community doesn't realize that goes into consideration while you're up here on the dis. So, just to reiterate what we're going through, literally every subject matter that I'm going to touch on may have multiple layers, different cases, different statutory um authority. So, this is a really high level review and I'm happy to take any questions along the way um if you know you have anything to add to it. So, we're going to get started by just introducing where planning commissions even come from. I feel like a lot of times um the community doesn't even realize that the planning commission is basically a local agency's planning agency under the government code. And if city council didn't choose to create a planning commission, they would actually assume all of the responsibilities that you do on a monthly basis. And so the government code gives city council the authority to do so. And so you're responsible for guiding land use decisions, ensuring compliance with state and local laws, and then you're also a place where the community can come and engage and be heard on what they feel is sustainable development practice. And this is just I always like to start with this because this is an example of really what you don't want to see in your city, right? Um, this is kind of the idea of planning in general to really guide planning and development into different zones that are proper for

a certain community, keep residential in residential, commercial and commercial, and maybe prevent something like this where there's a shopping center next to an adult business. So, this is exactly what happens when we don't have or don't follow the zoning laws that we have in place. Now what is the role of planning commission as defined in the statutes in government code of California? The biggest thing that we have to do here is evaluate development proposals. So, planning commission is responsible for de um evaluating those proposals to ensure that they align with community, align with state law and local municipal codes and even sometimes federal law. And in order to do that, the law dictates that you are a what we call a quasi judicial body where basically your role is acting as a mini courtroom. together. You are basically a judge and you review specific development proposals and apply existing laws to zoning rules to individual projects. You hold public hearings and consider evidence. And the the goal here is to always ensure that the commission understands that we are a fair, unbiased decision maker. And that is the position you're taking when you're reviewing for land use approvals. And I know that that we don't really have a problem here in see me, but oftentimes different communities have an issue distinguishing what a formal public hearing is and then just what public comment on a regular business item is. And so for a formal public hearing, that's what the procedures dictate in state law. So, it is literally outlined in the government code and it is a legally noticed meeting

where the public may attend and provide input before a planning decision is made. So, whenever you do conduct a public hearing, you'll see on your agendas, you always have that separate space to identify exactly when this special procedure needs to be followed. So, the three things we keep in mind are findings. utmost we have to basically state the reasons why a project does or does not comply with the zoning code, the general plan or any other applicable state or federal law before you make the decision. You also have to consider the due process rights that an applicant is afforded during this hearing. So, giving the people that are coming before you fair treatment to make sure they receive proper notice of a hearing and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. um before the planning commission takes a dis um makes a decision. And finally, I think the biggest thing that we need to keep and oftentimes staff is very aware of this when they're conducting your staff reports, when they're writing out everything that you're needing to address during a planning commission meeting is that the idea is these land use decisions can be challenged in court. So everything that we do here, whether it's the written record, audio, video, basically you have to conduct yourselves in a way where a judge could review these documents and understand what happened and how the planning commission reached this decision. That's really the goal of every public hearing that we have. And so to go into that a little further, due process considerations, it is making sure that every person here is fair and impartial, that we're not distracted, right? Whenever an applicant is here, if staff is presenting, if applicant is, you know, arguing for

their position on a certain item, that they are meaningfully heard and that they're they do have a right to a hearing before an unbiased officer. So what is bias? Um basically we have to just make sure that we don't do this but a bias is when a decision maker has a personal or financial interest in the outcome or has already made up their decision before the hearing preventing a fair and impartial decision. So that's what we want to avoid. And in adding to that, we also want to make sure that we also disclose any kind of exparte communications, off-record conversations, and oftentimes that happens when maybe a planning commissioner wants to visit a site, right? You want to get an idea of what the community looks like, maybe what the traffic is at a certain time. Do you agree with the studies that have been presented to you? But again, totally okay. We just have to make sure that the public is aware of that communication and so that we are following the statutory guidelines of a public hearing. And like I mentioned previously, another really large purpose of this is to facilitate community engagement. you are a an place to hear public concern about what they want to see, what development that they would like to encourage, maybe issues that they have um in their community or in their specific neighborhoods. And so that is a big part of what you do as well. Now, so this is the part of the presentation we're going to really go over very fast just all the different types of law that you deal with. So just California land use law in general. So some of the key legislations that are often reviewed here as you get items

presented to you. SQUA I'm sure that you've noticed in every every staff report. There's a SQA analysis. It is necessary. Literally you can have entire courses, you know, college courses on SQA. We have specialties in SQA. It is a big big area of law. Um and then just planning and zoning law generally, right? They it establishes the framework of how planning and zoning regulations are adopted and what should occur um in different city municipal codes. And there's also the subdivision map act which governs the division of land into smaller parcels. And again, these are huge areas of law, but staff does an amazing job of, you know, taking all of that information it and condensing it into a staff report that's, you know, easy to review. And in general, even outside of that, just zoning regulations in general, we have zoning districts and classifications. That's outlined in our municipal code. You'll see that referenced. any kind of permitted uses or conditional uses that's always addressed in a in a staff report when applicable as well. And then there's always a method of exceptions to those general rules, right? So variances and zoning amendments and the code kind of out the municipal code outlines the ways that you can kind of go about requesting those amendments. And the biggest thing, the general plan, the largest area, the thing that controls everything, it is the top of the hierarchy. Whenever anything is considered and brought before you, there's always going to be reference to whether a general plan um is complied with. Is the project compliant with the general plan? Do we have, you know, any

issues concerning that? And so, what does the general plan address? visions and goals, right? Clear visions for s a sustainable community. Um making sure that the development that we want to see aligns with local needs, land use elements. Again, that in and of itself could be a whole whole presentation, but land use designations, density, zoning classifications, and then guidance on the kind of development that is associated with each of those classifications. And then it also addresses housing and transportation strategies. And so that's always helpful just depending on what's being presented before you. Oftentimes you'll see the reference to that as well. And finally, it also provides an implementation framework. It's take gives you the steps and policies that you need to follow in order to be compliant with what the policies are aligned in the general plan. I'm going a little fast so I know that this is like please stop me if you have any questions but just a little quick intro like the slightest intro to SQA just for anybody who is not aware we start with an initial study that's always the first step in the environmental review process and that really dictates where you go in far as far of yours as your next step right if you find in your initial analysis that there are significant impacts identified. Um you then move on to an environmental impact report and really the goal is to you know analyze the potential effects of the development and to see if there's any alternatives or mitigation measures that are necessary before following through on that development. And finally, the biggest thing is, you

know, really identifying what those mitigations measures are and then it would be up to the city to monitor and make sure that those are being followed. And so that is just like a general overview of like I had mentioned just land use in general, but you also have all of these other things that apply to the planning commission just in your role as a commissioner as a city official for Seami Valley. So you have to consider Brown Act considerations, parliamentary procedure, public records act, conflicts of interest, ethics, all of that is also included in what you do as a planning commissioner. So what's next? Um I know that that was a very large big picture overview. Um, but really the goal here is to provide information to not only the commission, but you know, the community. I feel like oftent times the community doesn't exactly know how you function or maybe why you're making the decisions that you're making. And it could be, you know, just doing a deeper dive into the Housing Accountability Act. You know, why we are limited in our ability to deny or reduce housing, right? A lot of people don't understand that we're not just reviewing projects and putting a rubber stamp on it. There are actual laws we are, you know, limited by. And then findings, right? What is legally required? What constitutes an explanation that a judge would understand how you got from point A to point B, right? um really identifying the statements that explain how the agency applied relevant law to the facts of the project and how that allowed you to reach your decision

and even conditional use permits and conditions of approval. you know, really including that aspect of findings. But there's actual case law that talks about principles of nexus, making sure that the conditions that you are applying are proportional to the um effects that that specific development are going to have on the community. And so, like I had mentioned, you have an amazing staff that really goes through all of this analysis and really combines all of it for your review in, you know, your staff reports. But I think the one place that we still have questions and I feel like you do get a lot of concerns from your community when you do have public comment here is how do I balance that? Right? I'm limited by what state law provides and I'm hearing that my community has a concern. So how do I show them that we're not just putting a rubber stamp on this project? Right? And really the there are two ways. Um, in order for us to approve a project, we use a substantial evidence standard. So, really just evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid value. And I know it's not, you know, the most solid definition or doesn't provide a huge explanation, but you do that through building a defensible record where, you know, you outline exactly what is required of state law, what is required of our municipal code, what findings are required, what evidence, studies, you know, analysis, case law has been reviewed by staff in order to say, "Hey, planning commission, we actually recommend approval and these are the reasons why. So again, oftentimes you do have a hard time balancing maybe a project that somebody would not like next door to the fact that we have certain laws that we have to abide by

where if we chose to deny that denial might not be sustainable in a court. So that is the end of my presentation. and my colleague herein Vasquez is going to go over a little more with you with Brown Act and parliamentary procedure but I don't know I'm happy to answer any questions on this or we can kind of circle back after his presentation. I just want to thank you for the presentation. I thought that was very well done and I really appreciate that you used prey and not PowerPoint.

Oh yeah. Maybe like not get make sure we get your attention here. I'm still a dinosaur using PowerPoint. I beg your forgiveness. Thank you, Chair Kennedy, Vice Chair Rice. Uh, congratulations. Uh, members of the planning commission, um, here to present on two items, uh, very important to what the planning commission does. Uh, those are Brown Act training and parliamentary procedure. We're going to hit the Brown Act first and then uh get into um parliamentary procedures second. And uh the Brown Act is is an open meeting law. We have a picture of Ralph M. Brown um who uh forwarded the bill. Uh it was approved by the legislature in 1953. And just to give some background leading up to um the legislaturator's adoption of the bill, there was an expose in the Bay Area in the San Francisco Chronicle 1951 1952 where a reporter uncovered um secret backroom deals made by cities, school districts, county boards. Um and over these two years he reported on meetings that were sort of window dressing for you know kind of checking a public participation box public goes away then they actually make the the real decision. So uh the reporter collaborated with uh council for the um council at that time for the California League of Cities. They put a draft together um forwarded that to Ralph M. Brown who was a state legislator from the Modesto area um was

known as one that could build coalitions. And this declaration gives the intent. But uh the idea is um the public has to write a right to know um about local state business and um they must be uh informed on decisions that affect them. And the Brown Act pertains to open meetings. Um it's set forth in the government code. Uh if you want some nighttime reading, you can go to government code section 54950 um and uh explore. But it's really about ensuring the public's right of access. And the key is that all meetings of a legislative body, which we'll get into what that mean means um of a local agency shall be open in public and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of a legislative body. What the heck is a legislative body? So, um, the first this first bucket are ones that are most intuitive to folks, city councils, school boards. Um, this planning commission falls in that second bullet of appointed bodies. Um, you give advisory, uh, opinions, advice to, um, the city council. Um, and the third tier, standing committees, which usually relates to city council standing committees. Uh they might have a um standing committee on economic development where you have um a couple city council members that have a focused ongoing subject matter jurisdiction and their meetings are uh going to have to comply with the Brown Act. What is a meaning? This is very critical in that the colloquial general conception of a meeting differs from what a meeting is under the Brown Act. So the Brown Act

has a wide net on what constitutes a meeting which includes a mere discussion, deliberation, um hearing, taking action on an item. A lot of times when a a body or an individual gets accused of violating the Brown Act, they'll say, "Well, we didn't make a decision. We didn't come to a final decision on it." That's not the threshold. So, um, it's about getting that to that decision, and the key is ensuring that the public has an opportunity to know and participate in that decision. Few different kinds of Brown Act meetings. You're probably most familiar with the first two, regular meetings, special meetings, emergency meetings, typically more often in the purview of the city council. Um, when it comes to pandemics, natural disasters, things of that sort, adjourn meetings, you might see one of your own regular meetings that could run late into the night, early morning. You might decide to adjourn it to a future time and date. Um special meetings can also be adjourned and these are meeting exceptions. So we have a list that includes individual contacts, conferences. For example, if you go to the um League of Cities, the Cal City Cities Commissioner Commission Academy, um community meetings, go to meetings of other legislative bodies, the city council, um schoolboard meeting, those would not be a planning commission meeting, of course. Um standing committees you can attend. Um if if uh you're not a member, you can attend as an observer and social or ceremonial events. Uh if you go to one of your peers weddings, um you're free to attend that. And we we'll get into the key of

of in various scenarios without memorizing these exceptions what the takeaway is to to keep in mind. And um you're going to want to be careful of of serial meetings. And there's a time element to this because in a moment you may think that well I'm just having a conversation with one or two people, one or two of my colleagues um uh or even just one that could be harmful if if things snowball from there. So, uh, serial meetings are where you're circumventing the Brown Act essentially through a series of communications to deliberate, discuss, take action on an item without abiding by um, the Brown Act requirements. There are two main examples. We have the daisy chain example where member A contacts member B, member B contacts member C, and they're discussing business within the jurisdiction of the body. In the hub and spoke example, we have um typically a staff member acting as the hub where they contact various members of the body and they're sharing the impressions um from one member of the body to the other. That's the hub and spoke example. And and the harm is really done to the public because they don't know that this business in the body's jurisdiction is being discussed. they're not having an opportunity to weigh in and um provide evidence or additional basis for your decision- making. This is a visual um representation of the two serial meeting types. We had the daisy chain of course with a straightforward three members of a this is a assumed five member body where you have a majority discussing um listening to each other taking action on uh matters within the body's jurisdiction

and then in the hub and spoke of course we had the staff member communicating one-on-one with different members but sharing information impressions essentially facilitating facilitating a discussion by a majority of body. Some individual meetings are okay. Um you can of course engage in separate communications um with the person outside of the meeting public someone on the body. Um and it's best to especially with the public answer questions, give clarifications, provide information. You might run into a neighbor who says, "Oh, you know, I saw the agenda. I didn't have a chance to make it. what did the planning commission where did they land on this item? Um you can of course you know share um what the upshot of a decision was. Um the idea is that you don't want to communicate u a member's comments or positions to any other legislative body member um conservatively to because of course you don't know what that member that you're sharing with might turn around and do. So, the best policy, the best takeaway here is if you're going to discuss planning commission business, um, this is a place to do it. Practical tip, um, before communicating with another commissioner on a matter within the body's subject matter jurisdiction, you can ask, uh, that member if they've had any communications with other members. This is really if it's there's a burning desire that you want to have a a conversation about something within the body's jurisdiction. Again, the the prudent advice is is to avoid substantive discussions on items within your jurisdiction. And even if they say at that time, no, I haven't discussed with anyone else, you don't know what

they're going to do tomorrow. Um, and so forth. So practically this plays out in texting, emails um because uh you never know how those communications can spread. Informal gathering uh informal gatherings, use caution when socializing with your peers from the dis. For example, after this meeting um you want to get drinks, get dinner afterwards, you can of course do that. All five of you could technically do that. Um it's better if you discuss the Dodgers in spring training or the past Super Bowl um non-sporting events so long as it's not about planning commission land use things within your jurisdiction. Again, be cautious with with emails. Um staff is well trained in um providing you information via email um in a way that helps avoid you replying all inadvertently um creating a serial contact or inadvertently having a meeting via email. Um be careful on replying and um definitely don't communicate your position on any matter within the jurisdiction and um don't directly reply to a majority. So be cautious when you hit send whether it's via text, email, social media. If you if you wouldn't want to see it printed in a newspaper or posted on the internet or um in a um lawsuit pleading, then probably don't send it. Social media, this is interesting in the sense that the rules for social media do not track your rules for in-person

interactions with your peers and the public. So um with regard to the public you uh majority you can't discuss business um with the public but also with each other and this ex this includes um mere commenting reposting liking responding with with emojis. Um the contrast here is that where in person technically two of you if it's limited to two of you could have a substantive discussion that's not a majority that's not a meeting. Um however if the same conversation was done on um uh I still say Twitter on X on Facebook on Instagram blue sky whatever um that one-on-one interaction that's okay in person is not okay on social media and um my understanding of the legislative intent here is that the nature of social media and how communications can spread very quickly. Um, we hear a lot about going viral and and veral verality. The the nature of social media makes it to where the legislature thought that um social media restrictions for even one-on-one communications should be limited in this way. So, you can answer uh questions of of the public about, you know, when's the next planning commission meeting. Um, I I would stick to logistical things like that, but when it comes to substantive issues, again, this is the place to do it. And um, keep in mind there is some interplay. This is probably the only thing I'll mention as far as the public records act, but keep in mind that um since uh there was

a case out of San Jose, the California Supreme Court has determined that even if you're using your own phone, if it's not a city phone, if you're using your own Gmail, not a semi valley email, so long as you're discussing business within your body's jurisdiction, that is disclosable. It's a public record under the public records act um unless some other exemption applies, but um it's not uncommon for council members, other members of legislative bodies to have to go through their phones and um provide screenshots, etc., you know, copies of their emails um because they've done business. So, it's always best to communicate on city accounts um but also be careful of you know what you put in there as well because they are public records. And this is just a visual um contrasting of those two concepts where above we see kosher for the two council members in this case planning commission members to discuss business uh in person but um we see that that's not authorized that even that one-on-one interaction between um planning commissioners on social media. agendas are are critical um for the Brown Act to allow the public to know what's going to be discussed. Maybe they have to decide between watching Jeopardy or actually coming to give a comment to you all. And so, um the notice has to have some minimal information of it. um must give the time and date, location of the meeting, um and a brief general description of the matters to be discussed or considered. And discussions that stray away from the agenda's description parameters almost always violate the Brown Act. We'll get into

some the few instances where there are flexibility there, but this is the most common one where um my colleagues and I have to interject and um steer legislative bodies back to what's on the agenda and definitely appreciate that complex topics that you deal with can often have tentacles and reach into different areas and intuitively you'll naturally want to discuss things and there are a lot of connections that you can discuss for a given item. But once you've strayed too far, um it's incumbent on on your attorney that's uh sitting with you and on the chair. Congratulations again, chair. U to help keep you all on task and focused on the agenda. Timing wise, uh the agenda has to be posted for a regular meeting at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Uh it's 24 hours in advance for a special meeting. And what happens if there are items that are provided to you, directed to you with regard to uh an item on your agenda after the agenda has been posted. Very common. Um Stephanie was mentioning SQUA. So it's not uncommon for 5 minutes before the meeting you get a 300page document that says this is why your SQL analysis is deficient. Um or maybe a little earlier but if it's after the agenda is posted there is a requirement that it may be that it must be made publicly available. So, um the best practice and and this is more for staff because um it's always um pretty certain that you are all going to see

it. But it's important especially for staff to keep in mind that um items uh directed to you be made publicly available after the agenda is posted. Best practice put on the website, give it to the G clerk, make it available for public inspection. And again, just driving this point home. You cannot discuss or take action on any item that is not on the agenda. There are some limit limited exceptions. Um, you can briefly respond to statements, questions from the public. You can ask clarifying questions of staff. Um, even a commenter, uh, you can ask them to clarify their questions because of course you want to know what the public is sharing with you. um on you see this at city councils or planning commissioner comments. You can make brief announcements or reports on personal activities or um often say, "Hey, you know, here I I went to the uh commissioner academy and I did AB1234 ethics training." Um tidy things like that. Um, and uh, if this is a nice tool, this matter of asking staff to place a matter on a future agenda or request a report back. This is a a useful tool in those instances where you might be straying from something um, that's on the agenda into something that's not. So, it's great to say, you know, we definitely want to allow you to talk about this and we're going to put it on a future agenda so the commission has an opportunity for a robust discussion and so that the public knows you're going to discuss it and has an opportunity to weigh in. There's a an emergency safety valve procedure, very very rare. It does require that action must be taken right now at this meeting. Twothirds of the body has to approve it. And it's not just something that staff

forgot about. It has to be something that came to the city's attention after the agenda was posted. Again, very rare. Public participation bread and butter of the Brown Act. They must be uh open and public. Comment must be allowed for all agenda items either during the item or before um your consideration of it. little nuance for special meetings where comment is limited to items on that agenda. So, you won't have items on general land use or other planning commission um purview items um for special meetings. It'll be strictly limited to those listed on the agenda. Time, place, manner limits um are legally permissible. The one that is known to most people is a minute limit per uh speaker when they address the planning commission or the city council. Um I've seen as little as one minute. Um typically you see three to five, but um the chair can make decisions um and has discretion to adjust if there's if you have um another client. They had a recent planning commission meeting. Sorry, it was a council meeting, but they had over 300 speakers, so they had to adjust the time downward, of course. Um, and the idea there is in the public interest because you want everyone to have an opportunity to be heard. Um, so as long as the time, place, manner restrictions are not contest contentbased and are even-handedly applied, then they're okay. Um, but I will say public comment not an opportunity for Q&A. It's it's more of a one-way street where the public is sharing their impressions

um giving their recommendations or even sharing um what really constitutes evidence for you to consider on a on an item. Um and it's not your responsibility to respond with questions. You can maybe um in instances, for example, for like a general public comment, you can say, "Well, um Sean, we want that on a future agenda. We we want to talk about that on on a future agenda, but um not an opportunity for for Q&A and and I know wanting to connect with the public um can be enticing to make public comment an opportunity for for Q&A, but um that very often when it turns into that risks string into discussion of items that are not on the agenda. This is supposed to scare you. Um, so don't violate the Brown Act and be guilty of a misdemeanor, please. Um, most commonly violations are enforced on on the civil side. Um, practically speaking, there's often um there's required sort of a notice that goes to the agency that says why a member of the public believes that um the Brown Act was violated. It's very common for a body, a city that receives that letter to essentially do a redo and ensure that they've dotted their eyes and crossed their tees um and just redo what they did. Um but um there are serious violations and it can be very costly if the city's on the losing side. um uh especially when it comes to court costs and attorney fees. You know, darn those attorneys. But um this is just sort of a wrapping

up for the Brown Act portion. The Brown Act requires openness, transparency, public access to information, and any gathering that involves the majority of this body um that involves any aspect of decision-m um triggers Brown Act open meaning requirements. Before I pivot to parliamentary procedure, anything on the Brown Act uh that you had any questions on? Great. So, why does parliamentary procedure matter? You're, you know, not wearing powdered wigs. Why do we need all this formality? Um, it it is important in in the form that applies to you all specifically, uh, to ensure orderly meetings. um that there's fair and consistent discussion, clear decisions, and effective proceedings. And as far as what govern governs your commission procedures, so um as of the latest version of your commission bylaws, um dated 2024, um I will say I'm informed that those are uh due for some revisions. So, um, when those are revised, those will of course come to the body. But as it stands now, the bylaws themselves have a section 12 entitled parliamentary procedure. And what that section does is it points to the municipal code. And it says that these specific municipal code procedures that apply to the council, they apply to the planning commission as well. And of course we're um constrained limited by state law including the Brown Act and if there is a conflict state law will control. So as part of the council procedures uh applying to the planning commission the

terminology in the code if you want to take a peek at it it's it is those sections and when you look there just know that when it refers to a council member it's referring to a commissioner. The council means the commission, the mayor means the chairperson, and the city clerk means the secretary. And it's important to note that parliamentary procedure and many jurisdictions either go with an explicit adoption of Robert's rules of order. Um, a lot of vintage for Robert's rules of order. They're about 1,200 pages. a lot which don't apply to government bodies, let alone um cities, let alone planning commissions. And there are more recent um what's called Rosenberg's rules which are recommended by the uh California League of Cities, but um what's applied to you in the code is um still robust and um we're going to cover the basic the basics to help you understand what you need to conduct a meeting within those rules. So, as far as what a quorum does, um this is all pretty low hanging fruit to you, but um it's essentially the minimum number of commissioners needed to conduct business. So, for a five member body like the planning commission, three members need to be present to conduct business. There's no quorum, there's no meeting. As to voting, you need at least a majority of the quorum uh to take action. So, for example, if three members are present, you need two concurring votes required for action. And Chair Kennedy, this is especially for you. Again, congratulations. Your responsibility is to preside over meetings. Um,

state motions or direct them to the secretary to state them. You can't delegate that. You recognize commissioners before speaking. Um, this is especially important and we see this in in courts as well, um, where you want to avoid people talking over each other because when there's a record being built, um, for posterity and, um, uh, in building that record, you want to make sure that it's clear. And so the chair directs traffic and says, "Okay, um, you know, Commissioner, um, Commissioner Rice, I'm sorry, Vice Chair Rice, you know, it's your turn to to speak on this. Uh, you know, what are your thoughts?" And and providing that order and that helps maintain order, decorum, um, and ensuring discussion stays focused um, and on the agenda item. How do motions work? So motions are how the commission takes action. Procedurally um as you did very well um earlier this evening, one member will make a motion, another seconds. The chair states the motion before discussion and um withdrawal. If uh this is withdrawal of the motion, it is not automatic under the applicable rules after the chair states the motion. So after the motion is stated by the chair, withdrawal can only be made um by approval of the mo the mover who's usually the one that'll you know get the withdrawal initiated. The secondary also has to approve as well as a majority of the commission voting. So few different ways to bake a cake here. Um, votes may occur by voice vote, roll call vote, or the more

informal uh, no objection method. Any commissioner under the applicable rules may request a roll call vote. Votes of course are entered into the record and are reflected in the minutes. And a tie vote means that no action is taken on an item. So it's always great when we have five members all voting abstensions. Um so on that idea of five members present all five voting um if you're here um you should vote unless you're disqualified. And disqualification is different from an abstension. for disqualification. For example, if you have a real property interest for property within 500 feet of a project, the the state FPPC presumes those guidelines presume that you have a material conflict of interest and you cannot participate. Doesn't mean you did anything wrong, but there's a song of dance to that and you cannot participate in the meeting and a disqualified member no longer counts towards the quorum. um for an abstension. Um I will say even though you should vote, you're may not be forced to vote. Um no one's going to twist your arm. Um but an abstension does not prevent um commission action. It doesn't um handcuff your colleagues and it does not affect the commission's quorum. Reconsideration. This is essentially voting on prior action that the commission took. It must be made by a person who voted in the majority at the same meeting or at the next meeting if not is stopped. What do we mean by not

stopped? Um I'll get to that after I emphasize why it's important that if you want to do reconsideration that I strongly advise that you do it at the same meeting. This is because and it dovetales into the next meeting. If you wait until a subsequent meeting, especially in when it comes to land use approvals, commercial business uh establishment, housing approvals, you will be a stopped um the city will be a stopped, the commission will be a stopped from um unringing that bell because at that point they the applicant developer may have already um invested more money in the project. they might have pulled permits. So that makes it more difficult to unwind and legally precarious at that point. So I will say even though there is leeway in the rules to make the motion at the next meeting, um you're likely going to be stopped from doing that at the next meeting. So if you want to reconsider it, I would do it at the same meeting. Um, and for example, as far as who must make it, um, if a motion passes 32, only one of the three yes votes may make the motion to reconsider. This makes sense because if you allow people in the minority to continue to make motions for reconsideration, you're going to get stuck on the same items and you're not going to get a lot done. If the motion for reconsideration is adopted, the original motion goes back to the commission for discussion and a new vote. And there is a limit where after one motion for reconsideration, unanimous approval is required for sub subsequent reconsideration on the same item. I'm going to speak about written findings. Um Stephanie did a great job early in her presentation about talking about the importance, how critical they are. Um

definitely encourage you to to keep that in mind. Um for my purposes, I'm discussing findings in the context of the rules, the parliamentary rules that apply to you. And so the written findings are reasons that explain your decision. And not all decisions require findings. Of course, when you made a decision to um elect Chair Kennedy and Vice Chair Rice, um findings were not legally required for that. But if you're approving a CUP, um recommending approval of a zoning code amendment, things of that nature, those legally require findings. And um this last parent bullet, if rejecting staff's proposed findings, this again comes from the parliamentary rules that apply to you. But a motion must state alternative findings, direct staff to prepare new findings consistent with the decision, or direct staff to reduce oral findings to writing. I I I will say that taking a step back from that that for the findings to make their way to you from staff, um they've been thoroughly vetted by staff. They've been run through legal. Um but that's not to make you feel like it's a rubber stamping exercise and you're not required to agree with staff's recommendations, staff's findings. However, um your decision must be based any decision you must be ma you make in this regard must be based on findings supported by evidence in the record. If evidence in the record doesn't support

whatever decision you want to make, um it's going to be very legally vulnerable to being overturned um by a court subsequently. This is a little recap on on sort of the the highlights of things that commonly cause confusion. I just wanted to hit some of these again, but motion requires a second. A stated motion cannot be redrawn withdrawn automatically. A tie vote results in no action and reconsideration must be made by a commissioner who voted in the majority. That's my presentation. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I do have a question. if nothing more than to prove I was paying attention. Who determines whether an item is a stopped from coming back for reconsideration? That so if if it's a stopped and timewise if there is that gap where it's between an initial meeting and a subsequent meeting um I imagine that for there to be reconsideration it would have to be on the agenda. there would have to be some discussion with staff. So, um I think there would be a discussion with staff, the city attorney's office, and even looking um at sort of facts based on what the applicant has done to make a determination if um a stoppple does apply to that motion for reconsideration being considered at a subsequent meeting. So um it would go through some vetting um in that time.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

Good for me. Thank you. Very well presented. Thank you. Yeah, just state state. We're doing 12B2. Read the title. Oh, there we go. It's not on mine. Uh 12B2 discussion on reasonable accommodation requests.

Thank you, Chairperson Kennedy, members of the planning commission. I want to take a short amount of time today to discuss reasonable accommodation, a brief overview of the process, and we could follow up with some uh legal comment on that as well. And I have a normal PowerPoint presentation, so I apologize. You're fine. So for the purposes of planning, our focus is reasonable accommodation for housing for persons with disabilities. Both the Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act, FHAA, and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations such as modifications or exemptions, exceptions in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. This could be a zoning regulation such as a zoning setback, lot coverage, animal keeping, or other rule in our code. Over the past couple years, planning commission has seen an increase in reasonable accommodation requests. So, we've decided to provide you with a brief overview of the process and some of the guard rails we must follow. Just get my slide correct here. As required by the city's general plan housing element, the city has an existing ordinance that established an application type for requests for reasonable accommodations. Shown here is the development code section providing the purpose of reasonable accommodations. This section allows for reasonable accommodations which authorize the

director or appointee, which would be myself in this case, to approve requests for persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing under the acts that result in no fiscal or environmental impacts to the city if implemented in compliance with the provisions, requirements, and standards of the development code. A request for a reasonable accommodation may be made by any person with a disability. their representative or any entity when the application of a zoning law or other land use regulation, policy or practice acts as a barrier to fair housing opportunities. This, like I said, this may include a modification or exception to the rules, standards or practices for the sighting, development, and use of housing or housing related activities that would eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice. We have an application requirement. Um, it shall be filed in compliance with chapter 9-30 of the development code and application must be accompanied by information identified by the department and as I said the director may grant a reasonable accommodation or may defer the action and the application to the planning commission. Generally, the process, as you know, is um staff prepares the report currently and it's distributed to the planning commission and city council for a 14-day review, which I'll mention a little later. Uh much like conditional use permits or other development applications, you may see there are findings um consistent with reasonable accommodation law based on these factors uh one, two, and three, which is here. Um, is it necessary to make specific housing available to the individual with

disabilities under the acts, be in full compliance with the development code and municipal code, and be consistent with the purpose, intent, goals, policies, programs, and land use designations of the general plan or any applicable specific plan. Uh, just also to note, reasonable accommodation just doesn't apply to tenant housing or rental housing. Um, but it may apply to your own home or a home that you own. And as discussed, a homeowner or tenant could request a reasonable accommodation request. Similar to uh some of our other permit types, we may impose conditions of approval such as buffers, environmental protection, landscaping, maintenance, hours, lighting, parking, other performance guarantees deemed necessary and reasonable to ensure that uh the approval would be in compliance with the findings. We take um we take great steps just like with any application to review the surrounding areas and community and potential people that might be impacted. Um also we look at um when approving certain reasonable accommodations. One thing we check is is there similar allowance that we could relate it to. For example, um with ADU laws, you're permitted a 4 foot setback to the side of rear yard. If someone is requesting reasonable accommodation for a accessibility ramp or some sort of special entry, uh there is kind of a relationship to um a similar allowance which would be could be a finding for approval that's very minor change to the area. Um, with that we prepare a small report with the findings,

potential conditions of approval and and supplemental evidence attached to report. The director or designate makes an approval. Uh, it is subject to appeal. The planning commission may choose to appeal the decision rendered by the director. the signatures of at least two planning commission members is required to initiate an appeal of the decision before the expiration of the appeal period. And just just to keep things in perspective, the applicant or someone else may also appeal the request through their on their own behalf uh if they don't like the decision or um choose to appeal it for other reasons. And of course, the um decisions of the planning commission are appealable to the city council. And that initial appeal period of uh our determination is 14 days. Um now for any u legal concerns with the Fair Housing Act and how we process this, I'll turn it over to Stephanie with some general comments as well.

Yes. Thank you, Deputy Director. So I just wanted to kind of reiterate in terms of reasonable accommodations. I you know I think the most common thing that we've seen lately is like emotional support animals but all that to say is these laws actually apply to a large range in considering like our land use designation in our planning department. So I'm just using that as a quick example. So on top of everything that we have to do in terms of the findings that are in the municipal code, there's also federal law that requires us to ask certain questions including, you know, has the person requesting the accommodation provided information which reasonably supports that an animal does work, perform tasks, provided assistance, or provides therapeutic emotional support with respect to an individual's disability. And that's just federal on the California side which is actually more extensive than what is required on the federal level. it is if you would like to clarify any kind of determination that clarification from for example what we would normally say is like a doctor's note that note can come from according to the California code of regulations can be provided by a health care provider therapist social worker non-medical service provider member of a peer support group parent child or other relative so I'm I'm bringing those things to the attention of the commission to say that similar to what we had kind of advised earlier in the presentation of each one of these items really has you know like three different blocks of information or even further that we can really dive into similar to reasonable accommodations if for example it's for a reasonable accommodation for an emotional support animal there are multiple levels of different areas of law that staff has to look at and oftentimes we even get you

know asked on the legal end, hey, what does this look like? Can we get further clarifications and there are, you know, federal guidance that is produced, um, case law that we might have to look at to just see if the situation is similar. So again just to reiterate the importance of the findings, the evidence that is presented and really the limitations that are based on state law or federal law that staff you know has to abide by

and thank you Stephanie. Um, so I think that's a general overview reasonable combination unlike uh or not unlike but similar to the other application you get in your boxes like administrative action or administrative conditional use permits. those uh those reviews uh go through the appeal process or uh when warranted, the appeal period and uh potentially you may we may see more of these over the coming years because they seem to become more popular or another avenue uh the latest trend I guess is an option. So, um, we will continue to take very close looks at those and, uh, try to address the zoning rules as closely as possible, staying within the confines of the of the, uh, federal and state laws. But, um, however, if there's any questions tonight, I'm here to try to respond to any of those.

Yeah. What one comes to mind real quick, especially on the emotional support animal side of this that uh and and making these reasonable accommodations and I I know there's all the legal interpretation. I take a lot of fair housing stuff in my business. Um when the uh accommodation request is made and it impacts neighbors and other property uses because of that accommodation, at which point does that either get revocable or get another take take another look at from the legal standpoint of view?

So oftentimes we actually could possibly turn to code enforcement actions. You know, it might just be that we provide some sort of notice of violation and they, you know, I'm just using hens for example, maybe a noise, you know, it's getting out into neighbors and being disruptive because maybe they didn't isolate the hens in a way that they were supposed to according to the conditions of approval. So it could be as easy as, hey, we received something indicating that there may be an issue. You know, your conditions of approval with that reasonable accommodation do require that hens are, I don't know, isolated in the garage or whatever that may look like. We just wanted to follow up and make sure that that was occurring, right? And then we would we would go through it is a long process, but we would go through the different avenues of can we appeal this, can we withdraw this, what what avenues are available. So I think you know the point that I always want to bring home here is again the the idea that commissions or staff just kind of rubber stamp things that's really not true. Like we really do try to go through and ask for those clarifications and ask for that um you know just further information whatever we need in order to make sure that yes you're not affecting the daily life of your neighbor next door as well. So, as a little followup to that, what if the uh the staff investigation wasn't complete enough to know that it was a reactive uh there was already a notice on that property uh that created the situation where somebody got into uh making a reasonable accommodation request. So, it was a reactive

Oh, I see. See where I'm going with that?

Yeah. And I think that there's only so much that, you know, we can do as far as looking into. Case law is always something that we kind of just default to because there are those scenarios where a court has identified maybe that issue. And then if that hasn't been identified, we look at different options that you know, can we understand reasonably like for example that substantial evidence standard is the information that's being provided credible? Right? Is that information only being provided by an angry neighbor that just believes that's what happened or is there some sort of proof that that actually did occur? Right. Um, but if there are specific questions and if you think that this does require just maybe a little more information or a little more in-depth discussion, I'm happy to come back. we can do a memo to the commission and even another presentation on really different case scenarios that have been vetted and that way we have an idea of what to look for and maybe be able to address concerns of the community that they have when they see emotional support animals.

I think I think along the lines Sarah was are we at jeopardy because that information was there and we didn't uncover it prior to the uh accommodation request. is that I mean that pits maybe one neighbor against another or multiple neighbors against another. At what point does the city come under jeopardy?

So for for any kind of reasonable accommodation request, all we can do is review what's in front of us and what's asked for by law. So if we have a certain application process which is identified in the municipal code, they have to provide us that. If we feel that for an example, you know, a therapist note didn't really indicate how the nexus of that service animals um presence on the property helps you, we can ask for that further clarification. But even then, federal law doesn't provide, you know, that level of detail that we're looking for. And so oftentimes it is a risk analysis on the city's end. Are we facing a legal challenge? What would that look like? and it might lead to an appeal to city council and or to planning commission first and then to city council. So there are avenues that we can explore but I think that the specific answers that you're looking for are not so easily attained. Yeah.

Thank you very much.

Char's going to go. Anybody else have a comment? Any other commissioners? And thank you for the education. Okay. Uh we're at 13 now. Yep. Oral communication and reports. Uh this item gives the planning commission and uh board members the opportunity to update other members on committees, commissions, or special projects on which they may be participating. Staff staff has no comments tonight. Thank you. Uh planning commissioners, excuse me. Planning commissioners? Uh

I I I I have a comment. I I wanted I wanted to ask if I can have a pet goat, but it's okay. I already asked you that. They are very Okay. Okay. So, we're uh now at uh 13 C, the mobile mobile home rent mediation board. And chairman, we have no comments tonight on mobile home mediation board. And 13D, Tree Advisory Board. No tree advisory board comments tonight. Any other comments from staff or planning commissioners before I close the meeting? This meeting is adjourned. I got