Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Well okay. Okay. Well, we have a active room tonight. I like the energy. We'll go ahead and, start. Good evening. Welcome to the Planning Commission meeting of 05/14/2026. And I will ask the the clerk to please take the role.

Chair Hull? Present. Vice chair Sanguinetti? Here. Commissioner Graves absent. Commissioner Oaks? Here. Commissioner Crowder?

Here.

Commissioner Amen? Present. Commissioner Hernandez? We have a quorum.

Right. And I would ask, commissioner Aman if she would do the pledge, please. All right. We'll move on to consent items. We do have two consent items. And I believe one of our commissioners did not. So yes, I see the vice chair, you want to make a motion?

Yes, I'd like to make a motion that we split them apart and take them individually because we had an absentee at one of the meetings.

Okay.

All right. So, let's go ahead and vote please. Okay, can I get a motion for that second agenda item? And we do have, Commissioner Ahmad did have a chance to watch the video and read the agenda. So she can thank you. Let's confirm that. And can I get a motion? Oh, I can go ahead and motion to approve that. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Go ahead and vote, please.

Motion passes six zero with commissioner Graves absent.

Excellent. Okay. We'll move on to public comment. This section of the agenda is reserved

for We

did vote on it. I think didn't we vote on I I believe we voted on on these first agenda item.

I thought that the first vote was a vote to vote on them separately.

Oh, okay. Then I'm sorry. My bad. Okay. So let's go ahead and You're understanding. I will I will go ahead and make a motion to approve the 01/08/2026 agenda. Can I get a second, please?

I'll second.

Okay. Now let's vote on that. Thank you, chair.

You abstain on

that one.

Yes, I'll be abstain.

Thank you. Let's go ahead and vote.

I believe mister Hernandez is abstaining. We'll we'll just recast our votes.

Okay. We're the recast. So on this one, yeah, you need to abstain. I'm sorry. We got a little confusing here. We'll go ahead and try that again.

Don't push it.

Let's go ahead and vote one more time, please.

Motion passes five zero with commissioner Hernandez abstaining and commissioner Graves absent.

Oh, thank you vice chair for keeping me on topic. So I appreciate that. Let's go ahead and then move on to public comment. Public comment is, section of the agenda reserved for public comment, anything within the jurisdiction of the commission. If a member of the public would like to speak on the specific agenda item they may do so either here or when the item is called. Do we have any public comment cards?

We have none, Chair.

Okay. Alright. Then we'll move on to item number 5.1. This is a administrative use permit established nineteen eighty seven square foot pawnshop in an existing building at 2002 Pacific Avenue, APN number 1272024P26Dash005, and we'll open up the meeting. And Scott, I guess you're not the person I expected, but great.

Right. Not the

person you said was gonna be My

apologies, Jackson Patton, our assistant planner who is going to be presenting this item, is ill and cannot attend tonight. I sent him home because he was not doing too good.

Okay, well thank you.

So, will be presenting the item. As stated, this is an administrative use permit to establish a 1,987 square foot pawnshop use at 2,002. The application is an AUP to convert Suite A Of 2002 Pacific Avenue from a Banks and Financial Services land use that specialized in payday loans and check cashing services into a pawnshop land use. The current general plan land use designation for the parcel is commercial and the current zoning for the parcel is commercial general. In the CG zone a pawn shop land use requires an administrative use permit.

As previously stated, the proposed project is Suite A of the existing building which is on the corner. It's the first one there on the corner of Pacific and I can never pronounce the name of that street. Wynnott Street. Wynnote. Wynnote. Sure. Wynnote. Wynnote.

Wynnote. Wynnote. Wynnote. Wynnote.

Thank you. The applicant intends to use the existing floor plan with no major changes. As mentioned, the pawnshop land use requires an AUP, or Administrative Use Permit. The application was reviewed by the planning staff as well as staff from other city departments including the police department, and the project was found to meet the applicable requirements of code along with the use permit findings. In accordance with code, notice was then sent to nearby property owners informing them of the city's intent to approve the use.

As a result of the notice, multiple responses were received by our department. We received eight letters, seven responses from an online forum set up by the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District, and a petition containing 12 signatories, all requesting that a public hearing be held and request that we deny the project. We also received two letters in support of the project. As part of the codified process for AUPs, we are now presenting this project at a public hearing for the commission's consideration. The responses requesting denial all had similar issues with the proposed project.

These issues which you have received all of the responses in your packets, so I'm not going to go through them one by one, but generally these issues included incompatibility with the identity of the Miracle Mile, concerns over public safety due to the potential for crime loitering in a negative atmosphere, and general erosion of the Miracle Mile's character by attracting other similar uses. In response to the comments, the applicant reached out to the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District and met with a subcommittee of the MMCID board. Together, the applicant and the MMCID agreed on additional conditions to of approval to alleviate the concerns raised by the project. These added conditions are conditions seven through 10 in the proposed resolution. These conditions are limiting operations to the purchase sale and provision of loans for jewelry, watches, and coins only.

Limiting the hours of operation to 10AM to 6PM Monday through Saturday. Ensuring to maintain a clear view from all storefront windows and prohibiting features such as metal bars, metal shutters, and window signage, and installing security features on security cameras on-site. As indicated by the applicant with these added conditions, the MMCID no longer opposes the project. As outlined in your staff report and in the resolution, all the use permit findings can be met. The proposed use has been found to be consistent with the other uses in the vicinity of the proposed project.

The police department has reviewed the project and concurs that the proposed use poses no additional risk to the health, safety, or welfare of the Miracle Mile. Other pawn shops in this area of the city currently experience minimal calls for service, mostly of a non criminal nature. Also, the addition of conditions seven through 10 further ensures the safety of local patrons and residents. For these reasons, staff recommends the planning commission adopt a resolution to find the project is categorically exempt from CEQA and to approve the administrative use permit to establish a 1987 square foot pawnshop in an existing building located at 2002 Pacific Avenue in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions included in the proposed resolution.

Excellent. Okay. Before we move on to any questions for Scott, I would ask if we have any commissioner disclosures at this time. Yes, Vice Mayor?

Yes. I had received a call from the applicant's attorney earlier today, and there was nothing of any magnitude that was discussed other than to let me know that there was a meeting tonight and make sure I'm here.

Yeah, I'm sorry. Yes, Vice President, Commissioner Crowder, hello, sorry. Spit it out Terry.

I almost got a whole new title. Yeah. Promoted. I wanted to also disclose that I attended an event on the mile and the Miracle Mile board did their due diligence, knew who I was and kind of followed me around and was talking behind me so loud enough so I could hear them. So I just wanted to disclose that they did do their due diligence and I've never heard my name whispered so much before in my life. So it's kinda interesting.

Okay. Any other disclosures? I have a disclosure. I did have mister Hakim reach out to me as well and just discuss the proposal. So that is is it. So any questions for staff about the project? Yes. Mister Oates.

I'm sorry. You went by this very quickly, so I just wanted to clarify, because as I age, my hearing ages with me. What you said somebody has withdrawn their opposition as a result of the conditions?

Notified by the applicant that if those added conditions were added to the project that MMCID would officially not oppose the project anymore.

Okay. So the bid the Business Improvement District,

does Yes. That

come That's what we were

Miracle Mile Improvement District, yes. Thank you. Speaker: Can I?

Male Yeah, sure.

Just a follow-up. Did they indicate I believe they have a board, is that correct?

Male Right. So the applicants met with members of the board. Didn't meet with the full Board.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. We'll move on then. Thank you, sir. Okay. So I would invite the applicant, if you could, at this time, Come up, please, Mr. Hakim, and you can present applicant's statement,

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners Mike Hakim, 3414 Brookside Road in Stockton. I'm here tonight to represent the applicant, Brian Perez, who's sitting next to me. With us tonight are Brian and his father, Jose, the operators of the existing store on Wilson Way, which we'll talk about a little bit later. I also have the property owner sitting with us, Andy Largamacino.

By way of brief background, Brian and his father Jose have operated the existing Don Pepe's loan and jewelry on Wilson Way here in Stockton for about eighteen years. And for that eighteen years, they've been very successful, and they want to open a second store in Stockton. They chose the Miracle Mile because there's RDA Jewelry and Loan downtown, and also an additional store in North Stockton, And they felt that the mile basically is in the middle of Stockton, in a midtown location. It made sense to think about the Miracle Mile. And so, contacted Andy, and they're in contract to use his facility where the prior check cashing store was located for x number of years.

I think it's important to point out that there have been no significant police calls to the existing Wilson Way store in the eighteen years. In fact, in the last year and a half or so, there have been about eight or nine calls. Seven of them were just for loitering in the general area, nothing to do with the operation of the store. And so, they have not had a significant police activity at that location. As staff indicates, the project description is for a retail store to purchase, sell, and loan money for jewelry, watches, and coins.

All of the loans all of the loans on the jewelry will be for items that are small enough to fit inside the safe in the back of the store. So, there's no large items, there's no guns, there's no camera equipment, there's no computers or musical instruments. It's basically for jewelry items small enough to fit inside the safe that will fit in the back of the store. As I indicated, the prior location had a check cashing store, and it's I think it's supportive and helpful to us that the check cashing store already had a facility relegated to a security provision. In other words, there's a large waiting room in the facility today.

There'll be no modification of that. There's a large waiting room in the facility, and then there's controlled access to the back of the store for jewelry and or transactions. So when you come into the store, there are four windows. Those will still be used for transactions. There's also an opportunity to look at jewelry, come in through a controlled entrance and go through the back into the back of the store.

That's basically the existing program that's there and that will be the program that'll be continued. As we know from the staff report, the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District held a board meeting on March 11. And, I think it's important to point out to you on that meeting on March 11, they voted nine to three, nine to three to not oppose this application. They are not saying they were in favor of it, but they specifically said they were not gonna oppose the application. They wanted the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and to hear the evidence and make a Planning Commission decision on the application for the use permit.

So, their position before you this evening is they're neutral. And, I have a letter, email from Clem Lee that I'll distribute later in the evening, which kind of sets forth some of the detail in that process. I also heard from the Miracle Mile Association that they wanted us to meet with a subcommittee of the board to go through some of the actual operations of the facility and discuss additional conditions of approval. So, on April 20, we met with four or five additional board members to discuss additional conditions for the project. We agreed to all of the conditional additional conditions requested.

And as staff indicated, those are part of your resolution this evening. And those are part of the approval package to have those additional conditions. As indicated, the hours of operation will be ten to six Monday through Saturday. The windows will remain open and clear with no signage and no advertisements. There'll be no bars on the windows, no rolling shutters, and there'll be a full security system to be approved by the police department with cameras inside the facility.

We were also asked about signage. We will use the existing building sign at the corner of the building, and as well as a sign on the awning, and that sign will not say pawn shop. It will say what it says on the existing facility on Wilson Way, Don Pepe's Loan and Jewelry. And that's the name of their corporation, Don Pepe's Loan and Jewelry Incorporated in California, and that's the name and trade style they've been using on Wilson Way for these last eighteen years. In closing, we believe that this new store will be a positive addition to the existing retail mix on Miracle Mile, and specifically because of the operators experience and success on Wilson Way.

As you know, the use permit runs with the land, but part of your analysis tonight in decision making is gonna be to evaluate the credibility of the applicant, the applicant's experience, his success on on where he is on Wilson Way, and use that in your deliberations this evening. The police department was consulted, and they had no opposition and no concerns. And I think that's a very important consideration for you tonight, that your Stockton Police Department, as well as your staff, is recommending approval of the project, even with the opposition. But you'll notice tonight, there's very little opposition. I think you'll hear from one or two people, and that's probably gonna be it.

So the groundswell of opposition that was in your package comes basically when the first announcement came in, there's gonna be a pawnshop. Well, there were visions of massage parlor and different things, and nobody was sure what it meant and who was gonna operate it. And all kinds of concerns and discussion flourished in the community. And that resulted in a groundswell of opposition, which I think we have stepped up responsibly and appropriately to address the concerns raised by the mile. And we've agreed to additional conditions and mitigation conditions that go that go a long way to giving this an opportunity to be something you could consider tonight.

So, we're asking you to follow the positive staff recommendation and to make the findings that are in your application package. I'm gonna hand out an email that Clem Lee had sent me earlier today, and he specifically asked me to present this to the Planning Commission. So I'm gonna hand it to the clerk, and there's 20 copies. There's plenty enough enough for the opposition to have a copy as well. I'll give you a chance to look at that.

I wanna say thank you for letting me speak a little longer than normal. We look forward to questions from the commission. We reserve our brief right of rebuttal, and my client is ready, willing, and able to step up here and answer any questions that you have of me or him or his history on Wilson Way or his or his or his business plan for Miracle Mile. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I would say we could take a moment real quick. We might have some questions right off the bat for you. Do we have any questions for Mr. Hakim, anybody? Yes, Vice I do. Mr.

Hakim, maybe you can answer this or maybe staff will need to answer it. I'm not sure who. But what comes to mind based on what you're saying this business plan is, isn't a true pawnshop from what I'm gathering, from what its intent is and how it's gonna limit itself to loans on jewelry and coins and those type of, those three items basically. So, it's more of a loan shop. That, so why do we call it a pawn shop?

A pawn Yeah. Shop is

has multiple, you know, sells everything, even guns.

Unfortunately, commissioner Sangwonetti, there's only one placeholder or label in the process for entitlement in the city of Stockton and that is we fall into the pawn shop category. See, think it's

considered a loan shop.

Right.

A pawn shop. We are Right. Definition isn't correct.

The the facility on Wilson Way is jewelry and loan, it's not your traditional pawn shop.

No, and I grew up in this neighborhood from the time I was five years old, and that till I'm still there every night visiting my mom. But I mean, I remember the Bijou Theater. I remember head shops in the 60s on Adams Street. I remember all of the facilities that used to be there. Foots variety store was on a corner were by Wirlows and all that area.

And it was a thriving area, a different time, but it was a thriving area. And our goal really is, per our general plan, is to create thriving areas. So I personally struggle with condition seven if we're going to call it a pawn shop. If we're going to call it a loan shop by definition, then I understand using that term. But pawn, I mean pawn shops sell everything. So I struggle with that condition number seven that was imposed by the Miracle Mile Group in that.

We agreed with the subcommittee, Mr. Sangamonetti.

I understand you agreed with it, and I'm giving you my take on the definition of pawn versus a loan shop.

I can appreciate that definition. Okay,

thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, sir. We'll go ahead and and oh, I turned off my occasions. We'll go ask for communications at this time. I know we had communications.

Are you referring to correspondence? Sorry.

Yes. I'm sorry. Yeah. Correspondence. I know we had correspondence that came in as part of it, we did have communications, yes.

Through the chair, we received a public comment earlier today from Mary Elizabeth. I believe that's been entered into the record. Clarifying question, do we need to waive the reading of that comment since it was submitted prior to the 04:00 deadline?

And it's not related to the item?

It was a non agenda comment.

Yeah. Yeah. It's not relating to the item so it would not require the waive?

That's just I'm asking for clarification on that.

Do we need to so the question is do we need to waive Do

we waive reading?

The reading of the general public comment that was received by Mary Elizabeth? Yeah. I think the answer from the clerk is

no. No. No. Okay.

Well then we'll move on to public comment. Do we have any cards? I assume we do.

Mike Hickam.

Oh, hold on a second. A second. On a second. Commissioner Amen? Go back.

Talk to the police officer. Do we do it when it comes back to us?

Yes. Okay. We'll do

it after

that Thank you.

Yeah, absolutely.

I can't get the button. There we go.

I believe Mike Hakim spoke already. So, Kevin Hernandez?

For sure.

Yes. Go ahead. Sorry. One more question.

I would like to acknowledge D. R. Graves is here. I did contact the vice chair. Just wanna acknowledge that I have arrived. How are you guys doing? Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

Good evening, commissioners. It was some time ago I remember sitting up there with you guys. I wanted to read something to you for if there's any just a point of clarification. I was looking up when you guys were talking, and it says, Pepe's Loan and Jewelry Incorporated is a pawn shop in Stockton, California that offers pre owned jewelry, watches, gold. They are known for providing cash loans, buying gold, and having selection affordable jewelry with.

And it goes on and on, but it does it does say that in the Google search. For any of you who have that question, I wanted to point that out. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Kevin Hernandez, and I'm a lifelong resident of Stockton, California as well as a business and property owner within the mile within the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District for sixteen years. It's a long time.

I am here to express a concern regarding the proposed pawn and loan shop used within the Miracle Mile District. To my knowledge, the Miracle Mile has never had a pawn shop used within the district. We do have successful respected businesses such as Avenue Coin exchange and operates a secondhand retail dealers buying and selling coin and jewelry. However, the pawn and loan operation is materially a different land use and a business model. And I wanted to say something about that too.

If this owner ever sold, the use goes with the land. We all know that. If this owner who might be a great guy, not doubting his his his due diligence, but if he ever sold it, it goes to the next person who will be running that pawnshop. So I want you to have that in mind as well. In 2023 sorry.

Over the last several years, the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District, worked collaboratively with the city staff on a proposed zoning and overlay intended to support a long term vision for the district. That vision is centered on creating a walkable, family friendly destination focused on retail shopping, dining, entertainment district, and neighborhood serving businesses that strengthen the overall economic vitality of the corridor. In 2023, a committee of property owners, merchants, and consultants proposed overlay standards to the city at the request of Matt Diaz, who's no longer here with us. But we were able to work with him, and it was great deciding on various aspects of our overlay and what where we're getting at. Then he was a senior planner, with the city.

Since then, we have a continue we've had continued meetings with the staff regarding implementation and future land use direct at the direction of the Miracle Mile. The concern here is not about any single property owner, as I was saying, or legal business. The concern is whether this particular particular use aligns with the long term planning goals of the economic development vision of the Miracle Mile. The city may I?

Yeah.

I'm sorry. I'm almost done. Okay. The city and Miracle Mile stakeholders have repeatedly emphasized the importance of the pedestrian oriented and economically vibrant district along the Pacific Avenue along with pawn, allowing a pawn in loan use at this time appears inconsistent with those stated goals and with the time and tenant mix use of the district that has been actively working on attracting and retaining appropriate use of businesses. Land use decisions shape the long term identity of the market perception of commercial districts.

Once established, those proceedings can influence a future leasing, investment, and recruitment efforts for years to come. For those reasons, I respectfully ask the commission to carefully consider whether this proposed use is truly compatible with the city's and our Miracle Mile stated vision and the Miracle Mile's ongoing revitalization efforts. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Thank you.

Kevin Dugarty.

Welcome.

Good evening, commissioner, chair Hull and commissioners. My name is Kevin Dougherty. I'm a lifelong resident of the Miracle Mile area, and my family and I own several businesses and properties in the Miracle Mile Community Improvement District. I'm here this evening to share my personal perspective regarding long term direction and vitality of the Miracle Mile Corridor. The city, property owners, and local stakeholders are currently investing significant time, capital, and effort into planning the revitalization of the Miracle Mile.

The goal is clear, to restore this corridor to a vibrant, high quality destination that Stockton has historically taken pride in. That vision requires alignment, not just from the city, but from property owners and tenants as well. While we understand the pressure to fill vacancies, the long term success of the district depends on being thoughtful and selective about the types of businesses that are allowed to locate there. The Miracle Mile will only thrive if it attracts patrons who support multiple businesses, customers who dine, shop, and spend time throughout the district. Uses that do not contribute to that ecosystem or that attract a different type of consumer behavior can undermine that momentum and discourage complementary investment.

We've seen a successful model with Lincoln Center, which has been intentional about tenant mix and overall environment. That level of curation has helped create a destination where businesses benefit from one another and customers feel comfortable spending time and money across multiple establishments. In contrast, uses such as PON oriented businesses, while not without merit in other areas, typically do not generate the kind of cross shopping activity that retail and restaurant districts rely on. Their presence can also influence future leasing decisions, signaling to other property owners that tenant quality and compatibility are secondary to occupancy. If that pattern takes hold, it becomes increasingly difficult to attract the types of businesses and customers needed to elevate the district as a whole.

We respectfully encourage the Commission to consider not just individual tenancy approvals, but the cumulative impact of the Miracle Mile's long term identity, economic vitality, and community perception. A rising tide requires shared standards and a commitment to a common vision. Without that, we risk limiting the very progress we all are working to achieve.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

That concludes public comment for this item.

Okay. Do we have a does the applicant want a rebuttal? You're allowed that opportunity.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief. I respect the opposition's opinion, but I sincerely and significantly disagree with them. They presented the same arguments and concerns they presented to the Miracle Mile District Board.

And after a robust and candid debate among all of the board members, they voted nine to three to not oppose the application. And, I think it's important to point out the nine to three vote as against two individuals appearing in opposition to the application tonight. The same arguments and issues were presented to your staff. Your professional staff did their homework, and they're recommending that you can make the findings and you can support the project. Interestingly, that the opposition doesn't spend much time talking about the police department did not respond negatively.

The police department has no opposition to the request. They've done their homework and they've evaluated and taken a look at the operator's activity and history, eighteen years on Wilson Way. He's a good operator. He's earned a good reputation, and he deserves an opportunity to present himself for the mile. This is a use permit.

It's conditional. It can always be revoked by the city if the applicant doesn't live up to the conditions of approval. And I would even suggest an additional condition that there'd be a six month review of the project so we can monitor exactly his opening and his moving in the direction of becoming a member of the mile and make sure that we respond to any issues that come up. So, would respectfully request that you follow the staff recommendation and approve the application, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner Oates, before I bring it back to us, is this a No, I You're done?

I'll wait until.

Okay. Okay. Well, I would actually ask director, we do have a comment for the police. Do you want me to take that? Commissioner Amman wanted

It sounds like Commissioner Amman would like to have police speak. So I think as long as the public hearing remains open, they can come forward and

It'd be appropriate, I think. Yes. You could, sir. We have a question for you.

Good evening. I'm Good a lieutenant for special investigations for Stockton Police Department.

You have the floor, commissioner Ammin.

Hi. How are you? Welcome back. I'm more concerned with, they did bring up the store in Wilson Way. What stats do you have on that that you can

show So Mr. Hakim is correct in his assessment of the current owner at that location. There are minimal calls of service at that location.

And then, I hate to go this far out, but I know it's what's on everybody's mind. Are there pawn shops nearby? There are several nearby, sort of, kinda, I don't know the names of the streets. Is is this a type of business that maybe you may have a little bit more police calls on based on, you know, people going to sell things and and things like that? That's a I think there's a

lot of misinformation out there in regards to these specific locations. Historically, the stats are very low at these low end locations, especially ones that's closest, which I think is a 4,000 block of Pacific Avenue. Yeah. Very low, if any, calls for service at all. Mhmm. So mister Hickam is correct in the assessment that there are very minimal calls at these low end locations. Okay.

Thank you.

I just

wanted to ask about that part.

Do we have one more question, vice chair?

Yeah. Of the Lieutenant. Given that there's a coin and loan, coin jewelry loan store just to the north of this location that's been there some time, is there any calls for service at that one?

No, there is general calls for service on the Miracle Mile, and that's

Loitering, drunkenness, I I mean, I don't worry about those.

As a police department, you shouldn't target if you have a business on that location, as mister Hernandez and a lot of other people do that are in the audience, At times, there's gonna be a call for service that's gonna be in front of your business. However, that doesn't mean that those patrons are from your business, if that makes sense. It could be a 911 call. It could be just a parking complaint. It could be a call for service of any kind that doesn't have to do with the patron that actually is associated with that business. So there are calls for service in that location, none specifically for that current location that the Pawnshop is currently trying to obtain now.

And none for the one of the existing one? Correct.

There are calls for service. I I want to clarify.

There's not robbery calls and so forth Correct. Of that

Any other questions? Well, we have them here. Yes.

I wanted to clarify because from what I understood from the rumblings that I have heard, did the current jewelry loan, pawn shop, whatever it's labeled as, did they not have three break ins within the past couple years?

The information that we have, no. Okay. So and no. I know there was we reserved information that there was someone on the commission that advised there might be complaints. We're unaware of the complaints that came in. No one at least contacted us, and with the specific information we have for this location, again, there are calls to service. I'm not trying to say there are none, but they are not specific for these locations.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sure.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Oh, I'm sorry.

What I'm still I had

a question for the applicant.

Okay. We can we can bring why don't we bring the applicant back up again? I guess we have a question while we're open from Commissioner Oates.

So the is this mirroring the app the store on Wilson Way or does it differ?

Thank you. I'm sorry I'm a little difficult to hear you. That's Try to repeat the question please.

Does this location limiting it to jewelry and coins is that what the Wilson Way location does only also?

Yes. Yeah. So it's the they've that's the model that they use on Wilson Way. They would use the same model on the Miracle Mile. It's watches, jewelry and coin. Only items that could fit in their safe at night when they lock up, they put the items away in the safe. That's the only things that they would loan money on. I

mean, you know, there's a gold statue in Washington right now that, you know, maybe somebody could pawn eventually.

I guess. Any other any other questions? Well

of fitting Okay. Your

Well, I think if we don't have anything else, I will go ahead and bend the gavel and I will bring it back close above the carrying portion and bring it back to my fellow commissioners. And this would be the time for questions or comments. Yes, Commissioner Oates, I think you're first. Okay.

Thank you very much. I am mindful of the concerns, I am mindful of the I don't live terribly far from the American Mile, and I occasionally walk up there too, but I also don't want to discriminate, if you will, against a business because of a public perception that does not match reality, and I'm satisfied by what the police department said. I would I don't love this type of business on the Miracle Mile, but it does meet all of the requirements. We do have a good operator. It was a payday check cashing location that is now vacant, and so we're potentially moving up a step.

I would ask for a couple of things that the condition regarding the six month review be included. And then I would also because I appreciate that the work that is going on for the Miracle Mile traffic and purification project is ongoing and not quite settled, but my concern in regards to walkability, etcetera, would be that while I appreciate that the windows will be clear, is there a way we can that they need to be cleaned? I mean, I don't want people to be able to walk by. Here they have this beautiful project and then you have this building where the windows are not broke, but they look dingy. I mean can we require regular cleaning or something so that the front of the building looks fresh and compatible with other properties?

So, through the chair, and I'll defer to legal, there's already property maintenance standards in the code. So, if something is to fall beneath minimum standards code enforcement could cite. There is the added condition about the transparency of those windows that they will remain clear and visible to folks on the outside and also public safety as I imagine why they wanted that condition If you wanted to add a specific language.

If it's part of the code there's I enforcement opportunity for property just happened to be in Tracy the other day and they have a very vibrant mix of businesses, but there are a few that make you think twice about going on that block and I don't want that to be happening to the Miracle Mile because I do think everybody is working on that. The other thing in regards to I have to pull it up here. The project shall be limited in scope to the purchase, sale and provision of loans for jewelry, watches and coins. Other goods shall not be sold on-site. So that we make sure that if at some point in their time they decide that they want to expand their Wilson Way location to other items and they've agreed not to sell them at the location on the Miracle Mile, but they would put them in the lobby or whatever to promote them.

I don't want to clutter up. So I just want to be clear that when we say sale not be sold or displayed.

Do you have any comment on that Director?

That would need to be a part of the motion once you take action that you would want the if you motion for approval with the added language or condition number seven of or displayed on-site. I

wanted to just say that I it's a balancing act and because conditional use permit, so therefore they have to maintain. So even if it does change hands and they don't maintain, if the new business doesn't isn't a good actor, this can be revoked. There

is

a six month review. The police department has has satisfied my concerns about that. And I think the diversity of businesses and considering what was there before, it is not inconsistent with the long term plan, for the Miracle Mile. And so, I am inclined at this point to support the project. Thank you. Commissioner Crowder?

Thank you, Chair. Okay, so I don't have any questions. As somebody who We all know, I am probably one of the most transparent people you will probably ever meet, brutally transparent and honest. As somebody who has been to and used the services of a pawnshop and a cashing payday place, I will tell you I would much rather be in a pawnshop than a cash payday place. And and also, I would like to also point out if it helps at all for anybody who has concerns, When selling of things or purchasing, let me restate that, of like coins and things of that nature, we have kids that are getting into these kind of things.

And I personally am raising one of them. And it's a great opportunity to teach our children. And so, I am And I frequent the mile. You guys, I love the mile. I live in District 5 and I will travel to District 4 every weekend and I will visit every store on that mile.

I have flier those stores, I have gone into every place. I'm not going to lie, my favorite place is, you know, I've got one that's my favorite. But, I will say that I don't think that this as long as this shop follows the conditions of the Miracle Mile, I don't think it's going to hinder anything, and I say that with confidence because I walk by a whole lot of vacant units on that street. They are disheveled, they need help. I have asked business owners, What's that?

Can we not do something about that? So, and I have gone by the Wilson Way shop and I will say that being able to maintain a shop of this nature on Wilson Way with limited to minimal to almost none police response is quite an achievement. I know what happens on Wilson Way, I think we all do. It's an interesting stretch, full of its own character. So, and I do appreciate and I do I will be seconding Commissioner Oakes or display motion.

I believe that that's a very strong statement. I would think though a six month review might be a little early because you're just getting started. You probably may not even have everything together completely. I would almost like to suggest if we could do a twelve month to see that all conditions have been met and that we don't have loitering and we don't have calls for service and things of that nature. Because I think six months, they're still in the red.

They're still trying to build. And like I said, I had plenty of humans following me on Artlet, all kinds. And for the most part, when I went into stores and whatnot for people who already that I know personally, I only came across one that was not happy. Other than that, they were like, please get rid of the payday loan, sign, make it go away. And, I am inclined to also support this project.

I appreciate diversity and I appreciate the mile, It's gorgeous. And, I'm telling you, my goal is to give every district a Miracle Mile. I want to use Miracle Mile as a template. I don't think Lincoln Village, that's specific. That's a whole different type and class of human over there, you know. And some of us feel a little uncomfortable in Lincoln Village. I don't frequent Lincoln Village. So, I will also be inclined to support this project.

Thank you. Vice Chair Singuletti?

Have a As question more to you know, and I've already said, I don't agree with the definition, and I will support this project and that and I probably agree with my fellow commissioner about twelve months as far as review goes for the purposes she stated, okay? And that I don't agree with condition condition seven, but they've agreed to that. And so, I'm going to support that with Commissioner Oaks's statement about display because I think that clarifies that a little bit better. But, with the question I have for staff is, is we keep hearing about the Miracle Mile District. And yeah, I'm sure they have and I'm aware that they have their own district.

I mean, mom's house gets notifications and everything. But, we talk about an overlay district. I'm not aware that the city of Stockton's GP has an overlay for this area. And if it does, can you clarify that for me?

So the general plan identifies neighborhoods and Miracle Mile is identified as a neighborhood. In terms of an overlay district, that is a zoning function and overlay district does not currently exist for the

I didn't mobile think so. Because there are other areas within our GP that are overlay areas.

Such as the channel overlay.

That's right. And so, technically that doesn't exist. So, to be using that term isn't correct for something of this nature where we're taking this on as a planning commission issue. And I just want to be clear, we this area does not exist in an overlay, technically speaking. There's a Miracle Mile district, and that has worked with a former planner of Stockton to develop some standards that would kind of be typical that you would include in an overlay district, but it's never gone before this board or the city council to be adopted.

So, we don't have an overlay district to deal with in that which is actually an important fact regarding we keep hearing about overlay and the conditions and stuff in that. So, the only conditions we have are our current development code that we're here to address here tonight, And that, along with an agreement that takes that would take, you know, have some credence to it with the Miracle Mile District voting nine-three to basically be neutral and not oppose the project. So, that's our technical background of it. Along with the police is report, I see no problems with this facility. Like I said, the only problem I see is our definition of pawn because this isn't a true pawn shop.

And that's a code issue. We'll discuss that at a later date.

That's a different meeting, I think. Yeah. Thank you, Vice Chair, for your comments. Commissioner Graves, you're next, I believe.

Thank you. I believe I walked in a little bit late, but I did see the item on the agenda. My question is they have to leave the original sign at the top or those signs that are displayed?

They'll change it to their name.

Okay.

And use those two sign placements they have.

Okay, they don't have to leave these banners hanging up, Loans and other, okay cool. That was, I just wanted to make sure they're being treated fairly and all that kind of stuff. But mainly, you already said what I was gonna say, Vice Chair, the people in that district already voted nine three, the police approve it. I don't see the problem why we can't move forward. I mean, it seems like a good plan to me and we can review it in a year and go from there.

Thank you, Commissioner Grace. Commissioner Aman.

Yeah, before coming in here tonight, was kind of on the fence with this. I do agree with the, first I said six months, but I think a year review. I do agree with that. That way the board, they can kind of go and make sure, just keep the business on its toes. Anything that's gonna happen, they'll be able to hopefully nip it in the bud.

And, you know, like you said, it's a use permit. So, if something's gonna happen within those twelve months, then there's options that they do have there. I know that there is going to be some wonderful changes coming to the Miracle Mile. They've been fighting for for a very long time. All of us have grown up going there and I also do have an issue with it being called pawn if it's not a pawn.

I know pawn shop is one thing, and I don't know too much about that, but I really have an issue with that. If it's just going to be not pawning, then I would wish it would be called what it is, Loan shop. Yeah, just a loan shop, simple. I do, I was a little interested in the nine to three vote. I wasn't really expecting to hear that of all the letters that I read through.

But I obviously, you know, they met and they came up with agreements and I hope that the board is going to hold them to those changes are gonna be made. I hope that they do keep an eye on that because I view Miracle Mile as a place where there's a lot of foot traffic and you have events there, people are going in and out of the shops. I didn't really think of a shop like this being where you're having an event and people are just gonna be drifting in and out of a loan shop. When you're having the chalk thing or different things that are happening there. I'm not saying it's not gonna happen, but I think I'm just viewing this as a different type of business.

But I do appreciate the fact that they did meet with the board to try to come up with a solution. They have met all of the things so far that have been asked of them. And I may not wholeheartedly agree with it or agree with the name of it or whatever, but I think that time will tell. They have a year to prove that they belong there. And I'm hoping that if something does go to the left, that the board there will hold them accountable and make sure that they're on the right path so it doesn't change Miracle Mile and what it is and I hope that you do become part of the community there and make sure that you're working with the board there.

And that's what I'm hoping to see when I go to the Miracle Mile. So, I do at this part, more likely will probably support it.

Thank you. Vice Chair Singletti, did you have a

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to Okay. Approve the CEQA exemption and to approve staff's approval resolution with two additions to the conditions. Condition seven would be the display to include and display, in that. And, the other condition would be a new condition that there'd be a twelve month review of this use permit from the time of approval.

Can I, sorry, through the chair? Just when I'm hearing the word display. I I think I understand the intent is that we don't want to display items that could be bought. But, I worry that that could also prevent displaying like Christmas decorations in the window at Christmas time or that it could be interpreted in a way that's broader than it's intended to be.

I understand. So you've I got a better

was gonna bring it back to you to consider.

I'll change that then, okay. So, the or display of any items for sale beyond what's allowed to be sold.

It could be of merchandise. That usually infers

Yeah. The display of merchandise would would added the clarification I'm looking for.

You. You don't have to long wind it like I did.

Perfect. Thank you.

Okay. I've asked one point clarification. Commissioner Graves came in, in between, he missed it. So I assume you're okay voting No. On Okay. So you're able to hear that. And I didn't know if there was an issue. This is a council question probably.

I'm sorry.

You missed the first review of the actual report. Miller a

little bit. But if he's read it and he understands what's going on, there shouldn't be any issues.

Yes. I I I think if if he's, yeah, been informed on the project, you've heard a good chunk of the discussion, I think it's fine to to vote on this.

So my motion stands

Okay.

With the correction of merchandise display.

Got it. Okay. Well then I would ask for a second.

I will second.

Okay. Everyone vote please.

Motion passes seven zero.

Thank you. Yes.

Appeal rights. Any party that wishes to appeal this decision may do so within ten days of the Commission's decision to pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.100.20. And we'll move on to new business, is Item 6.1, which is our 2025 annual compliance review for the development agreement. Hello, welcome sir. How are you doing?

Good, thank you. Good afternoon Chair Ho, fellow members of the Planning Commission, Ansel Hossett, Senior Planner. And we're going to be discussing Development Agreement Annual Review. A Development Agreement or DA is a legal contract between a local jurisdiction and usually a developer. DEAs are usually used for large projects that develop over multiple years.

The Planning Commission decides the annual compliance and staff will inform the applicants of your decision. Annual reviews are required by state law, city code, and DA requirements. In 2025, the city had 10 DA's. This is the location map. Cannery Park initiated in 2004 with Holman Investors LLC for twenty years.

It is roughly it was extended to expire in 2034. It is roughly four fifty acres. They are constructing single family homes. Final maps have been recorded and Holman Road was open to traffic to 8 Mile Road. Compliant.

Delta Cove initiated in or took effect in 2023 with Dean Spanos and Dee Spanos Berberian, co trustees of the Alex and Faye Spanos Family Trust for fifteen years with the possibility of a five year extension. It expires in 2038 and is about three sixty acres. In 2025, the applicant requested to assign the DA to a new entity and staff is working with the applicant on that request compliant. Mariposa Industrial initiated in 2023 with Greenlaw Development LLC for ten years with the possibility of a five year extension. It expires in 2033 and is around 218 acres.

Construction has begun as you can see from the aerial photography here and the applicant estimates that Walmart the Walmart project will be completed next year compliant. Mariposa Lakes took effect in 2008 with PCCP Mariposa Lakes LLC for either twenty years from the first building permit or roughly twenty five years. It expires in 2033 and is nearly 3,800 acres. The applicant submitted an annexation agreement by the deadline provided by the commission last year. Compliant.

Port Of Stockton took effect in 2012 with the Port Of Stockton for thirty years and expires in 2042. It is about 2,300 acres. There have been 30 major development projects entitled in the last fourteen years with some still pending. The port continues to develop and operate consistently compliant. Sanctuary initiated in 2008 with Sanctuary by Group E LLC for either twenty years from the first building permit or roughly twenty five years.

It expires in 2033 and is about 1,900 acres. The applicant engaged with a flood control engineer and the reclamation district compliant. Spanos Park West took effect in 2008 with AG Spanos Construction Inc for twenty years. It had it was extended to expire in 2032 and is about 200 acres. Major infrastructure has been completed and most parcels are developed.

Projects have been submitted compliant. Saint Joseph's initiated in 2023 with the Port City Operating Company LLC for twenty years with the opportunity of two eight year extensions. It expires in 2043 and is roughly 18 acres. Projects were submitted, building construction and demolition have not yet completed, compliant. University Park initiated in 2003 with the Center Site Authority and Group e commercial company for twenty five years and expires in 2028.

It is nearly 103 acres and they have remodeled existing buildings and constructed new ones compliant. Westlake Villages took effect in 2004 with the Spanos Family Partnership and AG Spanos for fifteen years. It was extended to expire in 2040. It is around 690 acres. They are constructing single family homes.

The recreation center and community park are completed and a minor amendment to the master development plan was approved, compliant. Crystal Bay is portion of the Westlake Village's DA. This property changed ownership recently and is described separately. The property has upgrade infrastructure for the project. There has been discussion about a revised preliminary concept plan compliant.

This summarizes the twenty twenty five compliance recommendations. And, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a motion to accept the twenty twenty five annual DA compliance review as described in the staff report and direct staff to notify the applicants in writing. That completes staff's presentation. Are there any questions for staff?

Yeah. Commissioner Crowder?

This is actually a question for legal, I believe. I do have a disclosure. I am contracted with KIPP, not through University Park but through Conway. So I don't know, does that I'm contracted for employment through the rest of the school year but it's with the Conway KIPP and not with the KIPP University Park But they are part of this presentation. Yeah.

I mean the question that we have to look at is whether or not your decision here is gonna have any financial impact on you and it seems like it probably would not. So I I don't see a a conflict.

Okay. I just wanted to make sure that I was

Commissioner Oates?

Thank you. In your letter to mister Rupel dated 12/05/2025 regarding Spanos Park West, there are five items you requested, and the response did not include those five items and yet you found them compliant. Could you just please

Thank you. That's a good question, Commissioner Oates. The letter that you're describing is the letter to Spanos Park West agent miss Ruppel or

Unfortunately the attachment isn't numbered so

I understand.

Attachment c.

So the we we have staff has been in discussion with the agent for Spanos Park West over those items and since that submittal was provided, the letter that she provided, we've been working with her on receiving that information. The some of the items we are still working with the city staff, including the city attorney's office, are working with the agent on receiving that information.

So, they're not compliant?

No, I didn't mean that they are not compliant. No, no, no. The information that was requested, we are still working with them on receiving all of the information that was requested. So they have provided information to staff, but they are working with the city attorney's office on one of the requests. They had a donation that they had stated in their letter that they had provided, and they're working with the city attorney's office right now on getting it.

Alright. So I don't know who this So I'm a little concerned about this one because Mhmm. You asked for this information Mhmm. And you haven't gotten it and it's before us. So, I mean, if we say, well, we've said they're compliant and they don't provide the information, what's your recourse?

And I just think there's a sort of a level of respect and responsiveness here that I just want to be, you know, if I don't think you're asking for this information for fun. I think you're asking for this information as a reasonable request to proof that they are in fact doing what what their agreement said they were doing. And I don't I'm not saying that they haven't. I'm just saying that they haven't provided you with the information, and I'm hesitant, therefore, to say okay.

So the Spanos Park West over the compliance portion

I read their long, long response as well. Yes. But it still didn't address your I mean, and and it was like, yeah, yeah, yeah, but what about?

It's a very good question. I appreciate you bringing it up. Their expert the expiration date for Spanos Park West is in 2032. So that requirement of the high density units is not bring them out of compliance for this year of 2025. They still have until 2032 and to complete their all of their conditions. The donation that was asked for documentation, I believe is what I asked in that letter

Yes.

From their agent, and they have provided documentation. They're working with the city attorney's office right now to confirm that information. We I don't believe that sufficient information has been provided to confirm the donation as of yet, but that does not make the development agreement non compliant for the year of 2025.

All right. Just as a matter of course, I just think we should set an example that if information's requested, it ought to be provided in a timely fashion. That's my

Absolutely. I agree with you. And, we have been working with the agent from the Hispanos companies.

Any of that is unreasonably bureaucratically onerous. I thought it was a reasonable request and thank you for the clarification.

Yeah, you're welcome.

Vice Chair,

you had a question?

Yes, I have a question about, I understand the lengthy responses. Sometimes I'd rather see some length better responses. I think we've talked about that before with time extensions and everything. But we have a very short email response from one of these DA holders, Mariposa Lakes. In that, that says that, you know, they were ten to eleven days before their time that we gave them ran out.

They submitted on October 14, and then the deadline was October 25. That was one of the responses. And then there was a next sentence that's for the next item response was is that they're working on their utility planning and planning in that. So, what is that going to be next year? We're still working on the planning?

I mean, this project has been around one of the original DAs, okay? And it just keeps going and going, and it's so massive in that. And the utility cost for that is going to be so great. This hurts us from our hurts us when we start talking about units because they can be counted as units for future developments. That's an approved project, although not annexed in that.

But there's no tentative map, there's no utility planning that's been submitted to my knowledge. So, I think there should be a new condition put on them that we have to have some better information come by next year's time, a compliant time, and that they need to submit some more information. They've been out of compliance from day one.

Director, I think you had a response.

Through the chair. So, I would request, I can't agree or deny the statement that they've been out of compliance since day one. All I can go off is that the information that I have here and they were deemed compliant or they're currently compliant because they did meet the additional request by the Planning Commission last year to submit that annexation agreement.

Okay. Not disagreeing with Okay.

But I

think that, you know, there needs to be, instead of two line item that says this is what they did and working on, there needs to be a little better explanation to keep continuing on and to let this project just fester longer and longer and I mean when it takes up our numbers.

I think your concerns are valid and very much noted. However, D and correct me if I'm wrong Anson, The DA language does not have specific milestones or time frames that need to be met in terms of meeting development by certain times. So, because the way it's written, we don't have like legal teeth to say, we want to see something by June '27. Obviously, lessons learned and as we move forward our DAs are stronger and written better. But this one, to your point, and you're absolutely right, is one of the older ones, 2008 if I'm not mistaken.

It wasn't written that way. It was written much differently than what we would write today. However, with that, I think we're happy to continue our communications with the developer to encourage activity.

This is one of those projects that needs more bureaucratic input, if you want to say. And that so that we get so that all the effort that's been put into it either materializes or goes away.

Understood. But they do have certain rights afforded to them through the DA.

Yeah. They are

locked know some of what's taken place in the past with this.

But we understand your sentiment. Thank you.

You, Pastor. Any other questions? Okay. Any other questions? Concerns? Okay. There we go. Do we have any commissioner comments about this item? Or do I have a motion potentially on this item? I don't see everyone running for their buttons. No one? No one has a motion? I'm

not running for modulate.

Language. You accept the report? Yeah.

I think that's acceptable. What

language you need for for for me to make the motion to I'm trying to pull up the agenda. You can the right.

So, motion would be Yes.

Accept the recommendation from staff to accept the annual development agreement compliance review and project determination, and for the staff to notify the applicants of the compliance determinations.

Do I have a second?

I have a question. Oh. Okay. If this motion didn't pass, that means all of the DAs wouldn't be recognized as compliant for this year, in that, what would be the city's position?

Can we stop a motion to ask that question? That's a council question.

Yeah, think you can, there hasn't been a second on the motion So, yet or a yes, a question can still be entertained.

So, my question stands.

So, I think I would need to speak with legal because the municipal code states that the Planning Commission is tasked with the review for compliance on an annual basis. If the planning commission does not accept the report, I'd have to look at how the code language is written because it's not an approval per se. It's a report on compliance. So I I don't know how this how it would stand at that point.

Would you like to take a five minute recess? We could take a look at the municipal code and have a discussion with the attorney and

I think it does garner looking at a few Sure. If you require an answer at this moment.

You want it at this you

want this Yeah. Don't know an answer what happens. We should know what happens if something like this doesn't Certainly. Gets denied here.

Okay. We'll take a five minute recess.

It's whatever. Jewelry and loans Oh. LLC or Inc, then that's what they are. That will bring us back.

It will bring us back authority here. So do we have a response?

Yes. Yes.

Have still have a motion on the table. Right? Yes. Now a second, but we'll get that Okay. Clarification.

So the question from vice chair was essentially what happens if there's a finding of non compliance?

It's not finding.

Excuse me.

There are

no finding. If there is a

vote basically right.

If it's a vote not to approve. Right. Because there's no findings to this.

So the code provides that you can determine non compliance. However, a determination of non compliance would need to be specific to the project. So I would say if you're going to find a project non compliant then you'd need to go project by project and determine which ones are and which ones are not. For the projects that are non compliant, the commission needs to articulate a basis of substantial evidence that the applicant has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the agreement. So

There's the attorney in you coming up. Okay. I'm. That's valid. But find there are no findings in this type of motion.

Findings through the chair you are correct. Findings of fact are not a part of your decision of deeming whether something is compliance or not. But what you judge for compliance is whether or not adequate evidence

Substantial

evidence. Substantial evidence has been provided. So because it is a duty of the planning commission as stipulated in the code to deem something compliant, if you don't want to accept the report in its entirety to my go colleagues line by line and deem it that way is another option for you.

Okay. So, we still have an open motion. This was a good

exercise to understand how we would do something of this nature.

Chair?

Yes.

Before you call for a second. Okay. Can I ask a question real quick? Yeah. Sure. I'm so sorry. But

already opened up Pandora's box. No pun intended.

Well, you know. To vice chair's point, so I'm I'm trying to wrap my brain around this. This is a lot to try and wrap my poor little brain around today. Technically, if I'm not mistaken because and please challenge me if I am misunderstanding. Because of the I'm gonna say this word and I I apologize.

Archaic wording of the initial DA and we have learned our lesson and we have gotten more detailed in our wording, they would be able to pass compliancy because technically they are. Am I correct in my understanding? And they could challenge us or like Okay. So through the chair.

So just for the sake of clarity, we are discussing number four on the list, Mariposa Lakes, which is one of the oldest DAs on the record. And as with time, as we all grow and learn, we do better and better each year. Okay. Putting that out there. The language in that particular agreement does not have milestones that say within year five you have to do x, y, z. That is more common with more modern agreements. So they are currently compliant because the condition that was laid before them within the agreement was to have an annexation agreement. That is what they did. So last year it was non compliant because they had not yet done it. They have since completed that, worked with our legal team, they are in compliance.

And because there are no other specified actions or milestones at this point in time, they remain compliant and they are locked in for the term of their agreement. So they are locked into certain rights. That's what a DA is for. It gives you certain rights and assurances in exchange usually for a community benefit to the city. It's a whole thing. So they're in compliance in terms of the the way the agreement is written.

Can we reword

A d a can be amended, but it opens the whole thing back up. And it's a whole new negotiation process and Okay. There's a whole process that that

requires It's Pandora's box.

Yeah. It needs to go to council. That would be especially if it's a a major amendment to a DA. There's minor and major.

Okay. Yeah. Pandora's box three point o. Two point o.

I believe that if it were to be an amendment both the city and the applicant would have to be in agreement with any amendments that go through, and that's how these DAs work is that both sides have to agree on them. And once it's an agreement that is set in

The applicant would have to agree to amend We

cannot arbitrarily Okay. Change a

because it's both sides came to an agreement.

A binding agreement.

Yes. Got you. Thank you so much.

Sorry. Okay. So, I'm nervous to go back to the vice chair, but

I'm I'm in

Panama. You've already caused this mayhem.

I know,

right. So, yes, you're you're just causing mayhem. That's the defense we're getting. So, but go ahead. Go ahead, vice Just

so we all get a little bit I I don't wanna I'm not going to take it any further, but anyway. Technically speaking, if we want to talk technically in that, I think you're correct, okay? However, if I wanted to or this commission wanted to oppose it on the ground of substantial evidence, the evidence hasn't been presented for us to review. All we have is a report that says these are in compliance based upon these letters. What we don't have as part of our package is the individual agreements that were initiated for us to review and study in that.

So, technically, we would have to have those in that to we could make the argument that they're not substantially there is not substantial evidence because we do not have that information before us to review prior to this. If

if I may suggest a friendly amendment to that language, it would not necessarily be that they're not compliant. It would be that you would want to continue it because you require additional information for your consideration.

Before us.

Yeah.

I don't know if you'd wanna deem applicant, I don't know if you'd wanna deem DA's non, like deny their compliance status.

Deny the report, not their status. Deny the tonight, okay.

You could do that. You could deny the report And there

is no substantial evidence before us.

You would direct staff to bring it back.

Yeah.

Yes.

That's one way but we don't have to direct you to bring it We just leave it hanging. I I would to bring it back as an item. We don't have to direct you to bring it back.

Well, it depends on how you motion it.

Alright. Well, we have a motion.

Said I'm not gonna take enough of Okay. And I could debate this all night,

Stephanie. And I'm not trying to be difficult. It's more for clarity and for the record.

Yeah. Vice chair, Sanghuenity, if in the future you want to have a copy of the DA language No. We have those available?

That's the problem we have.

Okay. I was like, but in the future, for future development agreement, annual reviews, we could add that as attachment. Some of those

just wanna see number four as agreement.

We we can get you we can get you a copy of that. We can get you a copy of that. Absolutely. And, if you wanted in the future, those as an attachment, that could be something that we could look into?

They will be attached in the future.

Sounds like mayor's Pose O'Lakes needs to kinda get on the on the ball. So hopefully, staff will be on them a little harder for next year. But I'm still now waiting approval of a second on this motion. Can I get that? Or who made the motion? You made the motion. I lost make it. The motion. You made the motion. I'm gonna second it because I have that ability to do that. So I'm gonna second that we approve this motion. So everyone vote, please.

I'm not gonna kill everybody else.

Motion passes, seven zero.

All right. Okay. We learned a lot tonight.

You've got your civic lesson tonight I out in the see some young kids. Tonight, you've got a civics lesson in how bureaucracy and government actually works. I hope you all took good note of that.

Okay. We we gotcha, vice chair. Thank you for that civics lessons for our youth out here. We do have probably no unfinished business, but I'm gonna ask. I don't see the unfinished business. We do probably have reports and communications from the director, I presume.

Thank you. Just a brief update. So we had city council this week where a master property tax sharing agreement was approved by the council. That will address the requirement to have tax sharing agreement in place in order to have annexations into the city limits. So the next stage now is it's at the county's court where they will be working with special districts and taking it to the board of supervisors in accordance with taxation and revenue code section 99.

They also, the city council also approved an individual project specific tax sharing agreement for the La Barron project and the Thornton Road fast food restaurant project. They were both approved by council back in November. Those two were just brought together since they've been waiting for a number of months to be able to proceed with annexation application. So that agreement was also approved by the council and is going to be forwarded to the county for their consideration. So stay tuned for that. Also

That's the

same tax sharing agreement, same number?

The terms of the LaBaron Thornton agreement mirrored the one for Murray Ranch that was approved in March. So it does not have the special district cut out, but it is the sixtyforty, ninetyten setup as before. And then the new master agreement is the ninetyten for base, sixtyforty for incremental, but then it includes a 2.5% cut out for special districts that are impacted by detachment as a result of the annexation project. And so that hopefully will be going to the board soon. Also at council, the ADU ordinance that this planning commission recommended was adopted.

That is for consistency with state law. We did some updates to the definition of ADU, JADU, and some cleanup in that language. So I believe the effective date is thirty days. So that will be on the books here shortly. And the Community Development Department will be presenting a presentation in June, possibly July, depending on budget sessions regarding development process and generally what CDD is and what we do. This is part of our emphasis on letting people know what we do, what services we provide, and also celebrating our successes. We do a lot in our department and I think folks don't always know what departments do.

So,

is one of the directions from the city manager's office to help educate folks and to let us celebrate a little bit of what we do and let people know what we're here for. So, looking forward to making that presentation. That concludes my comments. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Fantastic. Any questions? Yes, Mr. Graves?

Yeah, that's glad we get to acknowledge you guys and all the great work you do. Is there a way we have a lot of young students and young people in the crowd today? I am the head football coach of a high school. I would love for us to possibly put something together for high school students, particularly my my team, and just introducing them to the world of politics. You know? Maybe one day, I don't we could organize it outside of that, but I'm you enrolled me into your vision, so thank you. Oh, thank Just wanna let you know that.

Thank you. Alright. If we don't have any other questions, we'll move on to commissioner comments if there's no other questions. Is that these are commissioner comments or these are questions? These are comments. Okay. Yes. Commissioner Crowder.

First of all, as always, I wanna thank you guys, and I would like to remind vice chair that you must close the box after you open the box. So you have to say, I close it.

Just say. I'll remember that.

That might be what I'm doing next.

I did want to just kind of openly make an acknowledgment over the weekend. I I was I'm gonna try and do this without crying. I was invited to celebrate the life of Adeline Sukatan, who I don't think anybody in here would remember her. But she was a planning employee for seventeen years with the city of Stockton before she retired. She came from Riverside and then came to Stockton in the planning department.

So I just wanted to acknowledge her and she meant a lot to me. The whole Sukatan family means a lot to me. She is also one of the I'm gonna probably misquote this and I'm gonna get a phone call later. She did she she used to hold the little Manila meetings in her home when they were first starting, and she was a huge community presence. So I just wanted to acknowledge that she is a City of Stockton family member and just acknowledged her celebration of life.

Other than that, the Miracle Mile art lit was exciting and it was amazing and we all know I love my Miracle Mile even though it's not mine. I will get one in District 5 sooner or later or at least District 6. It's like, need it closed. And I really do believe that we need a more walkable areas in Stockton. So I want to appreciate the Miracle Mile and all the work that they do to make that a beautiful and fun street with all of their events and their stores and their friendliness and all the work that District 4 puts into making that happen.

Other than that, thank you.

Thank you. Vice Chair.

I want to recognize our director for her great job she did with the tax sharing agreement. I know she was a major player in that, and so I just want everybody up here to know that she did a fabulous job, that it's been a long time coming that somebody got the right agreement for the city of Stockton and the county didn't get over on us and that.

Thank you. It was a team effort. DCM, Will Crew, and Chief Carr,

All of you.

CFO Gilbert Garcia.

And special thanks to you because I know you were instrumental in coming up with that district cost sharing for detachment.

Thank you. Commissioner Amin.

Okay. So, bear with me because I have something that I want to read.

Oh, geez.

I'm kind of glad there's some young folks in here and I'm just going to take this opportunity to say this now, especially after going through what we just voted on. Going through it with a fine tooth comb. And something stuck out to me, so there's something I would like to say and hopefully will be here and leave this building. While I understand the legal requirement for the Planning Commission to review conformity with the 2040 general plan, I cannot ignore the continuing pattern of infrastructure investment that appears heavily concentrated in the North And Northwest. Stockton, particularly along eight mile home in Lower Sack Thornton Highway 99, and the edge of county boundaries.

This is where much of Stockton's Greenfield housing expansion, master plan communities, commercial expansions, and infrastructure extensions are occurring. And also in Trinity Parkway, Brookside, Spanos, and so on. For years, South And Southeast Stockton residents have dealt with deteriorating roads, aging infrastructure, drainage concerns, neglected commercial corridors, and a lack of meaningful reinvestment. Yet, we continue to see major growth oriented projects, subdivisions, expansions, and infrastructures support directed toward greenfield development areas in North Stockton. Some not even completed and have years and years to finish their projects.

My concern is not about growth itself, but that Stockton is in need of housing, economic opportunity and infrastructure investment in South Stockton as well. My concern is balance and equity. We continue approving large scale residential expansions, new subdivisions, extension after extensions with no progress of those sites at all. Roadway extensions and development and supporting improvements. That's what I've seen over this past year.

Meanwhile, many South Stockton neighborhoods still lack adequate road repairs, modern infrastructure upgrades, neighborhood serving commercial reinvestment, and sufficient housing revitalization strategies. We need beautiful parks. We see beautiful parks in some of these instances, schools, and other amenities that come with these new developments that we are lacking. Residents in older parts of the city are asking why basic infrastructure repairs continue to lag while the city expands forward and outward. I also remain concerned that much of the approved growth continues to prioritize low density expansion rather than strategically investing in infill revitalization and housing opportunities in existing underserved communities.

As commissioners, we have responsibilities to ask whether our capital priorities truly reflect equitable citywide investments and unintentionally widen disparities between North Stockton and South and Southeast side of our city Before continuing to support long range infrastructures, what I would like to see is a stronger commitment towards South Stockton infrastructure rehabilitation, more balanced geographic investment, clearer timelines for roadways, utility modernization in other neighborhoods, and a great focus on infill housing and economic revitalization in historically underserved areas. Growth should benefit the entire city, not just one area or the edges of it. The long term health of Stockton depends not only on where we grow next, but on whether we are willing to reinvest in those communities that help build this city in the first place. So, I hope all of those upcoming potential builders, anyone listening to me now, will please stop and think where we want to start our roots next. Everyone dreams of being a homeowner.

South Stockton and East Stockton want to be part of those plans as well. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, appreciate it. Any other comments? I will add a few comments. Often, we're up here and we don't we vote on things that we don't ever see actually get built. And so that can be frustrating. I certainly agree with my fellow commissioner in that regard as far as obviously getting more building in South Stockton. I can't disagree with that. Can't disagree with that at all, obviously. But I did happen to drive by just by chance. This is not residential, but it's a commercial project that we did happen to just pass on Wilson Way, which obviously is still a fairly distressed part of Stockton, I would say, most of us would agree to with.

And they're building this this new car wash. I was shocked that it's actually going up. So it's nice to see an area that hasn't always benefited from a lot of new new business. I don't think there are any other car washes in that area that I'm aware of. So I think it's nice to see something that we actually vote on that we can see actually come to fruition. So that is nice little bonus if you happen to wanna go by, you can see they're actually building it. I've never seen one happen. Scott and I talked about that that I haven't seen something happen that fast before since I've been on the commission, so it was nice. Would've been nice if it was, you know, housing, but it's it's not. At least it's something that we did that came to fruition.

So I do wanna thank the staff. These are always challenging. We're always pushing the envelope, but I think that's I agree with my commissioner, Ahmed, that it's our job to kinda push the envelope and try to fight for our our whole entire community, not just north parts of or whatever, West parts, whatever part we're from. So I appreciate that. So taking that, I would say I would if there's no other comments, I'd say there's any motion to dismiss. I would entertain that, or I can make that motion myself. I'll go ahead and make that motion myself. I will make the motion that we that we adjourn. Can I get a second?

Mister Graves?

Yes. I got one from mister Graves. Okay. Everyone vote, please. Is it dark out? There it is. It's not quite dark. Thank you.