WRITTEN PUBLIC
COMMENTS RECEIVED
From: Darian Bojeaux
To: City Clerk; Huma Ahmed
Subject: Today SS Item C-3
Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 1:51:13 PM
CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER
Be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. Verify the sender's email address and be on the lookout for phishing attempts.
Please read the following comment at today’s study session.
Dear City Council,
The agenda report explains that the new CEQA exemption does not apply to projects which include a hotel use unless the project application was deemed complete prior to January 1, 2025.
Footnote 2 on p. 2 of the agenda report indicates that “deemed complete” includes an applicant submitting a preliminary application pursuant to Govt. Code §65941.1. However (e)(2) of that section provides that if the city determines that the application is not complete pursuant to Govt. Code 65943, and the missing information is not provided within 90 days, then the application expires. Therefore, the footnote should simply cite Govt. Code §65941.1 and 65943.
This new legislation plants more nails in our city coffin due to 2 1/2 years of the city’s repeated failures to get our housing element accepted and the resulting builder’s remedy projects. No doubt that the attorney’s fees our city has incurred to defend against builder’s remedy projects is likely the cause of our $20M budget deficit for 2 years totaling $40M.
Given the extensive damage which has been done to our city, neighborhoods, and residents, I am requesting that an item be placed on a council agenda requiring the city to sponsor an investigation into the cause of the city’s failures to get the housing element accepted much sooner, and and those responsible, as was done concerning city wrongdoing related to Lots 12 & 13.
A council member advised me that the state just gave our city a hard time. If that were true, we would have a winnable lawsuit against the state. Another council member claimed that the city just kept trying to just add a little each time to the housing element so it could later take back what had has been added. But that was untrue because a city cannot take anything away from a housing element unless it makes a comparable replacement.
I believe I could round up over 100 residents whose neighborhoods are going to be ruined, to come to a council meeting to request that the matter be placed on an agenda, but it wouldn’t be a pretty, happy, or calm event, so I am requesting that the mayor simply do the right thing and place the matter on an agenda.
Thank you.
Darian=