From: Linda Dettmer <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 4:11 PM
To: Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]>
Subject: For the council meeting tonight. Thanks!
Honorable Mayor Davis and Council Members,
It is with great respect for the work you do that I now address the Council.
I fully support the decision made by the council to vote for Madison Davis as our new Mayor.
There are no hard, fast rules about the vice mayor having a right to the Mayorship. I am glad that you were willing to trust that the hands of the City are under much better stewardship with our current Mayor. Congratulations on the courage to stand up for our community knowing that it would be unpopular with a certain number of constituents. It takes a certain strength and commitment to keep your pledge to the people of Brisbane, without selfishness or entitlement.
Respectfully,
Linda Montenegro Dettmer
--
Linda Montenegro Dettmer,
Century 21 Baldini Realty
Affiliate Real Estate Broker
415-939-0478 cell or
415-587-4212 Ex 14
From: Dolores Gomez <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 2:19 PM
To: Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]>
Subject: tonight meeting
Hi, Please let the council know that I support the women of the council. I have no idea why they all feel the same way BUT IT has to be a very important reason that all four agree!!!
Sincerely,
Dolores Gomez
Brisbane resident
Virus-free.www.avg.com
From: Earthhelp <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 12:53 PM
To: Swiecki, John <[email protected]>; Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]> Subject: Comments on Housing Element
Please distribute to the planning commission and council members:
Brisbane Housing Element 2023- 20XXX
This is a train-wreck waiting to happen. By not questioning the fairness of our double-the-sizeof-your-town RHNA number assignment, we are now forced to have shovel to groundsomewhere, anywhere whether appropriate or not, whether safe or not. These laws amount to extortion... “Do this or we’re taking away your open space, your environmentally sensitive lands, your parking, your recreation areas... even your CC&R’s...” The law(s) you are trying to comply with, to bypass CEQA for only one element of the General Plan, this is out of balance, it has to be challenged.
Does today create our 30-day window for public comment period? The closing period is not clear. Have you properly informed the public of the changes, amendments since comments from the state? Have you informed the public that the elimination of R-1will mean your neighbor can multiplex to any height, shade out your solar system, eat up your parking, tie into your sewer lines without any environmental or mitigating compensations? Stand up to the profit-driven bullies in Sacramento and say NO, we can come up with a better low-income housing plan without destroying our whole town. Our RHNA number compliance is dependent on water availability and we don’t have the water. We don’t have any agreements in place to widen the roads or the myriad of improvements deemed necessary to support the growth for doubling our town.... to just to make 500 low-income units... based on a prior thoughtful community-reflected EIR. Where are your overriding considerations and agreements that the City will now take on these developer obligations? It’s implied.
SB 9, SB 10 and a multitude of housing reform laws were placed into service since 2018, the document you referenced for CEQA compliance. The effects of these laws have not been properly vetted. To undergo NO environmental review at the tipping point of the shift from the exercise of RHNA numbers to the implementation anywhere without covenants to mitigate the impacts, is tantamount to conspiring to defraud the citizens. Please don’t.
Incorporate by reference information regarding Housing Law changes for 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022.
2019 : https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2018/10/californias-2019-housing- lawswhat-you-need-to-kno 2020 : https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2019/10/californias-2020-housing- lawswhat-you-need-to-know 2021: https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2020/09/californias-2021-housing-lawswhat-you-need-to-know 2022 : https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2021/10/californias-2022-housing- lawswhat-you-need-to-know Brisbane had the mechanism to serve our low-income community’s housing needs. It was the 20% set-aside tax revenue from our redevelopment projects. With the capital improvements going on at Sierra Point, and if you were to be sincere in your efforts to provide housing for all segments of the society, you could implement the set-aside requirement and have sufficient funds to produce low-income housing. It worked in the past. It is disciplined and fair.
At the time, we had a city council that made it a priority to produce mandated housing in order to not lose their set-aside funds. Instead, through this multiple-year RHNA exercise, you have participated in allowing the city of Brisbane to play a game of monopoly with our public housing funds, to withhold funds and sit on properties for over decades, swap out for nonhousing uses, and actually lose one unit due to burdensome regulations. There should be more accountability than to look at the issue, once again, and come up with a program at some later date. You have a one-year window for compliance.
The 20% set-aside tax policy works... no need for more time to figure it out, straight to implementation. At least that is a recommendation to make to the council.
You have to look at council and city manager bias as our stumbling block. If you don’t, I will. To have a council member refer to this responsibility as serving “those people” with fearful remarks about folks from “the East Bay,” and all council members nodding in unison... I think the issue is that our council does not have the capacity to carry out their responsibility to the public. You have a legal background, It’s your job to generate laws to protect us from extortionists and fraud. Please do so.
The meeting I refer to council bias is on this clip between the minutes of 30:15 and 30:35. https://www.brisbaneca.org/citycouncil/page/joint-city-council-brisbane-gvmid-financingauthority-housing-authority-meeting I oppose approving this element because the alternate areas you considered for dense housing may be environmentally sensitive, inappropriate, and have land-use restrictions. We don’t have any studies or protections for sea-level rise. Please ask the city for an assessment of mud slides and closed roadways during this last storm event to determine whether denser housing should be allowed on our steep, clay hillsides or safe on our landfills subject to liquefaction. Are we prepared for 4x the housing?
This is a multiplying event with multiple impacts and you choose to not look at them. If approved tonight, you appear to be complicit with this theft. I ask that you vote no or excuse yourselves from creating a law that violates our rights to equal representation by our public officials.
Please recirculate this document. Please inform the public of the true impacts and please create regulations that protect all of us of the theft of our public assets, from wearing-out our infrastructure, all for the benefit of for-profit foreign speculator development.
Thank you,
Dana Dillworth
[email protected]
From: Tainter, Patrick A (Brisbane) <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 4:33 PM
To: Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]>
Subject: Written Comments for Council Meeting January 12, 2023 Re: Consent Calendar
1. Adoption of a Resolution Declaring the Continued Need to Conduct City Council, Commission and Committee Meetings Remotely Due to Health and Safety Concerns for the Public Dear City Council,
As a member of the Complete Safe Street Committee, I am writing to you in regard to the above referenced Agenda Item and the memorandum we have received from Michael Rousch with the Subject: "Conduct of Meetings Through February 28, 2003 (sic) and Thereafter; New Brown ActProvisions Allowing Remote Meeting Attendance."
I encourage Council to continue to allow Committee meetings to be conducted on a hybrid basis.
The memo notes that the application of new meeting requirements is to “legislative body members.” Complete Streets and other Brisbane all-volunteer Committees are not legislative bodies; we do not have decision making authority.
I believe most Committee members look forward to in-person meetings and will make every effort to attend in-person, however there will circumstances for many for which they cannot. As a consequence, if many volunteers are not allowed to attend and contribute remotely, important projects, recommendations to Council and grant applications will not be completed in a timely manner and possibly not at all.
Additionally, remote meetings have made the meetings of the Complete Safe Streets Committee more focused and efficient. The public has continued to attend and comment at our remote meetings a level equal to our prior in-person meetings.
With this in mind, I encourage you to allow the all-volunteer Committees to continue to meet on a hybrid basis.
Thank you and Regards,
Patrick Tainter
From: JuanitaYee <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 12:02 PM
To: Council Members <[email protected]>
Cc: Juanita Yee <[email protected]>
Subject: council members
I support the city council member's decision to make Madison Davis Mayor of Brisbane. Time to stop this bickering perform your duty let's back to why we voted for you. Taking care of City business!! The last meeting I felt that four out of five council members showed a lack of confidence in Council Lentz. No matter where you stand on this issue maybe it's time for the Mayor position to be on the ballet for the Brisbane people to vote on.
If a Male council made this would the response be the same. It is this woman's opinion that it would have been different.
Sent from my iPhone
From: Earthhelp <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2023 5:20 PM
To: Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]>; Padilla, Ingrid <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Public Comments VWR Parcel "B"
Happy New Year Ingrid,
Lease make this document and three photographs part of the public record and make available to the City Council, Planning Commission, OpenSpace and Ecology, and Planning/Public Works employees who may need information on VWR. There was a comment period for their Remedial Action Plan for one segment of the property.
I am concerned that there are open trenches and uncovered soils in its current condition.
Thank you.
Please find the attached comments and pictures showing current conditions of Parcel “C” to become part of the public record.
Thank you again for helping get these matters moving forward. Please inform us of the final plan.
Happy New Year!
Dana
415-468-8587