CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Zoom Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84059733437
Dial-in: 1-669-900-6833 | WebinarID: 840 5973 3437
Alt 1: https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream
Alt 2: Cable Channel 26
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 June 13, 2022
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
June 13, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Mary Bier called the meeting to order on June 13, 2022 at 5:07 PM 5:00 PM STUDY SESSION
Annual Reports to City Council from the Beautification Advisory Committee, Economic Development Committee, Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, Open Space and Parkland Advisory Committee, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission
PROPOSED ACTION: This is an informational item. It is requested that the City Council provide feedback and receive and file the annual report of each commission and committee.
Mayor Bier called the study session to order at 5:07 p.m., stating that all councilmembers were present to listen to annual reports from various commissions and committees.
City Clerk Coffey brought up the reports on the screen.
Planning Commission:
Vice Chair Samantha Hauser began the report, which was then continued by Chair Lauren Berman and completed by Commissioner David Leal.
Mayor Bier thanked the Commission on the thorough work they did over the weekend.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck, as a former Commissioner, also thanked them for the hard work during their study sessions.
Councilmember Vaterlaus also thanked them for the work they did which was harder than anything they did when she was on Planning.
Councilmember O’Neill echoed their comments that they are dealing with a lot more than he did on the Planning Commission and he thanked them for the long hours at the last weekend’s meeting.
Councilmember Beckmeyer also appreciated the level of professionalism and work they did.
City Council Regular Meeting 2 June 13, 2022
Mayor Bier reminded Council on the time they had for the rest of the reports, suggesting that they speed things up a bit to be sure they get to everyone.
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission:
Chair Cindy Abbott presented the report, with Commissioner Carl Nicolari in attendance.
Mayor Bier thanked them for the presentation.
Councilmember O’Neill thanked them for their service.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thanked them for all they do and appreciated their service.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thanked them all from everyone.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck was impressed by the broad scope of all the work they do, such as beach safety.
Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission:
Police Captain Clements said that Commissioner Chair Doug Hladky would be making their presentation.
Commissioner Chair Doug Hladky presented the report.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if the Chair or Fire Chief could answer his question which is briefly go over the background of some of the people who serve on the Commission.
Chair Hladky stated that they had a slide for everyone which they didn’t show to save time. He stated that two of the commissioners are long-term nurses who have also worked in the pandemic and other emergency related areas, several members in law enforcement at federal and local levels, and had a recently retired Commissioner that was in FEMA’s administration, i.e., a very diverse group.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he just wanted to make sure the public saw the breadth of expertise that serves on Emergency Preparedness and they make sure they are doing everything to ensure we can all be safe. He is honored to be at those meetings and learn from them.
Chair Hladky stated that they appreciate everyone who comes to participate.
Mayor Bier thanked him for his presentation.
Beautification Advisory Committee:
Chair Melinda Moses presented the report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thanked her for the great presentation. She knows they’ve seen those images before but she thought it was important to keep seeing them and reminding themselves about the great work happening. She thought the State Farm site should be City Council Regular Meeting 3 June 13, 2022
nominated. She asked the City Manager if they could put a pin in dealing with murals on private property because that site is crying for a mural and that is another issue and another ordinance, etc. She again thanked Ms. Moses and the team for the work they do. She also thanked Cindy Abbott and Ginny Jaquith for their ongoing support of the murals subcommittee as that unfolds and grows.
Economic Development Committee:
Chair Daisy Fong presented the report.
Mayor Bier appreciated the survey she did and thought her presentation was also important for people to see all the work they did. She asked if any Councilmembers had any questions.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she had none but thanked her and the team for all they do, and she thought the level of professionalism they have brought and combining with staff resources is how we can leverage not having enough staff. She thought the Job Fair was a perfect example and she looked forward to more, and also thanked Councilmember O’Neill for all his good ideas.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thanked her for being here, and he had a question about where he could find the gift cards being advertised.
Chair Fong stated that, if he means gift cards in general, they can find it on the Pacifica Anchor, NextDoor, Connect with Pacifica, Chamber Wave, Chamber website, and on Facebook accounts.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if we have a spot on PCTV currently.
Chair Fong stated that they don’t, and they have to talk about, as she thinks they need to get in touch with them.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck is impressed with the work they are doing and he thanked her for being here.
Mayor Bier thanked her and then moved on.
Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee:
Chair Arlene Patton presented the report.
Mayor Bier asked if it would be a good idea to update Council on what is going on with Mori Point and the progress that has been made with the GGNRA.
Chair Patton stated that she would have to turn that over to staff since making the recommendation, it has been either political or staff.
Mayor Bier stated that they did have an update from the GGNRA.
Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that they last got a formal update from GGNRA on that effort on the April meeting and they are continuing to work with contacts at the Moose Lodge to arrange City Council Regular Meeting 4 June 13, 2022
some shared parking at their site and the city will likely get more information and more concrete determinations on that in upcoming weeks.
Chair Patton stated that there was one more update that happened a few months ago which she thought was promising, i.e., adding a half-staff position so there will be better maintenance for Mori Point and that was a good win.
Mayor Bier thought that was a direct result of the committee, working and listening with the public.
Committee member Joanne Arnos wanted to give the committee a boost that, in their bylaws and goals, they are the advisory committee to Council and this is the first time they had an opportunity to advise Council and Mori Point was the package they put together to present to them and the subcommittee interacted with the public in the neighborhood and supplied them with a lot of information on what the issues were, etc., and they presented it and recommended a task force of the stakeholders in the problems and stated that they are wonderful allies to Council and she hopes that, in the future, they can be used more on this kind of thing to let them know and what the public comes to their committee to address their thoughts. She stated that part of their package that she brought up was making a recommendation about Mori Point and serving the city better and they had an idea of pack it in and pack it out, and they were open to making that information and working with sides to put in the area approaching Mori Point in all their meetings. She appreciated working with Council.
Councilmember O’Neill thanked them for their service. He referred to Ms. Arnos mentioning getting a sign from the GGNRA and he has a couple of residents in the area complain to him that people are hauling BBQs with open charcoal up on Mori Point, and he asked if that sign could include no fireboxes or whatever is appropriate.
Ms. Arnos thanked him for the feedback, and she stated that Mayor Bier is spearheading the committee and has gone from their report back to Council and the interaction is not with them in terms of specifics.
Mayor Bier stated that was definitely part of the letter.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated they have a little time for comments, and he knows on Emergency Preparedness they have been talking Mori Point a little bit and he wants to thank them for the work as it is important and valuable to our community and one element of everything they are all doing as being a custodian of about 50% of our land mass. He looks forward to opportunities in the future to collaborate if they arise.
Mayor Bier thanked them, then stated she will open up public comments.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti introduced the speaker.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she was impressed by all these committees and all the talent, time and dedication they put in and she added her thanks. She referred to a comment from the Economic Development Committee about problems with our permitting process for new businesses and she thought it affects them and our revenue and might be good to look into that process.
City Council Regular Meeting 5 June 13, 2022
Mayor Bier closed public comments and asked if Council had any more comments, and if not, she stated that they can take a break before the regular meeting starts.
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Bier called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Mary Bier Mayor Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Mayor Pro Tem Present
Mike O'Neill Councilmember Present
Sue Vaterlaus Councilmember Present
Sue Beckmeyer Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.
Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney; Lisa Petersen, PW Director; Christian Murdock, Acting Planning Director; Dan Steidle, Police Chief; Yulia Carter, Asst. City Manager; Sam Bautista, PW Dep. Director; Ron Myers, Fire Chief; Michael Perez, PB&R Director; Alyssa Barranti, Management Analyst; Jason Bustria, IT Analyst; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk.
Mayor Bier asked City Clerk Coffey to read the instructions.
City Clerk Coffey explained the conditions for having Council meetings pursuant to Government Code Section 54953 (as amended by AB 361), to conduct necessary business as an essential governmental function as a teleconference meeting with no physical meeting location open to the public. She also gave information on how to present public comments participating by Zoom or phone.
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Bier read the Land Acknowledgment.
Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Beckmeyer
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation: Pride Month - June 2022
Mayor Bier read the proclamation in honor of the month of June as Pride Month.
City Council Regular Meeting 6 June 13, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that one of our fellow councilmembers, Anders Fung in Millbrae, was attacked in San Francisco and she wanted to send out thoughts to his family and let him know that we stand with him in that violence against our community which is unacceptable.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Bier asked if anyone wants to pull anything from the consent calendar, and seeing no one, opened public comments. She welcomed Mgmt. Analyst Alyssa Barranti for joining them at the meeting.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti stated that there were no public comments.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Move: O’Neill
2nd: Vaterlaus
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she had raised her hand before the motion as she had a comment to add to the minutes and request if it was okay to pause on the motion to hear that.
She referred to packet page 178, and at the bottom of the page, in Council communications, during her comments regarding Coastal Commission having a collaborative meeting coming up between coastal cities for CalCity staff and coastal commissioners. She stated that, fourth line from the bottom, after the word “primarily”, she wanted to add the word “public,” as she was trying to make that point in regard to what the framework is about.
Councilmember O’Neill amends his motion to accommodate Councilmember Beckmeyer’s clarification; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
1. Approval of Disbursements for 4/16/22 through 4/30/22.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 4/16/22 through 4/30/22
2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on May 23, 2022.
3. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard.
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
City Council Regular Meeting 7 June 13, 2022
4. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station.
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept Report and Make a Determination that Conditions of Local Emergency Continue to Exist at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach.
5. Continuation of Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).
6. Consideration of a Resolution Making Findings as Required by AB 361 to Continue to Permit the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to Conduct Teleconferenced Meetings Due to Health and Safety Concerns Relating to COVID-19 PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a Resolution making findings pursuant to AB 361 to authorize the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to conduct teleconferenced meetings due to health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19.
7. Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services in the Public Right-of-Way and on City Owned Properties and Facilities to increase the Budget Authority by $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2021-22; and Authorize City Manager to execute the Task Order.
8. Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022 to Chesterwerks
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022 to Chesterwerks in the amount of $120,960 for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project for Project Construction Services.
9. Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
10. Introduction of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings“ (Status: CEQA Exempt)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Introduce by Title Only and Waive further reading of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings” and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
NONE.
City Council Regular Meeting 8 June 13, 2022
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember O’Neill attended a County LAFCO meeting, the Airport Roundtable and the Pride flag raising at the Community Center. He attended the lunch from the Historical Society for a fundraiser for the railroad car and drove to Atherton for the opening of the new Atherton library which was pretty as they integrated the new library with their heritage town hall which was built with Spanish tile roof and adobe look. The Historical Society had their rummage sale.
Mayor Bier asked about the Eagle Scouts.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that was the highlight of the week. He attended the Troop 256 as the Council representative for the Eagle Scouts and they had seven people over 18. They were catching up for all the ceremonies they weren’t able to have due to Covid, as the Council congratulated Brian Joseph Solomon, Dylan Murphy Matthew Macias, Lucas Roland-Boe Tassio, Claire Ray Milby, Andres Ernesto Pranza, Liam Dean Milby and Bryce Boyd Milby. He acknowledged Claire Ray Milby as the first woman to get an Eagle Scout in Pacifica, along with her two brothers, and the rumor had it that she beat her two brothers and, considering all the merit badges she had to get when they allowed girls, she had to hustle. He congratulated all of them on their achievements and wish them the best, mentioning that some of them are already in jobs as they finished when they were 18 and now is two years later. He thanked Mayor Bier for reminding him.
Mayor Bier thanked him for going, as she thought he was the perfect person to be there.
Councilmember Vaterlaus went to the Civic Center groundbreaking and was happy to see that they have a fence around it and they are getting going. She went to the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust Member Agency Meeting and they had an event in San Carlos which she attended. She went to the Lion’s Police Awards dinner and it was great to see our police officer get an award. She also went to what she wrote as the Homeless County meeting. She went to the Pride flag raising with all the other councilmembers and rode in a convertible in the parade.
She was so happy to see so many people out for the parade. She stated that next year it will be bigger and better. She listened to the Planning Commission’s General Plan meeting and another Let’s Talk Homeless meeting. The CCAG Legislative went over all the bills that related to housing, transportation, seamless Bay Area, etc., and they went over the budget which was huge. She stated that the bills aren’t passed yet, and it will take months for the governor to go through all the bills but they all have to be in. At the CCAG regular meeting, they had a presentation by Safe Routes to School and OBAG 3 giving out large grants for economic development and transportation, and that grant funding just opened up. They also mentioned that CalCities is working on a project to take old abandoned tires and doing a derivative of the tires compressing and turning it into various other uses because the amount of tire debris is huge and they are finding that it will not destroy fish so they can use it in the ocean and it doesn’t affect the ecosystem of the ocean and, actually, can help. She stated that it was interesting and was sure we will hear about it more. She looked at the train car and it was interesting to be able to see inside the train car as it is usually covered.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that they heard about a few of the items that occurred since the last Council meeting but one she attended was the Rotary Club meeting the morning after Council’s meeting and have a fantastic presentation by Mayor Bier and City Manager Woodhouse, and was very well received. She attended the groundbreaking which was amazing and very satisfying to move forward on that project. She attended the Small Business Job Fair which was superb as heard in the presentation and was looking forward to more on City Council Regular Meeting 9 June 13, 2022
that. She thanked Debi Hirshlag and Alyssa Barranti and Daisy Fong and Yulia Carter for all the work on that. She attended a meeting of some members of the Chamber in regard to the BID (Business Improvement District) and got some clarification there. She attended the Beautification Advisory Committee meeting, with one issue needing a little resolution which was mentioned in their presentation earlier which was to help bring to conclusion the mural on the pump station which they know was needed and she commended staff, PW Director Petersen and Paul Lavorini and Nelson Schlater for working to come up with a solution to enable the continuation of that mural painting as they are almost there. She stated that it is bright and they will notice when at the beach. She gave a hat off to the mayor for the Pride Parade which was a fantastic job. She loved her statement in the committee meeting that as soon as it was over they are going to start planning the next year, as they learned a lot. She thought it was exciting to see the response from the community and the outpouring of support. She attended the rail car lunch and she asked Councilmember O’Neill to prevail upon him to carry a message back to the board about rethinking the title of that event. She thought the can discuss it later but that feedback was given a year ago and she thinks it needs addressing. She thought the lunch was lovely, the approach was great and she agreed with Councilmember Vaterlaus that, to get a peek under the tarp was the best. She stated that it reinforced to her why it is so necessary to be in a safe place as you can see the graffiti and tagging that was done inside of that historic resource when it was parked on Shamrock Ranch land as it didn’t have security and she knows it feels like a long time, but when you are raising the dollars month by month with a rummage sale, it takes a long time and the patience of the property owner where it is located, support of city staff with the use permit and keeping on to get that done. She stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting that was very long Monday, and she attended the other Planning Commission meeting on Saturday which was longer and she thanked the Planning Commissioners for their diligent work on both those occasions which was very impressive. She attended not as much of the Coastal Commission meeting as she would have liked because it was falling on the very last day at school but she was able to pop in and observe some of it.
She will be going back over the recording on that.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that it was a busy several weeks. He started by saying Ukraine is in his heart and on his mind and he hoped for a peaceful resolution to the conflict sooner, rather than later. He was refreshed regarding Covid and he attended the last meeting by calling in because he had Covid and he was happy to be public about his experience. He was thankful that it was mild because he was fully vaccinated and was able to get back on his feet relatively quickly. He understood it was a pain, but asked that they mask up as it helps a lot. He attended the Civic Center groundbreaking and was thankfully outdoors and he masked up thoroughly and maintained his distance. He and Councilmember O’Neill had an ad hoc rules and ethics meeting and they were starting to see some results of that. He stated there was a PCE meeting. They started with a moment of silence for Texas. They needed to do that as the shooting at the school happened the day before. He stated that PCE celebrated their five-year anniversary and approved the new Citizens Advisory committee members and updated their work plan. He stated there was an initial budget review and he was finding that everywhere he goes all the committees are reviewing their budgets. He stated the next meeting will be on June 23. There was a Working Together Day on Homeless meeting on the 3rd and the key term was permanent supportive housing and they had the opportunity to hear the stories of those whose lives were really saved through the program. He stated that it was heartening that all the organizations’ tipping point, life moves, project We Hope, Samaritan House, Dignity on Wheels and Mental Health Assn. were all contributing to the solutions and it was amazing to see all the collaborative effort going on in the County at this time to do everything we can to end homelessness. There was a salient quote used that “life was about what we do with what life has done to us.” He stated that, on the 3rd, he and Mayor Bier got to attend a Stanford Electric City Council Regular Meeting 10 June 13, 2022
Vehicle study that that the students did in Pacifica and it was amazing to see what the students were doing. He stated that our staff was getting recommendations from the Stanford students.
He was taken on a tour of the Pedro Point Headlands with John Keener who is part of Pacifica’s Land Trust. He had never been up there and wanted to check it out for years and he had a wonderful tour guide. He met with Jeremy Stafford who is the president of the District Fire Union and he learned more about fire which has been a recurring theme over the last couple of weeks. He stated that was at the Pride Parade which was a beautiful event. He stated that it was so heartening to see all councilmembers attend. He checked out the rail car very briefly as he needed to take a look on his way to Atherton. He stated it was beautiful to see the painting that they did on it and was interesting to see the remaining work they have to do on the interior.
He agreed with everything Councilmember Beckmeyer said about how important that project is and how nice to see its progress. He went to the new Atherton library and got some cool swag and in the makers space they were giving away tape measures in their maker space and they apparently had the first digital lab in the county like some of those things you can print on a 3D printer and design them in their computer lab, etc. He stated it was great to see the kids running through the banner to open the library and it is becoming a ritual in the San Mateo County Library system. He stated that our new Congresswoman Anna Eshoo was there as well as County Supervisor Don Horsley, State Senator Josh Becker, Ray Mueller from Menlo Park was there and he is running for supervisor. He got to enjoy time with Councilmember O’Neill as well. He also was taken on a tour of the firehouse by Jeremy who is the representative of the fire union and he showed him around. He showed him some of the vehicles and it was amazing the work they do with what they have, and are pursuing some grant funding for a rescue vehicle and he hopes they get it as it is amazing what they have to work with. He attended a second viewing of the movie, “Everything, Everywhere All At Once,” and it occurred to him that there was a theme about how chaotic the world is in this time, and it will probably be irrelevant. He mentioned that it was a theme reminder to figure out ways to be kind we might make it through together and a reminder for him to do everything he can to maintain whatever kindness he can even when feeling disinclined. He then attended the Planning Commission about the General Plan and he got to listen to all the public feedback, then the next day was election day and he was hanging out with a Supervisor and then went to Kevin Mullin’s event. He also attended March for Our Lives and gave a speech where he felt inspired to swear once talking about the shooting that happened at the school in Texas. He stated that simultaneously the idea that we need to work together on everything we’re doing which was that his speech was about his running into people whose views are not his and rather than assuming he will disagree with them, he thought it was a good idea to dig into discussions by specifically working with them to figure out what we can agree on, such as like guns or not, they don’t like kids getting shot. He stated that, if they begin every conversation with that premise he can discuss with friends who can talk to lawmakers what they agree on and they can take it back to elect those people. He stated that there was a Wildfire Awareness event which he enjoyed and watched as much as the Planning Commission meeting as he could and made sure to record what he couldn’t watch in real time. He attended the Sanchez Art Center which has an amazing exhibit on death and dying. He stated that he attended the Library JPA meeting with Councilmember O’Neill, adding that if you end up in a car with him, the entire San Mateo County community turns into a museum and you have the world’s best docent who tells the most amazingly interesting stories.
They got to check out the Brisbane library deeper as the meeting was held in the maker’s space room where they had virtual reality and laser etching and 3D printing which were on wheels so they can move them out and what was left was a space where they had a meeting. He noticed that they have bicycle checkouts. He stated that they passed their budget and were excited about the all-electric mobile and they are doing a pilot for their vehicles with solar electric vehicle charging. And he discussed libraries with people and a coworker asked why they don’t have a seed library and he brought up to the director of the JPA, mentioning that Woodside is City Council Regular Meeting 11 June 13, 2022
already doing it. He was through with his reports, but referred to a public comment by Christine Boles made earlier about a building official and he knows we have a building official on hand for all our needs and he asked the City Manager during staff communications to update them on the Whiplash Creamery.
Mayor Bier attended a lot of the same events her colleagues have attended, but she wanted to talk about our Pride Parade. She thanked Jenny Walters from Coast Pride and Katie Brookshire from Table Wine for being consistent and determined and strong in planning and getting it all done. She stated that it was an amazing, beautiful and wonderful experience. She will always mention them as she thinks they’re awesome but Pacifica Hot Rods showed up and one of their founding members and longtime friend of hers had passed away the day before.
She stated that, as she was already emotional seeing them drive in to the back parking lot, when she went to the back to get into the cars and they told her, it hit her on how much of Pacifica they are. She stated that everyone was sad when they showed up. She stated that they are having a gathering every third Friday night at Park Mall from 6pm to 8pm. She can’t wait for next year as the whole thing was so beautiful. She thanked the Rotary for having them and it was fun to present and the City Manager made her look good. The Civic Center groundbreaking was amazing and she can’t wait to see what happens there. She attended two separate meetings with the Economic Development Committee, one a special meeting and the other was mentioned by Councilmember Beckmeyer with the Business Improvement District.
They will hear about that later in the meeting. She referred to the Stanford presentation and, if we don’t do what the students have suggested, it will be crazy. She stated we have a whole work plan that is all laid out for us as the work they have done is incredible. She thanked them for all they did. She went to the Working Together to End Homelessness which was important for people to understand the process and the different agencies coming together and they go from being homeless to transitional housing and permanent supportive housing and it is working. She is confident in it that people she loves will be helped. She went to the Historical Society train car lunch and looking into the train car and speaking about the Little Brown Church and the work they did there. She stated that we were very lucky to have the Historical Society and she thanked them for having them as it was a fun time. She had a meeting with Fairway Park residents who are very concerned about Ridgeway Drive and she will be meeting with the Little League board to talk about their concerns and she will get them all the information she can. She stated that it feels good to be able to go out and be with them, even if they are upset.
She thought creating that working relationship is important for her so she can speak up and advocate for them as we move forward. She attended the CCAG Bike and Pedestrian Committee and they had presentations about Caltrans Bay Area bike highway study which is interesting and that led into the presentation from the San Mateo County micro-mobility feasibility study and it was interesting to talk about that, which is the scooters and bikes and bike highways are very interesting stuff. She was chosen to be on the ad hoc committee evaluation panel for the one Bay Area grant which is what Councilmember Vaterlaus mentioned and she will review all the applications and score them and will be very busy for the month of July. She thought it was exciting to be a part of that and was happy to do it and is learning a lot as she goes along.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, based on Council’s communications, it has been a very busy few weeks since the last City Council meeting. He has several updates that he would like to provide. He stated that it has been an exciting few week, and he wants to start and say that, later in tonight’s agenda, they will hear a couple of presentations from Yulia Carter and he wanted to announce that he has promoted her to Asst. City Manager and Finance and City Council Regular Meeting 12 June 13, 2022
Administrative Services Director to fill the gap that was left when previous Asst. City Manager/Planning Director Wehrmeister left the city. He was excited to announce that, as she has great experience in having been Asst. City Manager in previous jobs, as well as Finance Administrative Services Director and related to the budget presentation later, part of the recommended budgets are some reorganization details related to covering the different business needs in the City Manager’s office. He stated that they will also hear in the budget presentation more details on information about the In-Lieu Vehicle License Fee and returned Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) issue. He wanted to announce now that all the cities in San Mateo County and the county launched an aggressive advocacy campaign to kill a trailer bill that was being proposed by the state that would have capped the returned ERAF dollars, and they were successful. He referred to that kind of legislative advocacy that our state representative were on board with it, and it really pays off. He stated that there is still a battle ahead for future years related to that issue but it does preserve for the city over $200,000 that will be able to go into our disaster accounting fund this year. The budget details are later, but he wanted to mention the effect and give thanks to all the Councilmembers for their work related to that very important topic. He wanted to speak a little bit more about the Stanford electric vehicle strategy that was launched, and for background, there is a public policy class and program at Stanford called local government in action and early on, during the last quarter, they had contacted with them and proposed this project, and a team of three Stanford students with another student advisor were excited about looking at electrical vehicle charging in Pacifica and how a strategy could also tie to economic development and they culminated that with their end of school year presentation previously, and it was a fantastic presentation with some great learning opportunity for them. They had a room filled with executive staff and commissioners and Mayor and Mayor pro Tem to ask hard questions of them and push them and they handled it really well and it is a win-win situation because the city gets a great starting analysis for a strategy moving forward. They are hoping there is actually future phases of student-led projects that we can leverage for the benefit of Pacifica community. He stated that the last week the Police Chief and the Captains and he spent about five hours in interviews for applicants for the Police Chief’s Advisory Panel. They had a great response for those interested in the ten advisory panel positions. The interviews took quite a while but it was a great result which will be announced sometime this week. He also announced another opportunity coming up that KTVU and their Zip Trip program has selected Pacifica this summer season to highlight Pacifica in a live program where they go on scene and do an hour long show which will occur at the end of July which is what they are planning and they are working with them and he thanked Mayor Bier and Councilmember O’Neill whom, as Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck pointed out, is a walking encyclopedia and history buff about Pacifica and some great recommendations have been provided to them, and they may go off and do their own due diligence and make their selections about what they want to highlight, but they are working with them to bring that promotion to Pacifica and look forward to that happening at the end of July. He also had the opportunity to attend the once annual in person joint city managers’ meeting between all the city managers in Santa Clara County and in San Mateo County and they got together for panel discussions and lunch in Mountain View and it was great to see colleagues in person and also had a couple of great presentations, one relating to the recruitment and retention challenges that local government has which is being felt everywhere. There was valuable information from that. He mentioned the information he has about the Whiplash Creamery and the building official. He stated that the city does have a contract building official and, while the actual position is part-time, that same firm has a full-time staff team that evaluates all of our applications and handles all of the plan check work that runs through the building department.
Regarding the Whiplash Creamery, he wanted to clarify the information he has, and Acting Planning Director Murdock can provide more detail of Council wishes. He stated that, for the Whiplash Creamery, they applied and their permit sat dormant due to activity on their end for City Council Regular Meeting 13 June 13, 2022
about a year, and then they changed their application and reapplied in May and the city has processed their application in all the appropriate city processing timeline and sent them back plan check comments on June 10, and there was no delay on the city’s behalf related to that application. It happens with businesses, as they were inactive for quite a while on their end. He asked Acting Planning Director Murdock if he had anything to add.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that, if business owners feel like they are experiencing delays and problems with the building permit due process, that is what he is here for and he encourages them to reach out as he can help if there is an issue or explain where there is not an issue. He is the resource for that.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, for clarity, the applicant put in an application and they responded and they sat for a year not responding to their questions or comments, and they have yet to go to San Mateo County Health, being they are serving food.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that he doesn’t know about the status with the Health Department but the first part of what he said is correct. They submitted in April 2021, the city returned plan check comments to that first applicant in May 2021, and there was no response from the applicant until May 2022. They had already responded to that May 2022 application released in plan check comments last Friday as the City Manager indicated.
Councilmember O’Neill thanked staff for their prompt reply to the applicant and inactivity or not responding to staff is not staff’s fault. He stated that maybe members of the public could get accurate information rather than spreading misinformation.
City Manager Woodhouse thanked Acting Planning Director Murdock, and he wanted to mention that he was excited to be able to spend a long weekend with his family and be with his oldest son who graduated from college this weekend. They had a great time and busy and a great milestone.
Mayor Bier stated that she forgot to thank Laura Palmer-Lohan who is a councilmember from San Carlos for coming to our Pride Parade and sharing her story with us. She also had Covid and she thought she was just tired and had a headache because she works too much. She had Covid as well as her family, and she thanked Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck and Councilmember O’Neill for filling in for her and she asked everyone to keep masking up.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she had one tiny addendum to something Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck was talking about regarding the bike available for checkout at the library. She stated that Pacifica also has bikes available for checkout at the library. She understood that, at those libraries, she has seen the one at Sharp Park, where the upper entrance is, there is a railing there and a side door where they go in and that is where they are located and any of the staff could help any citizens who want to check out a bike.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, if he had known of the resource sooner, he might have checked it out and it is good to know that resource is there.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11. Public Hearing on Proposed Ordinances adding Sections 7-2.214 (Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee) of Title 7 and Chapter 21 (Construction Vehicle Impact Fee) of Title 8 of City Council Regular Meeting 14 June 13, 2022
the Pacifica Municipal Code and adoption of Resolution setting rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and Construction Vehicle Impact Fee.
PROPOSED ACTION:
1. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
2. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
3. Adopt resolution entitled A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Setting Rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and Adding both Fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.
PW Director Petersen presented the staff report.
Councilmember O’Neill referred to streets that were never accepted when the city took over as they were the old county roads, such as Pedro Point, Vallemar, East Sharp Park, and he asked if they are not maintaining those streets as they never accepted them and are they subject to this fee.
PW Director Petersen stated that the way the fee was developed takes into account any streets that we are maintaining and she was not sure if the streets mentioned have asphalt on them but, the way the fee is set up, it looks at the actual condition of the streets. She stated that, because the city has low PCI overall, the city’s fee for an older street tends to be fairly low, such as the street cuts are only $1 per square foot and the fee is based on the condition of the asphalt on average for the whole city. She was sorry that she didn’t know what exactly streets he is talking about, but if it is a street that is considered a city street and has asphalt on it, it would be included.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he was driving down Loma Vista today and it looked like there were more patches than asphalt. He understands why they are charging the fee and he supports it, but he finds it hard to justify when they are basically replacing a patch. He stated that another concern is that they don’t have a definition of a heavy vehicle. He asked if that is like the big flatbeds that drop plywood or other building materials and how will it be enforced.
He stated that a neighbor on his street just got new siding, and another neighbor got a new roof, so there was one truck dropped off the roof and the other neighbor got one that dropped off siding. He stated that they were both delivered by heavy vehicles but they didn’t pay, and he asked if those trucks were subject to the fee.
PW Director Petersen stated that the fee was determined based on the number of heavy construction vehicles that are going back and forth to build a standard 1800-sq.ft. home. The fee does not take into account someone that is not adding on square footage to their house and there would be no charge for someone who is replacing their roof or putting on siding.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that recent developments done in the city, such as Saltaire and Marvilla and condos off Rosita are considered private streets and there is a homeowners association paying for it, so he asked what is considered a private street and are they subject to this fee.
PW Director Petersen stated that any private streets would not be subject to the fee.
City Council Regular Meeting 15 June 13, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill referred to Marvilla and Saltaire, and asked, if they replaced the lateral, if there is no fee for that.
PW Director Petersen stated that if it is a private street and the city does not maintain it, such as a street that is part of a condo complex, she doesn’t know the exact history of the street, but if it is not a city street, they would not pay a fee.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that Marvilla doesn’t have homeowners dues and they have no association. She stated that they got a letter from someone who was adding on to a property but he only drives his pickup truck and he was subject to fees and he was disturbed because he said that he drives a pickup truck just like everybody else but Amazon and UPS drives their giant trucks and they aren’t paying. She stated that they have an exception and they can appeal the fees to review if there was no damage so she was glad to see the exception.
PW Director Petersen stated that she can talk about it. She had a call in to that resident and she wanted to state, related to the information she has currently, the person was putting on a 500-sq. ft. addition on their house and they don’t have any of these types of fees that can determine the size of what somebody is doing. She stated that in 2018, there was a requirement for that person to put a slurry seal on the street in front of their house and it fits with the pavement damage. She stated that they are encouraging these fees, and in this instance, she calculated under the current fee that the property owner would pay $595 instead of a slurry in front of his entire property and this allows the city to be much more equitable about how the fees are being distributed. If someone is doing something small, he is going to pay a small fee but if someone is building a large house, they will pay a larger fee.
Councilmember Vaterlaus referred to her statement regarding someone getting a sewer lateral and they didn’t need a compliance certificate, and she stated that she put in a new sewer at her house and she has a compliance certificate as it shows that the sewer is good for 20 years.
She referred to the document saying not needing a compliance certificate, just for selling houses.
PW Director Petersen stated that there are certain times that it is defined when you have to get a sewer lateral compliance certificate, such as when you are selling your house and if you are adding in a certain number of fixtures to the house or doing a certain amount of remodeling, and in those circumstances they are required to get the sewer lateral certificate, but someone who has been in their house for 10 years and they find out they have a broken sewer lateral, they aren’t required to get a new sewer lateral certification. They would be asking them to pay the $500 fee no matter how much they cut the street because they want to encourage them to fix that.
Mayor Bier opened the public hearing.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti stated there were no hands raised for public comment.
Mayor Bier closed the public hearing.
Mayor Bier appreciated Councilmember O’Neill for asking about streets that are not paved, as a couple of her neighbors also had that question, and that detail might be important for her community on her block to understand it a little better so she will explain it to them in as much detail as she can.
City Council Regular Meeting 16 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer also wanted to follow up on his point on that and pursue it further, as they are now deliberating. She referred to roads lower than 41 PCI and are bringing down the entire curve, she had the same concern about applying this new fee. She compares it to recent decisions like the slurry seals they did in last year’s work in the lower part of town in the Linda Mar area and are doing this year in the north part of town on Monterey, etc., or when they were fortunate enough to be able to repave Linda Mar Blvd., with a machine that eats up the road and lays down a new road, and they can only use that on straight streets, not like downhill in Loma where Councilmember O’Neill and you can’t use that in Rockaway Beach or Reina del Mar or most streets in Pedro Point. She added that those streets are in terrible shape and she has a hard time charging people a fee against a pavement cut on a road that is almost not a road. She needs to talk about it and figure out the exception policies, alternatives and how it can be resolved. That is not her deliberation but her sticking point on this issue.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that all the fees from the different houses are going to go in a ledger fund, not to the specific street on which they are collecting the fee, but they don’t have a patch, patch, slurry.
PW Director Petersen stated he was correct, adding that, instead of having people do the spot repairs in front of their house, related to the construction vehicle impact fees, all the fees will go into the street maintenance funding which would allow them to do more streets, including the streets that are in the worst condition category. They did quite a few of them in the last couple of years and they put the seal on them to keep them from getting into a worse condition category. It will allow them to fix more streets by putting those funds in that street maintenance CIP program.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he has been thinking about it and it bears discussion even though it’s uncomfortable to discuss it. He refers to Rockaway where he understands the condition of the road is so poor that the city cannot do the slurry seal on it. He thought, if they are having the people put in their fair share, he wants to know that they ultimately are getting something out of it. He understands that it can take years to see that come to fruition, but he thought the knowledge that it will come to fruition is important at this time. He asked if staff can help them navigate that.
PW Director Petersen stated that they have done streets that were in worse condition than Rockaway with the seal coat they mentioned, and when they came to Council in October 2020, they talked about wanting to keep our good streets in good condition by putting slurry seal on the good streets, but they also recognized that we have some very poor streets in Pacifica and we don’t want to forget about those streets and let them turn into rubble. They took a number of those streets in very low PCI's and put a different kind of seal on them, called a cape seal product where you put a chip seal and cover it with a slurry seal and on top of it you do pavement repairs. She pointed out that looking at streets next to Balboa and drive on them now, those were very low PCI streets, probably the lowest in the city, and now they are being held together and look pretty good. She stated that it doesn’t mean that they don’t want to come back in the future and try to put another seal coat over the streets or an overlay. She stated that they are using the money to address those streets that are in very poor condition by keeping them from dropping into a worse condition category, and some look pretty good after the treatment done.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck appreciated having not asked in advance, and if they don’t have the information readily available, he apologizes for not preparing ahead of time as it didn’t occur to City Council Regular Meeting 17 June 13, 2022
him until this moment. He asked if they were aware of some those streets on the horizon that might be benefitting from the cap seal treatments so we have some idea of the streets where we will see this work.
PW Director Petersen responded affirmatively, stating that they are generally using our street saver program in order to see what streets they need to address. She stated that Council may remember that there were a couple of areas where they said they were probably not going to look at those areas, such as Vallemar, Pedro Point, East Sharp Park because there are so many bad streets in those areas. She stated that they could say, if they have more money going into the fund, they can start addressing some streets in those areas as well with these treatments they have used in other areas, i.e., taking low PCI streets and capping them to prevent them from becoming a worse condition category. She stated that it will expand our ability to look at all streets, including streets in worse condition category and some of these areas they haven’t been addressing because they don’t have the funds and most of the streets are in poor condition.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that she was saying this was the beginning to be able to start doing this work.
PW Director Petersen responded affirmatively.
Mayor Bier stated that, while it is being recorded, she should have written down every single word she said as it made more sense to her now than it did at the beginning of the conversation.
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked about when the city does new sewer lines, as she was on a street where the city put in a new sewer line but they didn’t go back and fix the street after and there is a huge long cut that the city trenched out and nothing has been done. She asked if that street has to wait until it is on the CIP project list.
PW Director Petersen referred to part of the way the fees are implemented, and she stated that she can talk about moving forward and then talk about that particular street, but the way these fees work moving forward is you have to treat everybody equally and when they cut streets in our sewer department, they will have to pay that fee in order to put money into that fund as that is how the law works, you can’t treat yourself differently than you are treating other people. She stated that what has been happening, sometimes delayed. She stated that, if she can give her the name of that street in an email later and she can look at it, but the sewer department has been trying to get a few projects together and then get the slurry done on the street, so it could be what is currently happening with that street, and if she sends the street name to her, she can let her know what the schedule is.
Mayor Bier stated that there are three proposed actions, two are to waive the first reading and introduce the title and one is to adopt the resolution. She thought they should get started with the first one.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to waive the First Reading of and introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
City Council Regular Meeting 18 June 13, 2022
Vote: 5-0 (Item #11-1)
Councilmember O’Neill moved to waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #11-2)
Councilmember O’Neill moved to adopt resolution entitled A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Setting Rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and Adding both Fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule; seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #11-3)
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
12. Conduct Public Hearing to consider Adopting a Resolution Confirming the Annual Report from the Pacifica Hotel Business Improvement District, Approving the Program Expenditures, and Assessing the Levy for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 at the same rates as in the Fiscal Year 2021-22.
PROPOSED ACTION: Review and discuss the available options provided in this report for Council's consideration and select an option for proceeding.
Asst. City Manager Carter first thanked the City Manager for his remarks earlier and she looked forward to continue serving this beautiful community then presented the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse noted that they had Archie Judan from the Chamber of Commerce was promoted to panelist and if Council has questions for the Chamber regarding the BID assessment, he is available to answer them. He then commented that each year during the budget process this BID assessment process is challenging, more so this year and they have been working for months to achieve collaboration with the Chamber of Commerce on a variety of marketing and economic development programs, but as reported in the staff report at the last Council meeting, the city’s obligation is to ensure that the $1.00 BID assessment recommended is benefitting the hotels, which is an obligation by state law. He stated that, when they received a work plan and a budget with some to be determined or ranges of money, that was legally concerning to staff which was why they brought it up and Council directed staff to meet in more depth, and he thanked the Economic Development Committee members, Councilmember O’Neill previously and now Councilmember Beckmeyer and Mayor Bier for their work with the Economic Development Committee and in the BID meetings and the attention they paid to this.
He stated that they raised concerns and it has been challenging to carve out the time, finding meetings to work collaboratively with the Chamber and they didn’t receive the revised plan until Saturday and it was posted today. He stated that he normally likes to be clear about City Council Regular Meeting 19 June 13, 2022
recommendations to Council, but on this item there are a few options Council has that are before them for discussion and they will do their best to answer questions and make specific recommendations within those depending on what Council wants to do. He thanked Ms. Carter and others for the time they spent on this and they are working as a city and an economic development program to benefit the hotels, and this is one tool by state law that allows them to do that and they want to be sure it is really effective and benefits the hotel and the Pacifica community as well.
Mayor Bier asked if they had questions and concluded that they would open the public hearing.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti stated that there were no hands raised for public comment.
Mayor Bier closed the public hearing.
Councilmember O’Neill referred to a couple of the expenditures, and he was concerned that he see Via and Pacifica Anchor magazine. He thought Via was the AAA magazine and he could understand, but he asked what the distribution of the Pacifica Anchor magazine was.
Chamber Member Judan stated that the reason for the distribution purpose is to target and redistribute those magazines to specific geographic regions of neighboring cities to their visitor bureau centers as it creates visibility of our branding of Visit Pacifica within those actual cities that target more stay-cation with those particular regions. He stated that is the output for that specific type of expenditure.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if it was ads in the magazine.
Chamber Member Judan stated that there will be ads in the magazine that is reflective of the BID and the representation of the hotels, and these magazines will be placed strategically in geographic regions outside of Pacifica.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if there was any contract as to how many are going to be done and where because strategically in neighboring cities he didn’t know of a lot of people in San Bruno that come to a hotel in Pacifica.
Chamber Member Judan stated that as far as the neighboring cities, they also target dry spot cities as well, such as Stockton, Sacramento, areas where they want to get away from extreme heat to a coastal environment that is for the weather and that will be the scope of the specific campaign, but they don’t have a contract to support that but they wanted to include that in their projections for the city’s effort.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if that was usually handled by the brochures which would be far cheaper than ads in the magazine and they can hire a company to actually distribute brochures for the brochure racks at train stations, airports, etc.
Chamber Member Judan thought those were definitely good ideas on a brochure, but for now they have a publication that is already in place and they want to maximize that capability for that specific traction that is generated already with the publication.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, on No. 9, they have a digital campaign with SF Media Company and they use it as an example of San Francisco Bucket Listers and Do The Bay. He saw no tab on there or anything and it looked like a place where you wanted to go and buy a City Council Regular Meeting 20 June 13, 2022
ticket to go do something, to the museum or to a play versus hotel space. He checked the website and he didn’t see that. He stated that we are looking for hotel room occupancy and transit occupancy tax and he didn’t see that on the website mentioned. He did SF Travel and he did a search of Pacifica and a couple of our hotels did come up there, but that was through Bookings.com. He stated that, when you clicked on SF Travel, it just brought you to Bookings.com, not to that website. He stated that was similar to what members of San Mateo County Convention of Visitors Bureau and they do our hotels already, and if you go to their website you can reserve Pacifica hotels. He asked if he had any comments about the Bucket Listers, Do the Bay and SF Travel.
Chamber Member Judan stated that those platforms that he sees developed for us highlight specific events that are occurring in Pacifica and be able to compliment that with the increase and therefore increasing the use of occupancy for example, the Dog Surfing Competition or Fog Fest where we definitely should see an influx of hotel occupancy because of promotion of those events. He stated that utilizing these platforms are a way to compliment those cascades will be key.
Councilmember O’Neill continuing blog creations or are re-posting blogs with substantial content. He asked if that was what Hook, Line and Thinker did or did they let that go.
Chamber Member Judan stated that currently that is the case but, to justify what blogs are, blogs are included in our search engine optimization process which helps the website generate more traction. He stated that it was very important that they may take concept for that as well as being able to use that as a way to disseminate public information that could be viable to ultimately increase hotel occupancy just by promoting Pacifica events with the city of Pacifica.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she is going back and forth between what was in the packet last time and included this time from the BID proposed budget and the updated supplemental materials they received and she needed clarification about the website consultant or web manager. She asked if that figure changed in the original proposal. She explained that she is asking these questions because what they were talking about at one of the meetings she was in with the Mayor was the collaborative work of the BID and, by extension, whomever they contract with to do work, and the city under the auspices of the CDA marketing contract and working towards have those two groups work together in a complimentary way, not in an overlapping way. She wants to understand what was adjusted in terms of any ad budget and anything specifically with regard to website maintenance. She asked if that is still happening, more, less, i.e., what changed in terms of the budget.
Chamber Member Judan stated that they considered the base pay the steps of checks and balances to make sure that, when they enacted the marketing update with the city, it was understandable that they monitored everything as far as the content creation but they were able to compromise as far as accessibility for the website as well as the social media platforms.
They reallocated some of the hours for their webmasters to compliment some of the efforts that are required for the third party with CDA. The third party consulted with CDA and they were notified by CDA that they are not familiar with the platform that their website is currently posted on. He stated that for them to learn the development so they could have autonomy on that website was concerning on their end and they asked to re-allocate some of the hours to make sure their website managed to help support the needs of CDA and where they are going to be developing concepts for the web sites. A lot of the considerations they wanted to do was to create more pages with the Visit Pacifica, but were not very familiar with utilizing platforms that the website actually sits on. They wanted to be sure there wasn’t any tampering or anything City Council Regular Meeting 21 June 13, 2022
that was to occur on the website and they would be able to review it prior to being publicized.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, when she looks at the packet, page 415 and she is seeing the marketing action plan and the first item on there is website. She concluded that this was the old iteration of the budget. She stated that it said the BID/Web consultant was $10,500 to $14,500 and as a portion of the budget and an ongoing time frame, continuous throughout the year. She stated that, when looking at the new document, listed as Exhibit F, she sees item 2 is website and the cost is $8,500. She concluded the budget for the website portion of the BID work was reduced but thought it could be somewhere else that she is not seeing.
Chamber Member Judan agreed, clarifying that a portion of that was relocated over to the next item.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if it was the SEOs.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if $8,500 was on item 2 and $4,500 on item 3.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively, adding that they have to make adjustments with no longer being able to have a third party market consultant able to help them with their blogs, and they have to find another option to help enter the SEOs.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if that is part of what CDA is going to be working on, i.e., blog content.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that they discussed with the BID individuals the overall guidelines for cooperation. She stated that what they wanted to create two pages to the Visit Pacifica website, one for Shop Pacifica program and another one for work-cation program as both will directly benefit the BID members. She stated that the cost of creating these programs or pages and is included in the CDA contract and there is no additional maintenance included in the cost. She assumes that what Chamber Member Judan is describing that he is adding additional consultant hours to supervise the CDA work and work side by side while CDA will be creating this content. She asked him to correct her if she is wrong about that. She stated that the total website cost, two pages down on Exhibit H, the total cost of proposed by the BID is $17,000 a year.
Councilmember Beckmeyer assumes that is for the website.
Asst. City Manager Carter agreed for the website portion and the breakdown is exactly what they reported before on the Exhibit F, $8,500 of it is for creating the two pages.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that the cost is being covered by their contract with CDA.
Asst. City Manager Carter agreed, adding that if they had development rights the would update the pages.
Mayor Bier stated that the last time she talked with Chamber Member Judan, they were going to meet with CDA and she asked how that went.
Chamber Member Judan stated that they thought it went fairly well, and they stressed that they City Council Regular Meeting 22 June 13, 2022
understood the type of work that was going to be created and how well they understood that type of work.
Mayor Bier thought it was important that they all trust each other, and she stated that as she is new to being the liaison and still learning, but she thought it was important that they come at it from that platform and trust that they all want the best thing for Pacifica’s hotels and they could work through this to get there.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she was trying to reconcile what Asst. City Manager Carter said and she figured out as she was on the wrong page where Exhibit H is at $17,000 but she was only adding up to $16,000 but she saw the $1,000 social marketing paid campaign, additional cost for boost post on Facebook, sponsored links, etc. She asked if that was the extra $1,000 that is added to $17,000.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that what she is hearing is that, whatever the specific nature of the daily work, monthly or weekly work is, together it adds to $17,000 worth of the BID budget, and asked if that is accurate.
Chamber Member Judan agreed.
Councilmember Beckmeyer reiterated that she wants to be sure she is correct on that.
Chamber Member Judan stated she is correct.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked, when they met with CDA, whether there was any conversation about what they talked about capacity building within the BID.
Chamber Member Judan asked if she could describe more about capacity building.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it was basically working with the staff they have but execute the work within the BID so they develop skills and are able to expand what the capabilities are within the BID and within the Chamber to be ongoing. She stated that, as mentioned in their meeting, the reality is that the CDA is not a permanent part of the city, but a temporary part of the city, thankfully because of ARPA, and they want to maximize that investment. She explained that, with capacity building, she is talking about the idea of developing capacity within the Chamber and the BID to continue on an ongoing basis to do this work. With that thinking, she is trying to understand is if the $17,000 allocated to website would be sufficient to approach some of that goal.
Chamber Member Judan thought it is, but a lot of that is going to be contributing to a lot of the campaigns that CDA will be promoting as well, and they want to be able to copy that. He stated that, for the boost posting, they told CDA that they’re going to be utilized and perhaps social media influencers to help promote some of these campaigns. They told Chamber that the city would not be responsible for paying for those types of search activities for getting social media influencers to back up some of these marketing campaigns. He thought they need to help incorporate that into the marketing structures at our end so we can help with that campaign by relieving some of the financial coverage for the city, especially if they can’t pay for that specific type of accessibility.
City Council Regular Meeting 23 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if that was part of what Councilmember O’Neill was asking about, i.e., the Bucket Listers thing, item 2, on Exhibit H.
Chamber Member Judan agreed, explaining that is what their goal is, i.e., to take all of our marketing efforts to complement the city’s marking efforts as long as the understand and identified what those efforts are. He stated that they have never had this conversation with the city before prior to CDA. He stated that, for them to submit a report in time for him, prior to not meeting with CDA, wasn’t possible. He apologized if he could have submitted a report prior to not meeting with CDA.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agrees with what he said, as they haven’t had this conversation.
She stated that before she was on Council and was watching the BID presentation, she hasn’t seen this kind of interactive dialogue between the BID/Chamber as the Chamber is the agent of the BID, if she understands that correctly, and the city. She is glad they are having it and she wants to build on it. She wasn’t sure this was the best use of time to nitpick every single detail, but she is trying to understand what has changed and how they are going to move forward in a different way so they can evaluate when the year is up on how it went and whether it worked or not and how they are going to measure that. She has a lot more questions but she isn’t going to address them now and let other councilmembers ask any questions. She reiterated that she wants to make sure they have sufficient time and opportunity to create those task lists and understanding of who does what and how it will mesh together.
Mayor Bier thought, in order for that to happen, that is going to take time, and to do that, they have to agree on something here so they can get started and they can keep having those conversations and create the documents they need and get the feedback they need. She thought they have to allow the work to get started and go from there, as it will take time to answer all those questions, get the lists made, see how it is going with CDA, and again she felt they need to allow it to begin so they can see how it goes.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she will ask for a formal meeting of the group that met before which was a representative group of BID and she would like to have a quarterly meeting to break down these goals and look at it in terms of what their goal is for the next quarter and how they get there, then the next meeting, etc. She may not have a good handle on the details but with Item 3 on Exhibit H, the $11,000 for Via magazine and Pacifica Anchor magazine, she is not understanding is how much is allocated to each thing and what the BID’s span of distribution would be, along the line of what Councilmember O’Neill is asking.
Chamber Member Judan understood and they have to reevaluate their contract license with Via magazine, especially with the changes in current rates and prices and it is still under review.
With Pacifica Anchor, it will be based on advertising pages per their publications. He stated that they still have to understand, from a calendar perspective, when those publications are to occur for them to appropriately re-adjust or whether they can afford the specific type of pages they need for the BID. He stated that it is a monthly publication and whether they can afford a quarter page or half page or full page just for the BID.
Mayor Bier asked if anyone saw the promotion that Pacifica Anchor did for Pride. If not, she suggested they take a look as it was really good. She posted it out as it was quality work.
Chamber Member Judan takes consideration of a lot of trends that are occurring within the city and he thought, to hop aboard such a tool like this which was an effective dissemination tool.
He agreed that, if it really works, it could benefit the BID a lot, especially could benefit the city as City Council Regular Meeting 24 June 13, 2022
well with maximum exposure throughout the concept provided through this type of tool.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to him mentioning that he doesn’t have the contract set yet for those two items in Item 3.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if it was something that could be accomplished for the first meeting.
Chamber Member Judan stated that it is something they are prioritizing to fully complete so they can continue on with the marketing proposal for 2022-2023.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, on evaluating what the City Manager and Asst. City Manager were saying about the whole objective being to drive business to the hotels, she thought the idea of reaching into communities that are not immediately adjacent to Pacifica is key. She noted, in getting weird weather reports, such as temperature alerts on her phone and extreme heat, that it was almost like wherever those hot places are who they need to be reaching out to and where the placements need to be happening, going along with what Councilmember O’Neill said, and she hoped to have what makes her more comfortable which is if she had a more detailed budget of how that outreach is going to happen or are they saying that it happens because it happens with Via magazine, which is AAA. She is trying to get her hands around that, but is not saying he has the answer at this time, but that it is an important piece for her of what Council evaluating this BID budget is accomplishing what the ordinance says it is supposed to do.
Chamber Member Judan agreed and they would be happy to share their contract once they formalize it with both of these entities.
Mayor Bier asked what that will be with something done in collaboration with CDA, as professionals doing this work know where the outreach is. She thought that would be something CDA would do as well.
Chamber Member Judan stated that is a question they can actually discuss and they are planning to have another meeting with them and that line of communication is open which is important.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, if the city is already paying for the $8,500 for the shop local / work-cation, he sees this as part of the contract with CDA and he sees no reason why it even has to be included in this. He also didn’t see any point in them advertising in Pacifica Anchor magazine and having full magazines delivered to Stockton, Sacramento, etc. He stated that you can hire a company that would put brochures out, and thinks they need to explore what options then can get with the San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau, as the city is already a member of that and funding them to get hotel reservations and any conferences so he doesn’t see any reason for Pacifica Anchor magazine or the $8,500 if it is already being done by CDA. He asked Chamber Member Judan what the management fee was the Chamber is taking out of the BID.
Chamber Member Judan stated that the way it worked from his understanding was initially for the management for the visitors’ center was supposed to be an arrangement by predecessors that the city and the Chamber was going to help manage the actual visitors’ center. Somewhere City Council Regular Meeting 25 June 13, 2022
down the line, the city pulled out and the Chamber was left having to manage the visitors’ center by itself without any help from the city.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that it was also the Chamber’s office.
Chamber Member Judan agreed, but added that the BID was created to help support the Chamber and the visitors’ center.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that the BID, by state law, was to fund hotel rooms to help run hotel rooms.
Chamber Member Judan acknowledged that it was state law, but at this time that helps support maintaining the visitors’ center and the office for the Chamber at this time. He added that, because of the lack of hotel occupancy for the previous periods, the Chamber has not even taken at least 50% of that for the past two months because of the lack of funds that was provided by the BID. He stated that they take a lot of these in consideration, and it has been very challenging now for what they are really trying to work out of nothing, projecting a lot of these campaigns and not knowing whether they are actually going to be able to have this type of budget allocated and available. A lot of numbers they put there are not fabricated, but using them as buffers because they don’t know how much money they are going to have to operate.
They might not be able to accomplish utilizing these action items if they are not successful in increasing hotel occupancy.
Mayor Bier asked Asst. City Manager Carter, if they could have quarterly meetings as mentioned by Councilmember Beckmeyer, and they see that things need to be changed in the budget, if that is possible to do by amending the budget after this meeting.
Asst. City Manager Carter would like to hear from the City Attorney from a legal perspective.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that you can.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that, if they set the report as proposed and things change and any budget is a plan and things change, and throughout the year, they can continue working with the BID and bring different recommendations to Council and can work on different structure and different plans.
Mayor Bier agreed, and added to evaluate how things are going.
Asst. City Manager Carter wanted to mention that, given the shape of the contract with CDA, they need to identify key performance indicators to measure success in a specific way. That would be an indication for how well they do. She stated that every quarter they will see what they have done and what they have produced. It would be helpful if they could align those indicators to the BID so they can be on the same page. She stated that the challenge is that the city has not been able to start the work-cation program because they have no platform to launch it other than the city website which is not the best platform.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, to specifically answer her question, the city would not amend the budget or their work plan mid-year as that is an annual process that supports the reassessment. He thinks what the Councilmembers are talking about is the importance of working collaboratively together now that the city has this professional marketing firm involved and they are all working toward the same goal is and let them evaluate as they go along on a City Council Regular Meeting 26 June 13, 2022
quarterly basis about what is or is not working and learn to put together the most effective budget and work plan for each fiscal year. He referred to Asst. City Manager Carter mentioning that they have key performance indicators with CDA and suggests they try to align some of those and look at it and meet quarterly and ask how many Anchor magazines were distributed to Stockton or other areas and report on that information which they would like to get from BID.
He was sure the hotel BID members would also like to know that information.
Mayor Bier agreed, adding that it is setting up a structure moving forward where there is this total program evaluation and she thought it could work really well.
City Manager Woodhouse referred to comments he made earlier, i.e., this is a transition year as we are coming out of Covid, things have been very difficult in the tourist industry and it was an opportunity to look throughout the next year on how to work collaboratively on any tweaks or restructures necessary to the BID and be on the same page. He thought they could do that programmatically and periodically report back to Council. He stated that the City Attorney may be able to clarify but he suggested that they wouldn’t want to set up an amendment mid-year to the budget and the work plan.
City Attorney Kenyon agreed, and added that for clarity, there are three options for Council to do at this meeting. The first is, if you agree with the annual report as it was provided at the last meeting and attached to the staff report without any changes, you can have your final action on the BID at this time and approve the resolution with the attached report. The second is, if Council wants to make any changes to the report, that can be done at this meeting but they would need to know exactly what those changes would be. She didn’t hear any discussion on what the changes would be.
Councilmember O’Neill thought she was talking about line items.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that Asst. City Manager Carter’s comments about $8,500 already being paid by the city is a line item that can be removed at this meeting.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that his concerns about the Anchor magazine, shipping them to Sacramento and Stockton, etc., is a line item and he asked if that can be removed at this meeting,
Mayor Bier asked about changing line items to something different instead of removing things as they will still need them to be able to work.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that once they begin deliberations, which she didn’t think they have begun yet, Councilmembers will want to ask if anyone feels like they need to amend the report for any reason and then they can get a consensus of yes, and then they can have that discussion. If they don’t have a majority who want to amend the report, that will be a different conversation. She stated that, once they begin deliberations, it will be important for Council to focus on what changes, if any, do any Councilmembers want to make to the report.
Mayor Bier will accept the suggestion and pose the question.
City Council Regular Meeting 27 June 13, 2022
City Attorney Kenyon stated that, at the point when Council does start deliberations, she believes the City Clerk will be making Chamber Member Judan no longer a panelist, and if they have any more questions for him ask them now.
City Attorney Kenyon wanted to clarify that, if they have any questions for him, now is the time to ask them because he will be removed as panelist once Council starts deliberations.
Mayor Bier asked if any councilmembers had any additional questions for him.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that they obviously discussed this in the BID group and decided that this was the best way to go, that if they were going to add pages on the website it will cost money to get the company back on track with what they’re doing as they don’t have the same platform that the Chamber BID has and that will cost money. She stated this isn’t a question but it seems to her that this is where this is going and why they have this and they don’t know yet what they’re going to spend. She asked Chamber Member Judan if they don’t know now how much it’s going to cost for certain things.
Chamber Member Judan agreed, and that is why they estimated a specific buffer because the understanding through the CDA was that the amount of hours they’re going to spend for this specific campaign, and they took that in a 1-20 ratio as for every type BID they were going to put in was about 20 hours of work a button. They needed to make sure our expenditures would complement to support staff and that was going to compliment their efforts as well. They are not expecting to utilize all of it, but just to put a safe buffer on it.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she needs to understand something that goes along with what Councilmember O’Neill was saying, she referred to the City Attorney’s question about whether she was satisfied with the report and does she has any questions about the report.
She stated that she was specifically looking at packet page 412 that says “Pacifica hotels’ Business Improvement District report of resources and usage projected, July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023.” She stated that it shows that the projected BID assessment is $70,000. She asked if that was correct.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, off the top under uses, the first thing it has is $35,000 goes to the Chamber as the managing agency.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that the document they received recently shows an updated budget of $36,000 that is meant to replace the rest of the uses, which she guesses is on that page.
Chamber Member Judan responded affirmatively, adding that the other half going to the Chamber has no change.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that public relations Hook Line and Thinker is not currently on the budget.
Chamber Member Judan agreed that they are not, as they gave them 90 days notification and their contract will be ending.
City Council Regular Meeting 28 June 13, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he asked how much the management fee for the Chamber for this, and he had seen the $70,000 figure and he added up the expenditures of $36,000. He knows the Chamber has consistently taken a large percentage of the BID money for management, but he asked why he didn’t say that their projected revenue was $70,000 and the Chamber was taking roughly 50% when he asked the question.
Chamber Member Judan apologized if he didn’t, but that is what they had. He stated that it is not even the majority at 50% but that was basically the common fact in the offer that now is in play when he actually took on the position. He stated that they never reevaluated that set of conditions, and has just gone along with it.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought her question on that is, when they have a visitor center that was set up, she understood better what the service played out and how those funds were expended in light of driving business to hotels and serving hotel guests. She was trying to understand now is how is that different and how is it shaped since the Chamber doesn’t have the office on Rockaway Beach anymore.
Chamber Member Judan stated that they still have an office in Rockaway and they are paying for staff members to be on location so they can support visitors who come to the office.
Councilmember Beckmeyer concluded that it hasn’t changed.
Chamber Member Judan responded that they were still there and the visitors’ center is still there and accessible as well. He stated that the fund allocated through the Chamber is also used to pay for qualified staff to support the visitors’ center during operating hours.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it would be helpful to have a listing of that included, like Chamber managing agency, Chamber of Commerce, and a footnote stating open so many days and hours and they have a better handle on what that $35,000 is doing. She understands that Councilmember Vaterlaus said that they need money to do the work to refine and create this collaborative opportunity. She thought they were in the ballpark of where they need to be. She stated that none of them at this time can specifically zero in on exactly how much should be in the web, how much should be in the advertising and her general feeling is, tagging on to what Councilmember O’Neill is saying, putting a lot of expense into advertising in whatever form it takes, and they don’t have a contract with Via magazine. She thought that was where they need to place some dollars. She stated that now it is specifically limited to Via and Pacifica Anchor magazines, and she referred to Mayor Bier’s point of not taking away things but reallocate things, and she thought they may need to think about adding more funds into that segment because they want to do the advertising to reach those potential visitors, which is her suggestion.
Chamber Member Judan thought those were great suggestions, and now that they have the open line of communication, they will be happy to make those suggestions, especially if they have quarterly meetings. He stated that their intention is to definitely establish a symbiotic relationship with the city and supporting the city’s marketing efforts to campaign. He stated that the door is definitely open and they should take up an opportunity for that.
Councilmember O’Neill asked when their last meeting was with all the BID members.
Chamber Member Judan stated that the last meeting was the first quarter of this year in March City Council Regular Meeting 29 June 13, 2022
and they are due for their second quarter meeting, and he had to push it back to get all the board members in and they had challenges already to get the BID meeting with the city. He was trying to coordinate with a lot of them.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that his question was how many BID members were there at the meeting.
Chamber Member Judan asked if he was referring to the one with CDA.
Councilmember O’Neill stated no, he was asking how many board BID members did they have at the last meeting of the BID, specifically when have they had every BID member there or a majority of the BID members.
Chamber Member Judan stated that they always did a majority for a quorum and they had five at their last meeting.
Councilmember O’Neill asked when that was.
Chamber Member Judan stated it was March for Q1.
Councilmember O’Neill asked which hotels they were.
Chamber Member Judan stated that they had Anchor Inn, Seabreeze, the newest hotel, Fairmont. He stated that the ones missing were Lighthouse.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if the American Motor Inn.
Chamber Member Judan stated the American Motor Inn.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she was going back to her original request for a quarterly meeting and she requested that the meeting occur in due time to allow a preparation of the agenda for the quarterly BID meeting, so they are not one and the same, but pulling together the information that they are asking for so it can be presented to the BID. She stated that would be to answer the City Attorney’s question that she would feel better about this report if she had a sense of that.
Mayor Bier asked if they need to not have Chamber Member Judan for now.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that she thought they were still asking questions of him, and she asked if they are because, if they are, he needs to stay on, but if they are done with questions, then they need a majority of Council to give any direction to staff or anyone. She thought it would be clear if they conclude questions for him and start deliberations formally.
Mayor Bier thanked Chamber Member Judan, and they appreciated him.
Councilmember O’Neill stated he would like to propose as he thought he heard from at least three councilmembers that they need to look at the governing structure and maybe put on the staff work calendar revising some of the ordinances that were cited in the City Attorney’s memo.
He stated that the councilmembers have mentioned items and they were all regarding governance and he thinks they need to consider that. He stated he was putting a motion on the floor to get a sense of Council.
City Council Regular Meeting 30 June 13, 2022
City Manager Woodhouse wanted to add to what he was suggesting and coalesce what he heard from other Councilmembers. He has heard the importance of periodic quarterly meetings to talk about performance and specifically how different marketing money is being spent and how it is effective and an idea that might make sense is, right around mid-year, during the winter after a second quarterly meeting, to look at all of that information and potentially come back to Council with a summary report at that time and talk at that point about any ideas for refining, restructuring, or whatever they would call it to improve the whole process. After the BID and Chamber have gotten more specific about how they’re applying the marketing money and distributing the Anchor magazine, report to Council with that data and options for how to improve the BID moving forward from that mid-year point and it would give them time to prep for the consideration and reassessment or other code changes by budget time in the spring. He stated that is what he is suggesting timing wise that might make sense.
Mayor Bier agreed with that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed also, adding that she thinks the timing of that could lead into goal setting as it is a work plan item. She stated that, if they are going to update the ordinance, they are talking about a process from what she understands from the City Attorney. She stated that they will have to get their arms around with what that would look like. She stated that they have been talking about changing BID randomly over years so she thinks this is a structured way to go about that.
Councilmember O’Neill agreed with that.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated the needed to take public comment on this.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that there weren’t any.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck agreed.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought they should go forward now and look at it again in six months.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that going to the three things they have a choice to do at this meeting, she asked what they were doing.
Councilmember O’Neill didn’t see the Anchor magazine being an effective use of the advertising. He stated that you put the magazine in surrounding communities, such as Concord, Danville, Pleasanton, etc., and he asked where they will put a magazine on display that is going to be effective versus if you do something on line which is more cost effective, less use of resources, less labor intensive as you don’t have someone drive to those towns to deliver or hire someone to do an advertisement in Facebook, etc., Mayor Bier stated that they aren’t only a magazine, which she thinks he is missing the point about Pacifica Anchor, as they are on a blog, on social media and not just a paper magazine.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he said this is ads in magazines to distribute to neighboring cities.
Mayor Bier understands that, but she thinks they need to give them a chance so they can City Council Regular Meeting 31 June 13, 2022
evaluate it. She thinks what the City Manager said is appropriate so they can have some evaluation measures and take a look at it and change it if they need to.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if it was appropriate for the city to pay for CDA to do this same project and then have the BID pay the same amount again of $8,500.
Mayor Bier stated that is what they can work on between now and the next quarter and they can figure out where the money really needs to be. She stated that they don’t have an answer now.
Councilmember Vaterlaus didn’t think they will know how much money is going to be there. She stated that they can look at the differences in what they estimated before and what it is now.
She asked how they know as it is a hard measure as they don’t have an exact measure of what things improved the TOT.
Mayor Bier stated that is what they need to work on.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that it is because it is hard to know where it came from. She stated that it is because the whales came and maybe more people come and stay in the hotels because the whales came. She stated that it may not have anything to do with advertising.
She questioned how you know that.
Mayor Bier stated that it was a hard thing to measure.
Councilmember Vaterlaus agreed it is hard to measure.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, what they do know, is that they get a report from HDL that tells them what their TOT is. She asked if that is correct.
Asst. City Manager Carter responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed that they can’t define exactly what levers were pulled to make that happen but they can at least track the revenue and, with more communication, knowing what the different campaigns were along the line of what Daisy Fong was presenting earlier about the Shop Pacifica. She stated that, with more data, they will have an opportunity to look at it.
Councilmember O’Neill thought, if he remembers correctly, they hired a consultant who will be able to track where people came from by their cell phone, and if they could access that data, they should be able to find out if these people come from San Bruno or Sacramento, Stockton or Fresno.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought that would be one of the items on the work plan, in terms of the quarterly meeting.
City Manager Woodhouse stated he would jump in and draw the distinction between options 1 and 2. He stated that, if Council wants to make a change to a budget line item or an item in the report, such as how the marketing money is spent, they can direct that change at this meeting and they will reschedule and reset the public hearing for June 27 and do the adoption on June
27. If they don’t make any changes to the report but generally saying that it is a budget, projection, and they will evaluate it in their quarterly conversations and analysis and keep performance indicator evaluations and they come back mid-year to reassess but they don’t City Council Regular Meeting 32 June 13, 2022
make any specific changes in the plan. That is Option 1 and they can adopt the assessment at this meeting. He asked City Attorney Kenyon and Asst. City Manager Carter if he has that right.
City Attorney Kenyon agreed, and clarified that a bit more and say that what she is hearing is that Council thinks that they will be able to modify this report mid-year based upon their discussions with the BID members, but that is not the case. She stated that this report and the line items on the report will stay and Council will have no authority to make any amendments to the budget line items. The BID members may voluntarily choose to make those changes but there is no leverage for the Council to impose that on them. She stated that she is hearing one option to make no changes to the report, but meet with the BID members to work on how this report and analysis could be improved for next year, but it will not be improved for this year.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that he heard some interest from Councilmembers on the midyear piece is not making changes to the report at that time, but evaluating the data and performance to be able to work towards potential restructuring next year.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she wants to be able to tie the actions that happen to the subject and to say that these places happened through the website, and the five blogs were done so we see where the specific actions are coming from but now it looks like she would lump Item 4 with Item 1 as she didn’t understand the real difference from the blog site and website.
She stated that, since it’s listed that way and they think it will be $1.000 to do the blog site only and the rest is website, she didn’t have a basis for telling them it is not but she needs to know that those actions got done.
Mayor Bier asked, because they didn’t have enough time to give them the details, if they would be more comfortable to ask them to come back to give them more detailed line items.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that is where she wants to be clear. She stated that their options are limited. Either they accept the report or they amend the report, and those are the formal actions they can take at this meeting. The other measures that they are asking to meet with the BID members mid-year or quarterly are unrelated to the formal actions they need to take at this time. Her suggestion is that they get consensus on Council as to whether or not they want to accept the report as is with all the line items in there and, if so, they will choose Option 1. She stated that, because you choose Option 1 does not mean, regarding Councilmember Beckmeyer’s suggestion, that you can then give direction to staff to schedule meetings with a subcommittee of the Council and BID members mid-year or quarterly to talk about their progress. They are not going to be talking about amending the budget because the budget cannot be amended. If Council uncomfortable with the budget as described in the annual report, along the lines of what Councilmember O’Neill has raised, they are then going to want to decide whether they want to amend the report to reduce one line item as was offered by staff in their PowerPoint presentation, $8,500 or another figure and they would take that out of the line item for the report, they can do that, but that is all that motion would be and then they could make another motion to direct staff to continue to work with the BID on a quarterly basis or midyear to address how this budget is working, but from what she is hearing, she didn’t think Option 3 is on the table any longer, and it should be either they want to accept the report and meet with the BID or amend the report at this time and then meet with the BID. She stated those were their two options.
Mayor Bier asked Councilmember Vaterlaus and Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck what their thoughts were.
City Council Regular Meeting 33 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought they should accept it and vote on it, then come back after and meet with the BID quarterly to assess what has occurred, how the things they proposed worked and, if those in the BID want to change those, they can change it themselves but the budget stays the same. She stated that they will determine at that time whether the items they are doing are actually working and they will have seen what it is like to work with the other company, and maybe they don’t need as much as they budgeted for and they move it to something else, but they choose that option.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck appreciated that this seems to be bringing essentially a sense of selfawareness to the BID that wasn’t there before, and they are now more aware and that collaboration is genuinely has begun to occur in a way that it hasn’t before, i.e., a sense of accountability to what they need this to be. He stated that, within that context, the quarterly meetings are the proper mechanism for that to happen. He stated that a technical thing that mildly annoys him that they have this newer report that came today and he can point to the Hook, Line and Thinker that was just in the original report and not in this one. He didn’t know if it matters that they have been given 90 days’ notice and they will be gone. He stated that was in the original report, but will not exist going forward. He favors the second one but that means another meeting and he appreciated why that might not be something they want to do. He didn’t know that it matters, but it annoys him enough that he had to mention it.
Mayor Bier thought they have do head nods for those who want to accept No. 1.
Councilmember Beckmeyer wanted to clarify something. She stated that, if they don’t agree with No. 1, that means they change it and they have to do it again on the 27th.
Mayor Bier responded affirmatively.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck hoped that, as a result of this meeting, they have gotten most of their deliberations out of the way and it doesn’t seem like the public is overwhelming clamoring to add an extra half hour to the process. He thought, if they bring it back with the changes they want to see, it may not be the worst thing in the world.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it was two weeks, and she asked if it was reasonable to think that they can meet and change things and bring it back in two weeks.
Mayor Bier stated that they need to be specific about the changes.
City Attorney agreed and stated that, in order to do Option 1 or Option 2, they have to make a decision at this meeting and they will not be consulting with the BID about those changes and the changes will either be made at this time by Council if a majority has line item changes they want to make or they will accept the report as is. Under either option, she thought they will likely still have an additional direction to staff following whatever motion is finally approved to meet with the BID on a quarterly basis to go over progress on the budget that is adopted at this time, whether an amended budget or the budget attached to the staff report.
Mayor Bier stated that, if they want to make changes, they should talk about what those are going to be.
City Manager Woodhouse wanted the City Attorney to clarify specifically that, once Council specifies changes, then they need to get a revised report from the Chamber on behalf of the BID and agendize it for the next City Council meeting for a decision about assessment of the City Council Regular Meeting 34 June 13, 2022
fees.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that the report has to be modified at this meeting. They are not going to get another report back from the BID. She stated that they need to notice, prior to June 27, is the final report.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, on the 27th, they do notice the revised report that the Council revised at this meeting and that gets agendized for the 27 th for adoption. He asked if
that needs to be a public hearing.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that it is the same hearing that they have at this meeting.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated, before Councilmembers O’Neill and Beckmeyer recommend changes, he wanted to be clear about his stance, which is fundamentally he is neutral and has an existential concern because there is an obvious discrepancy between what reality is and what the first report says, and that mean, if they are changing one of the reports, he would favor changing the second one and working with the one they received on this day as it seems to be the most up to date and clear about what should be amended to make it what it is going to be.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she is having a hard time, and is going to run out of batteries, so if she falls off, she will have to log in on a different computer. She looked at today’s report, and the new Exhibit G is a text listing of activities with the priority given to maintaining VisitPacifica.com website which it states in the opening paragraph, and she agrees with it. She thought that was a valuable asset and is the thing that they want CDA working with the BID and Chamber on and it sounds like they are making progress on that. She asked Asst.
City Manager Carter if that was her impression, i.e., Chamber staff and CDA working together on VisitPacifica and access to those assets.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that at the initial meeting on the 9th, they haven’t started working yet so the fourth is coming and they still need the city to have access and still have plans on how it is going to work, budget pages, etc.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that in principle, the agreement is that is going to happen.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that there was definitely progress compared to the original report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, with websites, it is kind of where she sees it going and other blog items. On Exhibit G, the text list, there are four items, one of which is public relations. She stated that there are a number of action items underneath that about hosting media, doing a wellness media influencer plan, which is a familiarization trip. She didn’t see those action items reflected in Exhibit H which is the marketing action plan projected budget.
She stated that, when they talk about changes to the report, either she asks what is going on with No. 1 on Exhibit G needs to be reflected in Exhibit H, or maybe they set that aside for the time being and focus on website , social media and advertising as reflected in Exhibit H. She stated that they should strike Item 5, other BID rep/marketing consultant TBD on go as that doesn’t mean anything to her. She stated that, if the budget is for $36,000, that what they project is going to be available and the rest is going to the Chamber as a management fee. She stated that she is okay with the way it is broken down, knowing that they are not going to know the specifics of exactly what they do every day up to 20 times. She gets that they won’t know and won’t be able to change it after this meeting. She is not comfortable with public relations City Council Regular Meeting 35 June 13, 2022
PR , No. 1 and a whole list of what appear to be action items when there is no reflection of those action items in the budget on Exhibit H.
City Manager Woodhouse asked Councilmember Beckmeyer if she and Asst. City Manager Carter are able to take what she was saying and make it a specific change recommendation to the plan, and they can take each change piece by piece and say change No. 1 is this, delete the list on H or how she wants to express it.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they will be voting on No. F or H. He stated that Councilmember Beckmeyer is revising H, but he thought they were voting on F.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought it was the whole report.
Councilmember O’Neill understood that it is the whole thing, and he asked if that was accurate.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that was what the City Attorney said.
City Attorney Kenyon clarified that any item that is part of the annual report. She asked Asst.
City Manager Carter if she can assist Council in figuring out, when they are making a mention, as when Councilmember Beckmeyer is making suggestions, it would be helpful if staff could then say that would be change “blank” to page “such and such” of the annual report to help Council, as it is going to get very confusing, given the length of the report. She stated that they need to help Council, and they need to know from Council what changes they want to make, and as soon as they make that suggestion, it would be helpful if staff could help them figure out where in the report that change would be made.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that Councilmember Beckmeyer wanted to reconcile Exhibit F to Exhibit H in the budget.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, at that time, she was only looking at G, not F, and Councilmember O’Neill was looking at F.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that Exhibit H, F is the side to Exhibit H in the dollar figures.
Exhibit G is not represented in the dollars, and that is what Councilmember Beckmeyer was not comfortable with.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed, and added that maybe they should remove the whole item as it is not useful. She stated that she didn’t see Item 1 on Exhibit G reflected in F or H. She doesn’t see PR or familiarization trips. She stated that, maybe when they had more money coming in they were doing that, but maybe they cut it out because the budget is lower. All she can say is that, if they are receiving the report, it is internally inconsistent.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if it would be safe to say that she is proposing that they eliminate Item G1 to move this along.
Councilmember Beckmeyer responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that was the first cut. He asked if there were three councilmembers who agree with that.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated it was from the City Clerk.
City Council Regular Meeting 36 June 13, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill acknowledged that it was from the City Clerk.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck didn’t mind that and he would hope, in the future, they put dollar amounts to it as he likes the ideas that are put there, but he agrees that there should be dollar amounts associated with it. He thought it would be great in the future if that wasn’t abandoned by the BID that they come back with a monetary plan behind it.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that Exhibit G does not have any dollar figures, and she asked if Council would be comfortable moving this into a mid-year checkpoint as far as the progress is concerned. She stated that they aren’t amending the budget because it is not part of the budget.
Councilmember O’Neill concluded that she was recommending deleting Item G and it comes back in the meeting mid-year. He is okay with that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed and suggested they do that.
Councilmember Vaterlaus agreed.
Councilmember O’Neill concluded that now they are only considering F and H.
Mayor Bier thanked staff for helping them along.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they need to change the language in paragraph 1 of Exhibit F to reflect any agreement that has been made between CDA and the BID around how they are working together. She stated that they will work with the Chamber of Commerce’s BID representative and the city’s third party marketing consultant, CDA to ensure the implementation of the strategic plan that compliments the Chamber’s and the city’s initiates to promote Pacifica.
She thinks they know what they are talking about there, but she is asking Asst. City Manager Carter if there needs to be any more specific language in there around this now collaborative working relationship that they forged.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated it was hard for her to understand what that really means and where they are with the work because of meeting and they now send the request to BID what exactly needs to be happening in terms of deliberation and collaboration on how they can work together. She stated that as the Mayor earlier stated they need to start the work.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they will need parameters around that, like by June this will happen, by October this will happen, or are they just going to manage point, trusting that they all understand each other and they are going to make these quarterly meetings happen and they are going to work on it.
Councilmember O’Neill thought the BID have been pretty evasive. He stated that Asst. City Manager Carter asked for clarification on the budget and it was delivered three days late and was not able to be included in the packet to the public but they got to the supplemental at this time. He thought the first meeting will be held by June 30 or something to that effect.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that they are like Council, basically volunteers.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that the Chamber is being paid $35,000 according to their City Council Regular Meeting 37 June 13, 2022
budget.
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked what that is, i.e., they have to pay for their space and they have a part time person there. She stated that the person isn’t in charge of the BID. She stated that they have to pay for PG&E., a copier, and she asked how much is really going toward the person. She stated that, if someone is late, they have to consider all the things they are doing and they have another job just like Councilmembers have another job.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that they think they understand what their goal is.
Mayor Bier asked what changes they are going to be making.
Councilmember O’Neill suggested that they just add a phrase on there that the budget is being approved by City Council on the condition that the BID works with the city and CDA.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that it was fine to put that language in there, but she also thought it was important that the Council understands that language like that would not allow the Council mid-year to amend this report to make any changes to the numbers. Usually, when there are amendments to annual reports made, they deal with monetary amounts as opposed to narrative about meeting because there are no conditions to this report in terms of the money being allocated. The money will be allocated and she thinks the vehicle that the Council will use to try to get cooperation from the BID is really their quarterly meeting or if they want more control, which she is hearing, it sounds like Council would like to have more involved in what is being discussed and entertained for purposes of the budget of the BID. There are ways to restructure the bid and you can talk about mid-year as the City Manager laid out, but when you are talking about amending the annual report, most Councils will look at the monetary issues for amending the annual report as opposed to goals of cooperation between the city and the BID. She says that also because what they have to do at this meeting is actually read into the record whatever changes are made to whatever pages in the annual report are being changed, and if there is one page in the annual report that implicates another change, someone will have to read the whole report and make sure that it is consistent. She was bringing this up as it is a herculean task if Council really wants to make more than just budget line item changes to the annual report. They can do that, but it is going to take Asst. City Manager Carter, City Manager Woodhouse and her quickly going through the whole annual report to see if there are references in other narratives that would contradict the language they are drafting in one section. She stated that they can do it, but they will have to be very precise.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that Asst. City Manager Carter can tell her if this fits in that section that Councilmember Beckmeyer raised, to add general language that says the city and a quorum of BID members in the chamber will meet quarterly, will review performance and discuss performance measures in gathering information to report back mid-year to Council.
They aren’t saying anything about revising the report, just being more specific about the quarterly meeting process. He stated that quarterly typically means by the end of September, by the end of December, by the end of March but he doesn’t want to specify those actual deadlines but he asked if that fits in that section and does it add any value to that section, as that is a general change that is not overly specific but if it adds value, that might be good.
City Attorney Kenyon thought that change could work. She asked Asst. City Manager Carter as they need to make sure that there is a contradictory language somewhere else, and she cannot recall if there might be. If she is not concerned with that, that is fine, and she stated to remember that this report needs to be internally consistent and she didn’t know if the report at City Council Regular Meeting 38 June 13, 2022
all in any other location talks about other meetings with the city. If it doesn’t, that statement is perfectly capable of being inserted wherever Council wants in the report.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that to best of her knowledge, this section of the report is brand new that was the notification that was done with distribution and there is nowhere in the original report that the BID talked about the quarterly meetings. She also emphasized that with it would be very helpful to align the key performance indicators and bring them together on the same page in alliance with the quarterly reviews and those indicators will include something like how many posts were done last quarter and what did they produce.
Mayor Bier referred to the City Manager mentioning the quorum of the BID and she thought that part is important and those words need to be there. She agrees with those changes.
City Manager Woodhouse asked of one of the Councilmembers would like to say that specifically or repeat what Asst. City Manager Carter kind of throws out language and that would be change No. 2 to the report.
City Attorney Kenyon asked where that change would be, and suggested that they be specific, as to what page would exhibit and what is the exact language that they would. She didn’t write down what he said, and asked that he say it again so that it would be easier for Council to say what the City Manager said. She stated that they are more familiar with the report and where would be the appropriate place to make that change.
Mayor Bier stated that Councilmember Beckmeyer dropped off but she thought she will be back on as soon as possible.
City Manager Woodhouse asked Asst. City Manager Carter to identify the page and paragraph, but the general language he said was that the city and the Chamber and a quorum of the BID will meet quarterly to discuss performance, alignment of performance measures, and gather information to be able to report back to the Council mid-year.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that those changes will be made to item 1 on Exhibit F.
City Manager Woodhouse saw some head nods.
Councilmember Vaterlaus so moved to accept the report with the changes made to Section 1, Exhibit F as read by the City Manager.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that they don’t have to vote yet. This is change No. 2, and now the question is whether there were any other specific changes Council wanted to discuss.
City Attorney Kenyon asked what the first change that they agreed on.
City Manager Woodhouse stated it was getting rid of Exhibit B and directing those items to be discussed.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that the motion would be just to delete Exhibit G.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that the last one was to strike line 5 from the budget in Exhibit H.
City Council Regular Meeting 39 June 13, 2022
Mayor Bier asked if they had enough direction and are they ready to move on.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that they need a motion.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that they need a formal motion and she would guess that somebody will make a motion for Option 2 as amended per staff discussion.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved.
City Attorney Kenyon stated it would be to adopt and suggested they share the screen with the options.
Mayor Bier thought Councilmember Vaterlaus made a motion.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if Councilmember Vaterlaus made a motion while she was off.
Mayor Bier asked Councilmember Vaterlaus if she did.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that it was not the formal motion that they needed. She stated that, you see the action item on the screen.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to adopt a resolution confirming the receipt of the annual report of the Advisory Board of the Pacifica Hotel Business Improvement District (BID) and declaring the City Council’s intention to continue the BID program and levee the annual assessments for the fiscal year 2022-2023 at the same rate without change as leveed in the fiscal year of 2021-2022 as amended. She asked if she has to enumerate the amendment.
City Manager Woodhouse stated as amended by the three items specifically identified by staff.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked the City Attorney if they just specify it.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that the City Manager did just did.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated as amended by the three items.
City Attorney Kenyon stated referred to by the City Manager.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated referred to by staff.
City Attorney Kenyon agreed by staff.
Councilmember Vaterlaus seconded the motion.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 4-1 (No: O’Neill)
Mayor Bier called a 5-minute break then reconvened the meeting.
City Council Regular Meeting 40 June 13, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [4 TO 1]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
NAYS: O'Neill
CONSIDERATION
13. Consideration of (1) a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for By-District Elections to Elect One Member of the City Council from Districts 2, 3 and 5 Each, for a Full Four-Year Term; Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City's General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services; Adopting Regulations Pertaining to the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications; and authorize the City Manager to Execute the Service Agreement for Election Services; and (2) adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for Submission to the Qualified Voters of the City an Advisory Measure Regarding the Sale and Use of State-Approved “Safe and Sane” Fireworks in the City and Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services.
PROPOSED ACTION:
(1) Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for By-District Elections to Elect One Member of the City Council from Districts 2, 3 and 5 Each, for a Full Four-Year Term; Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City's General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services"; Adopting Regulations Pertaining to the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications and authorize the City Manager to Execute the Service Agreement for Election Services; and
(2) Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for Submission to the Qualified Voters of the City an Advisory Measure Regarding the Sale and Use of State-Approved “Safe and Sane” Fireworks in the City and Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services.
City Clerk Coffey presented the staff report.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that they need to be more specific, and asked her to cite the actual paragraph to which she is referring otherwise Council will have to recite those changes, and she would prefer she cite them on behalf of Council and they can make the motion, “as amended by staff”.
City Clerk Coffey continued the staff report with the specific changes.
City Attorney Kenyon asked if she was saying that this agreement needs to delete. She stated that the City Clerk was working off the agreement attached to the staff report, and what needs to be amended in the agreement that was attached to the staff report and go to that paragraph and say “these words should be deleted”.
City Council Regular Meeting 41 June 13, 2022
City Clerk Coffey referred to the sentence in the first paragraph of the agreement in the staff report, and read “the municipality and chief election officer shall be collectively referred to as parties” shall be stricken.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that was one change, and asked what was another change.
City Clerk Coffey stated the election services to be performed by the municipality does not have a section No. 1 enumerated and is just a heading, “services to be performed by the municipality."
City Attorney Kenyon asked what was being deleted in the report that is attached to the staff report.
City Clerk Coffey stated enumerator 1 of that section.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if it was roman numeral I.
City Attorney Kenyon got it.
City Clerk Coffey stated similarly II is not included.
City Attorney Kenyon stated it should be deleted. She stated that she is amending a contract attached to the staff report and she is deleting I and II.
City Clerk Coffey stated and deleting III is end of term. She stated, under the section terms, the paragraphs were not enumerated and removing 1, 2 and 3, but keeping the paragraphs.
City Attorney Kenyon stated it is 4 which will be renumbered 1.
City Clerk Coffey stated that they will not be numbered.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that they are keeping paragraph 4 and deleting paragraph 1 to 2 under roman numeral.
City Clerk Coffey stated that they are keeping paragraph 1, 2 and 3 but they will not be enumerated.
City Attorney Kenyon asked what is being deleted.
City Clerk Coffey stated that they are deleting, under Section 3, paragraph 4. For cost for services, they are deleting.
City Attorney Kenyon stated they are deleting Roman numeral IV.
City Clerk Coffey stated that they are deleting the numbers 1 and 2 but keeping the contents of those paragraphs. They are deleting the section titled miscellaneous in its entirety.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that they are deleting roman numeral V in that section miscellaneous entirely.
City Clerk Coffey stated that the changes are non-substantiative in nature and for the purpose of City Council Regular Meeting 42 June 13, 2022
the County Services agreement being consistent across all cities. She stated that will be the amendment with the service agreement. She stated that the second part of this item will be a resolution calling for the election and adding a ballot measure to the November 8, 2022 election for the purpose of an advisory measure regarding the safe and sane fireworks program which was discussed by City Council at the February 8, 2021 Council meeting at which time Council provided directions to the staff to prepare a ballot measure for the next regular election, November 8, 2022. She stated that the ballot measure would be advisory in nature similar to the 1996 measure U. The ballot measure language will be, “shall the city of Pacifica amend its municipal code to prohibit the ignition use discharge or sale of all state approved safe and sane fireworks in the city of Pacifica”. Based on the results from that advisory measure vote, the City Council would then provide a review of that vote and provide further direction to staff if any changes to the program are advised.
Mayor Bier stated that, when it comes time, they will be calling for a motion to vote for each one separately.
City Clerk Coffey responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they were voting on the actual verbiage at this meeting that is going in regarding the fireworks.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if what the City Clerk read is the actual verbiage.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that it is the ballot measure language.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, with the income to the non-profits as major, he thought they should put an effective date in there. He stated that it is happening in November 2022 and he asked if they want to put in there effective January 1, 2023 or go to January 1, 2024 as he thought that was fair.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that this is an advisory measure and it takes no action but giving the Council an indication of what the community feels about this question.
Councilmember O’Neill understood, but however it turns out, it will probably go that way and he thought it was only fair for the non-profits to know that, if it passes in November, they don’t get fireworks in 2023 or if delayed, it is 2024.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that, what most cities do when they have these type of resolutions, as soon as the vote is certified, and whatever the direction is on the vote, it will immediately come back to Council for direction on what to do, as there are a lot of actions that Council has to take to eliminate safe and sane fireworks in the city and during those actions Council can decide at that time when they want it to take effect.
Councilmember O’Neill asked what the problem was in telling the public the date Council will make this effective.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that is a discussion Council needs to make now.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that is what he is asking, i.e., to have a discussion with Council to City Council Regular Meeting 43 June 13, 2022
decide if they want to put a date in there so they are all aware that it is effective on a specific date, and he is just picking the January 1 date for 2023 or 2024 and the non-profits get over $100,000 a year and they will need some notice to try to make up that loss of income, and the city preparing their budget for the loss of $35,000 or $40,000 that pays for overtime for police and fire.
Mayor Bier asked if they had any questions and she thought they should bring it to public comment first and then discuss it. She asked Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck if he had a question.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he was going to ask if they were deliberating at this time or if they wanted to pause in deliberation until after public comments.
Mayor Bier opened public comments.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti stated that there were no hands raised.
Mayor bier closed public comments.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he didn’t know either way what he wants to implement, and he thought a bigger discussion for him is what involvement, if any, Council is going to have in contemplating a replacement program, such as whether it means strongly encouraging the community to take whatever actions they can to get money or if they contemplate putting a task force together before they get rid of it. He thought it was a larger process question and he was comfortable having that discussion after the vote of the people telling them whether, in general, they would pay for getting rid of fireworks or not.
Mayor Bier appreciated that as other communities do it, such as Coastside Gives to give to all the non-profits, and she thought that would be the discussion for them to have.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that they usually certify the election the first week of December, and the non-profits have their first meeting in February. He stated that, if they put January 1, 2023, the development of a whole funding alternative for the non-profits is three months to develop and implement a program and replace a budget implementation of January 1, or do they want to be faithful to the public and tell them they are voting to kill this in 2023 or 2024.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that he is putting the cart before the horse, as they don’t know how they are going to vote and Council makes the decision. She stated that, as in the past two elections, if people vote to keep safe and sane fireworks, and they put an end date on when it’s going to take effect, they basically cancel the program ahead.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he is throwing it out for discussion.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that is what she is doing, discussing just like he did.
Councilmember O’Neill understood.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he is comfortable with the language as it currently is.
Mayor Bier asked Councilmember Beckmeyer’s thoughts on this.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that her thinking is that this is advisory to Council and when City Council Regular Meeting 44 June 13, 2022
they have the result of the vote, they will have an immediate agenda item and they would determine things like an effective date, etc.
Mayor Bier agreed with that. She stated that they will definitely give them a heads up. If they vote against the fireworks, they will have to talk about what that is going to look like for our community and go from there.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that, as an advisory, Council still makes the choice.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that they have a consensus that there is no further discussion and he was ready to make a motion.
Mayor Bier stated that he has to make two separate motions.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck moved to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for By-District Elections to Elect One Member of the City Council from Districts 2, 3 and 5 Each, for a Full Four-Year Term; Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services; Adopting Regulations Pertaining to the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications and authorize the City Manage to Execute the Service Agreement for Election Services as amended by staff; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
Councilmember O’Neill referred to the past when they have done this, and asked City Clerk Coffey if it comes now or later, whether the city pays for the candidates’ statement or do the candidates pay for it or is that later.
City Clerk Coffey stated that it is included in the text of the resolution that the candidates will pay for the printing of each candidates’ statements and provide for a deposit in the amount of $300 and that will be refunded or invoice pursuant to the actual cost provided by the election division.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #13-1, as Amended)
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck moved to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 , for Submission to the Qualified Voters of the City an Advisory Measure Regarding the Sale and Use of State-Approved “Safe and Sane” Fireworks in the City and Requesting San Mateo County to consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #13-2)
Mayor Bier stated that it was 10:38 PM and she asked if they have a motion to extend the meeting to a certain time.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck moved to extend the meeting to midnight; seconded by City Council Regular Meeting 45 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (extend meeting to midnight)
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
14. Update on Implementation of the Short-term Rental Program PROPOSED ACTION: Receive update on Short-term Rental Program.
Acting Planning Director Murdock presented the staff report.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that code enforcement will be going after those who are using the ADUs.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that he thought the first follow up will be from the consultant, HDL, who has the primary responsibility at this time to follow up with unregistered short term rentals, thinking through the taxation component that they are primarily responsible for, and in the event the operators do not respond or fail to comply, the code enforcement officer following up, as well as other legal civil remedies, are options the city can exercise to the chief complaint.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked, for the operators utilizing ADUs, HDL is the starting point.
Acting Planning Director Murdock responded affirmatively, clarifying that they are the ones who are sifting through all the available data to identify where these are. He stated that it can be challenging as the limited information that is published on some of the postings can make it difficult to find the physical locations and HDL is using a variety of data points and sources to try to locate and contact the owners and initiate that outreach and notification process. As detailed in the staff report, not all operators know that there is a requirement to register, and some of them could be unwittingly violating the law and, with most people, once notified, they will take the appropriate steps to comply and they have taken that cooperative enforcement approach this far and HDL is the primary source for that.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he didn’t want to infer that he was thinking in terms of what he would want, but rather that he wants to understand the question. He thought, if they wanted to, they can’t limit the number of ADUs in our community and he asked if that is correct and if so, are there ways to amend the ordinance.
Acting Planning Director Murdock thought he meant limit the number of short-term rentals.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck agreed, as he knows they can’t limit the number of ADUs.
Acting Planning Director Murdock agreed they don’t want to do that, but as far as STRs, the city has options for imposing a cap which would require more significant research to try to determine the best regulatory approach for doing that, given Pacifica’s unique considerations. He stated that a number of cities have imposed counts and it is legally possible. He stated that the City Council Regular Meeting 46 June 13, 2022
program administration and all the consequences, depending on the regulatory approach, is something they would need to flesh out and give Council the appropriate set of options to consider.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that it sounds like they were on the beginning end of putting our mechanisms in place for identifying the ADUs and making sure we are monitoring them to begin with.
Acting Planning Director Murdock agreed, adding that the research involved in it was illuminating for him as he wasn’t aware that a number of ADUs were being used for that purpose and this first report is the first step and there will be follow up action by staff to try to rectify that situation for ADUs.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if any short term rentals we have in a multi-family unit are considered a hotel so they would fall under commercial building standards, such as sprinklers, etc.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that he wasn’t aware of a trigger for that, but it is something he can look into and follow up.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, a couple of years ago, he was given an address of a six-unit building in Sharp Park that converted every unit to a STR and he considered that person was running a hotel in a residential area and probably doesn’t have a sprinkler system, etc., that a commercial building would have, and he thought that was something they should consider. He stated that, at the League of Cities, some cities actually limit the number of guests to a house so you don’t have a huge party house of 25 people in a Linda Mar rancher. He would like to throw that out and see if they would like to do an amendment as he stated that they have all gotten emails from neighbors and it is usually is party city with a lot of cars and a lot of people. He asked if that would give police more options to clean it up and they revoke the license or something else. He stated that there was one city that had a requirement that the owner had to be on the premises, and he wasn’t sure how they would enforce that. He asked if this was an information item only, not voting.
Mayor Bier responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked how they find the short term rentals. She stated that she was trying to do research and it was almost impossible because it doesn’t have the address and they will go to a site and it will say plus 150 more and you go down a list and they are not Pacifica but in other cities but he pinpointed them on a map, and she thought they must have the exact address of the short term rentals from somewhere. She stated that the company she called did not call her back. She only asked them for the exact number and she tried several times but they didn’t get back to her. She is thinking about what Councilmember O’Neill mentioned regarding a six-unit building, and staff would have to check to see what the zoning of the building is as it might be zoned commercial already. She stated that most of the corners in Sharp Park are zoned commercial and if it is a building on a corner it is zoned commercial and, if over six units to start with, anything over five units is commercial. She thought that was something to look into.
Mayor Bier asked if there is any notification process, as she mentioned that one opened up kitty-corner to her house and it is super loud all the time and it is weird because there are always strangers. She asked if there is a notification process that has to go out when they open City Council Regular Meeting 47 June 13, 2022
up.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that the current set of regulations does not contain a notification requirement. The standards outlined in the staff report on packet page 453 at the top is the requirements. He stated that Councilmembers on the Council at the time might remember that they chose a light regulatory approach with the thought if seeing how it goes and at a minimum get them registered and take care of minimal public safety requirements for those in the units and begin to collect the tax revenue and, if there is a need that arises later, they can revisit the regulations. He stated that this report is part of the process of saying that a few years have gone by and they should see how things are going and decide if the city needs to revisit that as a policy item or are things generally working well as intended and they can make a decision.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she asked staff a question, and there wasn’t a way in the media to determine what benefit the opportunity to have a short term rental maybe affording our residents but they would technically not be the property owner and she stated it was very anecdotal but she was hearing that homes are being purchased and converted directly to STRs, and she is hearing from neighborhoods, as in lower Linda Mar where they thought it was going to be a family moving in because that is what they were told, and it became a full house STR.
She realizes that as mentioned earlier, they can’t differentiate as a property owner is a property owner, but when she thinks of someone investing in a home in Pacifica for a length of time, raised their family, are now in retirement and need a little supplement for their retirement income or want to travel part of the year and Airbnb their house part of the year, she thinks that is one type of category. The speculator who comes in, buys a home, and intends it to be an Airbnb income generator is another kind, from her point of view and she didn’t know how you address one versus the other. She referred to things Councilmember O’Neill brought up about limiting the number of residents and/or vehicle in each space, and what the Mayor brought up about the possibility of noticing when they have a use permit. She stated that, to close the street for a railcar demonstration, they have a process and have to ask the neighbors if it is okay. She thought, at minimum, they should be looking at something like that. She stated that she was on Council when they did agree to a waiting to see how it goes approach, but she thought it can become a Pandora’s Box. She was surprised and, as stated by Acting Planning Director Murdock, it was a little eye opening to see the data as when you hear anecdotal concerns from different people in your district or anywhere it town, it feels like it is a widespread problem and when you look at the data for other coastal communities, our numbers are very low. She stated that, on looking at the chart, as reported in the staff report, you can see where they are concentrated and she was concerned about Pedro Point and Sharp Park. She would like to look at the map in a way to expand it to see where all those dots that are standing on top of each other and where they are. She encouraged staff to explore and work more closely with the people who have the data because the people who are collecting money had to say where the address is, and they are on this side of the firewall but they work with the city and she thinks they need to explore it further and Councilmembers need to listen closely and pay attention at CalCity and other opportunities that we have to understand how these STRs are impacting other communities with which we interact. She is not asking for action now, but thinking about goal setting next year as, before it gets out of hand, they need to think about how to find some staff time to work on this.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he would save his deliberation until after public comment, but he wanted to dovetail that he has observations about one-bedroom stock on the other side.
Mayor Bier opened up public comments.
City Council Regular Meeting 48 June 13, 2022
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti introduced the speakers.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, stated that she concurs with one of the concluding remarks on staff’s summary that the STR ordinance was still relatively new and potentially this isn’t the time to make significant changes and she expressed her concerns that it has an ongoing potential to degrade the community aspects of their neighborhoods, mentioning some specific solutions and options.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, thanked staff, and she questioned the accuracy of the data on checking STRs, and shared her experience, thoughts and concerns on this issue.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck agreed with everything Councilmember Beckmeyer said and a lot of what Ms. Boles said. He stated that something that concerned him when the report was presented had to do with the fact that 50% of our studios or one-bedroom stock in Pacifica is being used for short term rental units.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that he needed to clarify what the data are stating, i.e., of the short term rentals operating, 57% are studio or one-bedroom and that is not the same thing as 57% of the city’s housing stock of studios and one-bedroom units are being used as short term rentals.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that he read it correctly but misunderstood him when he spoke.
Acting Planning Director Murdock apologized if he didn’t say it clearly.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he apologized for how he heard it.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that the point he tried to emphasize was that a disproportionate number of short-term rentals are studio and one-bedroom units when you look at the city’s housing stock overall, and if you are looking at impact unit types, you might want to look there first. He agreed that they tend to be the most affordable for long term occupancies and it could be a more acute relationship there between the impact of the housing stock and short-term rental operations.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that was his more acute concern, but he didn’t think he had to look at it as an emergency with how he was conceptualizing it. He was very concerned about having livable opportunities in our community, especially for any youth who may want to stay I n Pacifica for more than five minutes without a gazillion dollar job and that would be their only opportunity if it existed independent of a short term rental taking it up. He favors more robustly regulating this in any way Council would see fit and if it boils down to goal setting as the appropriate time to meditate on it, he would be fine with that, and if they want to take stab at it sooner, he was also fine with that. He thought Councilmember Beckmeyer elucidated his concerns.
Mayor Bier has the same concerns, specifically about the studio and one-bedroom, as it is not just youth who rent those but others and they need those units available. She was surprised that the numbers seemed low, but that was her perception as she hasn’t done the research.
City Council Regular Meeting 49 June 13, 2022
She thought the notification was important and it was time for them to look at it again at the right time, which they can talk about. She agreed with everything their callers said, i.e., looking at how it is impacting the neighborhood instead of the higher city and will be important data to address.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she knows two specific people who are Pacifica residents and got to stay in their residences because of short term rentals. She stated that one was divorcing and couldn’t keep her house without it, and the other was a person who was going to lose his house but turned it into part-time, short-term rental. He still lives in his house but he used it as short-term rental to make the funds to pay for his payments and it also keeps people in town who would have had to move out. She does see that maybe they are concentrated in certain areas and the notification of the neighbors is good also. She thought that maybe down the line they make additional rules. She stated that Tahoe has a rule that only two cars can be parked at the property in certain locations and that limits the number of people as the parties are a big problem. She stated that it was surprising that it was so little because they hear the stories and she thought the incidents of parties and getting out of hand was more than was reported.
Mayor Bier stated that she should start calling as they are so loud.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought what Councilmember Vaterlaus was saying harkens back to what Councilmember Beckmeyer was saying that she can conceptualize that they are two distinct groups. He stated that that what she was describing was there are some STRs that are regulated such as the owner having to be on the premises, in other communities, not Pacifica, and when the topic is brought up, he is chomping at the bit to have the greater discussion but he will wait for the appropriate time.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that he wanted to touch on one point from one of the public commenters. He stated that it sounded like there was interest from Council and he will talk to the City Manager on how that takes shape, and as far as the data, one of staff’s objectives moving forward is to continue to take a closer look and gather more data. He stated that they brought the consultant on line relatively recently and they are continuing to learn more about the capabilities the consultant can bring and the data they can gather and the analysis that the data can support. He referred to one point they heard, going into the assessment, there are hundreds of STRs if you go on Airbnb or other sites, and they had that impression as well, and speaking with the consultant that supports many communities in California with their shortterm rental programs, at first, it can look like there are hundreds of listing, but when they refine the data and do the analysis, many of those properties which are unknown to him, list multiple times, even on the same site, and you could see a listing for the same property 3-4 times, and it artificially inflates the number that appear to be active when, in fact, there is a smaller number.
He stated that, when they crunched the numbers and did the boil down analysis for Pacifica, they came up with 103 active figure, and that number fluctuates, and he can’t say that is the highest number that will ever be active, but it is perhaps not 300 or 400 based on the information from the city’s consultant.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she had a short-term rental in Arizona and she listed it on four sites, but not multiple times on each site. She stated that if they are taking VRVO, Airbnb, Glamping Hub and whatever the other one was, it would look like there were four listing when there was only one house.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that he is thinking that his role is coalescing input from City Council Regular Meeting 50 June 13, 2022
Council. He stated that short-term rentals are a complex topic and Acting Planning Director Murdock didn’t even mention the Coastal Commission aspect to regulation of short-term rentals and revising code. He stated that they are complex enough that changing the code would require a significant amount of staff time for research between Planning and the City Attorney’s office, and as Council is aware, they have a heavy workload in getting through the housing element approval in January. There were some questions he is hearing from Councilmembers saying this was the first annual summary report on how this evolving program is doing and the data surprisingly is that there are not as many as people thought, not as many complaints or real enforcement required as it may seem like. The question about timing, when to revisit it, and Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if during goal setting would be the appropriate context next year for updating data and seeing if Council wants to look at that. He stated that what he was looking for at this meeting is, because of the work plan impacts and what the data shows, he wasn’t recommending that they revisit ordinance revisions at this point in time and concurrence from Council. If that is true that they don’t want to direct revisiting ordinance aspects at this time, it is good to hear that, and alternatively, if they did, they would want to know specifically what they should be researching and when they should bring it back. He stated that, if they didn’t want that at this time, the concept of late winter bringing back updated data. He wanted to mention that Airbnb has really cracked down on the parties. He understood of the regulations is that you can’t have a gathering of more than 16 people otherwise you will lose your ability to be an Airbnb. He stated that it may have been updated even more recently. He stated that is the comments he has heard and getting specific direction about what to do is what he is looking for.
Mayor Bier acknowledged that they should give specific direction.
City Manager Woodhouse stated it should be thanks for the update and let’s continue to monitor it and prior to goal setting next year they will get another update of data.
Mayor Bier agreed to that.
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
15. FY 2022-2023 Program Options and Proposed Budget
PROPOSED ACTION: Hold public hearing and review and discuss the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Proposed General Fund and Other Funds Budget and provide additional policy direction on the desired budget options and strategies for the upcoming FY 2022-23 Budget.
City Manager Woodhouse stated he will forego any introductory comments and turn it over to Asst. City Manager Carter to dive in.
Asst. City Manager Carter continued the staff report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to her mention that it is not new money, and she wanted to clarify that there was a $200,000 item that was a place holder or estimate, and she asked if the $167.5 is in addition on top of the $200.
Asst City Manager Carter responded affirmatively, adding that the $200,000 was allocated for OPEB liability and the $167 addresses unfunded pension liability. She stated that this money is not something they obtained from CalPERS or somebody else; we are just setting this aside in another trust account.
City Council Regular Meeting 51 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer also wanted to clarify something that Councilmember O’Neill has brought up before, which is the more they are able to set aside money and show that when they are doing things like getting a bond rating and seeking financing for various things that help them.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that not only that but how they reduce them from the liability on the book. When they come back to Council with the next Comprehensive Annual Financial Report they will see that, by doing that, they can take advantage of the higher return rate and they will be able to reduce the liability from accounting at some point. She stated that it is a City trust account that they are moving money to hold that. She stated that, if the avenue to tap into this money, there is a mechanism to do that also. She then continued the staff report.
Mayor Bier opened public comments.
Mgmt. Analyst Barranti introduced the speaker.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she had a couple of questions. She was hearing from the Planning Commission that later there will be updates needed for landslides, fire maps, etc., the Housing budget had $20,000 and she thought that was low and mentioned several other categories, and she wanted to make sure they had enough money for various other items.
Asst. City Manager Carter wanted to clarify one item in budget options you see the net impact on the budget and sometimes they will see the grant money allocated for a specific purpose, but the city expense and net revenues is what you see on the slide.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that Ms. Boles’ had a good question about the Housing Element, which he thought Acting Planning Director Murdock might be able to clarify. He stated that the update is grant funded, and the $20,000 recommended is specifically recommended related to enhanced public engagement as part of the Housing Element update process and he thought Acting Planning Director Murdock could speak to the larger budget that is already grant funded for that process.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that the city received what is known and Leap and Reap which are grants that assist the city in local planning activities to advance housing development and they were fortunate to receive over $80,000 in funding through the grants to support Housing Element activities. He could also speak to the other points about Planning related actions if it is of interest to Council.
Mayor Bier asked him to go ahead and do it.
Acting Planning Director Murdock stated that there was mention of the General Plan Update process and fire hazard maps as well as landslide maps, and the details of those are best discussed in the process for the General Plan Update, but they hope to have resolution to the landslide mapping questions prior to adoption of the General Plan, but they don’t have any control over the fire map updates which the state is preparing and the best information they have is sometime within the next year the release of those maps indicating local responsibility areas and they haven’t forecast budget amounts for updating safety element in response to the fire map release and they will identify any need for that in the future but the timing of that is so speculative now and they have enough information to budget for it. He also stated that they have budgeted funds to perform additional CEQA analysis as part of the Housing Element City Council Regular Meeting 52 June 13, 2022
update and they expect to be able to tier off the certified EIR as part of the General Plan Update process and do further focus of environmental review, specifically to the additional housing units for we have applied.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if Asst. City Manager Carter could explain something to her in the report, i.e., on packet page 464, second to last paragraph, where bullet points are, which speaks to Gasby statement 54 requiring designations of contingencies and she wanted to check the parenthetical numbers, i.e., is it telling them what the amount is or is that a negative. She asked if they are reducing that amount.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that it just tells them what their reserves are and that is what they had in the table in the presentation.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to the Facilities Maintenance & Replacement, one-time policy reduction of $150,000 and she was getting confused by that.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that is the only redaction that was proposed for the project and mentioned when they talked about the CIP and the funding of the CIP project by this use and one time redaction of the reserves.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, while they are on that line item, he wanted to point out that he believes the $0.55 million is a typo as he thought it was $0.055. He asked if that was correct. He thought the Facilities Maintenance & Replacement reserve is just at the $55,000.
Asst. City Manager Carter agreed it was a typo.
Mayor Bier stated that, if they have more questions, they might consider extending the meeting.
She didn’t see any and there is no vote required, and they are happy with this budget.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she would like to see more positions in the Department of Public Works, not just the lead ranger, such as an arborist for tree work and she is not seeing that. She understood the situation of the budget and she hoped that in the future, it would be more flexible than where they are now.
Mayor Bier asked if the City Manager needed anything else from Council.
City Manager Woodhouse thought he got enough input and Councilmember Beckmeyer’s comments are accurate, and he stated that there are limited arborist positions from last year that are continuing in Public Works and tree related, and there will be more information coming on that and this is the budget and they will look into it further as they move forward and priorities are identified. He felt they have the direction needed and he looks forward to bring back the final package.
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
ADJOURN
Mayor Bier stated that Councilmember Beckmeyer wanted to adjourn the meeting in honor of someone.
City Council Regular Meeting 53 June 13, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she read in the paper over the weekend that Mary Milliken passed away. She had a short cancer illness and she was very active for decades in AYSO soccer in Pacifica. She knew her when her kids were playing soccer and she wanted to adjourn the meeting in her honor as she did so much for Pacifica and the children for many years.
Mayor Bier was glad to do that and remembers seeing her name on forms from a long time ago.
She adjourned the meeting at 11:57 p.m. in memory of Mary Milliken.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS AMENDED: 5 - 0; 7/11/2022
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor