CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer
Mayor pro Tem Christine Boles
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
Councilmember Greg Wright
City Council Regular Meeting 1 May 27, 2025
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
May 27, 2025 (TUESDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer called the study session to order on May 27, 2025 at 5:12 PM 5:00 PM - STUDY SESSION
Annual Reports to City Council from the Planning Commission; Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission; Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission; Beautification Advisory Committee; Open Space and Parkland Advisory Committee; Economic Development Committee; Library Advisory Committee; and Measure Y Citizens' Oversight Committee
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive informational annual report presentations from each commission and committee, provide feedback, and receive and file the annual report of each commission and committee.
Representatives from the Planning Commission; Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission; Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission; Beautification Advisory Committee; Economic Development Committee; and Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee presented their annual reports to Council. Council thanked all Commissions/Committees for their hard work.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comment for the Study Session.
Sue Digre, Pacifica, spoke in favor of physical outreach to residents and thanked all commissions/committees for their hard work.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comment for the Study Session. 7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Beckmeyer reconvened the meeting at 7:17 p.m.
City Council Regular Meeting 2 May 27, 2025
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Sue Beckmeyer Mayor Present
Christine Boles Mayor pro Tem Present
Mary Bier Councilmember Present
Mayra Espinosa Councilmember Present
Greg Wright Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.
Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Denise Bazzano, Asst. City Attorney; Yulia Carter, Asst. City Manager; Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director; Marisol Gómez, Finance & Administrative Services Director; Maria Sarasua, Police Chief; Ron Myers, Fire Chief; Melissa Tigbao, Public Works Director; Scott Leslie, PB&R Director; Zach Harris, Human Resources Manager; Tara Schiff, Economic Development Manager; Brianne Harkousha, Community Development Deputy Director; Bill Glasgo, Police Captain; Elizabeth Brooks, Management Analyst; Katelyn Snodgrass, Associate Planner; Craig Wittner, Fire Marshall; Stephanie Douglas, Recreation Manager; Brittany Hernandez, Program Manager; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk; Emily La, Dep. City Clerk.
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Beckmeyer read the Land Use Acknowledgement.
Salute to the Flag led by Mayor Beckmeyer
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation: Pride Month - June 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer read the proclamation in recognition of Pride Month (June 2025).
Mimir Castro, Program Director of CoastPride, thanked Council for the intention and effort put into writing that proclamation and appreciated the ongoing conversation between our representative and our community.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comment.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, stated she was speaking as a private citizen and thanked Council and Pacifica for acknowledging Pride Month. She added that Pacifica Pride 2025 are looking for volunteers for the upcoming Pride celebration day and shared information on this event.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comment.
Councilmember Bier thanked them for being here and highlighting the ongoing discussion and education. She encouraged everyone to come out for the parade and all the events.
Mayor pro Tem Boles added there was decorating the night before. She stated, along Palmetto, many merchants are opening their parking lots and providing materials, and she said it was a fun event to celebrate and educate everyone.
City Council Regular Meeting 3 May 27, 2025
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if any councilmember wanted to pull an item from consent. Seeing none, she opened public comment. There were no public comments on Consent Items.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
1. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the April 28, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting.
2. Adopt a Resolution Amending Administrative Policy No. 83, "Display of Flags at City Facilities"
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution Amending Administrative Policy No. 83, "Display of Flags at City Facilities" to allow for Display of Ceremonial Flags at additional City Facilities.
3. Approval of Agreement with HFS Systems (a division of Howell Electric) for the purchase and upgrade to the existing security cameras, access controls to the Pacifica Police Department, and replacement of intercoms in the Police Department's holding facility.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a resolution approving the Agreement with HFS Systems (a division of Howell Electric) for the purchase and upgrade to the existing security cameras, access controls to the Pacifica Police Department, and replacement of intercoms in the Police Department’s holding facility in the amount of $130,232; and Authorize the City Manager or Designee to Execute all Documents Associated with the Project.
4. Data Sharing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County of San Mateo and San Mateo County law enforcement agencies for a Data Aggregation Platform to provide a standardized approach and method of collection and sharing of information within their electronic data systems.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica authorizing the execution of a Data Sharing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County of San Mateo, the Town of Atherton, the City of Belmont, the City of Brisbane, the Town of Broadmoor, the City of Burlingame, the City of Colma, the City of Daly City, the City of East Palo Alto, the City of Foster City, the City of Menlo Park, the City of Redwood City, the City of San Bruno, the City of San Mateo, and the City South San Francisco for a Data Aggregation Platform to provide a standardized approach and method of collection and sharing of information within their electronic data systems with no cost to the City of Pacifica.
5. Adoption of the updated Classification Plan and related recommended Implementation actions based on findings from the Comprehensive Classification Study conducted by Sloan Sakai Yeung & Wong LLP
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution approving the updated Citywide Classification Plan, based on changes identified through the comprehensive review of essential duties, minimum qualifications and Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemption City Council Regular Meeting 4 May 27, 2025
status including revisions to job classifications, and FLSA status modifications as recommended by the Consultant, and authorizing the City Manager to implement related personnel actions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
Mrs. D’Amato, San Francisco, shared her experience at having her family’s home vandalized, as well as her family history and supporting businesses in the community. She described several meetings at the pier with City engineers and other interested parties, as well as with Congressman Sam Liccardo. Lastly, she thanked Pacificans for their support.
Robert Azzaro, Pacifica, stated he is present on behalf of Sharp Park neighbors and shared their concerns and questions concerning three RVs on Paloma Avenue. He described negative experiences with parking, safety, and proximity to school children. He also asked about Paloma Avenue being on the map for oversized vehicles.
Connie Campbell, Pacifica, stated she is also a neighbor on Paloma Avenue and concerned about the appropriateness for RV parking. She described difficulties driving on the street with RVs as well as safety for pedestrians and foot traffic.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, stated she is the Executive Director at Sanchez Art Center and shared her concerns on the Planning Commission’s May 19 Housing Element item and provided Council with written public comments submitted with Pacificans’ concerns on housing at that location.
Elina Jovel, Pacifica, stated she is a sixth grader at Ingrid B. Lacey Middle School and shared her concerns on climate change affecting our homes, animals, plants, and planet.
Abigail Aloway, Pacifica, stated she is a sixth grader at Ingrid B. Lacy Middle School and shared her concerns on what caused climate change and what we can do to fight it.
Vivi Smith, Pacifica, shared her concerns on the results of climate change and what we can do to fix climate change for a better situation.
Kerry Romero, Pacifica, shared her concerns on RV parking on Paloma Avenue and keeping the nearby school and their after-school events safe. She described sewage concerns and police presence and asked to consider removing RV parking from the area.
Peter Loeb, Pacifica, echoed Cindy Abbott’s comments and emphasized the need to protect and maintain the existing facilities of the Sanchez Art Center and Mildred Owen Concert Hall.
Remi Tan, Pacifica, echoed Cindy Abbott’s and Peter Loeb’s comments and added concerns about mixed-use increasing rents to artists and losing the artist community.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if there were any who would like to address any of the public comments during Council communications.
City Council Regular Meeting 5 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Wright stated he would like to acknowledge the young people who were here, he felt it was a pleasure to have the youth in our community speaking out and it is meaningful that Pacifica’s youth are speaking out, not just for themselves, but for us, too.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to confusion about the oversized vehicles and Temporary Safe Parking Program and she asked if staff could answer that the spaces on Paloma and Sharp Park are not part of the Temporary Safe Parking Program.
Councilmember Wright became part of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) with Councilmember Bier and he looks forward to being an additional voice for Pacifica on that committee. He stated it was a pleasure to see Congressman Sam Liccardo advocating for us with our climate issue and he looks forward to much more of that kind clear collegial collaborative effort with many of our future partners.
Councilmember Bier added BPAC will be reviewing OBAG 3 and it will be good to work with PB&R and she would love to look more closely at the Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. She thanked those from Sharp Park for coming out and meeting with her to allow her time to share history and policies and issues around the oversize vehicle ordinance. It was always good to see the young people and makes her heart feel so good. She went to the Memorial Day event at the American Legion Hall and it was beautiful. She thanked everyone who came out and organized the event to honor our fallen troops.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she has an update on the Temporary Safe Parking Program as she meets monthly with the PRC and Unhoused on the Coast group. The Temporary Safe Parking Program is full, with three people on the waitlist and one was moved to permanent housing in the last month. Based on Council direction and approval of funds, ten spaces will be opening up in the RV Park on July 1 and we will be getting some of the spots off the street on Lundy Way. They had a wonderful dinner at the San Mateo League of Cities, where they rotate once a month, and there was a presentation from San Mateo County Fire Department which has brought in more drones and she is excited that we have approved a couple of drones to use here. At Peninsula Clean Energy’s meeting, they announced that the solar and batteries at our Community Center project here went live last week. They are waiting for all the federal tax credits before they launch the next program of grants to government organizations. She shared that Congressman Sam Liccardo would be having a Town Hall at Sunset Ridge School.
Councilmember Espinosa asked City Manager that some people in her community received a letter and are asking about what is going to happen with those sites that have been identified in the Housing Element.
City Manager Woodhouse stated those letters went out to everyone in the City in proximity to sites and that was announcing the rezoning hearings happening with the Planning Commission.
He does not think it is appropriate in his communications to give an overview of the Housing Element process, but we will brief councilmembers about the Housing Element process.
Mayor Beckmeyer shared her observations regarding QR codes in Redwood City that would help with signage and navigating recreational activities in the City; she thought it would be a good start to align with Economic Development Committee. She shared that Congressman Sam Liccardo’s Town Hall will take place at Sunset Ridge on May 29, as well as follow-up visits by State Senator Josh Becker and Congressman Marc Berman. She thanked Councilmember Bier for bringing up the Memorial Day event, and she wanted to take one minute of her time to read the dedication on the back of the monument located at the American Legion Hall on Buel City Council Regular Meeting 6 May 27, 2025
Avenue in Rockaway: “This monument is dedicated to all veterans in honor of their service to the County and its people. The World War II and Korean War veterans came to Pacifica to start new lives and build a future for themselves and their children. Many arrived before Pacifica was incorporated as a city. These veterans worked, raised their family, volunteered for school and community activity. They built the city from a farm field to what it is now. They’re called the greatest generation for what they did here and throughout the country. The children and grandchildren of the greatest generation went on to serve their country and community. Many of these next generation Pacificans became veterans of the Cold War, Vietnam, Central America, Desert Storm, Somalia, the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. Future generations of Pacificans will continue to honorably serve the country in places unknown. Special thanks to American Legion Post 238 for their sponsorship.” She stated that, on the other side of the monument are the lists of names of the young men who lost their lives during war. She encouraged everyone to visit.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse announced that, as a result of Council’s adoption of the consent calendar, one of the items on the consent calendar was a revision to the city’s flag policy related to ceremonial flags and the Pride flag is our ceremonial flag and that revision authorizes the flying of the Pride flag to expanded sites at Civic Center, Community Center, and both libraries.
He was asked to comment regarding oversized vehicles on Paloma Avenue; our oversized vehicle ordinance is based on street width and traffic safety and it allows for the parking of oversized vehicles on Paloma Avenue. The Police Department, as mentioned by one of the speakers, has had a heavy presence there monitoring those vehicles and has cited some of them and will continue to enforce the law related to the parking of those vehicles, but they can legally park there. Finally, the Police Department and the PRC are working closely together to bring services to them if they are interested. It happens to be the case that not everyone who is living in an oversized vehicle is interested in the PRC’s services. He also introduced Pacifica’s new Public Works Director, Melissa Tigbao, who has over 20 years of Public Works experience.
PW Director Tigbao thanked everyone as they have been very gracious and it has been wonderful meeting staff around the city. She looked forward to contributing to the community.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.
CONSIDERATION
6. Introduction of Ordinance to adopt Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) for the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Map for the City of Pacifica
PROPOSED ACTION: Introduce by title only and waive further reading of an ordinance adding a new Article 3, “Fire Hazard Severity Zones” within Chapter 3, “Fire Protection” to Title 4, “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code to adopt the City of Pacifica Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map; and finding the ordinance exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if any councilmembers needed to state any conflict of interest.
Councilmember Wright stated he has a conflict of interest as he owns real property within the zone.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she has the same conflict of owning real property within the zone.
City Council Regular Meeting 7 May 27, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she has the same conflict of owning real property within the zone.
Councilmember Bier stated she does not own property so she does not think she has a conflict.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that requires a different analysis. She would need to look at the code of regulations to make a determination on whether or not Councilmember Bier can participate. The analysis she prepared was that she did own real property within one of the zones. She stated we potentially have four Councilmembers who have a conflict of interest and, when that happens, the Political Reform Act provides a way within which the Council can continue forward to make a decision which is called the rule of necessity, which would allow the minimum necessary of the officials to come back into the decision to participate; we would use the rule of necessity by selecting names, at random, until we have created the majority of Councilmembers who can participate in the decision. Once we make a determination on whether Councilmember Bier can participate, we can proceed with the rule of necessity and select names at random to determine which councilmembers can participate in the decision.
Mayor Beckmeyer called for a break and then reconvened the meeting.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano discussed with Councilmember Bier and she will participate, meaning there are two members who can participate, Councilmembers Espinosa and Bier.
City Clerk Coffey stated that the three Councilmembers were determined to have a conflict of interest for the real property owned within the zone were Mayor Beckmeyer, Mayor pro Tem Boles, and Councilmember Wright. Their names are placed inside a bag. She stated that City Manager Woodhouse will hold the bag, she will draw a name out of the bag, and the name chosen will be the Councilmember who will participate to form the majority required to make that decision on this item.
Mayor Beckmeyer concluded that we only need a majority, not a super majority for the item.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano confirmed a majority.
City Clerk Coffey stated she drew Councilmember Wright’s name and he will be the councilmember participating in this decision.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that she and Mayor pro Tem Boles will leave the dais.
Councilmember Wright asked, as a point of order, who will run the meeting.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that is a good point and we will have the three participating decide who will run the meeting.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated for the record that Council was notified this afternoon about potential conflicts of interest and calls could have been made to the FPPC to clarify. This is an item that is important to her that she has been working on for a number of years and she is upset at having to step down.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that it is her understanding that there are two choices, i.e., go to the room or join the audience but not comment.
City Council Regular Meeting 8 May 27, 2025
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, because this involves real personal property interests, Councilmembers have to leave the dais; they can go to the back room and listen to the meeting from there, or they can come and sit in the audience and observe and they can speak as a member of the public, but only as to their personal property interests.
Councilmember Wright asked, as point of order, is it possible to reconsider the selection of the councilmember participating in the discussion.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that the selection of the name has to be random.
Commissioner Bier stated we will carry on and she will run the meeting for this item.
Fire Chief Myers began the staff report
Fire Marshal Wittner completed the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse was anticipating that there will be comment from the public and potentially questions from Council that go beyond just the focus on this agenda item, i.e., adoption of these state required fire hazard zone maps, and ask questions about what we are doing about safety, fire resiliency, etc., and he wanted to make comments about. He stated that Fire Chief Myers mentioned the education that North County Fire Authority does. The City has been working for years with the San Mateo County Resource Conservation District, CalFire, CalTrans, and San Mateo County Midcoast on a fire resiliency project related to evacuation routes on Highway 1 near the Tom Lantos Tunnel, as well as resiliency work in the Pedro Point Headlands around the Pedro Point private property neighborhood. In February 2024, the Coastal Conservancy allocated a grant for over $4 million, led by the RCD, to do the study and implement the work related to Highway 1 evacuation and resiliency work, fuel reduction work around the neighborhood, etc. The map shown on the screen is from their grant proposal of the scope of work for the grant that shows the buffer area around Pedro Point neighborhood that will be studied and fuel reduction work implemented. The actual implementation of the evacuation route work, removal of lots of eucalyptus around Highway 1 for fire safety evacuation, is not funded by this $4 million because that will be extremely more expensive than that. He wanted to make sure Council knows that the City is focused on and seeking funding for important projects like this, and this is a recent success that the Coastal Conservancy funded, and it is underway, led by the RCD.
Councilmember Bier asked where the public can find that information.
City Manager Woodhouse stated, at this point in time, the scope of work is public and was approved by the Coastal Conservancy. He stated it is on their webpage and the scope of work that this grant will fund. He is sure in the future, as the work gets underway, the RCD will be providing much more information to the public.
Councilmember Wright asked if he understands correctly that no local knowledge or input was sought or received in the formation of these maps.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated not at this time.
Councilmember Wright asked if it was possible to submit any kind of public comment to them in the formation of these maps or official City position.
City Council Regular Meeting 9 May 27, 2025
Fire Marshal Wittner stated not officially.
Councilmember Wright asked if earthquake potential was considered in the making of these maps.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated earthquake information is not something that was included, to his knowledge.
Councilmember Wright asked if NCFA coordinated with North Coast County Water District to make sure we would have sufficient water pressure.
Fire Chief Myers thinks NCCWD provided an overview with their evaluation of their water system and they provided adequate support for their ability to provide water. He stated that NCFA did not have any concerns based upon what they provided and their ability to serve the community with water.
Councilmember Wright asked, regarding inclusion of the high fire zones for the inspections, if that means we would have to have fences moved five feet away from our house, have to cut down trees and, if we sell it, have to cut down bushes. He asked what all was included.
Fire Marshall Wittner stated no for fences, and he thinks Councilmember Wright is referring to the zero zone requirements. The Board of Forestry has not come up with their final determinations or recommendations yet, as he understands that they have been given to the end of this year to come up with their final recommendations. He concluded that no on fences, which is strictly voluntary, best practice, but not a requirement, until zone zero comes into play.
He stated, for the rest of it, the answer is yes; each property during sale would be required to have a defensible space inspection and may have to modify fuels in order to comply with defensible space requirements and each property is going to be different.
Councilmember Wright stated based on not yet available standards.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated we do have standards for inspections or defensible space, and we have guidance that will be given to the public. For defensible space inspections, yes, zone zero is not going to be coming into play for us until next year at the earliest, if it does.
Councilmember Wright asked where are those defensible space recommendations available to the public.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated that they are not assembled, i.e., he has not assembled regulations for folks to digest yet. NCFA will be working on those, and they can be viewed on the CalFire website, https://readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/defensible-space/.
Councilmember Wright stated it was his understanding that it is not ever eligible to be downgraded at all for any reason.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated there is no option for that.
Councilmember Wright thought, even if you do fuel load mitigations, you still do not get reduced.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated that the Fire Hazard Severity Zone will not be reduced. It is established by the State and legislature did not give any options for input or options to reduce, City Council Regular Meeting 10 May 27, 2025
only options to increase. If one were to apply defensible space or fuel reduction in order to comply with or be able to sell a home, they can do defensible space as a mitigation measure at any time and NCFA is encouraging people to reach out to their local insurance companies to find out what their standards might be and whether the person is in a zone or not.
Councilmember Wright asked if we have considered additional fire breaks and fire roads for additional evacuation routes.
Fire Chief Myers thinks it is very difficult to do those kinds of things and not have 100% confidence that we are going to be successful in evacuating people. To create any new evacuations, it would have to be a very improved road. They will utilize current street systems and make sure that, if evacuation should occur, traffic keeps flowing instead of being backed up.
Councilmember Wright asked if proactive defensible space inspections are available to the public, and is that a service that the fire department can offer.
Fire Chief Myers thinks there is literature, information, etc. they can share if someone calls.
Councilmember Bier asked if they can define zone zero again.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated zone zero is the first five feet from the exterior walls of your structure outward. Zone zero in the initial guidance means zero, nothing combustible. The Board of Forestry has softened some of their proposed regulations to gain public input, but they will not come out with final recommendations until the end of the year.
Councilmember Espinosa asked if a homeowner who lives in a high hazard zone will be notified.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated that, the way the legislation is written, local jurisdictions would have responsibility to notify homeowners if their property was in violation; that would be mandated inspections in a very high fire hazard severity zone.
Fire Chief Myers added but not in the high zone; if you are in the high zone, there is no requirement for you to do anything other than, if you sell your property, you have to meet the defensible space requirements.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, for clarification, the City is not going to proactively send out notices to residents to alert them to what zone they live in; the map is posted on the website for NCFA and there is a link in the proposed ordinance to that map. Homeowners should take the initiative and look to see where their property is located in relation to the map if they are interested.
Councilmember Espinosa concluded that they will not be notified and will have to find out on their own.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano added that there could be some regulation that comes into play in the very high zones, but the City will not proactively send out notices for the residents to alert them to where their property is in relation to the map.
Fire Chief Myers stated there is no consequence to a property owner that is in the high or moderate and there was no push by the State legislature to say you have to notify people as City Council Regular Meeting 11 May 27, 2025
there is nothing for you to do. Those maps were just established and put upon those communities and there is nothing you need to do with them at this point.
Councilmember Espinosa asked about the very high.
Fire Chief Myers stated unfortunately we have no developed areas in the very high and it would precipitate us doing inspections in forced compliance, including liening people’s properties to get them into compliance if they did not come into compliance. He stated that we are fortunate that we have no very high zone that is upon any of the developed areas of the City.
Councilmember Bier asked if we could have it available on the website, Connect with Pacifica, etc. She stated that we will not be sending out things to people’s homes.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano answered affirmatively. She mentioned that there is a link to the website in the City’s proposed ordinance and it is available on the State’s website.
Fire Chief Myers agreed, adding there is an interactive map.
Councilmember Espinosa thought that would be something we could put to find out if your house is located in a high zone.
Fire Chief Myers stated once we have the ability to make that available when you type in your address, we can put that on the website.
Councilmember Wright asked what happens if we say no.
Fire Chief Myers would turn to Asst. City Attorney as it is State law.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed. If Council does not adopt the State maps, then we would be out of compliance with State law and the repercussions could be enforcement by the State.
As mentioned earlier, there is no way to reduce the designations, but Council could consider increasing the designations of very high Fire Hazard Severity Zone if there is substantial evidence to support that and discuss what the reasons would be for that consideration to determine whether or not there is substantial evidence.
Councilmember Wright asked if that would then make us have to do the inspections and forced compliance if we were to elevate something into very high.
Fire Chief Myers agreed, and it would be a huge challenge if we designate areas in the very high zone. He stated that you could do vegetation management without creating very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Everyone in Pacifica should be considering reducing the vegetation around their properties to make their homes more safe and it does not require severity zones to do anything like that; but if you were to move into the very high, it requires a huge amount of money as we do not have the ability to do the forced compliance without adding positions and programs with millions of dollars to do that. He does not see the necessity to go to very high and he also does not see any modeling out there better than California to determine the zones that they have already determined.
Councilmember Wright thanked him for that information as that is what led him to create some defensible space.
City Council Regular Meeting 12 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Espinosa asked to clarify how many feet of defensible space is reasonable.
Fire Marshal Wittner stated that, historically, defensible space has been comprised of two zones, zone one which is the first 30 feet from the exterior walls of your home (lean and green zone) and the remaining 70 feet up to 100 feet or to the property line, whichever is closer. He stated, for our communities, where we have small lot subdivisions, we are mostly going to be talking about the property line in that first 30 feet. He stated that it does not mean clear cutting.
It may or likely lead to a reduction in the amount of vegetation we have in the close proximity to our homes, but it is about maintenance. He stated that their goal is to enforce reasonable regulations in compliance with State law, but it does not mean clear cutting.
Councilmember Wright asked if there are any upgrades that NCFA might want to mention at this time to educate the public about what else might help protect them from fires.
Fire Chief Myers stated NCFA has a document called “Ready, Set, Go” that shows you all the kinds of things you can do to harden your home from wildfire, and he would recommend that people go and take a look at that.
Councilmember Wright asked if it was digitally available on their website.
Fire Chief Myers answered affirmatively.
Councilmember Bier opened public comments.
Ken Miles, Pacifica, spoke in favor of mail notifications and being proactive in notifying the public. He shared concerns about fire insurance rates. He urged removing fireworks in July due to fire safety, undergrounding PGE’s electric lines, and expanding the defensible space ordinance for the very high and high zones.
Aren Clark, Pacifica, shared his discussion with a forester at the Presidio on how they manage that area, including forestry practices and sand dune restoration, and compared it to similar solutions possible in Pacifica.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, asked about maps with local responsibility areas and federal responsibility areas and which map the City will be looking at when approving development.
She shared her concerns about not getting a clear picture of the hazards in Pacifica and needing strong fire protections with any development.
Remi Tan, Pacifica, echoed Mr. Miles’ comments and spoke in favor of a fireworks ban. He also cautioned new development in fire danger zones. He posed questions about the zones in the maps and where councilmembers’ properties were in relation to it.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, stated she is speaking as a private citizen and shared her concerns regarding vegetation management and adequate disposal of green waste. She also described the lack of maintenance by GGNRA at Milagra Ridge.
Councilmember Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember Wright asked if NCFA could speak to the situational nature of evacuation plans.
City Council Regular Meeting 13 May 27, 2025
Fire Chief Myers confirmed that we have an evacuation plan. The issue of wildfire and other disasters is that you do not know where it is going to be and you cannot train people to go down the same route each and every time only to have the fire be on that route. What NCFA does in their evacuation plan is work to alert people and direct them away from the disaster, not to the disaster. We can have defined large routes, such as keeping Highway 1 open, but there is no way to come up with an evacuation plan that says you will always go down a specific road, as that road may be impaired for some reason and be the wrong way to go. Thus, there is not a plan that says you always go down a specific road. NCFA alerts people, with Law Enforcement and public information, to route people away from a disaster or emergency.
Councilmember Wright asked if he is aware of a map that exists that has an overlay of the local and federal maps.
Fire Chief Myers stated that the law of the land in California are the maps we are looking to adopt at this meeting; all the decisions that are going to be made in each community is based upon what zone you are in, which is the defining factor in California.
Councilmember Wright asked if he could speak to the history of wildfires in Pacifica.
Fire Chief Myers stated he has been in Pacifica for 24 years and the largest fire we have had has been six acres several years ago. He stated one of the reasons we do not get grants is we do not have a fire history. He talked to people in the Fire Department 50 years ago and they refer to two-acre grass fires that they put out. We do not get grants because we do not have the same kind of conditions as other parts of California, such as no 0 or 1% humidity, no 100-mile an hour winds, or the same type of vegetation and the type that burns as you see on TV. It does not mean you cannot have a five-acre vegetation fire that would damage or destroy some homes, but we do not have as severe a situation as others.
Councilmember Wright asked what the air support response time is.
Fire Chief Myers stated that what has been established in San Mateo County and Pacifica and all cities in North County Fire Authority is that they have a mutual threat zone. The minute they are being dispatched to a wildfire, it augments that dispatch by sending aircraft to our jurisdiction. If a new fire starts in Pacifica, the policy is that they will divert aircraft from any of those closer wildfires and move them in to come to the new fire to prevent a large fire.
Councilmember Wright asked about NCFA’s input on any potential development permit.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that our development projects go through plan checks with the Fire Department. They would be reviewing those projects against whatever the applicable fire codes are, which includes entitlement and building permits.
Councilmember Wright asked if that considers the fire maps.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it does consider the fire maps, as that is what determines which part of the Building and Fire Codes apply.
Councilmember Wright asked if it was NCFA’s position that green waste disposal would be considered a constructive fuel management tool.
City Council Regular Meeting 14 May 27, 2025
Fire Chief Myers stated, if you are not able to get rid of the green waste vegetation that you are trying to have people cut around their property, that will absolutely be an issue. There are not enough contractors and vendors out there to hire to come in and cut your brush, even if they wanted to do that; so as long as property owners are willing to do it, there needs to be a place to take that vegetation they are removing from the property.
Councilmember Wright referred to the public comment regarding councilmembers’ property lines within the Fire Hazard Severity Zones and asked if that could be discussed.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that is not relevant to the issue at hand.
Councilmember Bier asked what is underneath the green lines in the middle of the map.
Fire Chief Myers stated that was federal responsibility, as it is GGNRA land.
Councilmember Bier stated that it does not tell us what the environment is there.
Fire Chief Myers stated he was not sure that the State has jurisdiction to determine that piece of it, as it only covers State and local plans.
Councilmember Bier thought it would be helpful to reach out to GGNRA to find that out.
Fire Chief Myers stated that GGNRA is not all that responsive when it comes to answering requirements to clear their brush, etc. If there is a specific question, they would be happy to contact GGNRA and see if they are willing to provide or assist.
Councilmember Bier asked if the City owns a chipper.
Fire Chief Myers is not aware of the City owning a chipper.
City Manager Woodhouse would follow up with Public Works.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that this is an ordinance and we need a motion to introduce the ordinance by title only and waive further reading of an ordinance adding a new Article 3, “Fire Hazard Severity Zones” within Chapter 3, “Fire Protection” to title 4, “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code to adopt the City of Pacifica Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map; and finding the ordnance exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3).
Councilmember Wright stated so moved; seconded by Councilmember Bier.
RESULT: ADOPTED [3 TO 0]
MOVER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Espinosa, Wright
RECUSED: Beckmeyer, Boles
Councilmember Bier called for a break.
City Council Regular Meeting 15 May 27, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer reconvened the meeting. Mayor Beckmeyer and Mayor pro Tem Boles rejoined the dais.
7. Resolution to Adopt the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan PROPOSED ACTION:
A. Direct that the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan be renamed the Climate Action and Resilience Plan;
B. Find the adoption of the Climate Action Plan categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act; and
C. Adopt a resolution approving the May 21, 2025 Draft Plan under its new title, the Climate Action and Resilience Plan.
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Task Force Chair Meagher began the staff report.
Management Analyst Brooks completed the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse wanted to augment the presentation with three points that there may be Council questions about and he would recommend Council consider during discussion in adoption of the Climate Action and Resilience Plan (CARP). He stated that the technical change regarding zero NOx is an example of a more general discussion point that Council may want to consider in the final CARP which is “Should the document include a general statement about how the menu of recommended actions in the plan will serve to inform the Council’s annual strategic planning and priority setting to assess the legal, financial and operational feasibility for inclusion on that year’s work plan?” If that is a general statement in the discussion that Council decides would be good to include in the final plan, staff is prepared with some draft language to suggest regarding that. He asked, alternatively to that first point, “Should language of individual actions be revised to make clear that they should be considered, such as this technical revision to the zero Nox, pending legal, financial and operational feasibility, rather than ‘shall be implemented’?” The second point he wanted to add is “Should the Resiliency and Adaptation chapter in the actions be updated to reflect the city’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan certification?” A recent change was the Coastal Commission’s certification of the LCLUP. That work plan is the City’s official guidance for coastal zone and shoreline adaptation work, and the action menu in the Resiliency and Adaptation chapter in the CARP should be consistent with the LCLUP. Thus, Council may wish to consider a general action referencing the LCLUP instead of the numerous individual actions that talk about shoreline adaptation and other actions that the LCLUP covers as an official work plan. He stated that, finally, a more specific consideration for Council that relates to the second point is that there is an action in the plan, R2.17, regarding Pacifica Land Trust grant funded work related to nature-based solutions and consideration to ensure that City collaboration is consistent with and in the context of the LCLUP’s Shoreline Adaptation Program planning process, which is a global umbrella involving many stakeholders throughout the City to achieve. That particular action, R2.17, speaks to specifically working with the Land Trust on that without having the benefit of having scoped out in the context for the Shoreline Adaptation planning process that we will be embarking on. He stated that is a more specific point that Council may wish to consider during deliberations.
Management Analyst Brooks reminded Council that Anna Yip from Rincon Consultants is available online for any questions.
City Council Regular Meeting 16 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Wright commended the CARP as an impressive body of work. He is supportive of the CARP and thinks it is a wonderful set of goals. He does have some concerns about making promises that he was not sure we can keep. He will wait for deliberation.
Mayor Beckmeyer concluded that he did not have any questions.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to the points of consideration made by the City Manager and asked if those have all been discussed with the Task Force prior to this meeting.
City Manager Woodhouse stated no, as the report before Council is the Task Force recommendation for the plan. They are an advisory body to Council, and Council can consider the report and consider recommendations in the review and analysis of this and looking at specific actions in there. From questions he has received, that is why he raised those points as things that may be important to discuss if Council is interested in discussing those points before final adopted plan. He added that one option for Council would be to discuss them and send the work back with questions to the Task Force to get input from them or to staff or both. He wanted to be sure to lay them out on the table in case Council wants to take those up.
Mayor pro Tem Boles was confused about process as if there were issues legally with some of the policies that might have been reviewed before.
City Manager Woodhouse agreed, as he thought that would have been ideal. His understanding is that some of these actions that were included in the report were brought to the Task Force by public comments as late as in April and staff did not have time to assess and do cross comparisons and consistency analysis with the LCLUP policies and such, hence why he is raising it at this point.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she has a few comments and suggestions on some language and asked how much detail we will go through today or are we allowed to make those suggestions versus comments that would be a definite change and would it go back to the Task Force.
City Manager Woodhouse stated, in response to that, anything is at play for Council. There is a final draft of a report, and there are numerous new things that were not part of the joint study session with Council. Council can dig in to as much detail as they want and discuss any aspects of this report. He stated that it is great work, but this is Council’s final consideration before adoption; they can take more time to consider this, continue this, send it back for more research, or just make some specific changes and adopt it.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated her concern is that some of the Task Force members may step off and they may not have a quorum, thus what do they see as a process and what would be their preference if there are major things they still want to discuss.
Task Force Chair Meagher hoped that anything major could be discussed at this meeting with any specific amendments adopted with the final draft. She referred to the suggestions brought up by City Manager Woodhouse and stated that she thought it was a given that a plan will be used as part of Strategic Goal Setting, and she did not know if it was necessary to state that.
She stated that to soften the language of policy actions to change it from “shall be” to “consider” is a substantial change. As someone who manages a Climate Action Plan at a different agency, she thought it would be easy to hold a meeting to consider it and check the box as complete.
She strongly urged against that unless there are any actions that are untenable to keep, and that may be where we can soften them down to consider. However, doing that as a blanket City Council Regular Meeting 17 May 27, 2025
across the whole Plan would reduce the strength of the Plan. She agreed with changing the language in that introductory paragraph to state what has been done with the LCLUP. It is very common for Climate Action Plans to have actions and other things that touch on different plans that the City has, indicated throughout the Plan with various icons.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked, in terms of the capacity of the Task Force, if the work is continuing beyond today.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated that the current Task Force is chartered for Plan adoption.
Therefore, if Council does not adopt the Plan at this meeting, she thinks the Task Force would be obligated to continue to meet until they hit that requirement of their charter for adoption.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked of the consultant why there was not newer data than 2021 used for the transportation impacts on packet page 597 (CAAP page 9).
Consultant Yip stated that, in an ideal scenario, we use the most up-to-date data as possible. In this instance, we had to also consider where all of the data was coming from and what year all the other data would be based on. One of the things we avoid in planning scenarios like this is having 2021 data for one sector, having 2023 data for another sector, and compiling it altogether. Therefore, what they do is use the most recent date available for all of the data sources. While there are more recent years for some data available, 2021 was the most recent one available across the board for all data sources.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought we would be looking at data every few years for future updates, and there might be an opportunity to readjust that as we get clean data for all sectors.
Consultant Yip agreed. To Mayor pro Tem Boles’ original point around transportation, especially around COVID-19, she can say that, from trends they have looked at over COVID-19 with more recent data, we are reaching more normal transportation levels that they were experiencing prepandemic. For our own edification and best scenario, we can essentially assume and expect transportation numbers to reach back to the level they were at pre-pandemic level (before 2019- 2020).
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that, on packet page 604 or CAAP page 16, Figure 2, in green shows on road transportation, and she is curious why those numbers do not change very much, given our Housing Element goals to build 2000 new units of housing in the next six years of the planning period.
Consultant Yip stated her question was around why on road transportation does not increase as much and even decreases. She stated that the projections that they use take into account the already approved State climate-related legislation so this is taking into account the measures and actions that the State has enforced, especially related to zero-emission vehicles. In transportation in particular, we have goals related to achieving zero-emission vehicles, at 100% adoption by 2035, if not 2040 for sales of new cars and then transitioning fully. These projections we use take those into account, assuming that we will be meeting those goals the State has already set in front of us. If you look at the dotted line, while you cannot see the breakdown of the different sectors, the dotted line takes into account the business as usual scenario without these considerations of these climate-related goals that the State has set forth already and you can see the dotted line goes up as you might anticipate as a more business as usual scenario without any kind of climate-related adjustments.
City Council Regular Meeting 18 May 27, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that makes a lot of sense.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comments.
Remi Tan, Pacifica, urged Council to look at the language as written by the Task Force, as they have done a tremendous amount of work and have them continue implementing the Plan.
He agreed with Chair Meagher’s comments.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, shared her positive thoughts on the work done and partnership between the Task Force and staff. She shared concerns regarding possible changes and urged approval of the Plan as submitted.
Sue Digre, Pacifica, stated she agreed with Mr. Tan and Ms. Abbott’s comments and shared her positive thoughts on the Task Force’s hard work on this Plan.
Nancy Tierney, Pacifica, referred to The Language of Climate Politics by Genevieve Gunther which emphasized the need for clear and direct language. She felt the recommendations for this Plan were appropriate and acknowledged the great resources the City has had from other County groups.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comments.
Mayor Beckmeyer mentioned the recommendation about the NOx. She noted packet page 597, CAAP page 9, references other goals and actions in the 2014 plan and actual results, such as REACH Codes adopted in 2022. She asked the City Attorney if something like that informed the recommended language change on packet page 613 or CAAP page 25 with reference to E1.6 and E1.7.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano answered affirmatively, adding that our concern is making sure that standards that are adopted by the City conform with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
Additionally, there is a bill going through the legislature, AB 306, that would prohibit adoption of REACH codes for a certain period of time. Those are the concerns that we have in using language that is mandating a legislative act.
Mayor Beckmeyer wanted to clarify that the recommendation was for those two specific policies, not every instance of “shall” and change it to “consider”.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks the City Manager was using the recommendation on these two policies as an example of the language where it says “mandates the legislative action” and the City Manager was recommending an alternative of using different language.
Mayor Beckmeyer clarified in these particular two cases.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated these particular two cases were of concern because of the Berkeley case and also the legislation that is not adopted yet and is not law, but is being reviewed by the legislature. She stated that E1.6 and E1.7 have specific language but we would also recommend, if Council is willing to change the language, to also allow making conforming edits throughout the document relating to E1.6 and E1.7. She thought there are other locations where it is mentioned in a mandatory way that there would be an adoption of REACH Code and just making conforming edits to E1.6 and E1.7.
City Council Regular Meeting 19 May 27, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that, essentially, while these statements as written in the Plan conform with Bay Area Air District zero NOx rules, they do not conform with Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she cannot say that with certainty as the City Attorney’s Office has not analyzed that.
City Manager Woodhouse wanted to clarify the points he stated were not recommendations, but points to raise in case Council wanted to discuss them.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought AB 306 was retroactive to January 1, 2025.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that is in the current version of the bill.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated the version she had says June 1, 2025, to June 1, 2031.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated, in any case, we could not do it before June 1.
Councilmember Wright stated he was supportive of these goals, but he has concerns about the City’s ability to live up to them if we make this promise. He does not think we have enough staff to run the City as is, and he is not sure that it is implementable in the timeline outlined by this paperwork. For example, PG&E does not have the great infrastructure to support it and get it done in this timeline. He doubts if 5% of the houses in Pacifica have enough electrical infrastructure to support all of these changes. He wants to get there but he is not sure that we can make promises on this kind of timeline.
Councilmember Bier asked if he was concerned about the timeline or the process. She thinks this is the single most important work that we can possibly do, so the harder we push, the more results we will get, but she was concerned about the timeline.
Councilmember Wright asked what they are going to do in light of the budget and staffing.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that is a question she has as well. She wants to understand regarding the implementation action, for the result of approving this Plan tonight, what impact does that have to staff’s work plan. When she heard the City Manager say informing Strategic Planning goals, throughout this Plan it says low, medium, and high, in terms of the length of time, and she does not know how that overlays with what staff is already working on, especially regarding the Strategic Plan and workplan.
Councilmember Wright stated it seems to him that the roles of the CARP are staff-driven, committee-supported, and Council-directed. He asked what the Task Force’s and staff’s impressions were.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed that those things are not as well-defined in the CARP, such as the short, medium, and long timelines. She stated that these are goals we want to set, and we are not necessarily committing, in her mind, to meeting all these in specific years.
Councilmember Wright stated that is not what the document says.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed but noted that was how she understood it in her mind. She stated these are important things for us to consider and we will not be able to figure out the exact City Council Regular Meeting 20 May 27, 2025
timeline of each of these. She asked if we can say that these are good goals and that the Task Force will be working on this, looking for grants, and talking to staff to see what departments are impacted, and if it is possible.
Councilmember Wright agreed.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed. She stated that these are goals, not exact projects we are committing to over the next year, and that is the way she sees the document.
Councilmember Wright appreciated that. If that is what the document says, he would be 100% on board, but that is not what it says, which is his concern. He stated that we would then be making promises and not living up to it. He questioned the challenges involved in the process, such as PG&E.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed PG&E is a problem, but she also thinks PCE is a huge resource.
That is some of the language she wanted to strengthen. She stated that there are PCE grants for seniors, low-income, service upgrades, etc. and there is so much we can do if we just can get the work done.
Councilmember Wright supported doing anything we can do but he was afraid of making a promise we cannot keep.
Councilmember Espinosa asks what happened if we do not do anything.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that that was what happened with the previous Climate Action Plan and nothing happened. She thinks we need to start doing things. She would like to hear from the Task Force about how they are taking our concerns and is there a way to adjust language.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated, for the implementation, the direction they heard from Council was to move forward with this work. Council wanted to have the Task Force drive the implementation. She heard at that meeting about the burden on staff time and what can we push to commissions and committees, which included the implementation of this Plan. She stated that the next steps was having the Task Force bring a proposed charter to Council to switch the focus of the Task Force from adoption to implementation of the Plan. She thinks, instead of being staff-driven and committee-supported, it would be Task Force-driven and staffsupported.
Councilmember Wright asked where she sees the funding piece for that.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated her understanding is that staff is applying for another CivicSpark Fellow. Even though the federal funding landscape is more uncertain for this work, there is still a lot of funding at the State and regional county level to support this work. To Mayor pro Tem Boles’ point, once they get to that project level with implementation, that is when they start carving out grants to apply to these specific projects. They also intend to bring forward a draft work plan that takes these actions and assigns them to different committees and commissions and the ones that the implementation task force would take in each year. She wants to bring that forward and that is a work plan not for staff but for the Task Force.
Councilmember Wright asked if that was in an advisory capacity or discretionary capacity.
City Council Regular Meeting 21 May 27, 2025
Management Analyst Brooks stated they would be advisory to Council and the direction that Chair Meagher is referring to was at the April 14 Council meeting where Council directed that the Task Force would come back with a proposed change to the charter, scope of work, as well as the first 1-2 year work plan for the Task Force. All of that would be presented to Council.
She stated that no actions would be taken without specific Council direction.
Councilmember Wright asked how we determine how much staff time to allot and does that budget fit within our work plan.
Management Analyst Brooks stated in the work plan currently for the Community Development Department, we are tasked with implementing the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan.
Councilmember Wright concluded that those hours are already budgeted.
Management Analyst Brooks stated that those hours are budgeted and we took into consideration and will be bringing budget talks that we did apply for a CivicSpark Fellow who is a full-time staff augmentation and does require some support from full time staff so there is some portion of full-time staff member going toward the supervision of that; we will also be asking to continue the temporary Program Manager position that also requires some supervision. Between those that is a full-time person and a half-time person who can give their time to the support of the Task Force if we are to move forward with the implementation action.
Councilmember Wright asked where this fits in the priority scale on the rest of the Community Development responsibilities.
Management Analyst Brooks stated she is the supervisor for both of those positions which is a part of her normal course of work; supervising those staff and the work of the Task Force is of equal importance.
City Manager Woodhouse stated he would try to bring together some of the questions about timeline, goals, and expectations. He stated that the reason why he raised that potential discussion point about a general statement about this menu of options informing the Council’s Strategic Planning and developing of the annual work plans is because it is implied in the language, as Chair Meagher said, but not stated explicitly in the Plan. What is laid out in the plan is excellent because it prioritizes actions and establishes timelines that would be a goal to strive for. That helps in grant applications and annually regarding implementation of the CAAP in our work plan. As we look at the specific actions to implement, we will be referring to those and say these are the three most important ones, and they will go through the annual process.
Some of the actions say who is the lead, such as Task Force, Community Development staff, or the City Manager’s Office; annually, he can look at what capacity do we have realistically, given all the Housing Element implementation, LCLUP implementation, our Public Works work, etc. during Strategic Planning to balance everything out and say this is what we think we can accomplish this year and that is how this document is so helpful and beneficial. To the comments about filtering the language, that was not the point he was raising but instead each year we need to look at what can operationally, financially, and legally guide the menu of choices each year as we develop the Strategic Plan and the staff work plan.
Councilmember Wright thought “will” and “shall” mean that we will do it, not see how much staff they have to devote to it.
City Council Regular Meeting 22 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Bier stated she moved to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m.: seconded by Mayor Beckmeyer.
EXTEND MEETING TO 11:30 PM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Councilmember Bier appreciated Management Analyst Brooks’ explanation. She thinks that anything implemented will have to be studied by the City Attorney’s office, come back to Council with all the information, etc. and all those decisions will be made in the future. She stated that this is a guide and thanked them for the fine work they all did on this as it was the most important work they are doing. She stated this is where we start. She could agree to the changes for E1.6 and E1.7, and the references to LCLUP, but other than that, she thinks we should accept it as is with those changes.
Mayor pro Tem Boles was okay with that also but thinks we can clarify that the expectation is that the Task Force will be set up and working on implementation; and when it comes to goal setting, that is when they are bringing to Council the goals for the year. Staff takes all that, analyzes it with the budget, look at what grants they can get to fill in the places, and then they decide on the projects we can undertake that year. She does not think we have to refine all that language.
Councilmember Wright asked if that is what the document says.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she was reading the particulars of the policies and had suggestions there, but she was not looking at that language. She thought they could ask Management Analyst Brooks who has looked at that language if there was a sentence we can add. She worries about weakening it too much.
Councilmember Espinosa stated we have to start somehow and the first step is to start.
Mayor Beckmeyer wants to point everyone’s attention to Packet page 626, plan page 38, Item R2.4, which has a completion date of December 2027. She thought, if it is written down in this Plan, to Councilmember Wright’s point, then when goal setting for 2027 comes, would it be the expectation of the maker of this suggestion or the Task Force itself to come to goal setting and point out that the Plan says Council is going to do this by December 2027 and we have to do it then. She asked what if the timing is not right and other priorities are higher, etc. She heard what Councilmember Wright is saying that he does not want to commit to things we cannot live up to. She stated that we have set goals before where we needed to change it and modify it.
Councilmember Wright stated that this is not a goal but a plan.
Mayor Beckmeyer understood and asked if his concern is that we are signing off that we are committing to doing all these things by these dates.
Councilmember Wright responded affirmatively.
City Council Regular Meeting 23 May 27, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if it would be helpful if there were a list or table that made it clearer what the expectations are.
Councilmember Wright stated that it would be helpful if there was a list and staff reviewed it and told Council what they thought was achievable.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that is going to be year by year.
Councilmember Wright stated that we should not call it a plan but call it goals. He stated that he wants this done and to implement these things.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that page 607, section 5, CAAP goals and action, says, “This CAAP provides a list of recommended actions.” It says recommended, not enforceable.
Councilmember Wright stated he can find six pages of lists where it says “will” and “shall”.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated those are in the individual policy. She is okay adding text if Council wants and sending it back to the CAAP force where it softens some of that.
Management Analyst Brooks stated that part of the utility of having the dates in there helps with the calculation that are done by figuring out how much emissions could be reduced. If there were not target dates, we would not be able to make projections. This is a five-year plan, and we had to have some dates in there in order for Rincon and others who worked on the projections to put those in place. As science evolves and as this is looked at annually by the implementation task force or staff and with legal review based on that, some of those things will have to be tweaked and a calculation adjustment would be done based on those alterations.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that makes sense and we may have to, if still maintaining those goals, look at other policies and moving them up if we find one is easier.
Councilmember Wright stated everything is a give and take.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she is hearing urgency about approving it and hearing concern about overcommitting to that which we cannot accomplish.
Councilmember Wright would like to see us be able to achieve the goals and be heading off in that direction, but he wants to be careful.
Program Manager Hernandez has had the honor and privilege to work alongside all of these volunteers and, for every community event that they have been to, she has also been a part of for the last few months. The number one thing she hears is that it is not so much that the community cannot implement these things, more that they do not know what is out there and do not have the resources, guidance, or body guiding them. Having been a part of this team and everything they have put into it, she knows the implementation phase in the next 1-2 years will be the priority of making sure that more community members know that there is a Climate Action Plan and then to continue that implementation, including youth engagement. The implementation team with the right guidance and right support will get this done and get more people reading the Plan and going to the resource page that they created and continue to do outreach.
City Council Regular Meeting 24 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Wright asked if they analyzed whether we have the grid infrastructure to support the car goal.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated that there is one goal that we backed down on because of the feasibility around PG&E. They have not done that analysis yet but that would be part of what they do when they move into implementation. To the point of this being a living, breathing document, there is a whole section around measurement and verification and how this will be modified and changed over time as they get more information. That is when they start to update it.
Councilmember Wright stated, when he sees timelines that are based on unrealistic goals, it scares him. He wants them to do this work and to be part of the solution, but there are some realities that he is afraid they will run into. As long as he has had an opportunity to put a voice to that, so when the problem comes, that they worked in a collaborative way to get to a resolution, he feels much more comfortable.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated that they see this as a living document. This is with the information they have now, what they think they can do, but as they get more information, things are going to shift. She knows that timelines can be unfavorable, and she knows that Pacifica’s infrastructure is not ideal for some of these electrical changes.
Councilmember Wright sees her and staff working like this with Council having some oversight and decision-making. While he does not believe the document says it, he believes in her and the Task Force and in our staff and Council. He thinks we can get it done but it needs us all to work together and to give each other grace and space as we will run into problems.
Task Force Chair Meagher agreed. She stated that they have been very fortunate to have the City staff they have to work on this Plan and she thinks that is the foundation for them to start moving forward into that implementation phase.
Consultant Yip added that the EV charger-related goal specifically looks at public-facing EV chargers. The Plan does not have any specific goals related to personal or private EV chargers.
Councilmember Wright referenced some issues that individual homeowners might have, but the chargers they are talking about would be publicly accessible; usually, when installing public accessible chargers, it does require infrastructure upgrade for almost all instances because they are installing a new charger in a location where that sort of electricity was not previously being brought to. They factored into consideration that public-facing chargers likely would require energy upgrades that are very common for this kind of EV charging and that would not be a burden on a homeowner but rather would be the type of charger they see installed in public places like a shopping center or a public library. She reminded everyone that this was a nonCEQA qualified CARP and therefore not technically an enforceable Climate Action and Resilience Plan; it is not a legally binding document in the same way a CEQA-qualified CARP would be. It is very common to have these kind of CARP documents adopted with “will” or “shall” language even though it is more used as a guiding document for developing policies for the future.
Councilmember Wright stated the EV goal goes by miles traveled in this document. Most people he knows that have electric cars only charge at home. He stated it is that range anxiety and that lack of ease to go ahead and fill up that he is concerned will not get us to the goal. It is those kinds of challenges he looks forward to trying to resolve in a collegial collaborative way.
City Council Regular Meeting 25 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Bier agreed, adding that we will not know if we do not try.
Councilmember Wright agreed.
Councilmember Bier stated he said we should all move through life, giving each other grace and space. She thinks that is beautiful and she thinks our community does that for each other, even though sometimes it might not seem like it. She thinks she is ready to make a motion.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano clarified something stated by the consultant about this Plan not CEQA-certified. This is not a document that can be tiered off for environmental analysis, but it is a policy that Council is adopting; there could be an argument that it is legally enforceable as a policy document Council has adopted and is to be implemented, not as a CEQA document that can be used to be tiered off of. She stated that there is an important distinction there.
Councilmember Wright asked if she can recommend some language that would help Council with that and not have it be mandatorily forcible.
City Manager Woodhouse stated what he was referring to earlier was making it clear in the introduction that this Plan will provide all recommended actions and will serve to inform Council’s Strategic Planning process year after year for what would be feasible to implement in that work plan year. When we do that evaluation, we are considering if the law has changed, are there legal restrictions, operational concerns that make it infeasible, etc.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that a potential statement that could be added within the introduction or beginning of the document could be something along the lines of, “The CARP provides a menu of options for the City Council to consider annually during Strategic Goal Setting based on legal, financial, and operational feasibility”.
Councilmember Wright asked for the Task Force’s input on that part of the introduction.
Task Force Chair Meagher thought, from an intent standpoint, it makes sense for the Task Force. She asked if we would need to recalculate the targets each year if we start getting fluid with states and commitment.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if C1.1 and C1.2 have been evaluated as part of the budget or are they aspirational.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we have Program Manager Hernandez on staff as their part-time coordinator and one of the budget requests that we hope to be putting forward is continuation of funding for that position.
Councilmember Wright reminded all that we have a $3 million structural deficit.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated the other thing she would like to say is that she has concerns about the reference to the Pacifica Land Trust project that is grant-funded by the Coastal Conservancy where it is calling for a partnership and she does not know what packet page 628 exactly entails. She stated she needs to understand that better in light of the LCLUP approval by Coastal Commission and the concurrent requirements for the Coastal Management Resiliency Plan and Shoreline Adaptation Plan, etc. She stated that Pacifica Land Trust has no such constraints and apply for a grant and start working. This Plan calls for the City to collaborate City Council Regular Meeting 26 May 27, 2025
with them and her concern is how much overlap there might potentially be between these two efforts.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that she had flagged that one too, partly because we have no control over the Pacifica Land Trust and what they are doing and whether they are working on City policies or not. There are also other opportunities, and she would rather keep that broad.
Mayor Beckmeyer agreed.
City Manager Woodhouse stated, to Mayor pro Tem Boles’ point, what he said earlier is in this chapter we should update the introduction to be current with the status of the LCLUP and any of these actions in here that relate to the work of the LCLUP; we should also say that we need to be consistent with the work of the LCLUP. We can state that in the introduction and/or make this one more general as there may be many different external stakeholders that, in our Shoreline Adaptation Planning process, we will work with. To direct Public Works to collaborate directly with the Pacifica Land Trust may not be the most feasible thing until we know what the scope of that grant study compared to OneShoreline, Army Corps, etc.
Councilmember Bier stated we are not saying we will not partner, but expanding it without naming.
Mayor pro Tem Boles responded affirmatively. She was leaning toward not adopting it at this meeting but having staff and the Task Force work on these to flesh out the new language and bring it back to them for adoption at another meeting.
Councilmember Wright agreed.
Mayor Beckmeyer agreed. She thought phrase “external stakeholders,” for example, could be a more inclusive grouping instead of naming specific ones. She asked City Attorney and City Manager how we take action on tonight.
City Manager Woodhouse stated he wanted to make sure Council had discussed an introductory statement in the report that Community Director Updegrave read. He did not have a sense of whether there is majority Council on that. Staff will work on the language but is the general direction that we should include that kind of introductory statement in the Plan.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought she agreed but would like to hear from the Task Force; she was okay with staff drafting something, as long as it is reviewed by the Task Force and then it comes back to Council where they can see it. She thought “menu of options” was not necessarily clear for us to meet our goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and wanted to verify that it comes back as part of goal setting and budgeting and Council review.
City Manager Woodhouse stated the other direction related to this resiliency chapter is to update the references to the LCLUP and the framework that creates, at least for R2.17, a question would be if there are other actions, making sure that they are general enough to not be inconsistent with the LCLUP requirements.
Mayor Beckmeyer agreed and wanted to make sure we are completely aligned with the 15- month deadline of the LCLUP.
City Council Regular Meeting 27 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Bier stated that she wanted to adopt the Plan at this meeting and did not feel good about adjourning. She did not want to have to send it back to the Task Force.
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to extend the meeting to 12:00 a.m.; seconded by Councilmember Wright.
EXTEND MEETING TO 12:00 AM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Councilmember Bier thought we should have started this a long time ago and she would rather adopt this tonight. She heard Council talk about adjourning the meeting to a meeting to be determined, but she needs to understand why. She is hearing one thing about the introduction, and she wants that to go back to the Task Force to look at. She heard about expanding the language about to be inclusive of other agencies and community groups, and she heard changes for E1.6 and E1.7 and references to the LCLUP. She asks what she is missing that needs to go back and they need to take more time to deal with.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought we did not know all the references to the LCLUP to approve. She stated she would like them to review that language. She is hoping this can all be worked out, but she does not know staff’s or the Task Force’s capacity.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated it may be difficult to continue it to a date certain, given that we would need to convene another Brown Act meeting for the CAAP Task Force. Staff would need to work on revisions. There may be difficulties in identifying a date tonight that works to continue this hearing.
Management Analyst Brooks asked if the determinations need to be made by a quorum of the Task Force or would it suffice to have the implementation subcommittee work on the revisions.
As a body, they agreed that the implementation subcommittee could carry forth with any Council direction that happened as a result of this meeting. She thinks they are willing to get a quorum together, if needed, but is this the decision that needs to be made by a quorum.
Councilmember Bier stated that the implementation subcommittee work is fine with her.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it is okay with her also.
Task Force Chair Meagher stated that the implementation subcommittee can take what has been said here. She would recommend to come back with a redline of the draft and final draft by the next feasible Council meeting.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that June 23 has tentatively planned the rezoning EIR certification for the Housing Element as well as the final budget adoption, so it is a packed agenda. He posed to Council that this could be the final discussion and adoption of the CARP may be quick, but an elongated discussion like tonight could be an agenda planning challenge.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought it could be quick and can go over her questions with them.
City Council Regular Meeting 28 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Wright stated he has pages and pages too.
Councilmember Bier asked if Council will all be getting the answers to those questions.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated there were questions sent to staff awaiting answers and some questions sent to Task Force Chair Meagher as well. She had a few other suggestions that she was planning to go over tonight and she is happy to do that.
City Manager Woodhouse stated, to clarify, there were questions submitted on the CARP that staff did not have time to respond in writing today but staff is prepared to respond to those.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to Packet page 612, E1.3, which talks about partnering with funding agencies to offer incentives. She thought it was important to add “and educate the public, especially income qualified homeowners”. She also had a question about E1.4, multifamily, which talked about green point rating especially for multi-family projects. There is no definition of multi-family and she did not know if townhouses and condos count. She felt it would be helpful to clarify the definition.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that there is currently no definition of multifamily for planning purposes within the General Plan or the Zoning Ordinance. Staff would need to look at what the standards are in build green or green point to see if they have a definition. In adopting any kind of policies or regulations, that would probably be something we would need to determine or define. Generally, for land use purposes, multi-family is more than one unit. but it is typical to have definitions of that; that is something we would need to analyze and contact through the program and how the program is laid out.
Mayor pro Tem Boles wanted to make sure we are not missing the opportunity to ask for high green building standards for larger projects even if they are townhouses or condos.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, if we were to adopt any kind of green building standards, that would be work that would need to be directed by Council and would come back to Council for review.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated on packet page 616, T.I.11, regarding a TDM plan and Congestion Management Plan. TDM is about reducing the number of trips for a given project but then a Congestion Management Plan is what is needed to identify potential roadway improvements.
This policy talks about doing a TDM plan but then the performance indicators talk about a major California 1 Highway project. She thinks we either need to add the Congestion Management Plan or possibly take that out of Item C. She referred to packet page 627, R2.8, which did not make much sense to her, “plans for coastal erosion and storm surges by developing a policy that requires new or upgraded infrastructure to consider high risk zones” and then “the performance indicator policy in place, number of projects or structures constructed in high risk zone” makes it sounds like we want to build projects in high risk zones.
City Manager Woodhouse stated this is an example where the LCLUP governs this and he is not sure that this very specific action stated here is appropriate. Staff have to look at the LCLUP and see what it says but generally in this chapter the LCLUP is the guiding document.
Mayor Beckmeyer thanked her. She stated Councilmember Bier wanted to approve this tonight and she asked her if she understands the reasons why that might not be feasible.
City Council Regular Meeting 29 May 27, 2025
Councilmember Bier did not like it but she understands.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked adjourning to a date certain.
Management Analyst Brooks thought the suggestion was that staff bring back the redline version with these changes at the next feasible City Council meeting.
Councilmember Wright asked if the point of date certain was to not reopen public comment.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated no, it is to emphasize that we are not kicking it down the road.
Management Analyst Brooks asked if Council would consider, at that time, the revised scope of work and charter of the Task Force at that meeting potentially.
City Manager Woodhouse stated we can consider that. He stated tentatively scheduled on July 14 is the STR ordinance introduction. It is also the backup meeting for the Housing Element Zoning EIR which will be reviewed by Planning Commission on June 2. He stated that there were some variables there but we could be aspirational and it could be a combined item for the CARP adoption plus establishment of the Task Force. Discussion about the charter for the Task Force would make it longer. Those would be some of the factors.
Mayor Beckmeyer understood and asked if we can leave it with as soon as practicable.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked, when it comes back, that we highlight what has changed.
City Manager Woodhouse asked Councilmembers to send staff any of their specific text changes to the CARP.
Councilmember Wright expressed how much he appreciates the work that was done and how valuable it is to this community.
Mayor Beckmeyer thought this Council is committed and we want to make sure we are being fair and reasonable in what we are committing to.
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to continue the Climate Action and Resilience Plan discussion to a date uncertain; seconded by Mayor Beckmeyer.
CONTINUE MEETING TO A DATE UNCERTAIN
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
City Council Regular Meeting 30 May 27, 2025
ADJOURN
Mayor Beckmeyer adjourned the meeting at 11:47 p.m.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
APPROVED: 5 - 0; 6/23/2025
__________________________
Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem