CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer
Vice Mayor Christine Boles
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
Councilmember Greg Wright
City Council Regular Meeting 1 September 08, 2025
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
September 08, 2025 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Off-street parking is allowed by permit for attendance at official public meetings.
Vehicles parked without permits are subject to citation. You should obtain a permit from the rack in the lobby and place it on the dashboard of your vehicle in such a manner as is visible to law enforcement personnel.
PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES DURING MEETING
Alternative Ways to Observe and Participate in the Meeting:
The primary method for observing and participating in the meeting is in-person at the meeting location published in the meeting agenda. However, there are alternative ways to observe and participate:
• Join Zoom Webinar: https://pacifica-gov.zoom.us/j/81156158241 • Watch on TV on Comcast channel 26
• Watch a Live Stream of the meeting by following https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream or www.pacificcoast.tv
• Live Remote Public Comments (offered on a pilot basis):
• Join Zoom Webinar: https://pacifica-gov.zoom.us/j/81156158241 • OR Dial-in: 1-669-900-6833 | Webinar ID: 811 5615 8241 o Press * 9 to raise your hand to request to speak.
o Press * 6 to unmute when called upon to speak by the last 4-digits of your phone #. • When the Mayor announces the Agenda Item on which you would like to comment, raise your hand in Zoom. You will be called upon my screenname or last 4-digits of phone number if dialing in. Please mute any background sound and state your full name at the start of your comment.
Please note that Alternative platforms for participation are subject to underlying technology functionality and may be modified or interrupted at any time without notice. • Written Public Comments:
BEFORE THE MEETING: Written public comments may be submitted in advance by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date by email to: [email protected]. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Public Comment on Item Not on Agenda” in the Subject Line
• Include the submitter’s full name
Written public comments received by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date will be provided in their entirety to the City Council and posted to the City’s website prior to the meeting but will not be read verbally at the meeting.
AT THE MEETING: Materials in writing provided at the meeting should provide seven (7) copies to provide for each Councilmember, City Clerk and City staff.
City Council Regular Meeting 2 September 08, 2025
5:00 PM - CLOSED SESSION
00a. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8. Property: 1220 C Linda Mar Boulevard, Pacifica (APN 023-281-130).
Agency negotiator: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager. Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and Stephen Johnson Photography. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment of lease. 00b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8. Property: 1220 Linda Mar Boulevard, Pacifica (APN 023-281-130).
Agency negotiator: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager. Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and Art Guild of Pacifica. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment of lease 00c. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8. Property: 1220 Linda Mar Boulevard, Pacifica (APN 023-281-130).
Agency negotiator: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager. Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and Pacifica Performances. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment of lease. 6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Roll Call
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
The City of Pacifica acknowledges that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We honor the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples for their enduring commitment to Mother Earth. As the Indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. We affirm their sovereign rights as First Peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples.
Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Bier
Closed Session Report
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Special Presentation - Fog Fest Organizing Group - 38th Pacific Coast Fog Fest B. Special Presentation - Introduction of New City Employees
CONSENT CALENDAR
Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any item listed on the agenda should submit a speaker card to the City Clerk.
City Council Regular Meeting 3 September 08, 2025
Public meetings are a limited public forum, meaning that there are rules for commenting at these meetings. Comments on consent agenda items must relate to that specific item.
If comments do not relate to a specific agenda item, then City will provide you with an initial warning to stay on topic. If the warning is not followed, the Mayor will direct the City Clerk to cut off the microphone.
Items on the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion unless a Councilmember requests, before the vote on the motion, to have an item discussed. Time limit on comments is three minutes or less.
1. Approval of Disbursements for 08/01/25 through 08/31/25 PROPOSED ACTION: Approval of Disbursements for 08/01/25 through 08/31/25
2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the August 11, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting.
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.
4. Second Amendment to Lease Agreement between City of Pacifica (City), as landlord, and Spindrift School of Performing Arts (SSPA), as tenant, for use of City property at 1050 Crespi Drive, Pacifica (Leased Property)
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution Approving the Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement between City and Spindrift School of Performing Arts (SSPA) extending the term for the Leased Property at 1050 Crespi Drive for a period of five years, with an option for an additional five-year extension term, subject to agreement of City and SSPA, and authorize the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment.
5. Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement for Professional Planning and Related Services Between the City of Pacifica and Consulting Firm MIG PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a resolution approving an Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and MIG, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $15,000 for a total contract amount of $165,000 and, to authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.
6. Resolution Supporting the Manor Drive Overcrossing Project and Authorizing Submittal of an Application for Measure A and W Highway Program Funding PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the resolution authorizing staff to submit the grant application for the Measure A and W Highway Program Funding, authorizing the City Manager to execute any documents required for the grant application, and committing the required matching funds for the project if the grant is approved.
City Council Regular Meeting 4 September 08, 2025
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
This portion of the Agenda is available for the public to address the City Council on any issue that is not on the Agenda. Any person wishing to address the Council shall be recognized by the Mayor during this time, provided, however, that only items not on the Agenda for that meeting may be addressed. Comments on non-agendized items must address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. If comments do not address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City, the City will provide you with an initial warning to stay within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. If the warning is not followed, the Mayor will direct the City Clerk to cut off the microphone.
Councilmembers shall not enter into debate with speakers under Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda. A maximum of three minutes will be allowed for any speaker.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.
CONSIDERATION
7. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Pacifica To Amend Section 5-2.03, “Violations: Abatement”, Section 5-2.05, “Notices of Hearings”, Section 5-2.06, “Hearings: Determinations” and Repealing Section 5-2.07, “Appeals” and Section 5-2.08, “Removal” Within Chapter 2, "Vehicles Parked For Seventy-Two Hours Or More” of Title 5 Of The Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Parking Exceeding 72 hours (Status: CEQA Exempt)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to waive the second reading and adopt by title only an Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Pacifica To Amend Section 5-2.03, “Violations: Abatement”, Section 5-2.05, “Notices of Hearings”, Section 5-2.06, “Hearings: Determinations” and repealing Section 5-2.07, “Appeals” and Section 5-2.08, “Removal” Within Chapter 2, "Vehicles Parked For Seventy-Two Hours Or More” of Title 5 of The Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Parking Exceeding 72 hours and find the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.
8. Consideration of a Resolution establishing the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and approving its Fiscal Year 2025–2026 Work Plan
PROPOSED ACTION:
1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council establishing the Climate Action and Resilience Committee.
2. Approve the Climate Action and Resilience Committee Work Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Council Communications is for Councilmembers to inform each other of items of potential interest to other Councilmembers, such as interagency meetings.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Staff Communications is for the City Manager to offer announcements as appropriate.
City Council Regular Meeting 5 September 08, 2025
ADJOURN
NOTICE: If you challenge a city's zoning, planning or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any city administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of the final decision The City of Pacifica will provide assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 24 hours advance notice to the City Manager’s Office (650) 738-7301, or send request via email to:
[email protected] if you need sign language assistance or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.
The Pacifica Municipal Code is available online at the City’s website (www.cityofpacifica.org/municode);
HOW TO OBTAIN CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
Posted agendas:
Agendas are posted no later than Friday prior to the City Council meeting date, at the entrance to the City Hall location at 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica.
View on the Internet:
Follow the link to Council agenda, at www.cityofpacifica.org E-mail subscription:
Send a request to Sarah Coffey, at [email protected] City Clerk’s Office/City Manager’s Office
City Hall, 170 Santa Maria Ave.
Council meetings:
Agendas are available at the City Council meeting
HOW TO REACH YOUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
• San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller, District 3, 500 County Center, Redwood City CA 94063 (650) 363-4569
• Governor Gavin Newsom, State Capitol Building, Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 445-2841 • State Senator Josh Becker, 1528 So. El Camino Real, Suite 303, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 212-3313 • Assembly Member Marc Berman, 721 Colorado Ave, Suite 101, Palo Alto CA 94303 (650) 324-0224 • Congressman Sam Liccardo, 1117 Longworth House Office Building, Washington DC 20515 (202) 225-8104
• Senator Alex Padilla, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3553 • Senator Adam Schiff, SD-B40B Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3841 • President Donald J. Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington DC 20500
CITY COUNCIL
• Mayor Sue Beckmeyer, [email protected]
• Vice Mayor Christine Boles, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mayra Espinosa, [email protected]
• Councilmember Greg Wright, [email protected]
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Disbursements for 08/01/25 through 08/31/25 RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of August 2025 STAFF CONTACT:
Lucy Xie, Deputy Finance Director
(650) 501-6014
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Staff has submitted the following Monthly Check Register Report per California Government Code, Title 4, Division 3, Part 3, Chapter 3, Section 41004:
- Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through 08/31/25 are in the amount of $5,640,947.42 (Attachment 1).
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with acceptance of the Monthly Check Register Report.
ORIGINATED BY:
Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (PDF)
1 Packet Pg. 6
City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4304 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000915 ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA G 4305 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC.
4306 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000078 AMERICAN DEBRIS BOX SERVI 4307 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001084 AMERICAN RED CROSS
4308 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000096 AT&T MOBILITY
4309 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000098 ATLAS PLUMBING & ROOTER I 4310 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000108 VWR INTERNATIONAL
4311 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000110 BAAQMD 4312 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000130 BEARING AGENCIES INC 4313 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000133 BECKMEYER, SUE
4314 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4315 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464
4316 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000280 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC.
4317 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000281 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY
4318 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001324 ELIZABETH SOLIS
4319 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001019 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASS 4320 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000323 EOA INC
4321 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000332 EXPERIAN
4322 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000333 FACILITRON
4323 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001380 FIRST STUDENT, INC.
4324 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000346 FISHER SCIENTIFIC
4325 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000355 FREYER & LAURETA, INC.
4326 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001078 GOOD CITY COMPANY
4327 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER
4328 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000380 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #265 4329 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000952 HARDY DIAGNOSTICS
4330 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001273 HAZEN AND SAWYER
4331 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000398 HDL SOFTWARE, LLC
4332 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000411 HEART OF SAN MATEO COUNTY 4333 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000446 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC
4334 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000462 KIMBALL MIDWEST
4335 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001028 MATT LUJAN
4336 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000916 MCCAMPBELL ANALYTICAL, IN 4337 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000519 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COM 4338 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000520 MCMILLAN ELECTRIC
4339 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000015 NORTH COAST COUNTY WATER 4340 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001083 NATIONAL DRIVING SCHOOL, 4341 08/01/2025 PRINTED 999998 Craig Cummings 4342 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000603 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE, I 4343 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000605 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 4344 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000666 PRINT COPY XPRESS
4345 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000674 PUMP REPAIR SERVICE CO., 4346 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000679 QUILL CORPORATION
4347 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000683 RANEY PLANNING AND MANAGE 4348 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001050 RANGER PIPELINES
4349 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000982 S.R. ROSE ENGINEERING, IN 4350 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO LOCAL AGENCY FO 4351 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000019 SAN MATEO COUNTY HEALTH
4352 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000025 SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO 4353 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001306 SURF CAMP PACIFICA 4354 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000830 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPE 4355 08/01/2025 PRINTED 001420 VAPEX ENVIRONMENTAL TECHN Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
12,762.00
370. 57
97.99 2,384.00
259.38
1,200.00
786.33
28,341.00
1,250.21
374.97
523.25
1,565.79
17,800.00
5,865.08 101.30
53,704.25
1,711.15 100.00
640.00
5,292.82 418.35
98,115.13
47,851.00
1,403.85
3,074.28
1,134.65
19,505.01
9,071.62
3,166.64 645.63
1,650.89
129.14
349.00
84.17 16,815.00
23,280.50
2,300.00
787.00
26.05 787.80
154.84
61,075.19
1,191.62
10,238.38 1,543,029.16 6,570.30
8,082.00 700.00
78.08 7,921.20
1,628.70
10,148.13
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4356 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000878 STEVE KWON
4357 08/01/2025 PRINTED 000880 WHITE CAP CONST. SUPPLY
4358 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000039 AVINA, ANGEL
4359 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000056 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE
4360 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001102 ALBERTSONS / SAFEWAY
4361 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001381 ALLIED RESTORATION CO., I 4362 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000067 ALPINE AWARDS ACCOUNTING 4363 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC.
4364 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000108 VWR INTERNATIONAL
4365 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000779 AXON ENTERPRISE INC.
4366 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000120 BAY AREA TREE SPECIALISTS 4367 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4368 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4369 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4370 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4371 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4372 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4373 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000137 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS 4374 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000998 BETTS TRUCK PARTS & SERVI 4375 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000147 BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY COMPAN 4376 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001373 BLUE TRITON BRANDS INC
4377 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 4378 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000178 NAF SERVICES, INC.
4379 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000187 CAROLLO
4380 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000190 CALIFORNIA DIESEL & POWER 4381 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000201 CHILDCARE CAREERS
4382 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS
4383 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000224 COMCAST
4384 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC.
4385 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC.
4386 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001122 CUMMINS SALES AND SERVICE 4387 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000253 C.W.E.A.
4388 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000281 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY
4389 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000282 DISH
4390 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000296 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION 4391 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 4392 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001041 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES
4393 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001380 FIRST STUDENT, INC.
4394 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000346 FISHER SCIENTIFIC
4395 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000350 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC
4396 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000116 BADGE FRAME, INC.
4397 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000371 GOLDEN STATE LUMBER
4398 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER
4399 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000430 IPS GROUP INC.
4400 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001301 JENNIFER CHRISTIANSEN
4401 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000457 KBA DOCUSYS
4402 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000979 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS 4403 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000462 KIMBALL MIDWEST
4404 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000484 LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC, INC. 4405 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000916 MCCAMPBELL ANALYTICAL, IN 4406 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000519 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COM 4407 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000536 MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQU Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
45.00 463.90
300.00
1,573.63
1,200.47
33,552.40
743.21
1,216.82
1,646.23
8,819.54
8,700.00
18,833.30
12,037.58
8,155.83
13,988.80 523.25
529.75
523.25
65.23 1,856.85 61.07
219,712.45
1,699.44
25,010.33
2,742.89
880.00
278.13
32.60 3,355.00
5,655.00 155.87
251.00
192.65
74.99 1,524.00
55.75 1,948.03
2,380.32
1,201.52
9,213.78 48.00
30.65 209. 59
779.75
1,043.00 207.73
100,364.67 160.49
1,024.80
2,149.00
1,318.42 62.76
1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4408 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000561 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINE 4409 08/08/2025 PRINTED 999998 COHEN AND JACOBSON, LLP
4410 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000600 PACIFIC FIRE SAFE
4411 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000603 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE, I 4412 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000605 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINAN 4413 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000628 PARS
4414 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000648 PHENOVA
4415 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000656 POLYDYNE INC.
4416 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000679 QUILL CORPORATION
4417 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000710 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP.
4418 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001339 SALVADOR MENDEZ
4419 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY INFORMAT 4420 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000729 SEAVIEW TIRE & BRAKE CENT 4421 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000730 SERRAMONTE FORD INC.
4422 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001090 SMART CARE EQUIPMENT SOLU 4423 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001268 STACI MARIE HARPOLE
4424 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000805 T-MOBILE CORPORATION
4425 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000790 TERI BLACK & COMPANY LLC 4426 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000791 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTE 4427 08/08/2025 PRINTED 001142 THE CONSULTING TEAM, LLC 4428 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000828 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINAN 4429 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000830 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPE 4430 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000837 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS USA INC 4431 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000855 VERIZON WIRELESS
4432 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000862 VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
4433 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000862 VISION SERVICE PLAN- CA
4434 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000862 VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA
4435 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000878 STEVE KWON
4436 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000879 WEX HEALTH, INC.
4437 08/08/2025 PRINTED 000880 WHITE CAP CONST. SUPPLY
4438 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001081 DUDEK
4439 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC.
4440 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001316 CONSOLIDATED PARTS INC.
4441 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000096 AT&T LONG DISTANCE
4442 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000097 ATCO INTERNATIONAL
4443 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000954 THE BRIEFING ROOM, LLC
4444 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001351 BRITTANY HERNANDEZ
4445 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000917 BROADMOOR POLICE DEPARTME 4446 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000192 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC.
4447 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001424 CHEMTRADE CHEMICALS CORPO 4448 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464
4449 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS
4450 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000011 CITY OF DALY CITY
4451 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000217 COAST COUNTIES PETERBILT 4452 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000231 SCA OF CA, LLC
4453 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001012 CORE & MAIN LP
4454 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000931 CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEME 4455 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000244 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 4456 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000245 CRIME SCENE CLEANERS, INC 4457 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC.
4458 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001122 CUMMINS SALES AND SERVICE 4459 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000253 C.W.E.A.
Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
3,450.43
601,731.85 901. 59
122.95
557.95
400.00
525.09
53,069.64
1,141.08
418.56
991.22
164. 51
104.91
298.67
404.42
1,440.00
522.33
10,481.01 701.70
20,042.40
1,122.77 120.65
4,295.54
160.96
4,289.36
67.54 67.54
90.00 94.75
1,319.96
36,539.38
458.41
118.53
60.23 131. 21
1,467.06
68.00 845 .00
4,500.00
8,286.83
2,710.33 65.01
368.64
279.13
33,384.00
4,174.63
711.90
1,568.22
130.00
33,853.64
10,000.27 124.00
1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4460 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000253 C.W.E.A.
4461 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000255 DARRYL PANG
4462 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000280 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC.
4463 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000293 DUBOCE JANITORIAL SERVICE 4464 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000296 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION 4465 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001425 ECONOMY SIGN, INC.
4466 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000330 EWERS ENGINEERING
4467 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK VIOLATION PROCESS 4468 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 4469 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000341 FEHR PEERS
4470 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001423 FLEETROCK, LLC
4471 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001129 GOVERNMENT FINANCE SERVIC 4472 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000380 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #265 4473 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000955 HD SUPPLY FORMERLY HOMED 4474 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000943 HELLA THREADS, LLC
4475 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000947 K.F. HOWELL ELECTRIC, INC 4476 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001427 JUAN CASTRO
4477 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000457 KBA DOCUSYS
4478 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000480 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 4479 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000484 LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC, INC. 4480 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000520 MCMILLAN ELECTRIC
4481 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000525 MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, 4482 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001171 MK PRIVATE INVESTIGATION 4483 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000548 MSI FUEL MANAGEMENT INC
4484 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000592 O' REILLY AUTO PARTS
4485 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000587 OFFICE DEPOT
4486 08/15/2025 PRINTED 999998 Cohen and Jacobson, LLP
4487 08/15/2025 PRINTED 999998 Kathy Gonzalez
4488 08/15/2025 PRINTED 999998 Matt Lanier
4489 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000603 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE , I 4490 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001422 GSV HOLDING, LLC
4491 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000972 PLAN JPA
4492 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001421 ROBERT D. RESCH
4493 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000667 PRIORITY 1 PUBLIC SAFETY 4494 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000674 PUMP REPAIR SERVICE CO., 4495 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000679 QUILL CORPORATION 4496 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000021 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
4497 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONM 4498 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONM 4499 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001024 SCHAAF & WHEELER
4500 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000766 STERICYCLE
4501 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001137 STEVEN MANSKER
4502 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000776 SYNAGRO WEST, LLC
4503 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001099 TANNER PACIFIC, INC
4504 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000788 TELSTAR INSTRUMENTS
4505 08/15/2025 PRINTED 000791 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTE 4506 08/15/2025 PRINTED 001140 TRAVIS MEYERHOFF
4507 08/21/2025 PRINTED 000913 BENEFIT COORDINATORS CORP 4508 08/21/2025 PRINTED 000592 O' REILLY AUTO PARTS
4509 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000039 AVINA, ANGEL
4510 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000046 ABBY M. MARGOLIS
4511 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000052 ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFFS 0 Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
271.00
375.00
22,800.00
1,400.00
98.28 620.00
37,438.30 20.75
11. 50
12,189.38
604. 50
1,950.00 972.39
268.91
601. 50
5,012.94
748.51
25.00 6,470.00
437.64
22,457.11
20,807.49
2,000.00
22,496.61 543.41
37.97 8,488.15
2,000.00
2,000.00 103.67
808.23
10,214.17
7,450.00 150.00
10,980.00 25.21
4,173.50
1,923.00
2,053.00
3,420.00 344.82
1,460.25
1,827.35
74,267.60
42,551.07 169.78
125 .00
10,035.87
844. 56
1,800.00 338.00
425.00
1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4512 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001017 ADRIAN COLMENARES
4513 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC.
4514 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000078 AMERICAN DEBRIS BOX SERVI 4515 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001247 ANA CORREA
4516 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001303 ANDREW M MEROVICH
4517 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001023 ANGELA BOELDT
4518 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000096 AT&T
4519 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000096 AT&T
4520 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000096 AT&T
4521 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000981 BAY AREA JUMP
4522 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000130 BEARING AGENCIES INC
4523 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000152 BOOTZIN, ALEX
4524 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000160 BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SUPPL 4525 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 4526 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 4527 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000173 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STAND 4528 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001430 CAL SAFETY SOLUTION LLC
4529 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000178 NAF SERVICES , INC.
4530 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000187 CAROLLO
4531 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001431 CHALLENGER SPORTS CORP
4532 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000201 CHILDCARE CAREERS
4533 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464
4534 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000210 CLAIRE BREES
4535 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000253 C.W.E.A.
4536 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000257 D.W. NICHOLSON CORPORTATI 4537 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000944 DIRECT CARRIER SOLUTION, 4538 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000281 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY 4539 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001324 ELIZABETH SOLIS
4540 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000332 EXPERIAN
4541 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 4542 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000343 FIDDLER'S GREEN MOVING & 4543 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000350 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC
4544 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001271 FOLGERGRAPHICS, INC
4545 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001191 FRANKL VELEZ
4546 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000355 FREYER & LAURETA, INC.
4547 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000969 GIBSON JR., EUGENE
4548 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000368 GODSOE, LIZ
4549 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000373 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBE 4550 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000397 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & 4551 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001202 HENRY TRAN
4552 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000401 HILL SCOTT
4553 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000402 HILTON IRENE
4554 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000430 IPS GROUP INC.
4555 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000430 IPS GROUP INC.
4556 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001091 JASMINE MONTOYA
4557 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001301 JENNIFER CHRISTIANSEN
4558 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000455 KASEYA US LLC
4559 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000463 KING, KATHLEEN
4560 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000467 KONA ICE OF SAN MATEO
4561 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000978 LASHLEY, MARK
4562 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000503 MAKE ME A PRO SPORTS
4563 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000506 MARATHON DISTRIBUTORS, IN Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
100.60
558.85
358.99
705 .18
8,101.80 532.00
31.29 155.40
516.06
2,091.96
325.06
125 .00
1,561.32
3,955.64 183,934.92 1,966.40
3,000.00 655.20
24,267.57
4,299.40
1,552.00 333.41
360.00
271.00
22,468.00
1,595.45 884.66
140.98
100.00
18.00 3,942.00
10,668.41
10,246.43 533.40
23,413.81 100.00
46.00 746.14
1,750.00
853.00
165.00
1,691.90
529.78
2,603.33 705 .18
1,043.00
195.70
41.30 833.60
75.00 2,028.60 156.68
1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4564 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000519 MC MASTER- CARR SUPPLY COM 4565 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000553 NAPIER, NORA
4566 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000563 GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM, INC. 4567 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001002 OIL CHANGERS
4568 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000602 OMMM PACIFICA
4569 08/22/2025 PRINTED 999999 SHANKAR GOPINATH
4570 08/22/2025 PRINTED 999997 Mark Glenn
4571 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000595 ORTEGA, SHIRLEY
4572 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000603 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE, I 4573 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000629 PATINO, JOE
4574 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4575 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4576 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4577 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4578 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4579 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000648 PHENOVA
4580 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000649 PITTSINGER, R JANE
4581 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000667 PRIORITY 1 PUBLIC SAFETY 4582 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001059 PRODUCTIVE PRINTING & GRA 4583 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000680 R & H WHOLESALE SUPPLY, I 4584 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000683 RANEY PLANNING AND MANAGE 4585 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000684 SAN MATEO COUNTY RESOURCE 4586 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001296 ROXANNE MARIE SELIGER
4587 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000706 ROY COTO PLUMBING, INC.
4588 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001048 RYAN BIANCULLI
4589 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY PUBLICS 4590 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONM 4591 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF' 4592 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000717 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL
4593 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000717 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL
4594 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000936 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCIS 4595 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000759 ST. FRANCIS ELECTRIC, INC 4596 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000762 STANLEY ERHART
4597 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000768 STEVEN MICHAEL EVANS JR
4598 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000769 STEWART CHEVROLET
4599 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000776 SYNAGRO WEST, LLC
4600 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000780 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINE 4601 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000781 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #350
4602 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000791 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTE 4603 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000794 SOUTH BAY PUBLIC SAFETY T 4604 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000802 THOMSON WEST
4605 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000804 JOSE LUIS MONTES
4606 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000844 US FOODS, INC
4607 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001305 VALENTINA SUZANNE LINSANG 4608 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001190 VANESSA MOSQUEDA VELEZ
4609 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000877 WESTERN TRUCK FAB
4610 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000878 THE UPS STORE 0996
4611 08/22/2025 PRINTED 001344 WILLIAM GLASGO
4612 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000885 WINTZELL YLVA
4613 08/22/2025 PRINTED 000897 SERRA YELLOW CAB
4614 08/26/2025 PRINTED 000605 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 4615 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000062 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPAN Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
131. 21
586.00
1,902.65 64.00
2,008.30 45.00
4,950.00 116.00
242.22
104.00
81. 50
122.59
237,116.63
2,180.04
3,078.48 724.67
60.00 1,498.74
1,402.19
340.87
3,329.27
5,849.72
5,658.00
85.00 705 .18
1,893.75 638.00
2,655.00
5,627.52 720.00
7,400.00
29,646.90 450.00
213.00
209.88
8,211.90
1,770.50
858.00
182.00
1,727.00 445 .12
775 .00
7,889.96
1,131.90 266.70
2,048.88
225.00
705 .18
4,669.70
5,639.65 879.00
500.00
1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4616 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001307 ALLSITE CORP GOODS/SERVIC 4617 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC.
4618 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001084 AMERICAN RED CROSS
4619 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001104 ANVIL BUILDERS
4620 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001123 BELKORP AG
4621 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001079 BOBCAT OF THE BAY- FREMONT 4622 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS
4623 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001433 CITY OF BELMONT
4624 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000011 CITY OF DALY CITY
4625 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000011 CITY OF DALY CITY
4626 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000011 CITY OF DALY CITY
4627 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001312 CIVITAS ADVISORS
4628 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000251 CURTIS & SONS, L.N.
4629 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000265 DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY 4630 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001426 DHI WATER & ENVIRONMENT , 4631 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000277 DIAL GLASS AND WINDOW CO 4632 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000280 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC.
4633 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000282 DISH
4634 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001061 EAST PENN MANUFACTURING C 4635 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000319 ENGINEERING DATA SERVICES 4636 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 4637 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001041 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES
4638 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000380 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #265 4639 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000399 HERC RENTALS INC.
4640 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001428 HILLTOP DEVELOPMENTS
4641 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000947 K.F. HOWELL ELECTRIC, INC 4642 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000947 K.F. HOWELL ELECTRIC , INC 4643 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001441 KONSTANTINOS KAKONIKTIS
4644 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000438 JEFFERSON UNION HIGH SCH 4645 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001323 J.J.R. CONSTRUCTION , INC 4646 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000442 JMI SOURCING LLC
4647 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000446 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC
4648 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000522 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIO 4649 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001397 NICK SAKKOS
4650 08/29/2025 PRINTED 999997 Alvaro Gandara Astray 4651 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000590 OPENGOV, INC. 4652 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000600 PACIFIC FIRE SAFE
4653 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000016 PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT 4654 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4655 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4656 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 4657 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001434 PRECISION EMPRISE LLC
4658 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001437 RICHARD SHERROD
4659 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001438 SAMANTHA UPDEGRAVE
4660 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000021 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
4661 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONM 4662 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONM 4663 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000029 STATE WATER RESOURCES CON 4664 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000782 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #856
4665 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000782 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #856
4666 08/29/2025 PRINTED 001021 TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 4667 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000855 VERIZON WIRELESS
Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
22,437.99
27.45 235.00
516,526.40
135. 36
342.07
446.06
195 .00
8,225.33
583.87
21,522.18
3,009.81 203.54
29,085.00
24,000.00 198.88
3,505.20 149.98
563.42
10,064.87 16.00
97.86 5,411.87
4,708.49 650.00
600.00
1,620.00
11,480.00
97,850.00
393,047.34 8,476.32
154.92
82.41 25,000.00
1,238.00
6,908.25
754. 50
14,546.00
1,200.00
1,200.00
1,200.00
3,500.00
1,852.20
400.00
50.00 525.00
1,268.00 228.00
3,126.00
3,083.00
5,000.00
2,331.11
1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: uncleared
CHECK# CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 4668 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000860 VIP SEALING
4669 08/29/2025 PRINTED 000878 THE UPS STORE 0996
366 CHECKS CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL
Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Program ID : apchkrcn
1,931.20
135 .00
5, 640,947 .42 .00
1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through City of Pacifica
AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
UNCLEARED CLEARED
366 CHECKS FINAL TOTAL 5, 640,947 .42 .00
** END OF REPORT - Generated by Abby Decano **
Report generated : 09/ 02/ 2025 14: 13 user : 5234adecano Page 9 Program ID : apchkrcn
1.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report August 2025 (6029 : Disbursements dated 08/1/25 through
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to approve the minutes for the August 11, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Move to approve the minutes for the August 11, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting (Attachment A),
FISCAL IMPACT:
Within budgeted operational expenses.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 16
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 August 11, 2025
August 11, 2025 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer called the meeting to order on August 11, 2025 at 7:08 PM 7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Beckmeyer called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
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; Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney; Karen Murphy, Asst. City Attorney; Yulia Carter, Asst. City Manager; Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director; Maria Sarasua, Police Chief; Marisol Gómez, Finance & Administrative Services Director; Melissa Tigbao, Public Works Director (Zoom); Louis Sun, PW Dep. DirectorWastewater Div.; Roland Yip, PW Dep. Director-Engineering; Stephanie Douglas, Recreation Manager; Brianne Harkousha, Community Development Deputy Director; Travis Meyerhoff, Police Corporal; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk; Emily La, Dep. City Clerk.
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Beckmeyer read the Land Acknowledgment.
Salute to the Flag led by Mayor Beckmeyer
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if any Councilmembers wished to pull any items from consent.
Mayor pro Tem Boles had some questions about Item #7. She was confused with the agenda for the new contract amount for HdL, reading, “The total annual cost for the contract will increase from approximately $85,000 (previously based on a combination of fixed fees and variable
2.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 August 11, 2025
contingency fees tied to recovery revenues) to $125,000 fixed contract rate plus the ongoing contingency fees.” She understood from staff that last year’s total cost with all the other fees was close to $116,000. The staff report mentions this new contract being $125,000 as a fixed fee but her understanding from the answer is that it may go up and down depending on the work that HdL is doing. She concluded that was an estimate that they may go under. Her understanding is that the only big change, other than standard cost increases, is the new $24,700 fee for STR identification monitoring, education, registration, and compliance. She was confirming that as the only new piece that is in the contract, but the total amount of HDL’s contract is only going up by about $10,000 from before.
Mayor Beckmeyer understands that this is a two-year agreement and she asked if she is correct that what Council is voting on in this item is for FY 25-26 and 26-27.
City Manager Woodhouse believes that is correct.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if the last paragraph of the resolution provides an option to extend.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated it was an option to extend.
Mayor Beckmeyer confirmed that two years with an option to extend for one more year.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comments.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, thanked Council for the progress on the Short-Term Rental Ordinance, as well as the Planning Commission and community.
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, shared concerns about sections of the Voluntary Collection Agreement with HomeAway preventing tax audits and negative impacts on the Short-Term Rental ordinance.
He also asked for an explanation on the cost increase in the contract with HdL as well as the process for enforcement.
Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, agreed with Mr. Reinero. She also thanked Council and staff for passing the Short-Term Rental ordinance.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comments.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked for staff to comment about the auditing procedures in the contract with HomeAway and whether it is information also collected from hotels and why guest information would not be included with the STRs.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated staff worked with VRBO and Expedia for over a year about the contract and the contract helps for City to collect TOT. It is quite significant progress for implementation of the ordinance with certain provisions, including specific recommendations for accountability. For the VCA agreement, none of the platforms agreed to violate some of the privacy provisions. The language here is what their legal team agreed on. She stated that collaboration is there.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated the other provisions of our STR ordinance like platform accountability that would require them to list permit numbers before they collect taxes, etc. would still be things we can hold them to.
2.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 August 11, 2025
Asst. City Manager Carter agreed, adding that in the VCA payments, they still did not agree for this to be in the mandatory field but we had numerous meetings and they were willing to work with staff to report and coordinate with the City if the entry in this field is made and be able to remove this listing.
City Attorney Kenyon added that the City does have the ability in our TOT ordinance to audit transient operators who do not pay TOT. There is a way to audit and we do not necessarily need this in order to audit. She also said that this agreement took exhaustive negotiations and this was the final result of those negotiations. She stated that, with any changes at this meeting, her suggestion would be that we would have to pull this item and go back and negotiate with VRBO as this was a very important privacy provision from their perspective.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated this will help us collect the fees more easily so HdL does not have to do that work.
City Attorney Kenyon agreed, adding that at the end of the day we felt very pleased that they would agree to any kind of agreement. When we went into negotiations, we would not have been surprised if they said no, but after almost a year of negotiations, this is the result. It may not be perfect, but we have other tools that can address some of the issues that we heard raised at this meeting.
Asst. City Manager Carter added that STR compliance comes in three different ways: TOT, business license, and STR permit. This agreement will help address the TOT compliance which is a huge component of what HdL currently does as all VRBOs currently are required to self-report the TOT and remit them to the city and it may or may not happen.
Mayor pro Tem Boles assumed, if the City is not happy with this contract as it goes out, after a certain amount of time there are provisions for termination or changes that we can try to negotiate.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that we can always negotiate amendments.
Councilmember Bier moved to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Councilmember Wright.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
1. Approval of Disbursements for 07/01/25 through 07/31/25 PROPOSED ACTION: Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of July 2025.
2. 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.
2.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 August 11, 2025
3. Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of $68,895.20 from the state of California’s Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica authorizing the acceptance of $68,895.20 from the state of California’s Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws.
4. Approval of Agreement with Metro Mobile Communications for the purchase of (70) police handheld portable radios in the amount of $157,319 and to Authorize the City Manager or Designee to Execute all Documents Associated with this Project.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a resolution approving the Agreement with Metro Mobile Communications for the purchase of (70) police handheld portable radios in the amount of $157,319; and Authorize the City Manager or Designee to Execute all Documents Associated with the Project.
5. Resolution to Approve Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant Admin Building Elevator Modernization Project P0039
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution:
A. Approving the Construction Contract with KONE, Inc. in an amount of $205,232.
B. Authorizing a budget authority in the amount of $219,000, which includes contingencies in an amount of $13,768, not to exceed seven percent (7%) of the Construction Contract amount;
C. Authorizing staff to Execute Future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amount; and
D. Authorizing the City Manager and Designated Personnel to Sign Contract Documents related to the CCWRP Admin Building Elevator Modernization Project P0039.
6. Adopt Resolution Updating List of Projects Funded by 2017 Wastewater Revenue Bonds PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt Resolution to Update 2017 Wastewater Revenue Bond (Installment Sale Agreement Appendix B)
7. Resolution to approve a contract with Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates (HdL Companies) for Business License, Transient Occupancy Tax, and Short-Term Rental Services.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the attached resolution to approve the renewal of the consultant services agreement with HdL Companies to continue providing business license administration, Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), and other municipal revenue compliance services, and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement and any necessary amendments.
8. Resolution authorizing execution of a Voluntary Collection Agreement (VCA) between the City of Pacifica and HomeAway.com, Inc, for the collection of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and Pacifica Tourism Management District (PTMD) Assessments.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Voluntary Collection Agreement (VCA) between the City of Pacifica and HomeAway.com, Inc, at no cost to the City, for the collection and remittance of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and Pacifica Tourism and Marketing District (PTMD) assessments on short-term rentals through a VRBO hosting platform and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement and any necessary amendments.
2.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 August 11, 2025
9. Adoption of an Ordinance by the City of Pacifica to repeal and replace Article 49 of Title 9, Chapter 4 of the City of the Pacifica Municipal Code (“Short-Term Rentals”); Amending Article 29 of Title 9, Chapter 4, Section 9-4.2904 (“Exempted Signs”) of the Pacifica Municipal Code; and finding the adoption of the Ordinance exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Recommended CEQA Status: Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) “The General Rule” and Section 15301 “Existing Facilities” of the CEQA Guidelines.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt an “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica to repeal and replace Article 49 of Title 9, Chapter 4 of the City of the Pacifica Municipal Code (“Short-Term Rentals”); Amending Article 29 of Title 9, Chapter 4, Section 9-4.2904 (“Exempted Signs”) of the Pacifica Municipal Code, and finding the Ordinance exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (File 2025-001, Text Amendment TA-127-25).”
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
Mayor Beckmeyer provided a statement requesting public comments speaking on the Sanchez Art Center, either related to rezoning or the Housing Element, be held until Item #10. Item #10 is the Housing Element in general and specifically under that item is the Sanchez Art Center site. It is a separate facet of the same item. Mayor Beckmeyer stated that there were seventeen cards requesting to speak on items not on the posted agenda, and suggested limiting the time to two minutes each; Councilmembers agreed.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comments.
Clif Lawrence, Pacifica, stated under SB 1214, the City no longer provides online information and development application proposals for public review and comment. He stated that the City withheld all information, not only those that are copyrighted. He also stated public notices that have been moved to San Mateo Daily Journal are not able to be viewed without a subscription.
Joyce Toomey, Pacifica, requested that Paloma Ave. be removed from the oversized vehicle parking map. She also stated we need a no camping ordinance and shared concerns about tent camping in the Manor Shopping Center.
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, shared her concerns on the proposed parking ordinance amendments and asked to consider data, current studies, and community reports before making decisions that could bring harm to residents.
Julia Rapoza, Pacifica, shared her concerns about the 72-hour parking ordinance, the 1000 feet requirement, and officer discretion. She also stated it was confusing to determine where one can legally park and that it appeared that the ordinance was targeted at vehicle dwellers.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, stated the public comments in the previous item received three minutes but this public comment period received two minutes. She requested consistency for the entire meeting.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, shared her concerns about protocol and the clarity regarding what can be included in this public comment period.
Michael Wahlman, Pacifica, shared his thoughts on quality education for children and concerns about decisions by the Pacifica School District board. He asked City Council for a proclamation
2.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 August 11, 2025
or resolution for a cease and desist of the Pacifica School District causing further harm to the City of Pacifica, its residents, and businesses.
Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, referred to a trespassing violation on her property and Ms. Egan’s property by the STR at 1987 Beach Blvd. and asked for their permit to be revoked or not renewed in the next cycle.
Gioconda Egan, Pacifica, shared her concern about the trespassing violation described by Ms.
Quinn and further explained a trespassing incident that took place in December 2023. She asked City Council not to renew their permit in the next cycle.
Aren Clark, Pacifica, shared his concerns about homeless people living free near homeowning taxpayers and stated the City needs to provide overnight parking for incoming motorhomes so they do not move into neighborhoods.
Joaquin Jiminez, Half Moon Bay, invited the City of Pacifica to an event on August 16 called Vaquero Days and provided information on the event.
Marcia Sampson, Pacifica, stated she is present to share her concerns on RVs at Paloma Avenue, which differed from other circumstances in the City. She also stated we need a solution that directly addresses the RVs.
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, supported Ms. Quinn in the trespassing incident with the STR. He was not sure why the STR permit had not been revoked these past three years and asked Council to direct staff to be clear in the criteria that would trigger hearings and how many hearings in the past three years have City staff performed for revocations for STR permits.
Lyla Reinero, Pacifica, supported Ms. Quinn and Ms. Egan and asked Council not to renew the STR permit for 1987 Beach Blvd. She also expressed her concerns about overdosing in the community and asked Council to look into banning sales of nitrous oxide.
Lori, Pacifica, shared her concerns on getting documented information on Council and Planning Commission meetings and shared her request to provide online access for documents submitted for active planning applications. She emphasized that SB 1214 applied to copyrighted materials specifically and shared links that may serve as a solution.
Summer Lee, Pacifica, stated it was not standard practice to change the protocol to not let general comments for an issue not specific to an agenda item, as Sanchez Art Center was not specifically mentioned in Item #10.
Councilmember Wright asked for a point of order, as it was made clear that the Sanchez Art Center was part of item #10.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she will give Ms. Lee two minutes to complete her comments, but she sees there is a disagreement about the interpretation on Sanchez Art Center.
Ms. Lee wanted to offer a solution to respect those who came for Council to vote to move Item #10 up in the agenda. She stated that for those engaging the process that last-minute changes to speaking time and parameters, as well as transparency, feels disrespectful and disdainful.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comments.
2.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Wright asked City Manager Woodhouse to speak about some of the staff challenges regarding keeping information on the website, where it is in the work plan, what our plans are for the future, and how our challenged budget is affecting this process.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that the Community Development Department is working on improving our technology usage process for the development applications portal. It has involved manual uploads of information and, in the past, resulted in outdated application documents, which creates confusion in the community and inaccurate information when those are accessed. He stated that Community Development Director Updegrave recognized that and is working on a process to improve that dramatically. He stated that we are limited in certain aspects as commenters noted in providing information under new state law, but there is the Community Development portal that has a map of the applications that exist and we are working on both interim measures to implement as well as longer term. What is in Council’s Strategic Plan for implementation this year is a permit application and tracking system that will benefit not just Community Development but Building and Public Works projects, etc. He stated that it is not a simple thing to implement and manage. He stated that it comes down to resource constraints and commitment to ensure accurate and up-to-date information that is available to the public combined with the constraints of state law. We are navigating that to improve the whole system in due course.
Councilmember Wright asked about evening hours available one night a week.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that City Hall is open until 7:30 on Wednesday evenings.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we are working on interim measures, and she hears the frustration in the public. She asked if we have an idea when this might be coming on and is there a work around for at least projects that are coming before the Planning Commission or Council.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we are hoping to launch the initial stages of the process improvement work as soon as possible. She felt it was important that we have consistent, accurate, and updated information available at all times, which is always available at the Civic Center’s permit center. She stated that we are looking into some interim measures and hoping we can implement by the end of the year. She liked Mayor pro Tem Boles’ suggestion of potentially creating files for projects going before Planning Commission, and she thinks it is something we can explore and taking a more manageable project by project approach.
Mayor Beckmeyer suggested moving Council and Staff Communications after Item #10.
There was Council consensus.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Beckmeyer read a Letter of Commendation in honor of Roy Earnest.
Roy Earnest felt Pacifica has done well as a surfing community and it has been an honor to live here and being involved in surfing since 1962. Kahuna Kapuna was one of the ways he could give back to the community.
Councilmember Wright stated Mr. Earnest has helped build that community and he is part of that attraction that drew them here and part of what makes Pacifica special. He thanked him for all his years of service.
2.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Bier stated it was wonderful to acknowledge Mr. Earnest for all the work he does for our community, including the Age-Friendly Coalition. She has learned so much from him and she bring that into the community when she can and she appreciates him for that.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she had so much fun with him at the Kahuna Kapuna this year. She stated this is just one piece to try to make us a more age-friendly community. She mentioned that she was told loneliness for seniors is worse than smoking at least seven packs of cigarettes a day, and staying healthy is one way to stay mobile. She recalls telling AARP at a statewide conference about Kahuna Kapuna and they were blown away. She thanked Mr. Earnest for all he did.
Councilmember Espinosa thanked Mr. Earnest, stating that she had the opportunity to talk to him about what he does for the community. She liked to assist older members of the community and she thanked him for everything he does.
Roy Earnest thanked them for their comments.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated, independent of and underlaying all of this, it is the grace with which he approaches everyone and every issue in this community that inspires her the most. She felt he is a huge example to them and she is grateful for that.
There were no public comments.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS – NONE.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. General Plan Amendments (GPA-108-25), Zoning Ordinance (TA-128-25), and Associated Land Use (GPA-108-25) and Zoning Map Amendments (RZ-216-25) Implementing the Rezoning Program (File No. 2025-007) required under the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Action:
Certify a Final Environmental Impact Report, Adopt Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program.
PROPOSED ACTION:
1. Adopt a Resolution Certifying a Final EIR and Adopting Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program;
2. Adopt a Resolution approving amendments to the General Plan text and land use map; and
3. Waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance approving the amendments to the zoning code, and zoning map
Community Development Director Updegrave and Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha presented the staff report, alongside Consultant Allison Moore, Dyett & Bhatia.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if there were any Council clarifying questions.
2.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles appreciated staff reaching out to HCD about the Sanchez Art Center site and that it could be removed from the rezoning. She asked if staff can specifically explain what the difference is between not being in the rezoning and having been in the rezoning and how that helps protect the site.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the Housing Element has been adopted most recently in March 2025 and that is where we have the analysis and the establishment of what our sites are that are needed to meet our RHNA. That establishes the core sites and buffer sites. She stated that the Rezoning Program is a separate action outside of the Housing Element, but implements the Housing Element. This is where the sites that have been identified in the Housing Element get rezoned. In their current zoning designations and land use designations, those properties could not be developed at the density already established in the Housing Element, hence why the rezoning is necessary. Sanchez Art Center, Site 23, has been removed from the Rezoning Program and there are no proposed land use changes, no zoning changes, and no changes proposed for that site.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it is still listed as a buffer site in the Housing Element. She asked what that means and when might HCD force us to take a site out of the buffer and put it into the main sites for housing.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated HCD cannot force us to rezone a site.
Before anything could happen on that site, it would require a separate rezoning process: Planning Commission, public review, and City Council. The Council would need to decide to do that.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to 291 other low income unit buffer sites. She asked when would a buffer site need to become a site and how does that work.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated, pursuant to the Housing Element and State law, HCD has required that all the buffer sites be rezoned and effectively be made available for housing. That is why all the core and buffer sites are included for rezoning except for the Sanchez Art Center, which has been removed.
Councilmember Bier concluded that it is not a buffer site.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that it is listed as a buffer site in the Housing Element, but it is effectively not a buffer site because it is not being rezoned.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she missed that nuance that it is effectively not a buffer zone. She asked if this Housing Element cycle ends at the end of 2031.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy believes that is so.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked, if nothing happens with the Sanchez Art Center site before the end of the RHNA cycle, can we remove it from the Housing Element in the next cycle.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the City retains full discretion on what sites to include in future Housing Elements.
Councilmember Espinosa asked why is the Sanchez Art Center in the Housing Element now if we could have chosen not to put it there.
2.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 August 11, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave stated Site 23 was analyzed throughout the development of the Housing Element and has been included since the beginning as it is a cityowned site of a fair size.
Councilmember Wright stated that HCD did require us to include a certain number of City-owned sites as proper sites and through that process it became one.
Councilmember Espinosa stated her question is, if it is not required now, why do we still have to have it there.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that, in order to revise the Housing Element, Council would need to direct City Manager to reopen the Housing Element; it would go back through the process, including potentially analyzing alternative sites to take its place, go back through tribal consultations, go through a revision of our sites, etc. It is a separate process from the rezoning. If we were to reopen the Housing Element now, we would not be able to submit the Housing Element for certification to HCD until that process is completed.
City Attorney Kenyon stated, putting it more bluntly, that is the reason; in order to remove it, we would have to go through likely a year to remove it and, if we wait to go through that process to have it removed now, we will not have a certified Housing Element.
Councilmember Espinosa stated that we do not have to keep it there, but we will make a decision whether we are going to put it back into a buffer site.
City Attorney Kenyon thinks the decision will be does Council want to keep it in the Housing Element or do they want to remove it and go through that process. Council can go through the process without waiting for the sixth cycle.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy added that decision tonight is whether Council wants to move forward with the Planning Commission’s recommendation to take the site out of the Rezoning Program, which effectively means that it cannot be developed with housing and would remain as is.
City Attorney Kenyon added that the goal of the Council, i.e., to have a certified Housing Element as soon as possible, along with removing the Sanchez Art Center from rezoning, if it is approved at this meeting, the Council has effectively removed the Sanchez Art Center. She stated that it is not technically removed from the Housing Element, but the fact that it is not being rezoned means that there is no land use that can be made of that property, other than its existing use, until it is rezoned. So, effectively, the Council would have removed it.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that Council would be the one to give direction to have it rezoned in the future and go through the process with public input.
City Attorney stated she is correct and this is different than a third party parcel. She stated that we have so many controls in place, such as legislative control through the Housing Element rezoning and we are exercising that by not including it in the rezoning and cannot be developed in any other way; we are also addressing the issue that it is still in the Housing Element and moving forward with certification of our Housing Element as soon as possible. She stated it is a benefit for Council.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked the City Attorney to clarify if Council could remove it at some point in the future once we have achieved certification.
2.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 August 11, 2025
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively but that process would mean that we would have to go through a very extensive analysis to determine, if that is being removed, if we still have enough to satisfy HCD that we are meeting their RHNA obligation. She cannot say definitively how it would be removed or what the process would be other than we would go through a similar process that we did to approve the Housing Element in the first place.
Mayor Beckmeyer thought it would be very similar to that process.
Councilmember Wright wondered if ministerial approvals were appealable and to whom.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that ministerial approvals are appealable to the higher body: If it was a staff ministerial approval, it would go to the Planning Commission. That action would also be appealable to Council. The appeal would be whether the rules in place were complied with effectively. Even though a ministerial approval is appealable, the appeal would be limited to compliance with the ministerial requirements in the code.
Councilmember Wright stated, with so many changes in State law, if we were to start the Housing Element process over or do it, what would be some of the significant changes that have happened in state law that were adversely affect us.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that the State laws that are enacted would apply regardless of whether we are going through another Housing Element process. HCD does continue to keep adding additional requirements on Housing Elements; so there is always the possibility that, if we reopen the Housing Element, HCD may ask for additional changes to the Housing Element, as well.
Councilmember Wright asked if we have collaborated with Coastal Commission as well as HCD since 15% of Pacifica is in the coastal zone.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that, after adoption, we will file the Local Coastal Plan amendments for the four sites located in the coastal zone.
Councilmember Wright asked who trumps who, Coastal Commission or HCD.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated they are both State agencies and Coastal Commission will need to approve the sites. HCD has approved our Housing Element and, if Coastal Commission does not approve those sites, we would have to go back to HCD. She stated they are co-equal state agencies.
Councilmember Wright asked when compliance kicks in and when do we regain local control over some of these sites.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy asked if he means when we get certification, we will achieve certification after HCD reviews our ordinance, and they have said that our Housing Element is in compliance already as adopted, so they will issue a letter saying we are certified. Staff has conferred with them on the ordinance and we are extremely hopeful that they will agree that we have met all the requirements and this will achieve certification.
Councilmember Wright asked if Coastal Commission will not interfere with our application and we will still have local control regardless of what Coastal Commission does.
2.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 August 11, 2025
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated HCD has not included any requirements that the Coastal Commission needs to approve any aspect of it before issuing certification.
Councilmember Wright asked if staff can speak about some of the challenges with some of our mixed use zoning uses. He felt we are challenged from a commercial space perspective and he thinks part of the Planning Commission’s intent was to offer more choice and more options. He asked what some of the challenges are with some of the new State laws that are going to subvert the Planning Commission’s intent on mixed use development.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not know if staff can provide an answer for that as so much of development is also market-based. The Planning Commission included, through all of their work on the objective standards, a minimum FAR (floor area ratio) requirement, which is a measure of commercial floor area relative to the lot size, in mixed use (MU) districts that has been included in both the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. In those MU districts, we have a minimum FAR requirement.
Councilmember Wright asked if the 20% affordable changes that.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, on the sites eligible for by-right approval under State law, they could propose 100% residential on a mixed-use site.
Councilmember Wright thought that would subvert the intent of the Planning Commission to offer more if they did 20%. If they did 15%, would they still have the same.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that they would have to meet the requirement of State law which is currently 20%.
Councilmember Bier asked staff to clarify for everyone how long have we been out of compliance.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated about three years, as we were required to comply in January 2023.
Councilmember Bier asked how many builder’s remedy applications have been submitted.
Community Development Director Updegrave believes we have 6 or 7 currently.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened the public hearing.
Horace Hinshaw, Pacifica, shared history on Site 23 as the School District purchased the property for only playing fields in the 1990s and then expanded to arts. He appreciated what Council is doing and hopes things will be resolved and they will all be happy.
Rene Blanco, Pacifica, shared her personal participation in Sanchez Art Center and aspiration to keep it available for kids in the future.
Aren Clark, Pacifica, shared his appreciation for them taking the Art Center out of the process and shared his concerns regarding the increased housing projects mandated by the State.
2.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 13 August 11, 2025
Jerry Barrish, Pacifica, the Art Center’s artistic director for 25 years, shared some of the goals accomplished over those years and its positive impact on businesses. He asked Council not to rezone Site 23.
Michael Watkins, Pacifica, referred to Site 19, the Filipino Church, and shared his concerns on the infrastructure needs prior to building housing. He also was concerned that many neighbors did not receive information on this meeting.
Michael Wahlman, Pacifica, echoed all comments on the importance of the Art Center to Pacifica and shared his concerns on State builder’s remedy issues for the future, asking if the plan allows for new development outside of the identified sites.
Sara Woodhull, Pacifica, shared her thoughts on the importance of art culture by the Sanchez Art Center and supported keeping it out of the Rezoning Program for the Housing Element.
Andrew Leone, Pacifica, shared his thoughts on the importance of art culture by the Sanchez Art Center and supported keeping it out of the Rezoning Program for the Housing Element.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, shared her memories of all she did in town with her children and how the Sanchez Art Center was a treasure where parents could take their children to enjoy with no charge and requested that we protect it for the future.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, the Sanchez Art Center’s Executive Director, shared information on recent events open to the public to support local artists, etc., including artists throughout northern and southern California. She is speaking for all the facilities on the site that it needs to be removed from the Housing Element and to remove the fit study overall to show good faith.
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, shared his concerns that Pacifica is being forced by State law to force us to comply with HCD’s RHNA numbers with no opportunity to control our zoning and housing plan and asked the City to endorse a ballot initiative to regain local control of cities’ housing plans.
Lyla Reinero, Pacifica, hoped the City figures out a way to push back on the State’s mandated RHNA numbers and shared her concerns on the issue with existing infrastructure supporting added residents, especially when dealing with emergencies.
Summer Lee, Pacifica, thanked the mayor for respecting her protocol concerns. She shared her concerns on the State housing laws and the process of options available to remove the Sanchez Art Center permanently and asked that we take it out from the Housing Element.
Dinah Verby, Pacifica, thanked Planning Commission and staff for removing the Art Center from the Rezoning Program and expressed her concerns about State mandates for building housing.
She asked to remove Site 23 from the Housing Element at the earliest opportunity after certification.
David/CKS, stated he represents several owners in the West Sharp Park District throughout the Housing Element phases and shared information regarding a factual error in the zoning designation of two parcels on Salada which staff has said will be corrected. He requested that the City submit the corrected version for certification.
2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 14 August 11, 2025
Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, thanked them for removing the Sanchez Art Center from the Housing Element and requested they do whatever necessary to protect it, sharing her positive thoughts on the importance of the treasure of the Art Center for Pacifica and the need to preserve it.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed the public hearing. She called a break and then reconvened the meeting. She then stated to hear from staff some of the questions and comments by the speakers and then would like to give Vice Chair Berman the opportunity to sum up the Planning Commission changes brought forward.
Community Development Director Updegrave referred to a commenter who talked about a rezoning error and she clarified that the only sites proposed for rezoning are the 30 sites from the Housing Element and are listed in the ordinance. She stated that the site in question is not one of the rezoning sites and not in the Housing Element.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if that part of Salada where that specific question was raised is not part of the item we are discussing at this meeting in the rezoning.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she was correct. She stated that the commenter contacted staff earlier today with the question and staff will follow up on that, but she wanted to clarify that it is not a site proposed for rezoning. There is a table in the ordinance starting on packet page 273, and those are the only sites that are being rezoned and are before Council at this meeting.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated, since it is not part of the agenda on the table at this meeting, she asked if staff can explain what the process would be for directing that.
City Attorney Kenyon thinks staff must first determine whether or not there is an error.
Mayor Beckmeyer concluded investigation and, if there is a need, bring an item.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, if there is a mapping correction, we are able to correct that. If it were to be rezoned, it would need to go to Planning Commission and Council, as a rezoning would have to go through an actual rezoning process.
Mayor pro Tem Boles wanted to be sure that, if we are going to make any changes, it is going to a public process where the public is notified and can comment, not just be a staff amendment.
She wants to make sure our public processes are clear.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that we can make sure we are dealing with it through a public process if that is Council’s desire.
Community Development Director Updegrave also wanted to clarify, as mentioned in the presentation, with their next cycle of the Housing Element, Council retains control over what sites ultimately get included in the next Housing Element and there is no requirement that certain sites be carried over. She stated that we do get credit for RHNA for all new units that are constructed, even if they are not on one of the 30 rezoned sites. She stated that the point of rezoning these sites is to create the capacity that would allow us to reach the RHNA numbers. She stated that it is important to remember that, because an application is under review, it does not mean those units are going to be constructed. She referred to one commenter mentioning the fit studies on
2.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 15 August 11, 2025
Site 23 and that work falls under Housing Element implementation Program 3, master planning for public sites. There is a whole suite of different things to look at, i.e., Caltrans sites, district sites, City-owned sites, etc. The parameters of that work have not been determined yet but that is not part of the package proposing at this meeting but a separate body.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if there will be a public process where the public has the opportunity to understand what those exact steps are when they are ready to be taken.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated we can bring that to Council as we develop that plan.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if to Planning Commission first and then to Council.
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed we can take it to the Planning Commission as well.
Mayor Beckmeyer thought that would be warranted.
Councilmember Bier asked if she is talking about addressing the fit study for Site 23.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, generally speaking, HE-I-3 is the master planning for public sites and it includes a number of actions. We have not determined the full parameters yet of what we will be pursuing in the coming year.
Mayor Beckmeyer concluded we will be developing that scope of work. She then gave the floor to Vice Chair Berman. She asked if she could encapsulate for Council the major focus and major changes done as a result of the Planning Commission meetings’ work.
Vice Chair Berman stated, in addition to study sessions Planning Commission had with Council for the past three years, Planning Commission also had quite a few lengthy meetings where they went through the ODS and zoning changes in the General Plan amendment. Ultimately, they felt they provided Council with a thorough and vetted recommendation but they understood there might be some minor changes that would occur after their recommendation when staff was going to coordinate and clarify a few things with HCD. She stated that they had a lengthy discussion regarding the by-right approval on effectively not wanting our zoning to outline to developers how they can proceed with by-right ministerial approval but still complying with State law. They wanted to simplify the language in the zoning while adhering to the by-right requirement which is why their recommendation to Council was to remove the by-right language. It was a little different when presented to Planning but specifically outlining which sites could be by-right. The intent was to not explicitly list it but, understanding staff’s subsequent coordination with HCD, HCD required that the language be added and that is before Council at this time. Planning Commission did not have the opportunity to review that language. When they reviewed parking, it was reviewed with the intent of applying it to the newly zoned designation. Their discussion on parking was not with the idea that these parking changes would apply citywide; that is a change from Planning Commission’s recommendation provided to Council which is what is before them now. She stated a commissioner thoroughly went through the recital and wanted to make the recital clear and not repetitive. She stated that there were duplicative references that were removed as the Planning Commission believed they already had a statement that complied with State law. The Planning Commission’s recommendation was more concise recitals that didn’t reiterate HE-I-1 and that is another change before Council now that they did not originally recommend.
2.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 16 August 11, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if they had any questions for Vice Chair Berman.
Councilmember Wright believed parking is a big issue in what we are doing and going to make issues going forward on these sites and the surrounding neighborhoods. He was concerned about applying that to the whole City.
Vice Chair Berman stated Planning Commission appreciated staff and consultant team’s test fit analysis. Throughout their years of study sessions and ODS direction to staff, we never had real life scenario test fit to ensure that what we are requiring in our zoning would be feasibly developed on each individual site, and she knows it would be a liability to the City if we were to present zoning that’s not feasible to meet the unit count required. In the Planning Commission’s discussion with the consultant team on the test fit specific to parking, building height, setbacks, etc., they had to make some concessions as they could not have all of what they wanted and still have a feasibly developed site. , One concession they agreed on was to reduce the amount of required guest parking so they could ensure that they are not raising height limits to 60 feet.
Councilmember Wright concluded that they went from 1 to 4 to 1 to 5. He asked when they lost the one parking spot for a bedroom and 1.5 parking spots for studios.
Vice Chair Berman believes that change occurred after their recommendation and may have been staff’s assessment of HE-I-1.
Community Development Director Updegrave clarified that the reduction from 1.5 space for studios and 1 bedroom was part of the original proposal that is written in the Housing Element.
As Vice Chair Berman stated, when the Commission was looking at it, the scope was limited to the rezoned sites. She stated it was the same proposal that Planning Commission looked at but applied more broadly based on our read of Action 14 in the Housing Element.
Councilmember Wright asked, if we decided not to apply it to the whole City, if there would be any push back from HCD.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not believe it would be an issue for HCD and could be something staff would study further as we are looking at more citywide zoning reforms.
Councilmember Wright stated part of the reason he moved to Pacifica was related to parking.
Mayor pro Tem Boles also had concerns about citywide parking and the fact that Planning Commission had not talked about it. She stated that most of the sites in our Housing Element are along Highway 1 corridor and she thinks it needs more study. She understands the action is in HE-I-14 but she does not see a timeline with that. She felt it could be done separately later and be given more thought, which is her preference.
Councilmember Bier agreed, stating that was one of her concerns also.
Councilmember Espinosa has a question about traffic and safety.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if we are okay with taking that out so it does not apply to the whole City now.
Councilmember Espinosa stated, over traffic and safety, she was reading the public comments, and some are concerned about what happens when we have an emergency and are we going to
2.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 17 August 11, 2025
be paying attention to what we do with traffic. She asked how we address it as traffic is a big issue and she asked if we will be building close to the highway where there is more public transportation. Her other concern is if the City is going to be paying attention to just people building homes like boxes and not having anything around like parks or a living area where people can go and walk. She is hoping to have smart building where they have shopping nearby.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the Rezoning Program is laying the regulatory framework but we do not have any specific development proposals. Each development proposal that comes in gets assessed for a variety of standards, which includes open space requirements, building, safety and fire codes. Those are things that will get looked at but are not necessarily part of this particular action as her questions are more related to the project level.
This program is designed to provide some parameters for the buildings.
Councilmember Espinosa stated she is putting the seed there for when we get those plans.
Mayor pro Tem Boles understood that the by-right text that was added was not reviewed by the Commission but she would like to know if Vice Chair Berman has concerns with this language.
Vice Chair Berman preferred the language not be there and she was not the Commissioner that originally brought up the request to remove the by-right language but, once it was presented, she was in complete agreement with it. If the City has the ability to not add the statement but still achieve certification, that would be her ideal approach. She is happy to defer the hard decision to Council on whether the City push back on adding language as she understands from the staff report that HCD is requiring it in order to certify.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that she has concerns with the language as well.
Vice Chair Berman stated that, the way she read it, after inventory which are designated to address the shortfall of lower income RHNA units and back to the Housing Element on pages 28- 29 is where the Housing Element defines those shortfall low income RHNA units.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated the other question she heard Commissioner Davis ask was what is HCD’s statutory authority to require specific by-right language.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated HCD has the statutory authority to review our Housing Element and find it in compliance with State law or find that it does not comply with State law. They have the regulatory authority to certify our Housing Element or not.
Mayor pro Tem Boles understood and stated we are not saying we are not complying with State law and everything else shows we are complying with the by-right, but for them to specifically say what language we need to have in.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that they have indicated to staff that this is something they look for in their review in making that determination and have specifically stated that reference back to the Housing Element shortfall sites is a requirement.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that, on a related note in the recitals, she did not see this requirement in any of the correspondence from HCD that they wanted the HE-I-1 language in our resolution.
She asked why do we think we need to have this specifically, as the Planning Commission specifically took that out and said they were complying with the rezoning and the laws and the programs which include HE-I-1.
2.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 18 August 11, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave stated HCD did not review the Council’s resolution or the Planning Commission’s resolution. The Planning Commission directed staff to have those references removed from their recitals but did not discuss any of Council’s recitals. As a staff person who is required to go back and review the record, this type of information can be critical to future understandings for the record. She added that clearly stating that this implements HEI-1 is part of the record and it is literally the title of that implementing action General Plan and zoning amendment to achieve RHNA. In creating a very clear record, it provides direct evidence to HCD that the City has satisfied or is satisfying their commitment to the General Plan and zoning amendment to achieve RHNA. This action is directly tied to that program.
Mayor pro Tem Boles heard from Vice Chair Berman the concern that we are making this too explicit, that the by-right applies and we have no say over these sites and it could be detrimental to the City. If we can comply without being so explicit, it is in our favor. She stated HE-I-1 lists out all the sites. It would be her preference to not have that language in HE-I-1.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that this does create transparency and clarity in the record, but Council is able to remove those references in the recitals.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she is not inclined to debate that now because we all have questions and it soundslike we have a problem with all three of these bullet points and she is hearing language around walking some of this back. That concerns her as staff has spent a lot of time working with HCD on this to get to this point and she wants to prioritize what is a dealbreaker and what has the greatest impact as we go into that type of deliberation.
Councilmember Wright asked, these three points aside, if Vice Chair Berman would say that the rest of it is substantially conforming to Planning Commission’s recommendation.
Vice Chair Berman stated she did not see any red flags beyond what was explicitly presented in the staff report at this meeting. She found one amendment where she wanted to offer a suggestion. It is the height limit, article 25, on packet page 280, and she appreciated that staff took Planning Commission’s request on updating the diagrams. They had more rudimentary diagrams presented at the Planning Commission meeting and they talked about amending the height limitation equation. In the end, they reverted to something similar to what the current housing height limit equation which is measuring from the lowest finished grade at the building pad to the highest point of the roof, which is clear and concise. They did accept an exception to leave architectural flexibility for certain roofs where, instead of measuring to the highest point of that roof, it would just be to the center point of that roof. In her review of the staff report, the farthest right diagram sloped roof building, the equation is correct from how they imagined it on the Planning Commission where height goes to the center point of the roof dimension, but she thought it might be beneficial to have a different architectural profile there to show the type of roof that they meant for this equation to apply to. That is her suggestion but they did not talk about changing this diagram at the Planning Commission meeting as this diagram as before Council was not presented to Planning Commission.
Councilmember Wright asked if she thought it would benefit by adding the word “existing” to the grade reference.
Vice Chair Berman stated, from a civil engineering background, her practice is usually a proposed building height is measured based off of the proposed finished grade. She had a discussion about this with one of the Councilmembers in the past, with a suggestion to put restrictions on the
2.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 19 August 11, 2025
grading permit required for a site. She stated, on the other end of the spectrum, she did not know if it would make sense to measure all proposed building heights based off of the existing grade preceding the building, especially in such a sloped city with so much grade.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated many cities have this clarification for those very reasons. She has seen it done on the Vista Mar project and the quarry project. She stated she copied some ordinances from other cities that are more complicated and have more nuances but she thinks, instead of saying finished grade, if we just say “existing or finished grade, whatever is lower,” that would cover it in a simple way.
Councilmember Wright likes the grading permit as it gives us more flexibility.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed but stated we are not reviewing that here and it is much more complicated. She stated that we can always review this later and come up with something more nuanced. We do have Housing Element sites on steep slopes and she wants to make sure the loophole is not there.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that they get height density concessions.
Councilmember Bier asked exactly where we want to change the language.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated at the top where it says “building height is measured from lowest finished grade” could be changed to “lowest existing or finished grade, whatever is lower”.
Councilmember Bier asked, if we make a change like that, what that would mean as far as submitting it to HCD.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated HCD is not going to pay as much attention to the definitions of height. They are looking for the rezoning.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that the proposed amendment is on packet page 288, second paragraph under Section 9-4.2501, Height of Buildings, Item A, “Building height is measured from the lowest…” and insert the words “existing or finished grade point (whichever is lower)”.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought it may be a little confusing with the extra lowest and maybe just say “from existing or finished grade, whichever is lower”.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated changing it to the lower existing or finished grade is doable in terms of implementation, but it is a change.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated, in terms of implementation, the project would come with a grading plan that shows a survey with existing grades and the proposed.
City Manager Woodhouse stated, before we leave the previous point, he wanted to note for staff that we also need to change the text in the diagram.
There was Council consensus on making that change.
Mayor pro Tem Boles wanted one more follow up on the height. She appreciated what the Planning Commission was trying to do with the sloped building roof, allowing extra height to have
2.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 20 August 11, 2025
more interesting architecture. Her only concern is that some of these lots are big. She stated that it is in developers’ interest to build steep roofs and then build more finished floor area in them.
Councilmember Wright asked if she wants to measure from the curb.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated there may be a caveat and Vice Chair Berman suggested a certain amount of height like six feet additions is allowed which would give them 12 more feet if it is a half or a caveat that says it does not imply an extra floor level.
Vice Chair Berman stated, when discussed at the last Planning Commission meeting about the zoning amendment, that is why they only applied this additional height allowance to specific types of roofs; effectively, a flat roof, like many mixed use buildings have, would still adhere to the highest point of the roof and an A-framed roof would still adhere to the highest point of the roof.
It would be only the architecturally unique. She and Mayor pro Tem Boles discussed this in the past, but they did not discuss this on Planning Commission and a personal idea she had was adding an additional height limit to that extra allowance, measured to the average of the roof height up to six feet or up to eight feet, whatever Council is comfortable with, so it does not become 20 additional feet for an enormous warehouse building.
Councilmember Wright would not be opposed to it but he is not sure if he would advocate for it.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated her question is if we should also make that amendment or leave it.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that staff has not analyzed that and it is not something we can determine on the dais and she would want to look closely at changing that language.
Councilmember Bier stated, because Planning Commission has not had a chance to talk about that, she does not think she has enough information to make a decision on that change.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed that she would like to hear from staff. She wanted to make the point that there is no way we will get through all this at this meeting.
Councilmember Bier thinks we need to get through all this.
Mayor Beckmeyer agreed with Councilmember Bier. She stated that we better get to it. She asked to prioritize questions.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she has a lot of questions.
Councilmember Bier suggested she can ask questions. She reiterated that this has not been rushed and, if we do not make a decision about this at this meeting, we are putting our community at jeopardy once again and she cannot see herself doing that.
Mayor Beckmeyer concurs with everything she said.
Councilmember Wright thanked Vice Chair Berman and the Planning Commission for all their hard work.
2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 21 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Wright moved to extend the meeting to midnight; seconded by Councilmember Bier.
EXTEND MEETING TO 12:00 AM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Councilmember Wright asked if by-right sites are appealable.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated approval on by-right sites would be appealable but by-right sites still need to go through a subdivision process and are allowed to go through design review with objective criteria. Those actions would be appealable.
Councilmember Wright asked staff to explain the formulaic approach the State used to determine the RHNA numbers.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not have that information with her now, but she would be happy to send it to him as she would have to go back to the 2022 records.
Councilmember Wright asked if it was her understanding that it was a formula based on a certain number of miles such as from employment centers.
Community Development Director Updegrave would need to research that as she thinks there are a lot of complex things that go into the RHNA.
Councilmember Wright asked if staff can speak to why it is we cannot implement a bunch of codes to deal with some of our adverse environmental impacts of building 1,892 units.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated part of the EIR includes Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that establishes required mitigations for projects. Our by-right eligible projects would also be subject to that MMRP and that is written into the Zoning Ordinance in the by-right section as an objective compliance standard. Things like EV readiness are currently regulated under the Building Code.
Councilmember Wright concluded we would be able to implement a lot of those on these sites.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that he is correct about the mitigations.
Councilmember Bier wanted clarification about the fit study and how would we be able to talk about it for Site 23.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, as we develop the work plan for the Housing Element, looking at the master plan for public sites is something we will be engaging in during the fiscal year and, as we begin to put together those details, we can bring a proposal and share that with Council for feedback and direction.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked, regarding a quick clarification about the fit study, is it fit for housing.
2.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 22 August 11, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave thinks fit is a broader term, more like a feasibility type of study that also looks at site specific constraints, zoning regulations, land use regulations, access, etc.
Mayor Beckmeyer added with a driver for housing.
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed, under the Housing Element. She stated that, in this district, it would be for mixed use development and it is site-specific. For Sanchez Art Center, Site 23, there are specific parameters provided within the Housing Element and, based on Council direction, on what we would want to see there. Those things would inform this type of a feasibility study. She stated that they are preliminary but are specific to the site.
City Manager Woodhouse stated the concept is we need to design a scope of a study that is being directed by our Housing Element, thus an implementation action; normally, that is the direction.
He heard Council saying we want an extra step there to weigh in on what the scope of that work should be. It will add extra work and discussion.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she is not asking that, but wondering if we have gone to great effort to come up with a creative way of removing this site from the rezoning as we are recognizing the constraints for taking it out of the Housing Element completely. She sees the compromise as we can get the Housing Element certified leaving that site in there and we are not evaluating it for housing because we are not putting it in rezoning and thus does not need a fit study. She asked if it can be eliminated from RFP for doing a scope of work for City-owned properties.
City Manager Woodhouse thinks that would require coming back to Council with the scope of this study and the sites to be included in that. If you limit it to that, it could be a more constraining discussion rather than a broader scope of a fit study, but that is not what is on the agenda for discussion at this meeting and they would have to bring that back in the future in this fiscal year to confirm that and, in so doing, it is a public process and there could be input about other sites.
He stated that is the extra step and feasible to do.
Councilmember Wright thought we have 100% complete control as the City owns the property.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that is correct.
Mayor pro Tem Boles mentioned if it is by-right.
Councilmember Wright stated it does not matter if we own the property.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that we own the property and can say what we want on that site but, if it is by-right, at some point there is no public process for reviewing the plans and the refinement of the project.
Councilmember Wright stated it is part of the purchase agreement that, if they do not comply to the conditions we put on it, they cannot have the property and it reverts to the City.
Mayor pro Tem Boles did not think it was that simple but she is okay with what we have now. She would like to talk about the by-right in more detail.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked Mayor pro Tem Boles if she can help Council understand the scope and priority of her questions.
2.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 23 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she has questions about by-right, some of the new higher density article 54, the new language that was added about taller projects we have, EIR, and mitigations.
She would like to start with by-right as it is more complicated for her to understand. She referenced a table in the presentation that was not in the Housing Element.
Community Development Director Updegrave explained that the presentation included a collapse of Table 4 from the Housing Element. Table 4 lists all shortfall sites and all the income categories for the lower income, moderate and market rate. From information pulled from the Housing Element, staff created a table for this presentation that only included sites identified for lower income RHNA to assist that understanding.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated, in talking about clarity for developers, that is not in there and the only place where she may have seen it is on the A1 line where it lists the numbers.
City Attorney Kenyon thought staff may be able to suggest a language change.
Community Development Director Updegrave heard from Vice Chair Berman and some of the questions and conversations coming up in terms of what HCD asked us to add back in, confusion because it refers to sites listed in Pacifica’s Housing Element site inventory, which are designated to shortfall of lower income. If it feels more clear or less confusing, we could make some slight changes in the order to say “specifically that it applies to sites designated to address the shortfall of lower income RHNA within Pacifica’s sixth cycle Housing Element site inventory”.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked for the suggested language to be repeated.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that, “specifically, it applies to sites designated to address the shortfall of lower income RHNA within the City of Pacifica Housing Element site inventory”.
Mayor pro Tem Boles found something that was troubling her on page F37 of the Housing Element that seems to contradict what Community Development Director Updegrave said. It talks about the RHNA shortfall: “Table F12 includes sites that will be rezoned but are not required to meet the RHNA shortfall and serve to create a buffer to cover no net loss situations.” She stated that there are four sites in Table F12 that are on the list but it seems to say in the Housing Element that they are not required to meet the RHNA shortfall.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that the text in appendix F just references F11 as requiring byright approval; however, the sites in F12, the buffer sites effectively, also need to be rezoned to meet the HCD’s requirements. This was added in the program HE-I-1, action 8, that specifically lists all of the sites that are required to be rezoned. Throughout the Housing Element process, this is something that we worked on and discussed in terms of which sites needed to be rezoned to allow by-right approval. City Attorney’s Office discussed it internally and with their consultants that HCD is interpreting it to require the buffer sites as well, which is why they required all the buffer sites.
Aaron Aknin, Good City Company, stated if you look at the implementing actions in 8b, it goes over all of the different sites and includes Table F11 as well as F12 and then it goes to the specific sites. It clarifies it within this.
2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 24 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that it does say F12 is not required. She asked if what she just read is an error in the Housing Element at this point.
Consultant Aknin read 8b as being more specific in providing clarity but that is what HCD is pointing to and what they approved within their review. If he were to redo it, he would be more specific and have that exact language within the appendix.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if this is misleading.
Consultant Aknin stated he would prefer that it have more clarity.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she counted a total of 19 sites that have to be by-right and she wants to reemphasize to the public that includes Manor Plaza, Linda Mar shopping center, and a lot of our biggest commercial bringing money to the City and allows us to have neighborhoods walkable where they can buy things and not have to drive. She thinks it is problematic that the State is forcing this upon us and we need to do our work with the state officials.
Councilmember Bier stated that would be her question, i.e., what changes is she suggesting.
Mayor pro Tem Boles wanted to make sure this was correct because then it is not a change. She moved on to more of the by-right sections, referring to packet page 404, by-right approval requirement. Item C refers to Government Code Section 65582.2I and she believes it needs to be 83.2I for clarification.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that she is correct, and staff found that error earlier. Staff will make the correction.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if staff can explain the mitigation measures for by-right projects, which is tying back to the EIR mitigation because by-right projects will not be required to do additional CEQA.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it is correct that they will not be required to do additional CEQA.
Mayor pro Tem Boles concluded that their only CEQA was in relation to what we have in this EIR and these mitigation measures.
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively.
Mayor pro Tem Boles does not know if the City Attorney has analyzed this with the new State law in AB 130 and AB 131, and she asked if we are allowed to have those mitigation measures that we have identified.
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed as they are objective and adopted into the ordinance.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy added they will be imposed as conditions of approval on the project.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if she means when our Housing Element is certified.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy responded affirmatively.
2.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 25 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if we can do by-right projects before the Housing Element is certified.
She went back to a previous section on packet page 403, development standards, and this article has development standards that apply to all the different specific new zones for the high density residential and mixed use, but there is a section on page 403, 9-4.5402, Development Standards, which she believes apply to all the sites within all of those new zonings, and asked if she is correct.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated article 54, higher density residential and higher density mixed use districts, apply within all of the new zoning districts. She added that, the general use provision references back to this section in each individual zone.
Mayor pro Tem Boles read that all developments must include 50% of gross square footage for residential use. She is going back to a conversation she heard Planning Commission discuss, i.e., the 10-foot minimum setback above the second story, and when the fit studies were done, it seemed that the consultant had assumed that the Planning Commission wanted setbacks from all four sides of the building. She spoke with Chair Hauser and she said that was not their intention and perhaps Vice Chair Berman can confirm that because we have the 30-foot setbacks to single family residential within all the other zones, Chair Hauser said her intention was that the 10-foot setbacks just applied to the streets, and not to the other sides, as she saw that as a barrier to housing and affordable housing. She knows there was some of that conversation when they were talking about fit studies but does not recall that discussion continuing.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the question about which façade it applied along had to do with an additional sunshine plane setback above the third story and she does not recall setbacks being discussed in that way. She stated that, typically, setbacks do apply to the perimeter of a building and Planning Commission did not discuss or include that this would only apply to the front.
Councilmember Wright recalls having done that on a site by site analysis when Planning Commission went over this in the Housing Element which is before her time.
Community Development Director Updegrave thinks, if the intention is for it to only apply from the street lot line, Council would need to make that change and they can make that change.
Vice Chair Berman stated that Planning Commission briefly discussed from what she recalls was a point of clarification to Van Meter Williams Pollack where they took ODS direction from all four sides of the building but the original intent was from the main façade. She does not recall if Planning Commission explicitly determined they needed to make any language changes or discussed adding specific clarification. It was like they clarified for the consultant team and they understood it. She thinks it was the Planning Commission’s intent to have that setback be from the prominent façade.
Mayor Beckmeyer is reminded, when we were talking about this issue in the Sharp Park Specific plan, that particular conversation was having to do with this because we did not have all the byright, etc., at that moment and were focused on the Coastal Commission and the concern they would potentially be raising if they increased building heights in the coastal zone in terms of view shed. She recalls the answer to that was the setbacks. She is concerned on limiting ourselves to just street facing façade. She stated that it sounds like Mayor pro Tem Boles was concerned that they interpreted it that they wanted setbacks on all four sides and sounded like she wanted it clarified to just one façade.
2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 26 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we could say street facades to be broad enough for interpretation.
Vice Chair Berman thinks that would be aligned with the Commission’s intent. She mentioned past study sessions with the Sharp Park Specific Plan where this was a long discussion and she does not know the exact language they might want to add, if any, to clarify. She stated that they just clarified it in real time in their discussion and moved on.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we can certainly change it to be just from the street-facing façade. Her understanding was that it was that this particular one was also meant for the size which have a smaller setback to the neighbors.
Councilmember Wright thinks it applied where it was next door to lower residential housing.
Vice Chair Berman stated that specific language might have been in the Sharp Park Specific Plan but she recalls different scenarios. She thought it was in the Sharp Park Specific Plan, i.e., there is a step back requirement from the street façade and there was another step back requirement from the adjacent lot. That was a discussion from a few years ago.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated what was added, which she did not think the Sharp Park Plan has, is a 30-foot setback from any single family residential for these zones and that is in each one of the separate zoning definitions. She thinks that does that to protect the residential daylight plane without needing to step back the building also.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated it sounds like we do not need to worry about it in residential areas where there is already a 30-foot setback requirement, but we have many places in Sharp Park where that is not necessarily true because of the way it is already zoned and what the uses are.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that this is only for these new zones, not for the zones in Sharp Park.
Councilmember Bier asked if there is a suggestion for changing language here.
Mayor pro Tem Boles was suggesting “10-foot minimum setback above the second story on any street-facing façade”.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it can be implemented.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that the change that is being proposed at this time is to Section 9-
4.502 Section B1.
There was Council consensus.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to page 404, ground level commercial uses, and it says “minimum floor to floor height of 15 feet”. Her understanding from Planning Commission meetings is they wanted that from the mixed use zone but not the mixed use institutional and the way it is written it would apply to both and she wanted to confirm that with Director Updegrave.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, to clarify, commercial uses are not principally permitted in the mixed use institutional zone; the institutional uses are not commercial uses, but non-residential. She stated that this standard would not apply to a church or daycare or a school.
2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 27 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated this would apply to a commercial space off of the Sanchez Art Center where they are selling retail art.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that would be an incidental commercial use.
The way the Planning Commission directed the uses for the mixed use institutional would allow for incidental commercial, subject to the development standards of the primary use.
Mayor pro Tem Boles is okay with that if Vice Chair Berman is okay with that.
Vice Chair Berman thought what Director Updegrave recited is consistent with Planning Commission’s logic.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated all the MUs have a minimum and maximum FAR for commercial.
She does not remember the maximum being discussed at Planning Commission and why we would have a maximum. She stated it is in the sub-MU districts, starting on packet page 411.
Councilmember Wright believes the maximum would be to get housing on the site.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we have something that says we have to build 50% of the square foot that has to be housing. She stated that some of these are our big shopping centers where we are putting these sites, and from her professional experience, it is easier to get developers to build housing because they make their money off of housing versus commercial. She asked why we would ever put a maximum on commercial as long as we are getting our minimum residential.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated her understanding is that the intent was to provide a minimum FAR to ensure commercial development and a maximum to ensure that these are truly mixed use housing development projects with higher density housing.
Vice Chair Berman believes they also started discussing it to be consistent with what they had previously discussed in the Sharp Park Specific Plan which also has maximum FAR densities.
She thinks it came from an intent to be consistent with former discussions in the past five years.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thinks it is different because Sharp Park has mostly smaller sites and here we have some big sites with commercial. She is not sure she agrees with that logic.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked we could delineate them, like big commercial sites of some size.
Councilmember Bier asked what changes to the text would Mayor pro Tem Boles like to make.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that we could delete the maximum FAR limit on all of them or look at what the zoning is for all our shopping centers in particular to make sure we do not have a maximum. She stated that it affects the Fairmont, Manor, Brentwood and Linda Mar Shopping Centers and Park Mall sites. She asked about the zoning of each one of those sites as that is more complicated than just taking them all out.
Councilmember Bier asked if her suggestion was to take them out.
Vice Chair Berman stated there are also tables in the General Plan that would have to be consistent, and there may be implications to the EIR if we are allowing limitless FAR.
2.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 28 August 11, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave thinks we would need to research that further as she believes that it may be a requirement in State law to establish maximum FAR on sites that are identified in the Housing Element.
Nicholas Hamilton, Good City Company, stated it is part of State law of 65583.2H2 and, at least for the by-right sites, they need to have a minimum of 50% of the floor area.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we do say 50% of the floor footage has been residential and this would not necessarily contradict that.
Mr. Hamilton stated that may be the case but he offered that they discussed this with HCD about two years ago when they were developing these programs and this was important to them. That is the State law it is part of and it may also be somewhere else.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy thinks we do have the 50% requirement when we were discussing article 54. She stated that deleting the FAR would not be specifically inconsistent with this one section of State law so they could remove the maximum FAR. She thinks there is another question as to whether staff, from a planning perspective, thinks there is a reason why they would want to include that, but legally we can remove it. She stated we did confirm it would not impact the EIR as the EIR does have the height limits and it assumed the height limits in its analysis.
Councilmember Bier wanted to be clear on the suggestion.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she was waiting to hear back from Planning staff, as it would be deleting the maximum FAR on each of those zonings and each page number.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if Mayor pro Tem Boles’ concern was that setting a maximum floor area ratio would enable more of our large commercial sites, such as the shopping centers, to have more housing and squeeze out the possibility of commercial such as grocery stores, etc., that are currently available.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it would limit the amount of commercial.
Mayor Beckmeyer concluded it would limit the amount of commercial to only how much they are allowed and the rest is going to be housing.
Mayor pro Tem Boles agreed, stating that we need more commercial in town.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated she would not want that to happen.
Councilmember Wright stated he would not stand in the way but would not change it either.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked him what his reasoning is for why he does not think that is a concern.
Councilmember Wright thinks that the current policy does a sufficient job encouraging the development of commercial space in addition to housing and, if we are going to try to meet our RHNA numbers, encouraging housing partially is an important aspect of what we are trying to do to avoid further complications on future RHNA grounds.
Mayor pro Tem Boles is more worried about having sustainable communities.
2.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 29 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Wright did not disagree with her.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she is not saying we are forcing them to build a maximum but just saying that there is not a maximum. In construction, she referred to development at the Sea Bowl, as they do not want to build any commercial as that is not where they make their money.
Councilmember Wright stated he will not stand in the way.
Community Development Director Updegrave wanted to contextualize a 2.5 FAR as it is quite large. If you have a 10,000 square foot lot, you could build a two-story commercial building, lot line to lot line, and then have a third story that covered 50% of that lot and that would get you 2.5 FAR. 2.5 is a large allowance on a mixed use site and the FAR does not apply to the residential floor area but, to contextualize, a 2.5 is a fairly large amount.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if we know the FAR of commercial at Manor Shopping Center now.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not know the exact number, but she stated it does not go lot line to lot line and it is less than 1 for sure.
Councilmember Bier asked if we can move toward a decision about this part.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if there was a reason to have a maximum.
Community Development Director Updegrave thinks it is okay to remove it, but she thinks it was there to help balance residential and non-residential.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated you can also have commercial retail and then commercial offices and then residential. She stated that it gives more options with development without limiting.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we would need to make conforming edits to the General Plan document as well.
Mayor Beckmeyer thanked her for reminding her. She felt that is a concern that, if we change it here, we need to change it in the General Plan.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked where that is in the General Plan.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if we cannot just do that.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we can, as the General Plan is also being amended and it starts on packet page 258. As we added new land use designations, those all include the FAR range and the FAR ranges are also included in the tables. We would also need to make those conforming changes as well, which is doable and within the scope of what is before Council.
There was Council consensus.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to packet page 432, path of the combining districts and polygon sites.
2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 30 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Espinosa is concerned about that because one of them is in her neighborhood and she feels like what will those people lose.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated the polygons were all established in the Housing Element and we decided that we are not changing the Housing Element today. She read from packet page 432, Item 3, “lot coverage allowance established in the underlying zoning district is calculated based on the area of the enclosed polygon, not the property as a whole. Projects may propose lot coverage as up to 100% of the area enclosed within the polygon or specific area less any lot area within the underlying designation setback requirement.” She stated that we have setback requirements to extend single family housing of 30 feet and that would be in addition to whatever the polygons are. She asked if that was correct.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the setbacks are measured from the lot line.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to packet page 135, page F33 of the Housing Element, site G.
That is the one that Councilmember Espinosa is concerned about. She stated that there is a little bit of a distance between the polygon and the residential site, but the property line goes right to the back of the residential site. She stated if you need to do the 30-foot setback from outside the residential property line, then you are going to be inside the polygon.
Councilmember Wright asked if she is suggesting to add language that states whatever is the more restrictive policy applies.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated the other question which this does not address is that we have setbacks to single family residential but we do not have setbacks to creeks determined. There are several sites that are right up against San Pedro Creek and she asked if there was some way we might want a greater setback to the creek because the polygons were not studied in terms of environmental review and the by-right sites may not have any more environmental reviews.
Councilmember Wright asked if she has a suggested minimum.
Mayor pro Tem Boles does not have a suggested minimum and was just raising the question.
Councilmember Bier stated the question is where would she like to see changes made.
Mayor pro Tem Boles does not think this language is strong enough to consider those two things.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that creeks are regulated by the State and our engineers look at creeks at that as part of their review.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that there is no CEQA review for biology of the creek in any of these by-right projects that is going to happen.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated Public Works still conducts a review and, even if the project is by-right, they are still required to meet all applicable laws and regulations.
Mayor Beckmeyer remembers having this conversation with the LCLUP because there was a desire by Coastal Commission for increased setbacks over what was required by other agencies.
Councilmember Wright is thankful for her bringing up the concern, but it sounds like it is covered.
2.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 31 August 11, 2025
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha stated a clarifying point is that, in practice, when there are proposals such as a ministerial project, those are routed to the Engineering Division and they provide comments and conditions that require the project to comply with certain permitting, either state or federal, that regulates the bodies of water such as creeks.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if California Department of Fish and Wildlife would necessarily be consulted as part of that.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha stated, as part of the objective standards of the environmental checklist that is required for the by-right projects to comply with, where in the by-right section they are required to comply with the mitigation measures, there are also policies in the General Plan stated that are objective standards that they would also be required to comply with. She stated that it is a future checklist that staff will maintain and require of byright projects but not proposed as a draft before Council this evening.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated it sounds like we are taking this into consideration.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha responded affirmatively.
Mayor pro Tem Boles is concerned because the language says “project may propose lot coverage up to 100% of the area within the polygon”.
Councilmember Espinosa wants to find out what the setback from those homes to the lot if they are building there for Figure F-10, the Skyline water tank.
Community Development Director Updegrave will verify the zoning district and then the setbacks would be determined by the zoning district.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the proposed zoning for site G is R40 and the R40 development standards are on packet page 406. She then referred to the development standard table on packet page 407 and it has a 15-foot front setback, 5-foot rear side setback, 20-foot rear setback and a minimum 30-foot setback from any lot line that abuts the single-family zone.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thinks that one has more room, and she is more worried about the Linda Mar Shopping Center where the polygon is right up against the single-family homes.
Councilmember Espinosa stated, by checking those things now, it will be good.
Councilmember Bier referred to packet page 407, the additional setback part for single families, and asked if that is enough.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it may be for this one but it is where the polygons do not necessarily align with the property lines where it may be a little tricky.
Councilmember Wright asks what trumps what, the polygon or the setback.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, in the combining district, it provides measurement for how to treat the polygon that are a bit of an oddity in the zoning world and setbacks are measured from the property lines, not the polygon lines.
2.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 32 August 11, 2025
Councilmember Wright asked if they trump the polygon. He supposed that the 30-foot setback approaches into the polygon and asked whether the setback or the polygon rules.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the setback as it is measured from the lot line regardless of where it falls in the polygon.
Councilmember Espinosa stated that, on that lot, there is a road for the people to go to maintenance of the water tank and what is going to be the setback then.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we would have to look at a specific development proposal. This is just the regulatory framework and we are not analyzing a specific development proposal on any of these sites at this time.
Councilmember Wright stated 30 feet from any single-family house.
Councilmember Bier moved to extend the meeting to 12:30 a.m.; seconded by Councilmember Wright.
EXTEND MEETING TO 12:30 AM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Mayor pro Tem Boles referenced the checklist.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha stated that the specific language about the environmental checklist is in the packet but not the draft of the checklist as it is not ready.
Mayor pro Tem Boles mentioned the specific language about the environmental.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha stated that the requirements for a by-right project to comply with the mitigation measures and policies refers to a check list and that is just language outlining the checklist requirements.
City Attorney Kenyon stated the checklist has not been prepared yet.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha responded affirmatively.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought we can ask staff to make sure there is some language.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that would be part of Council direction to staff.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked what the direction is to staff regarding the checklist.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated add language to ensure that we are providing environmental setbacks to sensitive habitat, including the creeks, if needed, to be analyzed.
Mayor Beckmeyer thought that sounds good and asked if staff got that.
2.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 33 August 11, 2025
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Wright asked if we can talk about parking. He does not want it to apply to everything and will it apply only to these sites.
Mayor Beckmeyer agreed, but she asked why it got changed to apply to the whole City.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated staff thought it would be needed in HE-I-14, but it is not needed now.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked how HCD feels about the City walking that back. She referred to parking and the issue of those reduced parking requirements being applied to the whole City and should it just be applied to the rezoning.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy referenced the discussion of whether Council wanted to go back to the Planning Commission language on parking and take out all sites. Although there was a program in the Housing Element for this, it was not directly connected to the rezoning so we could come back and look at that. If that direction was to follow the Planning Commission’s recommendation, that language is on packet pages 940-941 regarding the changes. Council’s direction would be to go back to that language with respect to parking.
Councilmember Wright asked to restate that language so he is clear that it only applies to rezoning sites and does not apply to the rest of the city.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the change would be that two family and multiple family, including studios, townhouses and condominium in the R30 through 60, MU30 through 60 and MUI 30 through 60, within those zoning districts the change would be one space for each studio or one bedroom, two spaces for each unity with two or more bedrooms, which is the same. Guest parking is one per five units. Outside of the rezoning would be just what it is now, which is one space for each studio, 1.5 spaces for each one bedroom, 2 for each two bedroom and guest parking as one for every 4 units.
There was Council consensus.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated her other questions start with the EIRs so she did not know if we want to finish the deliberation on the other two Planning Commission changes, i.e. parking, the by-right language, and the HE-I-1 references in the resolution.
City Attorney Kenyon stated her suggestion is for Director Updegrave to take each one of them and, for the first State law by-right approval, read specifically what is changing and what is staying the same.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the change will be in the redline and would say “specifically it applies to the sites designated to address the shortfall of lower income RHNA within the City of Pacifica sixth cycle, 2023-2031, Housing Element sites inventory.” Instead of putting that at the end in the clause “which are designated as,” it front loads that and makes it easier to understand.
Mayor pro Tem Boles added that there is not confusion about the site’s inventory separate list.
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively.
2.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 34 August 11, 2025
Mayor pro Tem Boles thinks that sounds better to her.
Vice Chair Berman thinks the clarification is an improvement. Planning Commission did not agree to this language at all at their meeting, but she understands the requirements that HCD has in order to certify the Housing Element and she personally thinks the revised language is an improvement.
There was Council consensus.
Mayor Beckmeyer referred to recitals with references to HE-I-1.
City Attorney Kenyon clarified that this decision, from staff’s perspective, is within the discretion of Council. It is a deliberation among Council as to whether or not they agree with staff’s recommendation which, for transparency purposes, is to make clearer in the case HCD has any issues with our Housing Element that there was a reference to purpose for HE-I-1. If Council wants to take that out, it does not mean that it is not still in there as it is referenced in other places, just not referenced there. This is a decision within Council’s discretion to leave in or take out.
Councilmember Bier asked if we can just change it back to Planning Commission’s language.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated instead of referring to Housing Element program HE-I-1, it says, “HCD requires the adoption of revised Housing Element and adoption of General Plan and zoning amendments, pursuant to the Housing Element program” from packet page 824.
Councilmember Bier agreed, adding that we have the original language already.
There was Council consensus.
Mayor pro Tem Boles noticed one whereas statement in the Planning Commission resolution that was not in Council’s resolution so she wanted to confirm that it was taken out intentionally. In the middle of packet page 825, it says, “Whereas the Rezoning Program amends the Zoning Code (Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code) and the zoning map to reflect the new Zoning Districts and to ensure consistency with the Housing Element, including articles, etc.” She stated it is missing in Council’s resolution on packet page 250.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated the Planning Commission resolution was a compilation of all the actions, the EIR, the General Plan and the Rezoning, and when we created a document for Council, we separated out the General Plan recitals and findings from the rezoning recitals and findings. She stated what may have happened is that some of the language from the Planning Commission resolution regarding the rezoning was removed with the General Plan.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, because Council adopts the ordinance instead of a resolution recommending approval, that language is on packet page 271, which is the City Council ordinance adopting the rezoning. It specifies the Rezoning Program and then the Zoning Code and the zoning map to reflect the new district.
Mayor pro Tem Boles wanted to go down the line of the program EIR. She is looking at Table ES3, the summary of impacts and mitigation measures. She referred to the first section on aesthetics and wanted to know if the Coastal Act has been reviewed as part of this EIR. Looking at these sites that can now go up to 55 plus stories in the coastal zone, she wanted to make sure that was something that has been considered because she did not see it in the analysis.
2.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 35 August 11, 2025
Allison Moore, Dyett & Bhatia, stated that coastal view corridors are analyzed in the aesthetics chapter, 3.1-3, which talks about coastal view corridors. The Coastal Act is referenced on page
3.1-6 in the aesthetic chapter and thus was analyzed as part of the EIR.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated projects like the Manor Shopping Center rebuild would have to comply with Coastal Act also.
Consultant Moore responded affirmatively.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to 3.3-1, biology, which included red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes. She thinks there was a letter from CDFW asking about mountain lions and certain butterflies and she wondered if those were added.
Consultant Moore stated that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife requested more detail on California red-legged frogs and the garter snake habitat. They had added that the existing General Plan policies cover habitat delineations and buffers for projects. They also requested additional mitigation for nesting birds and bat species. The General Plan policies have been updated to include those specific requirements. For the butterfly habitat corridors, preexisting policies were found to be sufficient, based on site specific habitat studies that projects would be required to conduct later on.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we do not if CDFW is happy with that language.
Consultant Moore stated when we respond in our comment letters, they have to be sent back to the agencies.
Mayor pro Tem Boles added that they have not provided other comments.
Community Development Deputy Director Harkousha stated we have not received comments back from CDFW.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if our steelhead are a protected species.
Consultant Moore stated steelhead are identified on page 3.3-14 of the EIR. It says the species is documented to occur in San Pedro Creek, but suitable habitat is not present within the subject site, Site 29.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked to identify the several sites that the creek backs up to.
Consultant Moore stated on page 3.3-36, any development in sensitive areas identified in Figure 7-3, inclusive of the creek that runs through sites 16b and 29, which is critical habitat for steelhead, and would be required to engage a qualified biologist.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated the Linda Mar Shopping Center, Sanchez Art Center, and the Sanchez Library sites are all mentioned, although the Art Center was removed.
Consultant Moore stated all sites that are critical habitat for steelhead are reflected in the EIR.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated, under energy and greenhouse gases, this is one of the significant and unavoidable impacts. She asked if there are other mitigations we could add if we wanted to.
2.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 36 August 11, 2025
Consultant Moore stated that the EIR does consider all feasible mitigations. With AB 130, there is now a statewide moratorium on new residential REACH codes for building energy efficiency.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it was not until October but there are paths around that and we have had several discussions with the City Attorney because we have General Plan language that could allow REACH codes that would require further analysis. She does not want to block that from consideration and that would be a huge mitigation. She asked if that is language we can add for REACH codes.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we cannot add new mitigation measures without recirculating the EIR.
Consultant Moore stated that there is the question of political feasibility in terms of mitigations, as we want them to be implemented in a certain timeframe so there is also that consideration as well for whether or not a mitigation like that could be passed in a certain number of years.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy noted that it is something Council could continue to look at outside of this EIR process.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to 3.6 geology, i.e., 3.6-3 on page ES-33, and stated we have several sites that are on steep hillsides that are located in geologic hazard areas. She is concerned about the sites where we are not doing further CEQA review.
Consultant Moore stated that Dep. Director Harkousha mentioned sites that are in zones that required investigation still must comply with the requirements of State law and that does include geotechnical investigation for sites that are in areas of investigation. The Pacifica Municipal Code also establishes administrative procedures, minimum standards of review, enforcement procedures for ensuring stable soil conditions, etc. so compliance with existing regulations is something that by-right development must do which would help to ensure that impacts would be less than significant.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that there is also General Plan language about trying not to build on slopes 35% or more, as well as analysis for adding sites to HPD that she thinks have slopes more than 15%. She does not see anything in here that required a slope analysis be done.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if HPD requires slope analysis if the site is subject to HPD.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated yes, but the General Plan that says that we need to look at the whole City because there are sites that need to be added to HPD. We are not doing that work wholesale, but we could be doing it as we review projects and applications are put in.
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to extend the meeting to 1:00 a.m.; seconded by Councilmember Espinosa.
2.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 37 August 11, 2025
EXTEND MEETING TO 1:00 AM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Mayra Espinosa, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Mayor pro Tem Boles added this could be something that can be added to the checklist. She wants to make sure we are doing the proper geotechnical now.
Consultant Moore stated on page 3.6-20, there is reference to implementing policy SAI-8 geotechnical studies and is within the coastal zone and hillside areas that continue to require geotechnical site investigation for proposed development on sites located in any of the following areas prior to allowing site development: on slopes greater than 15%, areas showing evidence of landslides or landslide potential, and areas showing evidence of ground shaking or earth movement within 50 feet of a coastal bluff or within sand dune areas.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thought that was great about the geotechnical but she still wanted to raise the issue about the slope analysis and HPD. She thought it could be on the checklist but it is a way to start implementing our General Plan policies and ensuring we are putting new sites in HPD that are being proposed for development.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that our Building Code has some requirements related to geological and seismic hazards.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she is okay with the language that was read about the geotechnical so it is just the slope analysis and the HPD remaining. She stated she had questions about transportation, including VMT, and fire.
Mayor pro Tem Boles referred to page ES-40, 3.11-2, which says “the proposed project would conflict to be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines 15064.3 subdivision B”. She asked what is the CEQA and what are we not doing.
Consultant Moore stated a significant impact would occur if a proposed project fails to reduce vehicle miles traveled below 15% reduction of the threshold of existing conditions. The proposed project does not reduce employment VMT for employee below that 15% of the threshold.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked if it is only related to employment VMT and is there no VMT that we are analyzing for all these new residential units.
Consultant Moore stated that there are multiple metrics analyzed in the EIR: population VMT per capita and employment, which is the VMT for employee. Adding multi-family and infill development decreases VMT but Pacifica is not a job center so people are still commuting out to get to their jobs. The project does reduce population VMT per capita below that 15% threshold but does not reduce it for the VMT per employee.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked how we are reducing the VMT when we are adding all those new housings by adding multi-family.
2.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 38 August 11, 2025
Consultant Moore stated multi-family and infill development is assumed in the models when people run calculations on VMT for development to have less VMT impact than a single-family home.
Mayor pro Tem Boles concluded because you have to drive more between home but, overall, the VMT impacts will be more for Pacifica than they are now with all these new projects.
Consultant Moore stated compared to the base year.
Mayor Beckmeyer reiterated that is why those are unavoidable impacts.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she said we met the VMT criteria for residential, just not for employment. She does not understand how we can meet it for residential, as there are no mitigation measures.
Consultant Moore stated that a lot of this new development is mixed use so people are living in areas where they don’t have to get into their cars and drive to go to commercial services. The mixed use and the multi-family are driving the numbers down as compared to the proportion of single-family versus multi-family.
Mayor pro Tem Boles understands the percentages, but she thinks it is still a greater amount total of VMT as there are more people driving than there are currently.
Consultant Moore stated the way that the model sets it out includes those points and it does remain a significant amount of avoidable impacts.
Mayor pro Tem Boles noticed that a lot of the base models were like 2020 and 2021 which were COVID-19 era. She asked if that is giving true information.
Consultant Moore stated the baseline was 2019 when it was taken. She may have to take a look in the technical memo but she can come back to her question.
Mayor pro Tem Boles thinks she saw that the LOS study was done in 2021.
Consultant Moore stated that the LOS was updated as part of this analysis, just for informational purposes as it is not an impact required under CEQA.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it is something in our C/CAG plan that is allowed for us to look at.
She thinks there was language about certain intersections by law not able to decrease the LOS in the Skyline corridor and Highway 1.
Consultant Moore stated, on page 311-16, it does say that all ten non-CMP roadway segments are still expected to operate at acceptable levels of service.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she can read a section talking about traffic, 311-12: “The City currently has one roadway improvement project in the planning stage within the planning area [the Manor overcrossing]. Other improvements to the roadway network are expected to be needed during the General Plan planning period to achieve a balance between existing and future land use and traffic clearing capacity. Major street improvements planned a program for Pacifica as shown in the figure [the Manor overcrossing].” Additionally, it says, according to General Plan build out, adding over 3,000 units of housing, “additional improvements are justified based on the
2.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 39 August 11, 2025
analysis of existing traffic conditions and projected future traffic conditions with projected growth during the General Plan planning period compared to the City’s level of service standards as described in the following sections.” Her concern is that we have no improvement plan and no congestion management plan. They had a lot of comments earlier, including from the Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission, about the concerns around evacuation with all of these projects when we already have issues. She wants to know what we need to do to start identifying projects and planning roadway improvement as none of this is in the mitigation measure.
Consultant Moore stated traffic impacts and congestion impacts are not in LOS as they are not required to be analyzed under CEQA but they address emergency access and transportation in wildfire. The EIR does acknowledge that there will be an increase in regional travel but there is a robust framework of emergency preparedness and evacuation actions in place to facilitate evacuation and those strategies range from local planning efforts in making sure that, in project review, there is ingress and egress review to Pacifica’s and County’s emergency response and evacuation plans. This also involves close consultation with Caltrans and San Mateo County Transportation Authority as part of the C/CAG Congestion Management Agency, making sure that the congestion management plan updates are reflective of conditions and planning with them to make sure that improvements are being made. Other General Plan policies direct continued implementation and adherence to the multi-jurisdictional local hazard mitigation plan, and all hazard and evacuation plans, emergency operations plan. In totality, implementation of General Plan policies will improve connections between communities, trails, bikeways, and all those other transportation infrastructure that could help in an emergency and provide additional access routes will result in a less significant impact. Transportation improvements would be more of a General Plan issue.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated we do not have our own congestion management plan.
Councilmember Bier wanted to ask if that would be something we could look towards doing.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated that is where she wants to have a discussion in goal setting to understand what is needed so we can start to identify other projects.
Councilmember Wright agreed and stated that adding 1,892 more units is going to be a problem.
Councilmember Bier stated it is possible to look at a congestion management plan moving forward. She stated that cannot be fitted here but it is important to say what we can do.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated it ties into this as there are no mitigations for VMT for residential projects. She was hoping there would be a mitigation and there is nothing we can force a developer to pay into because there is nothing identified here.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, as a point of clarification, development projects are subject to the C/CAG TMD triggered by 100 plus peak hour trips. That is something staff reviews for and all projects are required to comply with that cross that threshold.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated she will skip her fire questions. She stated the objective design standards we have in here are very minimal and we have on our work plan working on more comprehensive massing and changing the envelope and colors and roof lines and things that can help us get the architecture. It has been on the Council work plan and staff are feeling that means a long robust public engagement process and will take a year to work on. That concerns her because we have all these applications and objective design standards that are one of the few
2.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 40 August 11, 2025
things we can give them to make sure we get good projects now. She stated that we are not giving direction on this now but she asked staff to look at Half Moon Bay because they saw that this was an issue with new laws now that there are restrictions in the whole coastal zone about projects and by-right projects. They quickly put together interim objective design standards which are quite comprehensive while they do their long program. She would like to suggest that we consider this.
Councilmember Wright asked if that was possible and asked to sign up.
Mayor pro Tem Boles stated, when we started talking about the schedule on all this and the fact that we are almost three years behind, that is why they have all these builders’ remedy applications and why we have by-right. She knows other cities are looking to increase densities so they change their zoning and is done before the Housing Element and it is not a by-right. She wants to make sure we are being thoughtful before the next cycle that we are giving ourselves enough time so we do not put our city in this predicament that we are in.
Mayor Beckmeyer gave a reminder about the COVID-19 pandemic, and our intent was not to wait until September 2022 against a January 31, 2023 deadline. In addition, at that time, we were working on the Sharp Park Specific Plan and General Plan through the course of the pandemic.
There was an intentional decision to go ahead and do the Housing Element after those were completed, not factoring in the amount of time a pandemic would take. There was also advice because the basis and work that consultants do with housing and community development, up until that point, included a grace period. She wants to make sure we understand that it was not by design, not by intention but where we landed. We need to make the best decisions that we can going forward, examine the process and, to Mayor pro Tem Boles’ point, make sure we do not do it again.
Mayor pro Tem Boles asked for a more careful understanding of the big work and prioritizing around that.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated big work is a relative term because it all depends on which lens you are looking at it through.
Councilmember Bier stated it was very important to ask where we are right now. We can move forward together now in the best way that we can together. She wants to keep the conversation in that space, i.e., where can we go now and do now to make things better.
Mayor Beckmeyer and Councilmember Espinosa thanked her.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the first motion is to adopt the resolution related to the EIR and there were no amendments. The second motion is the resolution for the General Plan, as amended by Council. The changes approving the amendments to the General Plan text include removing and updating the references to HE-I-1 in the recitals and removing maximum FAR. In the motion to waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance approving the amendments to the zoning code and rezoning, there were as amendment for parking language in the by-right provision, changes to the height section, removing the maximum FAR from the zoning, correcting the reference to State law in the by-right provisions, amending the setbacks, as well as HE-I-1.
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to adopt a Resolution to certify Pacifica Housing Element (6th Cycle, 2023-2031) Targeted General Plan Amendments, Rezoning, and Objective Development
2.a
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 41 August 11, 2025
Standards Program Final Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 202450168, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and adopt Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program in accordance with CEQA (Attachment A); seconded by Councilmember Bier.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to adopt a Resolution approving amendments to the General Plan text and land use map to reflect the new General Plan Land Use Designations and to ensure consistency with the Housing Element (with amendments to Chapters 1 (Introduction), 3 (Community Design), 4 (Land Use), and 7 (Conservation) (Attachment B) as amended by Council and discussed by staff; seconded by Councilmember Wright.
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
Mayor pro Tem Boles moved to waive the first reading and introduce an Ordinance approving the amendments to the Zoning Code (Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code) and the zoning map to reflect the new Zoning Districts and to ensure consistency with the Housing Element, including amendments to Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 6.5, 23, 24, 25, 28, and addition of Articles 54 to 67 (Attachment C) as amended by Council and discussed by staff; seconded by Councilmember Espinosa.
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christine Boles, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Mayra Espinosa, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Boles, Bier, Espinosa, Wright
CONSIDERATION - NONE.
ADJOURN
Mayor Beckmeyer adjourned the meeting at 12:57 a.m.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
2.a
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 42 August 11, 2025
__________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
2.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 8-11-2025 Regular City Council Meeting (6030 : Approval of Minutes)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard.
RECOMMENDED 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.
STAFF CONTACT:
Roland Yip, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer 650-738-3767
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 22, 2016, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency along the Pacifica coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard due to El Nino storm activity. Extreme wave heights for extended periods of time caused top-of-bluff retreat at several locations along the Pacifica coast and damage to City infrastructure. Since this date, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of other local emergencies along this same stretch of coastline. These emergencies are described below:
• Failure of the sea wall and promenade on Beach Blvd. (in the vicinity of Santa Maria Avenue), which have been repaired, from the January 22, 2016 storm. • The 300 & 400 blocks of Esplanade experience episodic bluff erosion. In recent years (2016-2018), the bluff erosion has progressed to a point where the erosion is now threatening public infrastructure and utilities.
• Undermining of an eight-foot diameter storm drain outfall and concrete headwall for the discharge of Milagra Creek into the Pacific Ocean in the vicinity of 700 Palmetto Avenue from the January 22, 2016, storm. The project was completed on April 24, 2023. • A failure of the seawall and promenade on Beach Blvd. in the vicinity of Santa Rosa Avenue and the Pier was discovered on December 16, 2020. Ocean waves, king tides, and high swells undermined a portion of the sea wall and created a large void (25’x25”) between the pier abutment seawall connection, affecting the sidewalk and promenade.
City staff and contractors stabilized and repaired the large void on January 22, 2021.
The sidewalk and promenade restoration were completed on February 22, 2021.
Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going.
3 Packet Pg. 59
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
• On December 29, 2020, another failure of the seawall occurred approximately 150-200 feet north of the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Santa Rosa Avenue. A void, approximately 10’ deep by 15’ long, was found behind the seawall and was repaired with geotextiles and concrete slurry on January 5, 2021. Full restoration of this section was complete in February 2021. Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going. • On January 14, 2021, a combination of high tides and large waves damaged a forty-foot section of the Pacifica Municipal Pier’s west facing deck and concrete railing. Following this event, the Pier was closed due to safety concerns. City staff requested a structural engineering assessment of the above deck pier elements and a proposed repair and associated cost from a local engineering consultant. This information was provided to the City at the end of March 2021. The pier was reopened on April 2, 2021, but the damaged portion was fenced off for safety reasons. The City is currently moving forward with a repair project and is designing the repair. Construction will be funded by grant money provided through Senate Bill 129. The City Council approved a resolution on December 13, 2021, to approve the application of the state grant funds for the repair of the pier and the application has been sent to the State Department of Parks and Recreation for processing. On May 13, 2022, the City received a Coastal Development Permit waiver from the California Coastal Commission to perform this work. A bid opening for the repair was held on June 9, 2022, and the City received one bid, which was $2 million above the project budget. Council rejected the bid and authorized the project to be rebid. The rebid for replacing the guardrails in need of immediate repair came in over $1.4 million and all of the guardrails at $4 million. As the project was beyond what had been funded for the project, the City pivoted to do further inspections on the pier before a sizable investment is made in fixing the guardrails, since it was prudent for the City to understand the full needs of the pier. The 2023 Pier Condition Assessment Report has been finalized and is able to be viewed at www.cityofpacifica.org/pier. In summary, the 2023 report notes that the end of the main pier and L-section of the pier is in serious condition and should be fixed within the next two years. The remaining area of the main pier is considered to be in poor condition and should be repaired within four years. This report does not include the new damage sustained during the December 28, 2023, high tide/big wave event. The structural engineers determined there was additional damage to the piles, handrails, and deck.
The structural engineers recommended limiting public access on the pier to approximately half of the main pier deck until a complete assessment is made after the winter storms.
• In November of 2023, a failure behind the seawall was discovered at the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Salada Ave. A void approximately 40’ long and 12’-15’ deep (2’-7’ in width) was found behind the seawall and was repaired with concrete and cement slurry.
The final sidewalk replacement was completed at the end of December 2023. • On Friday, December 29, 2023, another failure behind the seawall was discovered at Beach Blvd. and San Jose Ave. and was temporarily plugged. The final repair was completed on January 3, 2024, with the final sidewalk section and wall completed a week later. The total repair area was approximately 300 sf. This also caused damage to the Milagra storm drain outfall and left substantial sand deposits on the Beach Boulevard Prominade and on the southern Beach Boulevard rock revetment. • In Mach of 2024, City staff received an Emergency Coastal Development Permit (ECDP) from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for removal of the substantial sand deposits left on Beach Boulevard Promenade and southern rock revetment as well as for the repair of the damage to the Milagra outfall. Repairing the outfall and removal of the 3 Packet Pg. 60
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
sand on the Beach Boulevard Promenade was completed in late March/April 2024.
Removal of the sand from the southern Beach Boulevard Rock Revetment is expected to be completed by mid-May 2024, with work starting on May 9, 2024. • In May 2024, a sink hole (approx. 5’ w x 25’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. to the north of Santa Maria. The hole was repaired through an emergency contractor.
• In November 2024 a new sink hole (approx. 8’ w x 30’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. between Carmel Ave and Santa Maria Ave. The hole was repaired through an emergency contractor by December 16, 2024.
The City Council first ratified this proclamation (Attachment 1) at its regular meeting of January 25, 2016. Since that date, additional damage has occurred along Beach Boulevard and Esplanade Avenue as noted above.
Pursuant to Government Code section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least every 60 days until the City Council terminates the local emergency. Conditions of local emergency still exist since the City Council first acted to declare a local emergency on January 25, 2016, and since that time staff have brought the continuance of Proclamation confirming the existence of local emergency exists within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard every 30 days with August 11, 2025 being the most recent.
The City is using a combination of city staff, contractors, and consultants to manage the discussed emergency work. Staff will bring recommendations to the Council to end the emergency designation for projects on the list once conditions stabilize and the projects are no longer in need of the emergency designation.
The City Manager recommends that the City Council make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (PDF)
3 Packet Pg. 61
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (6027 : Continuation of "ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (6027 : Continuation of
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Second Amendment to Lease Agreement between City of Pacifica (City), as landlord, and Spindrift School of Performing Arts (SSPA), as tenant, for use of City property at 1050 Crespi Drive, Pacifica (Leased Property)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution Approving the Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement between City and Spindrift School of Performing Arts (SSPA) extending the term for the Leased Property at 1050 Crespi Drive for a period of five years, with an option for an additional five-year extension term, subject to agreement of City and SSPA, and authorize the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment.
STAFF CONTACT:
Scott Leslie, Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director
(650) 446-4683
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The Spindrift School of Performing Arts, a nonprofit organization providing affordable arts programming for Pacifica youth, has operated at the Leased Property since 2015 under a Lease Agreement with City. SSPA utilizes nine modular classroom and studio buildings at the Leased Property to deliver instruction in music, dance, and theater.
The original Lease Agreement was approved by City Council in 2014, effective October 1, 2015, and was amended once in January 2016 to align the Lease Agreement dates with SSPA’s building permit approvals (“First Amendment”). The First Amendment states that the Lease Agreement expires on September 30, 2025.
SSPA has remained in good standing, continues to fulfill its mission in service to the community, and has expressed interest in continuing operations at the site. In collaborative discussions with SSPA, both parties agreed to keep the terms of the lease substantially the same, and the SSPA has confirmed their support of this agreement.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
The proposed Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement includes the following key terms:
• A five-year extension of the term of the Lease Agreement until September 30, 2030. • An option for an additional five-year extension term that, if exercised and agreed to by 4 Packet Pg. 64
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
the parties, would continue the term of the Lease Agreement until September 30, 2035. • Continuation of the existing rent structure, which includes below-market rental rates to support the nonprofit’s community-based programming.
• No substantive changes to use or operations.
Any updates needed to comply with current City standards or legal requirements will be incorporated during final review.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Do not approve the agreement and provide staff with alternative direction.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
This action supports the City Council’s goal of fostering a Healthy and Compassionate Community by promoting access to youth arts programming and maintaining strong partnerships with local nonprofits.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no anticipated negative fiscal impact. Effective as of the Extension Commencement Date, SSPA will pay annual base rent of $7,311 ($609.25 monthly), with rent increasing by 2.5% annually during the Extension Term and any exercised Additional Extension Term. The existing rent structure was designed to be intentionally below market to support SSPA’s nonprofit mission. In lieu of market-rate rent, SSPA provides substantial public benefit through affordable and accessible programming for Pacifica residents.
ORIGINATED BY:
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Second Amendment to SSPA Lease Agreement (DOCX) Attachment B: First Amendment to Lease Agreement SSPA 1-25-2016 (PDF) Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 (PDF)
4 Packet Pg. 65
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. __-2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING THE
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH SPINDRIFT SCHOOL OF PERFORMING ARTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1050 CRESPI DRIVE WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica (“City”) is the owner of the property located at 1050 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, California, commonly known as Oddstad Park; and WHEREAS, City and Spindrift School of Performing Arts (“SSPA”), a California nonprofit corporation, entered into a Lease Agreement dated August 11, 2014, for use of a portion of the property to operate portable modular buildings for arts education programs; and WHEREAS, the Lease Agreement was amended on January 25, 2016, to revise the commencement and expiration dates in alignment with permit approvals, and establishing a Lease Agreement term that expires on September 30, 2025; and WHEREAS, SSPA has operated in good standing and continues to provide affordable arts programming for Pacifica youth, including instruction in music, dance, and theater; and WHEREAS, City and SSPA wish to extend the Lease Agreement for an additional five year term, with an additional five year extension option if agreed to by City and SSPA, under the same general terms and existing below-market rent structure to support SSPA’s nonprofit mission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that continued partnership with SSPA provides a valuable community benefit and aligns with City’s goals of supporting youth and cultural programming;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA THAT:
1. The City Council hereby approves the Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement with Spindrift School of Performing Arts for the property at 1050 Crespi Drive, extending the lease term through September 30, 2030, with an option to extend the lease term further through September 30, 2035.
2. The City Council authorizes the City Manager or their designee to execute the Second Amendment and any related documents necessary to implement this action • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 8th day of September 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
4 Packet Pg. 66
Pacifica City Council 4
September 08, 2025
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 4 Packet Pg. 67
SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
This Second Amendment to Lease Agreement ("Second Amendment") is made and entered into as of August __, 2025, between CITY OF PACIFICA, a California municipal corporation (“Landlord”), and SPINDRIFT SCHOOL OF PERFORMING ARTS, a California nonprofit corporation (“Tenant”).
RECITALS
A. Landlord and Tenant are parties to a Lease Agreement dated August 11, 2014, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Lease Agreement dated January 25, 2016 (collectively. “Lease Agreement”), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and Exhibit A-1 respectively, that provides for Tenant to lease a portion of Landlord’s property at 1050 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, California (“Leased Property”).
B. As described in the Lease Agreement, Tenant will use the Leased Property to operate portable buildings for classrooms, studios, and performance space.
C. Tenant has requested that the City agree to amend the Lease Agreement such that the term is extended beyond the current Expiration Date of September 30, 2025.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Landlord and Tenant hereby agree as follows:
1. Recitals/Defined Terms. The foregoing Recitals are incorporated into and material to this Second Amendment. Terms not otherwise defined in this Second Amendment shall have the meaning given to them in the Lease Agreement.
2. Term. The term of this Lease Agreement is hereby extended for a period of five (5) years, such that the extended term commences on October 1, 2025 (“Extension Commencement Date”) and continues until September 30, 2030 (“Extension Term”).
3. Additional Extension Option. During the Extension Term, Tenant shall have one additional extension option ("Additional Extension Option") to extend the term of this Lease Agreement, as amended hereby, for a period of five (5) years ("Additional Option Term") subject to the following conditions: (a) at the time the Additional Extension Option is exercised and also on the commencement date of the Additional Option Period, the Lease Agreement shall be in full force and effect, Tenant shall not be in material default of the Lease Agreement, Tenant shall not have assigned the Lease Agreement or sublet all or any of the Leased Property, and Landlord shall approve in writing, in its sole discretion, of Tenant’s exercise of the Additional Extension Option; and (b) the Additional Extension Option must be exercised by written notice given to Landlord no earlier than one (1) year or later than six (6) months prior to expiration of the Extension Term. If the Additional Extension Option is timely and effectively exercised, the term of the Lease Agreement shall be extended for the Additional Option Term, upon all of the terms and conditions of the Lease Agreement. Prior to the commencement of the Additional Option Term, Tenant and
4.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Attachment A: Second Amendment to SSPA Lease Agreement (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School Landlord shall execute an amendment to this Lease Agreement memorializing the extension of the Lease Agreement for the Additional Option Term.
4. Rent. Effective as of the Extension Commencement Date, Tenant shall pay as Base Rent the annual amount of $7,311.00 and the monthly amount of $609.25. Thereafter, during the Extension Term and the Additional Extension Term (if the Additional Extension Option is timely and property exercised), the annual rent shall increase on the anniversary of each Extension Commencement Date and on the anniversary date of each commencement date during the Additional Option Term (if the Additional Extension Option is timely and property exercised) by an amount equal to two and one-half percent (2.5%) of the prior year’s Base Rent.
5. California Accessibility Disclosure. Unless otherwise stated elsewhere in this Lease Agreement, as amended hereby, as of the date hereof, the Leased Property have not undergone inspection by a Certified Access Specialist (CASp). A CASp can inspect the subject premises and determine whether the subject premises comply with all of the applicable construction-related accessibility standards under state law. Although state law does not require a CASp inspection of the subject premises, the commercial property owner or lessor may not prohibit the lessee or tenant from obtaining a CASp inspection of the subject premises for the occupancy or potential occupancy of the lessee or tenant, if requested by the lessee or tenant. If so requested, the parties shall mutually agree on the arrangements for the time and manner of the CASp inspection.
However, the payment of the fee for the CASp inspection and the cost of making any repairs necessary to correct violations of construction-related accessibility standards within the Leased Property shall be borne solely by Tenant.
6. Brokers. Tenant warrants and represents that it has had no dealings with any broker in connection with the negotiation or execution of this Second Amendment.
7. Ratification. Except as modified by this Second Amendment, the Lease Agreement and all the terms, covenants, conditions and agreements thereof are hereby in all respects ratified, confirmed and approved. Tenant hereby affirms that on the date hereof no breach or default by either party has occurred and that the Lease Agreement, and all of its terms, conditions, covenants, agreements and provisions, except as hereby modified, are in full force and effect with no defenses or offsets thereto.
8. Entire Agreement. This Second Amendment contains the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the matters contained herein. No representations, warranties, covenants or agreements have been made concerning or affecting the subject matter of this Second Amendment, except as contained herein and in the Lease Agreement, as amended hereby. This Second Amendment may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of any waiver, change or modification or discharge is sought.
9. Interpretation. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of the Lease Agreement and the provisions of this Second Amendment, the provisions of this Second Amendment shall control. All paragraph headings of this Second Amendment are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the construction or interpretation hereof.
10. Counterparts: Electronic Signatures. This Second Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but which together shall constitute
4.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Attachment A: Second Amendment to SSPA Lease Agreement (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School one original Lease Agreement. The counterparts of this Second Amendment may be executed by electronic signatures and may be delivered electronically by any party to any other party and the receiving party may rely on the receipt of such document so executed and delivered by electronic means as if the original had been received.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment as of the date first written above.
LANDLORD: TENANT:
CITY OF PACIFICA, a California
municipal corporation
By:______________________/________
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Date:______________________________
SPINDRIFT SCHOOL OF PERFORMING
ARTS, a California non-profit corporation
By:________________________/_____________
Its:______________________________________
Date: __________________________________
Attest:
Name: _______________________
City Clerk
By:_________________________/_________
Its:
Date: ____________________________________
Approved as to form:
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
4.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Attachment A: Second Amendment to SSPA Lease Agreement (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School
4.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Attachment B: First Amendment to Lease Agreement SSPA 1-25-2016 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt -
4.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Attachment B: First Amendment to Lease Agreement SSPA 1-25-2016 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt -
4.c
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
4.c
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Attachment C: Lease Agreement SSPA 8-11-2014 [Revision 1] (6017 : Second Amendment to Lease Agmt - Spindrift School of
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement for Professional Planning and Related Services Between the City of Pacifica and Consulting Firm MIG
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to adopt a resolution approving an Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and MIG, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $15,000 for a total contract amount of $165,000 and, to authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.
STAFF CONTACT:
Elizabeth Brooks, Management Analyst II
650-738-7341
[email protected]
Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director
650-738-7341
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City of Pacifica entered into an agreement with MIG, Inc. on December 20, 2024 (Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services), to provide professional planning and related services through on-site staffing augmentation. MIG has supported the Community Development Department with ongoing planning needs, including development review, counter support, and implementation of City Council priority initiatives.
On May 12, 2025, the City Council approved Resolution No. 35-2025 authorizing the First Amendment to the Agreement (Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services), which increased the contract amount to $150,000 to address continued staffing fluctuations and sustained workload demand. Then on August 25, 2025, the City Council approved the Second Amendment to the Agreement (Attachment C - Second Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services), which extended the term of the agreement from its original end date to December 31, 2025 to ensure uninterrupted on-call planning support for the Department’s workload and priority projects. A separate action is now proposed to increase the agreement’s cost ceiling by $15,000. The additional budget authority is necessary to fund services through the extended term until a permanent Assistant Planner is in place in the Planning Division. The two actions were brought forward separately due to the timing of the agreement extension and the subsequent cost estimate.
The Department’s reliance on MIG’s on-call planning support continues to be essential, particularly in maintaining service levels, meeting state-mandated timelines, and advancing the Housing Element and Housing Element program implementation. At the same time, the Department has successfully filled some vacant positions, which is expected to reduce the need 5 Packet Pg. 98
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
for outside support going forward. To provide a smooth transition and ensure uninterrupted service delivery during this handoff period, staff recommends adoption of the Third Amendment (Attachment D – Third Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services) to increase the contract amount by $15,000 for a total contract amount of $165,000 and to authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may choose not to approve the proposed amendment to the agreement with MIG, or may authorize a reduced funding amount. Denial or authorization of a reduced amount would require the Community Development Department to reprioritize available resources, which could result in delays to planning services, project processing, or other City Council priority initiatives.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
This Amendment supports City Council Strategic Goal 1: Enhance organizational and fiscal stability by preserving critical contract staffing to manage workloads and maintain service delivery. It also advances Goal 3: Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing, and Goal 4: Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding for the proposed Amendment is available within the Community Development Department’s FY 2025-26 adopted budget for consultant services.
ORIGINATED BY:
Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (PDF) Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (PDF) Attachment C - Second Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (PDF) Attachment D - Third Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 99
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MIG, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES ________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Purchasing Policy (Administrative Policy No. 76), the City of Pacifica entered into an agreement with MIG, Inc. for on-call planning consulting and related services under the City Manager’s purchasing authority on December 20, 2024; and
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 35-2025, authorizing the First Amendment to the Agreement to increase the contract’s contract amount to $150,000; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 63-2025, authorizing the Second Amendment to the Agreement to extend the term of the contract to December 31, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City and Consultant now desire to further amend the Agreement to increase the contract amount by $15,000 for a total amount of $165,000; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and material to this Resolution.
2. The City Council hereby approves the Third Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and MIG, Inc., which increases the contract amount by $15,000 for a total contract amount of $165,000. All other terms of the Agreement, as amended, remain in full force and effect.
3. The City Manager is authorized to execute the Third Amendment and any related documents necessary to implement the intent of this Resolution.
4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 8th day of September 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ 5 Packet Pg. 100
Pacifica City Council 4
September 08, 2025
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 5 Packet Pg. 101
5.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment A - MIG Agreement for Consulting Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This First Amendment to Agreement for Consultant Services (“First Amendment”) is made and entered into this 12th of May, 2025, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and MIG, Inc., a California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2024, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into that certain agreement entitled “Agreement for Consultant Services” (“Agreement”) to provide on-call planning services and related services; and
WHEREAS CITY and CONSULTANT now desire to enter into this First Amendment to increase the Cost Ceiling in section 2.1 (“Compensation”) of the Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows:
1. Section 2.1 of the Agreement, "Compensation" is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:
Compensation. Rates charged for Services shall be in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $150,000 ("Cost Ceiling").
2. Agreement in Effect. Except as amended by this First Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
3. Counterpart Signatures. This First Amendment may be signed in multiple counterparts which, when signed by all parties, shall constitute a binding agreement. [signatures on the following page]
5.b
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) First Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: Date:
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
By: Date:
Daniel Iacofano, President and Chief Executive Officer
5.b
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) First Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
5.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) First Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
5.b
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) First Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
5.b
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) First Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
5.b
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment B - First Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Second Amendment to Agreement for Consultant Services (“Second Amendment”) is made and entered into this 23rd of June, 2025, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and MIG, Inc., a California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2024, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into that certain agreement entitled “Agreement for Consultant Services” (“Agreement”) to provide on-call planning services and related services; and
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2025, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a First Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost Ceiling of the Agreement; and WHEREAS CITY and CONSULTANT now desire to enter into this Second Amendment to extend the Term in section 3.1 (“Effective Date”) of the Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows:
1. Section 3.1 of the Agreement, "Effective Date" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until the Services are completed (the 'Term"). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all services by December 31, 2025.
2. Agreement in Effect. Except as amended by this Second Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
3. Counterpart Signatures. This Second Amendment may be signed in multiple counterparts which, when signed by all parties, shall constitute a binding agreement.
[signatures on the following page]
5.c
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment C - Second Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement) Second Amendment to the Agreement for Services: MIG and Pacifica for on-call planning services
OAK #4834-8257-2833 v1
05620-0129
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: Date:
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
By: Date: 6.16.25
Daniel Iacofano, President and Chief Executive Officer
5.c
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment C - Second Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.d
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment D - Third Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.d
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment D - Third Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
5.d
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment D - Third Amendment to MIG Agreement for Consultant Services (6026 : MIG Amendment to Agreement)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Resolution Supporting the Manor Drive Overcrossing Project and Authorizing Submittal of an Application for Measure A and W Highway Program Funding RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the resolution authorizing staff to submit the grant application for the Measure A and W Highway Program Funding, authorizing the City Manager to execute any documents required for the grant application, and committing the required matching funds for the project if the grant is approved.
STAFF CONTACT:
Roland Yip, Deputy Director of Public Works, City Engineer [email protected]
(650) 738-3771
Bryan Bautista, Assistant Civil Engineer
[email protected]
(650) 898-2233
Melissa Tigbao, Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(650) 501-6016
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan and Measure W Congestion Relief Plan provide funding for a multitude of mobility programs in San Mateo County. The San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) administers the proceeds of Measure A and Measure W sales tax revenue.
On July 11, 2025, the TA issued a Call for Projects for the Measure A and W Highway Program funds. The TA requires a governing board resolution supporting the application be provided.
The Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvement Project proposes to widen the existing Highway 1 overcrossing at Manor Drive between Palmetto Avenue and Oceana Boulevard. It will install traffic signals at the Manor Drive/Palmetto Avenue and Manor Drive/Oceana Boulevard intersections. This project will also include, as a required component by Caltrans, the study of an on-ramp for northbound Highway 1 at Milagra Drive using an existing bus pull-out at the Milagra On-ramp. The installation of an on-ramp at Milagra Drive and Oceana could reduce the amount of traffic that will otherwise have to go through the Manor Drive/Oceana Boulevard intersection and therefore reduce congestion at the overcrossing.
In Spring 2022, the City Council held another goal setting meeting to discuss its shared vision 6 Packet Pg. 124
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
for the City and develop a set of goals, projects, and initiatives to be implemented in the following fiscal year. This is to better align the City’s financial resources, through the annual budget development process, with its plan of action for a particular period of time. On March 4, 2023 Council adopted the FY2023-24 City Council Priorities, which identified the Manor Overcrossing Improvement Project as one of the high priority projects and for staff to pursue funding.
As part of the Preliminary Planning Study (PPS), it was required by Caltrans to analyze the traffic conditions and propose traffic congestion mitigations along Oceana Boulevard and in the vicinity of the Manor Drive overcrossing. Mitigations included analysis and feasibility of a roundabout north of the Paloma Avenue/Oceana Boulevard intersection or an on-ramp at the Milagra Drive/Oceana Boulevard intersection. The roundabout is challenging as there is limited right-of-way preventing its construction. Signalization at Oceana Drive/Manor Drive would facilitate improved traffic flow along the Oceana Drive corridor. During the public meetings, the City received some comments from the community that were not in support of the Highway 1 on-ramp at Milagra Drive. These residents stated that since there was an on-ramp just north of the Paloma Avenue/Oceana Boulevard intersection, there was no need for an on-ramp at Milagra Drive. The main objective is to advance the improvements on the Manor Drive Overcrossing to make it safer for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. Therefore, in discussion with the TA and to meet the Caltrans requirement of analyzing traffic congestion mitigations, the Manor Drive Overcrossing and the Milagra Drive on-ramp will be analyzed together, but the Manor Drive Overcrossing could be a standalone project going forward. At the completion of the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase, staff will bring the on-ramp component of the project to Council for consideration based on the results of the analysis.
Staff will submit the grant application for Measure A and Measure W Highway Program funds to advance the Project into the PS&E phase in the amount of $5,500,000. The City will be required to provide a match of $550,000. There are sufficient funds to cover the match from Fund 12 Highway 1 Improvement Fund.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to adopt the resolution. However, not doing so will make the City ineligible to receive Measure A and W grant funds.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
• Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities: Adopting the resolution will make the funds available to progress the Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvement Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adopting the resolution commits the City to provide the required matching funds of $550,000 if the grant is approved. The funds will be provided from Fund 12 Highway 1 Improvement Fund.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
6 Packet Pg. 125
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
ATTACHMENT LIST:
6 Packet Pg. 126
Pacifica City Council 4
September 08, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA SUPPORTING THE HIGHWAY 1 / MANOR DRIVE OVERCROSSING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY’S 2025 MEASURE A AND MEASURE W HIGHWAY
PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS
_____________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, Manor Drive Overcrossing Project does not meet current road, bicycle and pedestrian facility standards as well as structural and seismic standards, and WHEREAS, Manor Overcrossing Improvement Project will widen the overcrossing structure, flare the curb returns and install traffic signals at the intersections and provide for safer bicycle and pedestrian facility and further study a freeway on-ramp for northbound Highway 1 at Milagra Drive and Oceana Boulevard, utilizing an existing bus pull-out ramp that is no longer in use, and
WHEREAS, it will cost $5,500,000 to implement the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates project scope, and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica wishes to sponsor the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates, and
WHEREAS, the City currently seeks $4,950,000 in funding for the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates, and
WHEREAS, the TA issued a Call for Projects for the Measure A and Measure W Highway Program funds on July 11, 2025, and
WHEREAS, the TA requires the Sponsor's governing board to adopt a resolution:
1. Supporting the Project and application for $4,950,000 in TA Measures A and W Highway Program funds for Project;
2. Committing the Sponsor to the begin work within one year of an award and to the completion of the requested scope of work for the Project, including the commitment of matching funds in the amount of $550,000 needed for implementation;
3. Certifying that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources; and
4. If funds are awarded, authorizing the City’s City Manager, or designee, to sign a supplemental agreement and any amendments of the TA’s Primary Grant Agreement with the TA for TA Measures A and W Highway Program funding for the Project and to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution and execute applicable amendments.
WHEREAS, the TA requires applicants for Measure A and/or Measure W funds to submit a resolution in support of the application, in this case for $5,500,000 in Measure A Highway Program funds for Plans, Specifications, and Estimates, and WHEREAS, the TA also requires applicants to submit a resolution committing to the completion of the proposed project scope, in this case Plans, Specifications, and Estimates, and 6 Packet Pg. 127
Pacifica City Council 5
September 08, 2025
WHEREAS, if the TA Board awards Measure A and/or Measure W Highway Program funds to the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates the TA will require that the City of Pacifica commence work on the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates within one year of TA Board action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica,
1. Directs staff to submit an application for TA Measure A and Measure W Highway Program funds for $4,950,000 for the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates for the Manor Drive Overcrossing Project.
2. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee to execute a supplemental agreement and any amendments of the TA’s Primary Grant Agreement with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority [and/or other parties, if applicable] to encumber TA Measures A and W Highway Program funds
3. Commits to completing the Project, including contributing $550,000 of matching funds needed for the requested Project’s scope of work implementation, if the requested TA funds are awarded
4. Certifies that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources; and
5. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution and execute applicable amendments. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 8th day of September 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
CITY OF PACIFICA
By:______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 6 Packet Pg. 128
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Pacifica To Amend Section 5-2.03, “Violations: Abatement”, Section 5-2.05, “Notices of Hearings”, Section 5-2.06, “Hearings: Determinations” and Repealing Section 5-2.07, “Appeals” and Section 5-
2.08, “Removal” Within Chapter 2, "Vehicles Parked For Seventy-Two Hours Or More” of Title 5 Of The Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Parking Exceeding 72 hours (Status: CEQA Exempt)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to waive the second reading and adopt by title only an Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Pacifica To Amend Section 5-2.03, “Violations: Abatement”, Section 5-2.05, “Notices of Hearings”, Section 5-2.06, “Hearings: Determinations” and repealing Section 5-2.07, “Appeals” and Section 5-2.08, “Removal” Within Chapter 2, "Vehicles Parked For Seventy-Two Hours Or More” of Title 5 of The Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Parking Exceeding 72 hours and find the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.
STAFF CONTACT:
Maria Sarasua, Police Chief
[email protected]
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
[email protected]
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
[email protected]
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:
This ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council on July 14, 2025 and is now in order for adoption.
The City of Pacifica Police Department regularly enforces both local and State parking regulations throughout the City. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 22651(k), no vehicle can be parked or left standing upon any highway for seventy-two (72) or more consecutive hours. This State law has been incorporated into the City’s Municipal Code in Chapter 2, “Vehicles Parked for Seventy-Two Hours or More” of Title 5, “Public Welfare, Morals and Conduct.”
The Police Department regularly receives complaints related to vehicles not complying with the 72-hour provision and vehicles moving only a short distance from their previous parking spot.
This has created a challenge with accessible street parking in business districts and residential neighborhoods.
7 Packet Pg. 129
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
The 72-hour parking limit on public roadways is intended to balance the need for accessible street parking with the effective use of public space. Allowing vehicles to remain parked for no more than 72 hours prevents long-term storage of inoperable abandoned vehicles, which can contribute to neighborhood blight and reduce available parking for residents and visitors.
Chapter 2 does not specify a minimum distance that a vehicle must move and therefore, the police department cannot take any enforcement action against vehicles that move only a short distance from their previous parking spot.
ANALYSIS:
To address these ongoing parking issues, staff recommends an amendment to Chapter 2, outlining a minimum distance a vehicle must move to comply with the law.
Amendment to Section 5-2.03:
Staff is recommending the following revisions to Section 5-2.03, with additions in underline:
(a) No person who owns or has the possession, custody, or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle or leave the vehicle standing upon any highway for a period of more than seventy-two (72) consecutive hours. Any vehicle that has been parked or left standing in the same location or parking spot for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours must be moved at least one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) from its current location and may not return to within one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) of the same location or parking spot for at least twenty-four (24) hours after its departure. A vehicle shall be deemed to have been parked or left standing in violation of the seventy- two (72) hour parking limit if:
1. The vehicle has not been moved at least one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) from the location or parking spot where it was originally parked or left standing for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours; or
2. Less than twenty-four (24) hours after the vehicle is moved in accordance with this Section, the vehicle returns to within one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately twotenths (2/10) of a mile) of the same location or parking spot where it was previously parked or left standing for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours. (b) In the event a vehicle is in violation of subsection (a) of this section, any member of the Police Division of the Department of Public Safety authorized by the Director of Public Safety may remove such vehicle from the highway in the manner provided in, and subject to the requirements of, the Vehicle Code of the State and this chapter. (c) This section shall not apply to those vehicles displaying a valid regular permit or provisional permit issued in accordance with the temporary safe parking program pursuant to Section 4-7.1207.
(d) Whenever a member of the Pacifica police department or other authorized city employee removes a vehicle from the street pursuant to this Section and causes it to be stored or impounded as permitted by this chapter and the California Vehicle Code the police chief or their designee shall comply with California Vehicle Code Section 22852, as may be amended or renumbered from time to time, governing post-storage notice and hearing requirements for registered and legal owners of record. 7 Packet Pg. 130
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
(e) The police chief or his or her designee may establish and promulgate written administrative guidelines governing enforcement of the seventy-two (72) hour parking limit and said guidelines shall be made accessible to members of the public. 7 Packet Pg. 131
Pacifica City Council 4
September 08, 2025
Amendment to Section 5-2.05. “Violations: Abatement”:
Chapter 2 of Title 5 currently provides a process for a pre-towing abatement hearing which is not required by California law. The amendment streamlines the process for abating a vehicle parked in excess of 72 hours by replacing the pre-towing abatement hearing process with a requirement that a warning notice be issued at least 72 hours prior to towing that the vehicle will be removed if it is not moved a minimum of 1000 feet.
Amendment to Section 5-2.06. Hearings: Determinations:
In the event a hearing is requested, it shall be conducted as follows with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough:
(a) Conduct of hearings. All hearings shall be held before a Vehicle Hearing Officer, appointed by the Director of Public Safety police chief, who shall hear all pertinent facts and testimony. The Vehicle Hearing Officer shall not be limited by the technical rules of evidence. The owner of the vehicle and any other interested person may appear in person at the hearing or present a sworn written statement in time for consideration at the hearing.
(b) Determinations. Should no one appear at the time and place set for the hearing before the Vehicle Hearing Officer, either in person or writing, it shall be conclusively presumed that such vehicle is in violation of the provisions of Section 5-2.03 of this chapter.
(c) At the conclusion of the hearing, the Vehicle Hearing Officer may find that a vehicle is in violation of said Section 5-2.03, and order the same removed from the highway and disposed of as provided in Section 5-2.08 of this chapter,and determine the administrative costs and the costs of removal to be charged. The order shall include a description of the vehicle and the identification number and license number of the vehicle, if applicable. The Vehicle Hearing Officer may impose such conditions and take such other action as he deems appropriate under the circumstances to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Should the Vehicle Hearing Officer find that the vehicle is not in violation of said Section 5-2.03, the proceedings shall cease. If any interested person makes a written presentation to the Vehicle Hearing Officer but does not appear, such person shall be notified in writing of the decision.
Repeal of Sections 5-2.07, “Appeals” and 5-2.08, “Removal”:
To streamline the hearing process, Staff is also recommending that the decision of the Vehicle Hearing Officer be final. Staff therefore recommends that Section 5-2.07, which allows for an appeal of any decision of the Vehicle Hearing Officer to the Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission be repealed. Similarly, the repeal of Section 5-2.08 “Removal” is also recommended. To better align with California Vehicle Code requirements and the streamlined hearing process, the repeal of Section 5-2.08 is also recommended.
The proposed Ordinance, if adopted, would become effective within 30 days of adoption. 7 Packet Pg. 132
Pacifica City Council 5
September 08, 2025
CEQA:
Introduction of the proposed ordinance and adoption of the proposed resolution and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this resolution may have a significant effect on the environment.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may wish to consider the following alternatives:
1. Choose not to adopt the proposed amendments to Section 5-2.03 and 5-2.05; or
2. Provide different direction to staff.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
“Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.” ORIGINATED BY:
Police Department
City Attorney
FISCAL IMPACT:
There may be some indirect administrative costs relating to increased enforcement of Section 5-
2.03. However, Section 5-2.04 authorizes the Council to determine and fix an amount to be assessed as administrative costs, excluding the actual cost of the removal of any vehicle pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
ORIGINATED BY:
Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:
7 Packet Pg. 133
Pacifica City Council 6
September 08, 2025
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 5995)
ORDINANCE NO. ___________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AMENDING SECTION 5-2.03, “VIOLATIONS: ABATEMENT”, SECTION 5-2.05, “NOTICES OF HEARING”, SECTION 5-2.06, “HEARINGS: DETERMINATIONS” AND REPEALING SECTION 5-2.07, “APPEALS” AND SECTION 5-2.08, “REMOVAL” OF CHAPTER 2, “VEHICLES PARKED FOR SEVENTY-TWO HOURS OR MORE” OF TITLE 5 OF THE PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO PARKING EXCEEDING 72 HOURS WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has received an increasing number of complaints related to parking of vehicles for an extended amount of time on City streets, particularly in residential neighborhoods, where parking can be challenging; and WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code section 22507 authorizes the City to adopt ordinances or resolutions, to prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles; and
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Section 22651(k) authorizes cities to remove a vehicle located within its jurisdiction if a vehicle is parked or left standing for 72 or more consecutive hours in violation of a local ordinance authorizing removal; and WHEREAS, staff is now recommending that the City Council consider proposed amendments to the Municipal Code to provide clarity on how far a vehicle needs to move to be considered in compliance with the law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at the public meeting of the City Council identified herein, including any supporting reports by City Staff, and any information provided during public meetings; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pacifica does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find that the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Amendment. Section 5-2.03, “Violations: Abatement”, Section 5-2.05, “Notices of Hearings” and Section 5-2.06, “Hearings: Determinations” of Chapter 2, “Vehicles Parked for Seventy-Two Hours or More” within Title 5 of the Pacifica Municipal Code are hereby amended by repealing Section 5-2.03, Section 5-2.05 and Section 5-2.06 in their entirety and replacing those Sections to read as follows:
“Sec. 5-2.03. - Violations: Abatement.
(a) No person who owns or has the possession, custody, or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle or leave the vehicle standing upon any highway for a period of more than seventytwo (72) consecutive hours. Any vehicle that has been parked or left standing in the same location or parking spot for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours must be moved at least one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) from its current location and may not return to within one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) of 7 Packet Pg. 134
Pacifica City Council 7
September 08, 2025
the same location or parking spot for at least twenty-four (24) hours after its departure. A vehicle shall be deemed to have been parked or left standing in violation of the seventy-two (72) hour parking limit if:
1. The vehicle has not been moved at least one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) from the location or parking spot where it was originally parked or left standing for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours; or
2. Less than twenty-four (24) hours after the vehicle is moved in accordance with this Section, the vehicle returns to within one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) of the same location or parking spot where it was previously parked or left standing for seventy-two (72) consecutive hours.
(b) In the event a vehicle is in violation of subsection (a) of this section, any member of the Police Division of the Department of Public Safety authorized by the Director of Public Safety may remove such vehicle from the highway in the manner provided in, and subject to the requirements of, the Vehicle Code of the State and this chapter. (c) This section shall not apply to those vehicles displaying a valid regular permit or provisional permit issued in accordance with the temporary safe parking program pursuant to Section 4-
7.1207.
(d) Whenever a member of the Pacifica police department or other authorized city employee removes a vehicle from the street pursuant to this Section and causes it to be stored or impounded as permitted by this chapter and the California Vehicle Code the police chief or their designee shall comply with California Vehicle Code Section 22852, as may be amended or renumbered from time to time, governing post-storage notice and hearing requirements for registered and legal owners of record.
(e). The police chief or his or her designee may establish and promulgate written administrative guidelines governing enforcement of the seventy-two (72) hour parking limit and said guidelines shall be made accessible to members of the public.”
“Sec. 5-2.05. - Notices of Removal.
Prior to removing any vehicle from the street for violation of Section 5-2.03 of this chapter, a warning notice advising that the vehicle will be removed or towed for violation of Section 5-2.03 of this chapter shall be conspicuously affixed to the vehicle providing notice that if the vehicle is not moved at least 1,000 feet (approximately two-tenths of a mile) from its current location within the next 72 hours it will be removed. The notice shall also advise that the vehicle shall not be returned to within one thousand (1,000) feet (approximately two-tenths (2/10) of a mile) of its current location or parking spot for at least 24 hours after departure and, if it does return, it will be subject to immediate removal.”
“Sec. 5-2.06. Hearings: Determinations
In the event a hearing is requested, it shall be conducted as follows:
(a) Conduct of hearings. All hearings shall be held before a Vehicle Hearing Officer, appointed by the police chief, who shall hear all pertinent facts and testimony. The Vehicle Hearing Officer shall not be limited by the technical rules of evidence. The owner of the vehicle and any other interested person may appear in person at the hearing or present a sworn written statement in time for consideration at the hearing.
7 Packet Pg. 135
Pacifica City Council 8
September 08, 2025
(b) Determinations. Should no one appear at the time and place set for the hearing before the Vehicle Hearing Officer, either in person or writing, it shall be conclusively presumed that such vehicle is in violation of the provisions of Section 5-2.03 of this chapter. (c) At the conclusion of the hearing, the Vehicle Hearing Officer may find that a vehicle is in violation of said Section 5-2.03 and issue an order the violation and determine the administrative costs and the costs of removal to be charged. The order shall include a description of the vehicle and the identification number and license number of the vehicle, if applicable. The Vehicle Hearing Officer may impose such conditions and take such other action as he deems appropriate under the circumstances to carry out the purposes of this chapter.
Should the Vehicle Hearing Officer find that the vehicle is not in violation of said Section 5-2.03, the proceedings shall cease. If any interested person makes a written presentation to the Vehicle Hearing Officer but does not appear, such person shall be notified in writing of the decision.
Section 3. Repeal. Sections 5-2.07, “Appeals” and 5-2.08, “Removal” within Chapter 2 of Title 5 are repealed in their entirety.
All other Sections within Chapter 2 of Title 5 not otherwise amended or repealed herein shall remain unchanged.
Section 4. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council hereby finds that the action to adopt this Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
Section 6. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, and cause the same to be published in accordance with State law.
Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall go into effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage and adoption.
7 Packet Pg. 136
Pacifica City Council 9
September 08, 2025
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 11th day of August, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 7 Packet Pg. 137
Pacifica City Council 10 September 08, 2025
* * * * *
(ID # 5995) at 9/8/2025 5:00 PM City Council Regular Meeting 7 Packet Pg. 138
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
9/8/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Consideration of a Resolution establishing the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and approving its Fiscal Year 2025–2026 Work Plan
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council establishing the Climate Action and Resilience Committee.
2. Approve the Climate Action and Resilience Committee Work Plan for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026.
STAFF CONTACT
Elizabeth Brooks, Management Analyst II
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Brittany Hernandez, Program Manager
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Brianne Harkousha, Community Development Deputy Director [email protected] <mailto: [email protected]>
BACKGROUND
Pacifica adopted its first Climate Action Plan in July 2014, establishing a framework to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across key sectors, including energy, transportation, solid waste, and water. In recognition of evolving climate science, policy developments, and best practices, the City Council committed to updating the 2014 Plan and, in 2023, established the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) Task Force through Resolution No. 50-20231. The Task Force was created as a limited-term advisory body charged with developing and drafting an updated climate plan (“Draft Plan”), initially titled the CAAP. Members of the CAAP Task Force were appointed on July 10, 2023, and began convening in September 2023. 1 <https://www.cityofpacifica.org/home/showpublisheddocument/14914/638204333996670000> 8 Packet Pg. 139
Pacifica City Council 2
September 08, 2025
In accordance with its charter, the Task Force was responsible for defining the scope of the updated Draft Plan; analyzing the City’s GHG inventory and developing a forecast of future emissions; establishing measurable targets and actionable goals for emissions reduction and climate adaptation; formulating strategies and implementation pathways to meet those goals; and preparing a complete Draft Plan with recommended reporting requirements for City Council consideration and adoption.
Since 2023, the Task Force has been conducting extensive technical analysis and community engagement to shape the Draft Plan. To advance its work, the Task Force met monthly as a public body and formed focused subcommittees to address specific elements of the Draft Plan.
These subcommittees developed implementation strategies informed by best practices, state regulations, scientific research, and Pacifica’s unique environmental and geographic context.
Community engagement included a citywide survey, targeted focus groups, and interactive outreach at local events. These efforts ensured the Draft Plan reflected the diverse perspectives and environmental concerns of Pacifica residents. Throughout the process, the Task Force received logistical and technical support from City staff and consultants, which fortified the Draft Plan’s structure, data, and validity as a technically sound and community-informed plan. The resulting Draft Plan was both ambitious and practicable, reflecting regional standards, aligning with current state policies, and incorporating community input.
With the Draft Plan completed, the City Council began its formal review and provided direction to refine and finalize the document for adoption. The Task Force held a joint study session with the City Council on February 24, 2025, during which Councilmembers provided detailed feedback to strengthen the Draft Plan’s goals and strategies. At its April 14, 2025, meeting, during discussion of the City Council 2023-2030 Strategic Plan, the City Council directed that a standing committee be established to support implementation of the climate plan and requested that staff return to Council with recommendations regarding the committee’s scope, charter, and work plan. Additional direction was provided at the May 27, 2025, Council meeting, when the Task Force presented the Draft Plan for consideration and adoption. At that meeting, Council supported a Task Force recommendation to modify the Draft Plan’s name to the Climate Action and Resilience Plan (CARP). On July 14, 2025, when the Task Force brought back a modified draft, the City Council adopted the CARP through Resolution No. 64-20252. The adopted CARP represents the culmination of nearly two years of intensive research, collaboration, and community dialogue.
2 <https://www.cityofpacifica.org/home/showpublisheddocument/20713/638881947002270000> 8 Packet Pg. 140
Pacifica City Council 3
September 08, 2025
For a detailed discussion of the background and work of the Task Force, see the following:
• Joint Study Session of City Council and Task Force meeting agenda, February 24, 2025 <https://pacificacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1702> • City Council meeting minutes, April 14, 2025 (direction provided during discussion of the City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan)
<https://pacificacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=2483&Inline=True >
• City Council meeting agenda, May 27, 2025
<https://pacificacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1680> • City Council meeting agenda, July 14, 2025
<https://pacificacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1683>
DISCUSSION
As noted above, the City Council directed that the CAAP Task Force transition to a standing committee focused on implementation of the CARP. In collaboration with the Task Force, staff developed a proposed charter and initial work plan for this new body, referred to throughout as the Climate Action and Resilience Committee (CARC).
The Committee will be supported by the Community Development Department to provide continuity with the CARP’s development, but its advisory role will address CARP implementation across City departments and functions, accounting for the interdepartmental and programmatic breadth of CARP implementation. Its guidance will inform City Council decisions across the full range of related departmental activities.
SCOPE AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
The City Manager recommends the following provisions for the CARC. These provisions are included in the proposed committee charter, attached as Exhibit A of the Resolution. Except as modified by these provisions, the Committee shall be governed by the general requirements for committees and commissions in Chapter 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code3 and the City of Pacifica Commission and Committee Handbook.
These materials are presented below for the Council’s consideration.
1. Purpose
Under the direction of the Pacifica City Council and as administered by City staff, the CARC shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council. Its purpose is to provide guidance and recommendations on the implementation of the CARP for consideration in the City Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting process. 3 <https://library.municode.com/ca/pacifica/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT2AD_CH2COCO> 8 Packet Pg. 141
Pacifica City Council 4
September 08, 2025
2. Duties
The Committee’s duties are designed to guide its advisory role to the City Council, helping inform CARP implementation decisions through consultation with the community and other stakeholders to guide its recommendations. During its annual goal-setting process, City Council may determine which CARP action items to pursue in the upcoming year, along with any ongoing actions.
In carrying out its responsibilities below, the Committee shall engage the Pacifica community by fostering inclusive participation, promoting transparency, and incorporating community perspectives into its recommendations to the City Council. • Advise the City Council on issues pertaining to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, and related areas identified in the CARP.
• Provide recommendations to support City efforts to implement the goals and actions of the CARP, including identifying potential funding sources. • Prepare and present to the City Council each May4, an annual work plan for the CARC for Council consideration, aligning priorities with the General Plan, Local Coastal Land Use Plan, and other guiding policy documents, along with a report on work plan progress, including greenhouse gas emissions reduction data, if available.
• If directed by Council as part of the annual work plan, prepare and submit to the City Council each February recommendations on CARP implementation actions for consideration during the Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting in March. • Prepare a full update of the CARP beginning in year four of the five-year plan, ensuring continuity of climate action in Pacifica.
3. Staff Support and Responsibilities
Staff liaison(s) shall provide administrative and technical support to the Committee, including preparing agendas, maintaining records, and providing subject matter expertise necessary for the Committee’s deliberations. Staff shall collaborate with the Committee to facilitate its advisory role to the City Council.
The Committee’s role is advisory only and does not include directing the work of staff.
Day-to-day operations and allocation of staff resources remain under the authority of the City Manager. Requests for significant staff time or new initiatives must be coordinated through the City Manager and limited to Council-approved activities.
4. Size and Representation
The Committee shall be appointed by Council and be comprised of seven (7) voting members, including up to two (2) youth members between the ages of 14-25. 4 The months identified in the “Duties” section may change as identified by the Council agenda. 8 Packet Pg. 142
Pacifica City Council 5
September 08, 2025
The Membership Eligibility shall be as described in Pacifica Municipal Code 2-2.103 and Members may be selected to represent a broad cross-section of the community.
Members should bring knowledge, experience, or lived perspective related to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, or related areas, or demonstrated commitment to these areas.
The City Manager or a designee shall serve as staff liaison to the Committee. One Councilmember shall be appointed by the City Council as Committee Liaison, and one Councilmember may be designated as the Alternate Liaison.
5. Length of Service
Terms for Committee members shall be four years. In the event Council were interested in having shortened terms for some members, such as youth members, the Council would need to amend the municipal code as currently the code requires that all terms be four years. (See Pacifica Municipal Code section 2-2.105)
6. Meetings
The Committee shall determine the date/time that the Committee will convene for its regular meeting as a body which shall not be less than monthly and all meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public, subject to the Brown Act.
7. Governance
The Committee shall abide by the rules set out in the Commission and Committee Handbook and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code as amended by the City Council from time to time.
The Committee shall select one of its members to act as Chair and another to act as Vice Chair on an annual cycle in January. The Committee shall exist until disbanded by action of the City Council.
All other provisions regarding member removal, quorum, and other governance matters shall follow Chapter 2 of Title 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code.
WORK PLAN
The formation of the CARC is a critical first step toward successful implementation of the CARP.
To provide structure for the Committee’s early work, staff collaborated with the Task Force to develop a proposed work plan for Council consideration.
During the first six months, the Committee will focus on a targeted set of priority actions drawn primarily from the CARP, supplemented by foundational items needed to establish the Committee and fulfill duties required by its charter. These actions were selected based on feasibility, their potential to drive meaningful progress, and alignment with other City initiatives (e.g., the General Plan, Sharp Park Specific Plan, Local Coastal Land Use Plan). The priority actions are summarized below, with each entry providing a description of the action and any associated subtasks. Full details are available in the adopted Plan.
Following this initial six-month period, the Committee’s subsequent actions will be guided by City Council direction during goal setting and will be detailed in the annual work plan the Committee brings forward each May for Council consideration and adoption.
PRIORITY ACTIONS
8 Packet Pg. 143
Pacifica City Council 6
September 08, 2025
1. Receive training and determine skill sets and interest areas of new members.
Description: The Committee will receive an orientation on the CARP, the Committee’s charter, the Commission and Committee Handbook and other similar training.
2. Set up tools for tracking progress.
Description: To support annual reporting to City Council and ensure continuity in CARP implementation, the Committee will create a structure to track completed actions and monitor ongoing initiatives.
3. Develop a calendar for ongoing and regular check-ins with City departments, and city committees / commissions as appropriate, to facilitate CARP-related idea and resource sharing with City staff, foster connection, and support alignment with Council goals. (CARP C1.3)
Description: The Committee will assign members to serve as liaisons with City departments and committees/commissions, as appropriate. These liaisons will share climate action information and resources gathered through regional networks (e.g., RICAPS, LERN) as well as bring relevant updates from their check-ins with departments/committees back to the Committee.
Subtasks:
• Assign Committee members to serve as liaisons for specific departments/committees • Hold in-person introductory meetings with each department head, staff, and present to applicable committee/commission members, as appropriate; gather info on how the Committee can support staff
• Establish a schedule of regular check-ins with City departments and committees/commissions
• Ensure information exchanged is consistent with Council direction and the adopted CARC work plan
4. Attend monthly LERN and RICAPS meetings, and ICLEI meetings as feasible; receive training on ICLEI’s ClearPath 2.0 platform5.
Description: The Committee will elect members to serve as its liaisons to LERN, RICAPS, and, as feasible, ICLEI. Each liaison will be responsible for attending that group’s virtual or local meetings and reporting back to the Committee. In addition, at least two members will complete ICLEI’s ClearPath 2.0 training to support evaluation of the City’s climate actions.
All activities are virtual or local and do not require travel.
Subtasks:
• Elect a Committee liaison for each group, responsible for sharing updates with the Committee and staff
• Committee members will attend LERN and RICAPS meetings and keep track of resources and funding opportunities
• Two Committee members will receive training on ClearPath 2.0, a tool to evaluate efficacy of current and planned climate actions
5 LERN - Local Energy Resource Network, administered by the San Mateo County Office of Sustainability, providing training and support on local energy initiatives; RICAPS - Regional Integrated Climate and Planning Support Program, led by San Mateo County Office of Sustainability, offering guidance for regional climate planning; ICLEI - International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, run by ICLEI USA as part of a global network of local governments on sustainability;
ClearPath 2.0 - ICLEI’s platform for tracking local climate and sustainability actions. 8 Packet Pg. 144
Pacifica City Council 7
September 08, 2025
5. Create and maintain a web page that provides resources for home energy efficiency and electrification, especially programs offered by Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE), by December 2025. (CARP C3.1)
Description: With the input of Committee members, City staff will maintain a webpage of resources for residents, following regional best practices.
Subtasks:
• Committee members will research regional resource webpages • Committee members will work with Staff to design and populate a dedicated webpage for Pacifica residents
• Staff will maintain webpage and update as needed
6. Prepare recommendations for the February report to City Council in advance of Strategic Goal Setting.
Description: The Committee will gather information, insights, and input from staff, stakeholders, and relevant CARP resources to develop recommendations for CARP implementation priorities to be considered by the City Council during its annual Strategic Goal Setting process in March.
Subtasks:
• Review the current CARP work plan, recent progress reports, and ongoing initiatives • Consult relevant City policy documents, including the General Plan, Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP), Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and other guiding policies, to ensure recommendations align with City objectives
• Consult with staff liaison(s) and relevant City departments to understand departmental priorities, opportunities, and constraints • Gather input from stakeholders and community partners, using the stakeholder list as a reference, to inform recommendations
• Draft recommendations outlining prioritized implementation actions, lead department or entity, potential funding opportunities, and other actionable items • Submit recommendations to the City Council in February for consideration during the March Strategic Goal Setting
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The City Council could opt not to establish the Climate Action and Resilience Committee or establish a standing committee with reduced scope or a different membership structure. This path forward would mean that responsibility for CARP-related actions would remain with individual City departments, and guidance to the Council would come from existing committees, commissions, or ad hoc task forces as directed. This approach could limit coordinated planning, stakeholder engagement, and the ability to track progress and provide consistent recommendations to the Council.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN
The formation and work of the Committee advances the following goals:
• Goal #4: Pursue Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation, Action A: Adopt and begin implementation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. • Goal #5: Broaden public communications and collaboration, Action A: Creatively harness community expertise, advocates, and volunteers to advance City priorities. 8 Packet Pg. 145
Pacifica City Council 8
September 08, 2025
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with forming the Climate Action and Resilience Committee or approving its fiscal year 2025-2026 work plan. However, implementation of the CARP will require staffing support. The adopted fiscal year 2025-2026 budget includes $50,000 for a part-time Program Manager and $35,000 for a full-time CivicSpark Fellow to support CARP implementation efforts. The Community Development Department will also continue allocating a portion of an existing full-time employee to oversee implementation and coordinate Committee activities.
While no specific implementation actions require immediate funding, some may carry costs in the future, including continuing the $1,000 annual membership with ICLEI. Staff will continue to pursue grants and other external funding opportunities to support CARP implementation and will prioritize these sources as the primary strategy for funding specific actions.
ORIGINATED BY:
Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
8 Packet Pg. 146
Pacifica City Council 9
September 08, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. XX-2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA
ESTABLISHING THE CLIMATE ACTION AND RESILIENCE COMMITTEE ________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica recognizes that climate change poses significant environmental, economic, and public health risks to the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City’s first Climate Action Plan in 2014; and WHEREAS, in 2023 the City Council formed the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Task Force to update the City’s climate action plan; and WHEREAS, informed by the work of the Task Force and its extensive community engagement, the City Council adopted the Climate Action and Resilience Plan (“CARP”) via Resolution No. 64-2025 on July 14, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish a standing Climate Action and Resilience Committee (CARC) to serve as an advisory body to the City Council on CARP implementation and to provide guidance on CARP-related matters across City departments and functions; and
WHEREAS, the Climate Action and Resilience Committee shall serve under the direction of the City Council, be supported by City staff, and its membership, purpose, duties, and other provisions shall be as described in Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby authorize the creation of the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and shall appoint its members in accordance with the membership provisions set forth in Exhibit A. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 8th day of September 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 8 Packet Pg. 147
Pacifica City Council 10 September 08, 2025
Exhibit A
Climate Action and Resilience Committee Charter
1. Purpose
Under the direction of the Pacifica City Council and as administered by City staff, the CARC shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council. Its purpose is to provide guidance and recommendations on the implementation of the CARP for consideration in the City Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting process.
2. Duties
The Committee’s duties are designed to guide its advisory role to the City Council, helping inform CARP implementation decisions through consultation with the community and other stakeholders to guide its recommendations. During its annual goal-setting process, City Council may determine which CARP action items to pursue in the upcoming year, along with any ongoing actions.
In carrying out its responsibilities below, the Committee shall engage the Pacifica community by fostering inclusive participation, promoting transparency, and incorporating community perspectives into its recommendations to the City Council. • Advise the City Council on issues pertaining to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, and related areas identified in the CARP.
• Provide recommendations to support City efforts to implement the goals and actions of the CARP, including identifying potential funding sources. • Prepare and present to the City Council each May4, an annual work plan for the CARC for Council consideration, aligning priorities with the General Plan, Local Coastal Land Use Plan, and other guiding policy documents, along with a report on work plan progress, including greenhouse gas emissions reduction data, if available.
• If directed by Council as part of the annual work plan, prepare and submit to the City Council each February recommendations on CARP implementation actions for consideration during the Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting in March. • Prepare a full update of the CARP beginning in year four of the five-year plan, ensuring continuity of climate action in Pacifica.
3. Staff Support and Responsibilities
Staff liaison(s) shall provide administrative and technical support to the Committee, including preparing agendas, maintaining records, and providing subject matter expertise necessary for the Committee’s deliberations. Staff shall collaborate with the Committee to facilitate its advisory role to the City Council. 4 The months identified in the “Duties” section may change as identified by the Council agenda. 8 Packet Pg. 148
Pacifica City Council 11 September 08, 2025
The Committee’s role is advisory only and does not include directing the work of staff.
Day-to-day operations and allocation of staff resources remain under the authority of the City Manager. Requests for significant staff time or new initiatives must be coordinated through the City Manager and limited to Council-approved activities.
4. Size and Representation
The Committee shall be appointed by Council and be comprised of seven (7) voting members, including up to two (2) youth members between the ages of 14-25.
The Membership Eligibility shall be as described in Pacifica Municipal Code 2-2.103 and Members may be selected to represent a broad cross-section of the community.
Members should bring knowledge, experience, or lived perspective related to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, or related areas, or demonstrated commitment to these areas.
The City Manager or a designee shall serve as staff liaison to the Committee. One Councilmember shall be appointed by the City Council as Committee Liaison, and one Councilmember may be designated as the Alternate Liaison.
5. Length of Service
Terms for Committee members shall be four years. In the event Council were interested in having shortened terms for some members, such as youth members, the Council would need to amend the municipal code as currently the code requires that all terms be four years. (See Pacifica Municipal Code section 2-2.105)
6. Meetings
The Committee shall determine the date/time that the Committee will convene for its regular meeting as a body which shall not be less than monthly and all meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public, subject to the Brown Act.
7. Governance
The Committee shall abide by the rules set out in the Commission and Committee Handbook and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code as amended by the City Council from time to time.
The Committee shall select one of its members to act as Chair and another to act as Vice Chair on an annual cycle in January. The Committee shall exist until disbanded by action of the City Council.
All other provisions regarding member removal, quorum, and other governance matters shall follow Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code.
8 Packet Pg. 149