Agenda packet — San Carlos City Council, December 12, 2022

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
December 12, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson at City Hall and virtually via Zoom. Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Masks are no longer required, but are still highly recommended in accordance with California Dept of Health Guidelines. To maintain public health and safety, please do not attend in person if you are experiencing symptoms associated with COVID19.

Provide Public Comment. To address the City Council on any item on the posted agenda, fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the back of the Council Chambers and submit it to the City Clerk; or, you may raise your hand when the Mayor calls for public comments.

Remote Participation :

Observe via:
Zoom. https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88256140939; or call 16699009128 and enter the Meeting ID #: 882 5614 0939
Meeting Webportal . www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda Local TV. Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Uverse Channel 99 Provide Public Comment. If you plan to make a public comment on any item on the posted agenda, please observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), and during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address, use the “raise hand” feature. If joining Zoom by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”.

Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.

MAYOR: Sara McDowell
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Laura ParmerLohan, Adam Rak

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

4. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Communications and Announcements are brief items from members of the City Council regarding upcoming events in the community and correspondence that they have received. They are informational in nature and no action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

Each speaker is limited to two minutes. If there are more than five individuals wishing to speak during public comment, the Mayor may choose to allow the first five speakers to speak during this time, and the balance of the Public Comment speakers will be called upon at the end of the Council Meeting.

If the item you are speaking on is not listed on the agenda, please be advised that the City Council may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed as allowed under the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54954.2). The City Council's general policy is to refer items to staff for attention, or have a matter placed on a future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the November 14, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. c. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. d. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter Urging State Legislators to Amend Assembly Bill (“AB”) 2449.

7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes Cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election Held on November 8, 2022 and Declaring the Results.

8. REORGANIZATION
a. Presentation to Retiring Councilmember Laura ParmerLohan. b. Seat Newly Elected City Councilmembers.
c. Call for Nominations for New Mayor and Vice Mayor.

9. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

10. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI, if you need special assistance or translation services to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 8024222 or via email at [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

1 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
December 12, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson at City Hall and virtually via Zoom. Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Remote Participation :

Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.

MAYOR: Sara McDowell
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Laura ParmerLohan, Adam Rak

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

8. REORGANIZATION
a. Presentation to Retiring Councilmember Laura ParmerLohan. b. Seat Newly Elected City Councilmembers.
c. Call for Nominations for New Mayor and Vice Mayor.

9. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

10. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

2 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
December 12, 2022 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson at City Hall and virtually via Zoom. Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Remote Participation :

Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.

MAYOR: Sara McDowell
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Laura ParmerLohan, Adam Rak

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

8. REORGANIZATION
a. Presentation to Retiring Councilmember Laura ParmerLohan. b. Seat Newly Elected City Councilmembers.
c. Call for Nominations for New Mayor and Vice Mayor.

9. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

10. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

3 San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Regular Meeting
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
November 14, 2022 7:00 PM

MINUTES

ROLL CALL

City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember
John Dugan, Councilmember (Remote - Pursuant to AB361)
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor (Remote – Pursuant to AB361)

Staff Present: Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager
Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner Consultant
Gareth Harris, Fire Marshall
Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Cristian Padilla, Economic Development Coordinator
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Al Savay, Community Development Director

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mayor McDowell called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor McDowell.

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

None.

4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Declaring November 13 – 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week.

Mayor McDowell recognized United Against Hate (“UAH”) Week and highlighted UAH themed events in San Carlos for the community to participate in.

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 4

5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Parmer-Lohan provided an update from a recent Local Policy Makers Group meeting she attended.

Mayor McDowell announced that she and Vice Mayor Rak presented City Coins to former San Carlos Mayor Don Eaton and his wife, Glenna, to recognize their service in the community as they move out of San Carlos.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT

Alison and Bob Lyon, residents, expressed concern regarding speeding and accidents on San Carlos Avenue.

Cynthia Oliva, resident, spoke about recent accidents that occurred in front of her property.

Michael Oliva, resident, spoke about the damages to his vehicles that were sustained from the accidents Cynthia Oliva referenced.

Tim Ryan, resident, expressed a desire for the City to begin enforcing the state law against parking cars on sidewalks.

Mayor McDowell directed staff to follow-up on all the public comments received.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Due to his employment at Burke, Williams & Sorensen, City Attorney Greg Rubens recused himself from Item 6d (On-Call Legal Services Agreement) and stepped out of the Council Chambers for the Consent Calendar.

MOTION: Adopt City Council Consent Calendar Items ‘a’ – ‘h’; and Item ‘i’ Ordinance No. 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.

MOVER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
SECONDER: Ron Collins
AYES:

RESULT:

Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
Passed 5 – 0

a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the October 10, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. d. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Professional Services for On -Call Legal Services with Burke, Williams & Sorensen,

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 5

LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, Each for an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 and a Term of Two Years with the Option to Extend the Term by One Year. Resolution 2022- 112
e. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

Resolution 2022-113
f. Deny Claim of Marisa Huber.
g. Approve the November 2022 Strategic Work Plan Update. h. Authorize Cancellation of the December 26, 2022 City Council Meeting. i. Adopt Ordinance 1591 Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 8.20 - Explosives, Amending its Title, Adding Provisions for Regulation, Fines and Penalties for Possession and Use of Fireworks and Increasing the Penalties for Explosives.

8. PUBLIC HEARING

a. Consideration of the Following Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046- 051-080): (1) Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting P rogram; (2) Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial to Planned Development; and (3) Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property LLC.

Principal Planner Consultant Lisa Costa Sanders presented on the 405 Industrial Road Project and spoke on the proposed actions for Council consideration.

Council provided the following disclosures and noted that they would not impact their decision this evening:

- Mayor McDowell met with the Developer and the Greater East San Carlos (“GESC”) leadership
- Vice Mayor Rak met with the GESC leadership and the Developer’s attorney - Councilmember Dugan met with the Developer years ago when he was serving as a Commissioner on the Planning and Transportation Commission.

Consultant Jane Vaughan, with Applicant Menlo Equities , presented their building’s design..

Ms. Vaughan, City Manager Jeff Maltbie, Ms. Costa Sanders, Fire Marshall Gareth Harris, Transportation Consultant Ruben Rodriguez and Public Works Director Steven Machida responded to Council questions.

Public Comment
John Medina, with Sprinkler Fitters Local 483, spoke in support of the project.

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 6

Jeff Maley expressed concerns with the Project.

Paul Magginetti, resident and GESC Boardmember, opposed the Project.

Anthony Urbina, with the Sheet Metal Workers Union Local 104 and the San Mateo County Building Trades Council, spoke in support of the Project.

Dimitri Vandellos, resident and GESC Neighborhood President, opposed the Project.

Jennifer Rosse, resident, spoke in opposition to the Project.

Scot opposed the Project.

Anna Axiaq, resident, opposed the Project.

Debbie Baldocchi, resident, spoke against the Project.

Pattymm, resident, opposed the Project.

Alison Lyon, resident, opposed the Project.

Tim Hillborn, resident, opposed the Project.

Tim Ryan, resident, spoke in support of the Project.

Harrison Race, resident, spoke in support of the Project.

Rosario Fernandez, resident, spoke in support of the Project.

Eduardo Polanco- Leiva, resident a member of the NorCal Carpenter Association, spoke in support of the Project.

Bryan Shields, representing Carpenters Local 217, spoke in support of the P roject.

Sam Herzberg, resident and member of the GESC Neighborhood, spoke in opposition to the Project.

Army M organ, with O perating Engineers Local 3, spoke in support of the P roject.

Michael Ochoa, with Carpenters Local 217, spoke in support of the P roject.

MOTION: Approve to Close the Public Hearing.

MOVER: Ron Collins
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES:

RESULT:

Rak, Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
Motion Passed 5 – 0

The Council recessed at 9:00 PM and reconvened the meeting at 9:07 PM.

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 7

Ms. Costa Sanders and Transportation Consultant Ruben Rodriguez responded to Council’s additional questions.

Council provided the following feedback:

- designate community benefit funds from the Project towards improvements requested by the GESC Neighborhood; directly engage with GESC residents to determine their top priorities
- continue to work with Caltrans to obtain an encroachment permit allowing for a pedestrian/bicycle pathway
- agree with limiting life science tenants to Bio Safety Levels 1 and 2 only - post more documentation in a timely manner on projects’ webpage, including plans, studies, and CEQA reports
- re-review the dirt hauling map to ensure no left turns are allowed by trucks - remove the unprotected left hand turn component from the Project; agendize for further discussion and consideration at a future meeting

MOTION: Adopt Resolution 2022 -114 Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 405 Industrial Road Project.

MOVER: Ron Collins
SECONDER:

AYES:

NAYS:

RESULT:

John Dugan
Parmer-Lohan, Dugan, Collins, McDowell
Rak
Motion Passed 4 - 1

MOTION: Introduce Ordinance 1592 Approving the 405 Industrial Road Project Planned Development Plan and Related Zoning Map Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Landmark Commercial (LC) to Planned Development (PD) at 405 Industrial Road (APN 046-051-080).

MOVER: Ron Collins
SECONDER:

AYES:

NAYS:

RESULT:

Laura Parmer-Lohan
Collins, Parmer-Lohan, Dugan, McDowell
Rak
Motion Passed 4 - 1

MOTION: Introduce Ordinance 1593 Approving a Development Agreement with Menlo BCSP 405 Property, LLC for the 405 Industrial Project.

MOVER: Ron Collins
SECONDER:

AYES:

NAYS:

RESULT:

Laura Parmer-Lohan
Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
Rak
Motion Passed 4 - 1

Council recessed at 10:00 PM and reconvened at 10:05 PM.

MOTION: At 10:05 PM, Approve to Extend the Meeting till 11:00 PM.

MOVER: Ron Collins

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 8

SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

RESULT:

Dugan, Collins, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
None
Rak
Motion Passed 4 – 0 – 1

9. STUDY SESSION

a. Receive an Update and Provide Direction on the San Carlos Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvement Project – Phase III.

Public Works Director Steven Machida commenced the item with some background on previous phases of the Project and turned the presentation over to Consultant Brian Fletcher. Mr. Fletcher spoke on the community outreach and the revised concept plan based on feedback received. Mr. Machida responded to Council questions.

Public Comment
Cynthia Oliva, resident, spoke in support of a Phase 4 of the Project to include her area, provided suggestions on how to increase pedestrian safety and provided photos of recent traffic incidents in front of her home.

Michael Oliva, resident, commented on the financial impacts of the accidents that occurred in front of his home and spoke on the need to reduce traffic speed in the area.

Council
directed staff to continue the buffer bike lanes and replace street trees and spoke in support of continuing the project with a Phase 4.

10. NEW BUSINESS

a. Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction– 700 Block of Laurel Street (during the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction– During Farmers’ Market.

Public Works Director Steven Machida spoke on the need to update the Municipal Code to accommodate the updated Farmers Market parking restrictions.

Public Comment
Sonia Elkes, resident, suggested the City implement a pilot program for speed cameras on San Carlos Avenue.

MOTION: Introduce Ordinance 159 4 Repealing and Replacing San Carlos Municipal Code Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction –700 Block of Laurel Street (During the Farmers’ Market) with Section 10.32.224 Parking Restriction–During Farmers’ Market.

MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Laura Parmer-Lohan
AYES: Parmer-Lohan, Rak, Dugan, Collins, McDowell

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 9

RESULT: Motion Passed 5 – 0

11. AGENDA SETTING

a. Consideration of Agendizing an Item Directing Staff to Prepare a Letter to Elected State Officials Urging them to Allow Remote Meetings to Continue for Regional Meetings.

Mayor McDowell suggest ed the Council send a letter to legislatures to allow for regional boards to have flexibility in continuing to meet remotely if so desired. Council expressed support to agendize the approval of the letter.

Councilmember Dugan requested a report from the Police Chief on traffic enforcement and collision statistics in town. Council expressed support of this.

12. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 10:53 PM.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk

6.b
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 10

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Commissions pursuant to Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no financial impact associated with adopting the proposed Resolution.

BACKGROUND:

On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom of California proclaimed a state of emergency in response to the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Then on March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 easing Brown Act restrictions to allow local legislative bodies to hold their meetings via teleconference. This enabled the San Carlos City Council and staff to continue to safely conduct public meetings with public participation via teleconference, while still adhering to the County of San Mateo Health Officer’s "shelter-in-place" order.

On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom approved AB 361 with the goal to “improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options.” The bill contains an urgency clause, which made the bill effective upon signing with a sunset date of January 1, 2024.

AB 361 allows local legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely if they meet three criteria:

1. The local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor;

2. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and

3. Legislative bodies have determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

Pursuant to AB 361, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-093 on September 27, 2021, declaring the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting remote meetings. Since October 25, 2021, the City Council has adopted a Resolution each month renewing its declaration to continue meeting remotely for the next 30 days.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 11

Since May 9, 2022, the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission meetings have been conducted in-person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission and Youth Advisory Council have since decided to transition to in-person meetings as well. The Residential Design Review Committee continues to conduct its meetings remotely.

With hospitalizations and deaths dramatically reduced due to the state’s vaccination and public health efforts, the Governor announced on October 17, 2022, that the COVID-19 State of Emergency will end on February 28, 2023. Until then, the City may continue making findings and adopting a Resolution every thirty days authorizing remote teleconference meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. After the State of Emergency is lifted, remote access to meetings will only be allowed under the original teleconferencing rules or Assembly Bill 2449 (“AB 2449”) procedures.

AB 2449 was signed into law on September 12, 2022 amending the Brown Act restrictions for legislative bodies to participate in meetings remotely. Attachment 3 is a memo from our City Attorney’s firm detailing this new remote meeting law. Staff have determined that the provisions set forth in AB 2449 are not feasible for the commissions that hold untelevised meetings. Thus starting March 1, 2023, all our commissions, aside from the Planning and Transportation Commission, will hold their meetings in-person, and if there’s a need for a commissioner to participate remotely, they will do so under the traditional teleconferencing rules.

The City Clerk and City Attorney are working together to determine the implementation of AB 2449 for the Council and Planning and Transportation Commission meetings and will provide an update to the City Council and Commissions when ready.

ANALYSIS:

Adopting the proposed Resolution will provide commissions with the option to continue holding remote meetings through January 9, 2023. In addition, members of the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission will have the flexibility to participate via teleconference in the event of a potential COVID-19 exposure or COVID-19 related concerns, such as an asymptomatic infection or concerns that an infection might occur at a remote location when a councilmember or commissioner has an active infection. If the Council approves the proposed Resolution, staff will present a staff report to Council every thirty days through the end February 2023 (when the State of Emergency is anticipated to end) to verify that the circumstances continue to exist.

If the Council does not adopt a Resolution this evening to authorize remote meetings pursuant to AB 361, beginning December 13, 2022, all commissions will need to transition back to in-person public meetings and any remote participation from members of the City Council and Commissions would need to be done according to the traditional Brown Act’s teleconferencing requirements, which include identifying the teleconference location on the agenda of the meeting and allowing members of the public to attend the meeting at the teleconference location.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a resolution making findings and authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Commissions pursuant to AB 361; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution and proceed to transition all Commissions to in-person meetings beginning December 13, 2022; or

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 12

3. Provide staff with alternative direction

Respectfully submitted by:

Crystal Mui, City Clerk

Approved for submission by:

______
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

2. AB 361

3. Memo on AB 2449 Remote Meeting Law

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 13

7 8
8 RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

MAKING FINDINGS AND AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361.

WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for broader spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19); and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services of the City of San Carlos, proclaimed the existence of a local emergency within the City; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-013 ratifying and extending the Director of Emergency Services’ proclamation of the existence of a local emergency caused by COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, City staff set up Zoom meetings for all City Council and Commission meetings; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361 into law as an urgency measure that went into effect immediately; and WHEREAS, AB 361 authorizes local legislative bodies to continue to conduct meetings using teleconferencing without complying with the Ralph M. Brown Act’s standard teleconferencing requirements if certain conditions are met; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-093 making findings on the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue to teleconference in order to ensure the health and safety of the public; and WHEREAS, each month since the passing of Resolution 2021-093, the City Council has reviewed the situation and adopted a Resolution renewing its declaration for the need for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361; and
WHEREAS, since May 9, 2022, the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission meetings have been conducted in-person, with an option for the public to participate remotely via Zoom. The Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission and Youth Advisory Council have also transitioned to in-person meetings; and

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 14

7 8
8 WHEREAS, the Residential Design Review Committee has opted to continue conducting its meetings remotely; and
WHEREAS, adopting a Resolution making findings and authorizing the option for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361, provides Commissions who aren’t ready to meet in person the option to continue remote meetings; and
WHEREAS, adopting a Resolution making findings and authorizing the option for the City Council and Commissions to continue conducting meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns, pursuant to AB 361 and provides members of the City Council and Commissions who have returned to in-person meetings with the flexibility to participate via teleconference in the event of potential COVID-19 exposure, future orders restricting attendance, a new variant causing the need to return to full remote meetings or other COVID-19 related concerns.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby makes the following findings, in compliance with AB 361, and in order to continue to teleconference under the modified Brown Act requirements:
a. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; b. The Governor’s proclamation for a state of emergency issued on March 4, 2020 remains in effect;
c. Full return to in-person meetings would cause imminent risk to attendees who are vulnerable or where staff or councilmembers may have an asymptomatic, or where they are only able to attend remotely due to an infection, and it would be unsafe for the public to attend at their remote meeting location; and
d. State and local officials continue to strongly recommend masks be worn by all individuals in indoor settings.
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 12th day of December 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:______________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 15

Assembly Bill No. 361
CHAPTER 165
An act to add and repeal Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, and to amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of, and to add and repeal Section 11133 of, the Government Code, relating to open meetings, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
[Approved by Governor September 16, 2021. Filed with
Secretary of State September 16, 2021.]
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 361, Robert Rivas. Open meetings: state and local agencies:
teleconferences.
(1) Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act requires, with speci ﬁed exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency, as those terms are deﬁned, be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act contains speci ﬁed provisions regarding the timelines for posting an agenda and providing for the ability of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public.

The act generally requires all regular and special meetings of the legislative body be held within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, subject to certain exceptions. The act allows for meetings to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, that members of the public be allowed to address the legislative body at each teleconference location, that the legislative body post an agenda at each teleconference location, and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the local agency’s jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as deﬁned. The act authorizes the district attorney or any interested person, subject to certain provisions, to commence an action by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of obtaining a judicial determination that speciﬁed actions taken by a legislative body are null and void.

Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, authorizes the Governor, or the Director of Emergency Services when the governor is inaccessible, to proclaim a state of emergency under speciﬁed circumstances.

Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the Ralph M. Brown Act’s requirements for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the legislative body at the meeting, and that a legislative body of a local agency has a procedure for receiving and swiftly 92 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

AUTHENTICATED

ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 16

resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as speciﬁed.

This bill, until January 1, 2024, would authorize a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Ralph M. Brown Act when a legislative body of a local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency, as that term is deﬁned, when state or local health ofﬁcials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, during a proclaimed state of emergency held for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and during a proclaimed state of emergency when the legislative body has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, as provided.

This bill would require legislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allow members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body. The bill would require the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored. The bill would specify that actions taken during the disruption are subject to challenge proceedings, as speciﬁed.

This bill would prohibit the legislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and would specify that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. The bill would prohibit the legislative body from closing the public comment period and the opportunity to register to provide public comment, until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed, as speciﬁed. When there is a continuing state of emergency, or when state or local ofﬁcials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, the bill would require a legislative body to make speci ﬁed ﬁndings not later than 30 days after the ﬁrst teleconferenced meeting pursuant to these provisions, and to make those ﬁndings every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures.

Existing law prohibits a legislative body from requiring, as a condition to attend a meeting, a person to register the person’s name, or to provide other information, or to ful ﬁll any condition precedent to the person’s attendance.
92 — 2 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 17

This bill would exclude from that prohibition, a registration requirement imposed by a third-party internet website or other online platform not under the control of the legislative body.
(2) Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with speciﬁed exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body. The act requires at least one member of the state body to be physically present at the location speciﬁed in the notice of the meeting.

The Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic, provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the state body at the meeting, and that a state body has a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as speciﬁed.

This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to speci ﬁed notice and accessibility requirements, a state body to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body. With respect to a state body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the state body at each teleconference location. Under the bill, a state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge state bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(3) Existing law establishes the various campuses of the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and authorizes the establishment of student body organizations in connection with the operations of California State University campuses.

The Gloria Romero Open Meetings Act of 2000 generally requires a legislative body, as deﬁned, of a student body organization to conduct its business in a meeting that is open and public. The act authorizes the legislative body to use teleconferencing, as de ﬁned, for the bene ﬁt of the public and the legislative body in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law.

This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to speci ﬁed notice and accessibility requirements, a legislative body, as de ﬁned for purposes of the act, to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and 92 Ch. 165— 3 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 18

to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body. With respect to a legislative body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location.

Under the bill, a legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge legislative bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(4) This bill would declare the Legislature’s intent, consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20, to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future emergencies by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options.
(5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by AB 339 to be operative only if this bill and AB 339 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public ofﬁcials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains ﬁndings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose.

This bill would make legislative ﬁndings to that effect. (7) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public ofﬁcials and agencies be adopted with ﬁndings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.

This bill would make legislative ﬁndings to that effect. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 89305.6 is added to the Education Code, to read:
89305.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a legislative body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing 92 — 4 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 19

and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body.
(b) (1) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the legislative body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identi ﬁed in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the legislative body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the legislative body be physically present at the location speciﬁed in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satis ﬁed any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A legislative body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a legislative body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the legislative body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modi ﬁcation or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
92 Ch. 165— 5 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 20

(2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a legislative body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the legislative body’s internet website.
(f) All legislative bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to legislative body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 2. Section 11133 is added to the Government Code, to read:
11133. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a state body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body.
(b) (1) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the state body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identi ﬁed in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the state body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the state body be physically present at the location speciﬁed in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically 92 — 6 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 21

or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisﬁed any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A state body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a state body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the state body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modi ﬁcation or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
(2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a state body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the state body’s internet website.
(f) All state bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to state body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 3. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
92 Ch. 165— 7 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 22

54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the beneﬁt of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a speci ﬁc type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 23

(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter

2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances:
(A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local of ﬁcials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
(B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdivision shall do all of the following:
(A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter.
(B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3. 92 Ch. 165— 9 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 24

In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment.
(C) The legislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall take no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1.
(E) The legislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 25

(3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local ofﬁcials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the ﬁrst time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following ﬁndings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local of ﬁcials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdivision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 3.1. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency in person, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the beneﬁt of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a speci ﬁc type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body 92 Ch. 165— 11 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 26

shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.

Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or ﬁnal.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking ﬁnal action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a ﬁnal action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe bene ﬁts of a local agency executive, as deﬁned in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the ﬁnal action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 92 — 12 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 27

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 28

the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time.

This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local legislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to register as required by the third-party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to provide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed.
(ii) A legislative body that does not provide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that provides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a speciﬁc agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. (3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local ofﬁcials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the ﬁrst time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following ﬁndings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local of ﬁcials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdivision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 4. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting 92 — 14 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 29

of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the beneﬁt of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a speci ﬁc type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.

Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or ﬁnal.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking ﬁnal action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a ﬁnal action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe bene ﬁts of a local agency executive, as deﬁned in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the ﬁnal action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, 92 Ch. 165— 15 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 30

members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter

2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.

SEC. 4.1. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, in person except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the beneﬁt of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a speci ﬁc type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the 92 — 16 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 31

legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identiﬁed in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 32

powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter

2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.

SEC. 5. Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 339. Those sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2022, but this bill becomes operative ﬁrst, (2) each bill amends Section 54953 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 339, in which case Section 54953 of the Government Code, as amended by Sections 3 and 4 of this bill, shall remain operative only until the operative date of Assembly Bill 339, at which time Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill shall become operative.

SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, permitting expanded use of teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

SEC. 7. The Legislature ﬁnds and declares that Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, further, within the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to the meetings of local public bodies or the writings of local public of ﬁcials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the Legislature makes the following ﬁndings:

This act is necessary to ensure minimum standards for public participation and notice requirements allowing for greater public participation in teleconference meetings during applicable emergencies.

SEC. 8. (a) The Legislature ﬁnds and declares that during the COVID-19 public health emergency, certain requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) were suspended by Executive Order N-29-20. Audio and video teleconference were widely used to conduct public meetings in lieu of physical location meetings, and public meetings conducted by teleconference during the COVID-19 public health emergency have been productive, have increased public participation by all members of the public regardless of their location in the state and ability to travel to physical meeting locations, have protected the health and safety of civil servants and the public, and have reduced travel costs incurred by members of state bodies and reduced work hours spent traveling to and from meetings.
92 — 18 — Ch. 165

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 33

(b) The Legislature ﬁnds and declares that Section 1 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, Section 2 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 11133 of the Government Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, all increase and potentially limit the public’s right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public ofﬁcials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following ﬁndings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
(1) By removing the requirement that public meetings be conducted at a primary physical location with a quorum of members present, this act protects the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a physical location over members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location. (2) By removing the requirement for agendas to be placed at the location of each public ofﬁcial participating in a public meeting remotely, including from the member’s private home or hotel room, this act protects the personal, private information of public of ﬁcials and their families while preserving the public’s right to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business.

SEC. 9. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.

The facts constituting the necessity are:

In order to ensure that state and local agencies can continue holding public meetings while providing essential services like water, power, and ﬁre protection to their constituents during public health, wildﬁre, or other states of emergencies, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.

O
92 Ch. 165— 19 —

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 34

RIV #4884-6284-2933 v2
AB 2449
AB 2449 amends the Brown Act to provide an additional procedure for members of legislative bodies to attend public meetings remotely. It will become effective on January 1, 2023.

Under this new law, members of a legislative body may attend public meetings remotely without identifying their teleconference site on the agency’s agenda or ensuring it is accessible to the public if the procedures below are followed.

As long as a quorum of the legislative body participates in person from a physical location open to the public, the remaining agency members can participate remotely in two situations:

1. Just cause
Just cause is defined as any one of the following:
(a) childcare or caregiving of a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner that requires a member to participate remotely; (b) a contagious illness that prevents a member from attending in person; (c) a need related to a physical or mental disability; or (d) travel while on business of the legislative body or another state or local agency.

In order to participate remotely under the just cause provisions, the member must notify the legislative body at the earliest possible opportunity, including at the start of a meeting, of their need to participate remotely and provide a general description of the circumstances related to one of the four items above.

A member may only participate remotely under the just cause provisions up to two meetings per calendar year.

2. Emergency Circumstances
Emergency circumstances means a physical or family medical emergency that prevents a member from attending in person.

In order to participate remotely under the emergency circumstances provisions, the member must request that the legislative body allow them to participate in the meeting remotely because of emergency circumstances and the legislative body must take action to approve the request.

A member must make a request to participate remotely under the emergency circumstances provisions as soon as possible. The legislative body may take action on this request at the earliest opportunity. If the request does not allow sufficient time to place it on the agenda for the meeting for which the request is made, the legislative body may take action on the request at the beginning of the meeting by majority vote.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 35

RIV #4884-6284-2933 v2
The legislative body must request a general description of the circumstances relating to the member’s need to appear remotely. This description does not have to be more than 20 words and the member does not have to disclose any personal medical information.

Additional Rules if Members Participate Remotely
If agency members participate remotely under this new law for either the just cause or emergency circumstances situations described above then the following rules apply:
x The legislative body must provide a way for the public to remotely hear, visually observe, and remotely address the legislative body, either by a two-way audiovisual platform or a two-way telephonic service and a live webcasting of the meeting. x The legislative body must provide notice of how the public can access the meeting and offer comments.
x The agenda must identify and include an opportunity for the public to attend and directly address the legislative body through a call-in option, an internet-based service option, and in-person at the location of the meeting.
x The body cannot require comments to be submitted before the start of the meeting. The public must be allowed to make “real time” public comment.

x If there is a disruption to the meeting broadcast or in the ability to take call-in or internet- based public comment, no further action can be taken on agenda items until the issue is resolved.
x The legislative body must implement a procedure for receiving and resolving requests for reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities, and must give notice of these procedures.
x Members participating remotely must participate through both audio and visual technology.
x Members participating remotely must publicly disclose at the meeting before any action is taken whether any other individuals 18 years of age or older are present in the room at the remote location with the member and the general nature of the member’s relationship with the individual.
x A member may not participate in meetings solely by teleconference under this law for more than three consecutive months or 20% of the regular meetings for the public agency within a calendar year. If the legislative body regularly meets less than 10 times a year, a member may not participate remotely for more than two meetings.

Legislative bodies may still meet via teleconference by following the traditional Brown Act rules of identifying the teleconference site on the agency’s agenda and ensuring it is accessible for the public to attend. Further, legislative bodies may meet by teleconference under AB 361 until January 1, 2024 during the Governor’s proclaimed State of Emergency and as long as other requirements are met.

6.c
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 36

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter Urging State Legislators to Amend Assembly Bill (“AB”) 2449.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the City Council, to sign the attached letter urging State legislators to amend Assembly Bill (“AB”) 2449.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications associated with this action.

BACKGROUND:

The Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”) is a California law that guarantees the public’s right to attend and participate in meetings of local legislative bodies. Located at California Government Code 54950 et seq., it is an act of the California State Legislature, authored by Assemblymember Ralph M. Brown and passed in 1953.

The Brown Act allows a city council to use any type of teleconferencing in connection with any meeting. “Teleconference” is defined as “a meeting of individuals in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.” While it allows for teleconferencing, the Brown Act imposes certain restrictions and requirements around what constitutes a quorum, posting agendas, noticing of teleconference locations, and public access.

In March 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a state of emergency in response to the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and issued Executive Order N-29-20 easing certain Brown Act restrictions. In September 2021, Governor Newsom approved AB 361 to “improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options.” On October 17, 2022, Governor Newsom announced that the COVID-19 State of Emergency will end on February 28, 2023, effectively ending AB 361’s term. However, AB 2449 that was signed into law on September 13, 2022, will take effect on January 1, 2023. The attached memo, provided by the City Attorney, summarizes the new requirements associated with AB 2449. (Attachment 1). Traditional Brown Act teleconferencing rules will still remain in effect. The table below, summarizes the key differences among traditional Brown Act teleconferencing rules, AB 361, and AB 2449.

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 37

Table: Key Differences Among Brown Act Teleconferencing Rules Brown Act Teleconferencing
Rules
Traditional AB 361 AB 2449
Sept 16, 2021 –
Jan 1, 2024
Jan 1, 2023 –
Jan 1, 2026

1. State of Emergency must be in
effect? Per Governor Newsom,
state of emergency ceases
February 28, 2023.

N/A Required Waived

2. Post agendas at all
teleconference locations?
Required Waived Waived

3. Each teleconference location is
identified and accessible by the
public?
Required Waived Waived

4. Quorum of legislative body at
single location within jurisdiction
boundaries
Required Waived Required

5. Must demonstrate Just Cause
(pre-approved) or Emergency
Circumstances (voted on by
agency prior to participation)
N/A N/A Required

6. Limited to 20 percent of the
regular meetings for the local
agency within a calendar year,
or more than two meetings if
the legislative body regularly
meets fewer than 10 times per
calendar year
N/A N/A Required

7. Requires agency to use full
video conferencing or
webcasting of meetings if
members are going to be
remote
N/A N/A Required

8. Requires remote members to
use audio and video and to
disclose whether individuals
over the age of 18 is present
with them at the remote location
N/A N/A Required
During the agenda setting section of the City Council’s November 14, 2022 regular meeting, the Council directed staff to draft a letter to elected state officials urging them to relax the remote meeting requirements of AB 2449 with respect to regional meetings. The letter is currently being reviewed by the City’s Legislative Support Consultants and will be added to the staff report, as Attachment 2, no later than Friday, December 9.

ANALYSIS:

Relaxing the Brown Act’s teleconferencing requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic yielded numerous benefits. Local governments and regional decision making boards were able to continue operating, unfettered, while protecting the health and safety of civil servants and the

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 38

public. Many noted that public participation in meetings seemed to increase, as individuals were able to attend remotely from the safety and comfort their homes or work. In the past, vacations, sick time, or travel related to personal occupations may have prohibited participation in public meetings. During the pandemic, however, individuals could participate in public meetings regardless. Councilmembers who participate in dozens of regional decision making bodies were able to call into meetings, effectively reducing single occupancy vehicle trips and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The new teleconferencing requirements imposed by AB 2449 would negate some of these benefits and pose new issues. AB 2449’s quorum requirement, “just cause” and “emergency circumstances” requirements, and limitation on the number of remote meetings members may attend are unnecessarily restrictive. For example, AB 2449 requires a quorum of the legislative body from a single physical location open to the public, before invoking the “just cause” and “emergency circumstances” requirements. A quorum at a single physical location for regional boards and committees seems arbitrary and particularly burdensome when members of these bodies are comprised of a geographically diverse membership of dozens of various cities and counties.

Local city councils and their standing committees are often comprised of individuals with full time occupations. AB 2449’s “just cause” requirement unfairly prioritizes travel while on business of the legislative body or another state or local agency, but not travel related to an individual’s occupation. This raises an equity concern that participation in local and regional government would be limited to officials at a certain socioeconomic level. “Just cause” is not a requirement under traditional Brown Act rules.

Furthermore, AB 2449 limits the number of meetings that may be attended remotely. This too, seems arbitrary. Local jurisdictions and their constituents are best suited to decide whether to host in-person or virtual meetings and to decide the limitations of those meetings.

In addition, there are privacy concerns related to the requirement to disclose the identity of any individual over the age of 18 and the webcasting technology requirement is not feasible for regional boards who meet in various meeting rooms not equipped with this technology.

The new restrictions on remote meetings posed by AB 2449 are unnecessarily arbitrary and burdensome. These concerns are summarized in the letter to State legislators in Attachment 2.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the City Council, to sign the attached letter urging State legislators to amend Assembly Bill 2449; or

2. Do not authorize the Mayor to submit the attached letter; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 39

Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Memo summarizing AB 2449

2. Letter to State legislators to relax AB 2449 teleconferencing requirements

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 40

As long as a quorum of the legislative body participates in person from a physical location open to the public, the remaining agency members can participate remotely in two situations:

A member may only participate remotely under the just cause provisions up to two meetings per calendar year.

2. Emergency Circumstances
Emergency circumstances means a physical or family medical emergency that prevents a member from attending in person.

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 41

Additional Rules if Members Participate Remotely
If agency members participate remotely under this new law for either the just cause or emergency circumstances situations described above then the following rules apply:
 The legislative body must provide a way for the public to remotely hear, visually observe, and remotely address the legislative body, either by a two-way audiovisual platform or a two-way telephonic service and a live webcasting of the meeting.  The legislative body must provide notice of how the public can access the meeting and offer comments.
 The agenda must identify and include an opportunity for the public to attend and directly address the legislative body through a call-in option, an internet-based service option, and in-person at the location of the meeting.
 The body cannot require comments to be submitted before the start of the meeting. The public must be allowed to make “real time” public comment.

 If there is a disruption to the meeting broadcast or in the ability to take call-in or internet- based public comment, no further action can be taken on agenda items until the issue is resolved.
 The legislative body must implement a procedure for receiving and resolving requests for reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities, and must give notice of these procedures.
 Members participating remotely must participate through both audio and visual technology.
 Members participating remotely must publicly disclose at the meeting before any action is taken whether any other individuals 18 years of age or older are present in the room at the remote location with the member and the general nature of the member’s relationship with the individual.
 A member may not participate in meetings solely by teleconference under this law for more than three consecutive months or 20% of the regular meetings for the public agency within a calendar year. If the legislative body regularly meets less than 10 times a year, a member may not participate remotely for more than two meetings.

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 42

Dear Assemblymember Rubio:

On behalf of the San Carlos City Council, I am writing to request that Assembly Bill (“AB”) 2449 be amended to allow city councils, their standing committees, and regional boards more flexibility to establish their own teleconference requirements related to quorums, just cause and emergency requirements, and limitations on the number of remote meetings members may attend.

In March 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20, giving local agencies more flexibility to deploy teleconferencing, and it was a monumental success. It protected the health and safety of civil servants and the public, while effectively and efficiently conducting the public’s business.

Teleconferencing during the pandemic increased public participation, reduced single occupancy vehicle trips and travel costs, and decreased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

We believe there are several unintended consequences of AB 2449 and the following requirements should be considered for amendment:

1.Just cause travel. Local city councils and their standing committees are often comprised of individuals with full-time occupations. AB 2449’s “just cause” requirement unfairly allows travel while on business “of the legislative body or another state or local agency,” but not travel related to an individual’s occupation. This raises an equity concern that participation in local and regional government would be limited to officials at a certain socioeconomic level. Travel for a member’s occupation should be allowed under “just cause.”

2.Cap on number of remote meetings allowed. The limitation on the number of meetings that may be attended remotely appears arbitrary. The State could consider mandating a “floor” for in-person meetings, i.e. at least two meetings per year must be in person, and allow regional boards and standing committees maximum flexibility in determining the “ceiling” or “cap” on the number of remote meetings permissible. To contrast, local officials serve in the communities in which they live and the return to in-person meetings for local jurisdictions is not an issue. Nonetheless, local jurisdictions and their constituents are best suited to decide whether to host in-person or virtual meetings and to decide the limitations of those meetings.

3.Quorum. Requiring a quorum at a single physical location for regional boards and their subcommittees, and mandating that members of these bodies travel long distances to attend in-person meetings, contradicts the State’s efforts to curb GHG emissions and seems arbitrary and particularly burdensome when regional boards are comprised of a geographically diverse membership of cities and counties. Regional boards, as well as standing committees of a city council should be allowed to stay 100% remote, with the option of deciding as a body, how many meetings should be attended in-person versus remote.

4.Webcasting technology. Unlike local city councils, regional boards meet in a variety of locations that often are not equipped with webcasting technology to enable hybrid meetings. Under AB 2449 regional boards will need to pivot from online meetings to in- person meetings.

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 43

5.Disclosure. The requirement to publicly disclose any individual in the room over the age of 18 is a privacy violation. For example, if a member is under the care of an at-home nurse, this should not need to be shared publicly.

We have serious concerns regarding AB 2449’s measures to limit remote teleconferencing to a handful of emergency or restrictive just cause approvals. Without amendment, these measures will result in unnecessarily long travel times to meetings, suppressed attendance, and difficulty reaching quorum, which will in turn negatively impact the governing body’s productive work.

We respectfully request that AB 2449 be amended to provide more flexibility to regional agencies and local governing bodies. The Brown Act ensures that officials and their constituents can have open and transparent meetings, which we now know can occur using modern technology. The City believes in the benefit of increased access in our communities and California should make immediate moves to ensure this continues in the future. A permanent fix to the Brown Act to include more flexibility in teleconferencing is the right move for California.

Sincerely,
Mayor Sara McDowell
City of San Carlos

6.d
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 44

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes Cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election Held on November 8, 2022 and Declaring the Results.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election held on November 8, 2022 and declaring the results.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications associated with adopting the proposed Resolution.

BACKGROUND:

A General Municipal Election was held in San Carlos on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for the purpose of electing three members of the City Council, each for a full term of four years.

The County of San Mateo’s semi-official election results, as of December 6, 2022, are shown below, indicating that Sara McDowell, Adam Rak, and Pranita Venkatesh were elected as members of the City Council for the full term of four years.

The County has until December 8, 2022 (30 days from the election) to certify election results to the City of San Carlos. Once the Statement of Votes Certificate is received, it will be attached to the proposed Resolution as Exhibit A.

7.a
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 45

Following adoption of the Resolution by the City Council, the City Clerk will present the newly elected councilmembers with their Certificate of Election and will administer their Oaths of Office.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes Cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election held November 8, 2022 and declaring the results; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution
Exhibit A to Resolution - Statement of Votes Certificate

7.a
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 46

RESOLUTION NO. 2022– _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER AND THE

STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST IN THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 2022 AND DECLARING THE RESULTS.

WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election was held and conducted in the City of San Carlos on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, as required by law, for the purpose of electing three members of the City Council for the full term of four years each; and WHEREAS, notice of said election was given in the time, form, and manner as provided by law; that voting centers were properly established; that election officers were appointed and that in all respects, the election was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received, and canvassed and the returns made and declared in the time, form, and manner as required by the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California for the holding of elections in general law cities; and
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Elections Office canvased the returns of the election and certified the results to the City Council, and those results are attached and made a part hereof as Exhibit A.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos as follows:

SECTION 1: That the whole number of ballots cast in the City of San Carlos was 14,632.

SECTION 2: That the names and results of persons voted for at said election for members of the City Council are as follows:

Name Number of Votes Received
Sara McDowell 9,510
Adam Rak 8,543
Pranita Venkatesh 6,491
John Durkin 4,293
Alexander E. Kent 2,256
SECTION 3: That the City Council does declare and determine that Sara McDowell, Adam Rak, and Pranita Venkatesh were elected as Members of the San Carlos City Council for the full term of four years.

SECTION 4: That the City Clerk shall enter on the records of the City Council of the City of San Carlos, a Statement of the Result of the election (Exhibit A), showing: (1) the total number of ballots cast in the City; (2) the names of the persons voted for; (3) for what office each person was voted for; and (4) the total number of votes given for each person.

SECTION 5: The City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver to each person elected a Certification of Election and to have administered to the elected persons the Oath of Office, as prescribed in the State Constitution of the State of California and shall have those persons subscribe thereto and file it in the office of the City Clerk. Each person so elected shall be inducted into the office which he or she has been elected.

7.a
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 47

* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12 th day of December, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: __________________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ________________________________________________ CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Statement of Votes Certificate

7.a
December 12, 2022

Packet Pg. 48

7.a

1 City of San Carlos Members, City Council
11111
Registered
Voters
Voters Cast
Turnout (%)
JOHN
DURKIN

ADAM RAK

PRANITA

VENKATESH
SARA

MCDOWELL

ALEXANDER
E. KENT
36001 Total 2953 2114 71.59 % 597 1231 969 1393 350
36003 Total 2409 1768 73.39 % 500 1087 774 1165 259
36006 Total 3400 2295 67.50 % 639 1253 1048 1418 363
36010 Total 2115 1543 72.96 % 429 955 664 1038 221
36012 Total 910 616 67.69 % 190 291 263 374 111
36014 Total 3379 2562 75.82 % 860 1597 1112 1759 367
36019 Total 1407 998 70.93 % 311 562 405 618 171
36021 Total 2234 1587 71.04 % 444 902 712 1011 226
36025 Total 1219 791 64.89 % 232 441 361 490 137
36027 Total 106 83 78.30 % 18 55 47 59 7
36029 Total 7 5 71.43 % *** *** *** *** ***
36030 Total 7 5 71.43 % *** *** *** *** ***
3 6 0 3 1 T o t a l 1 1 9 9 1 7 6 . 4 7 % 2 15 85 45 21 3 36038 Total 207 153 73.91 % 42 95 64 111 23
36049 Total 0 0
36051 Total 0 0
36052 Total 28 21 75.00 % 7 12 13 14 5
Total - Vote Centers 20500 844 4.12 % 334 376 320 427 205 Total - Vote by Mail 20500 13788 67.26 % 3959 8167 6171 9083 2051 Contest Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 *** Indicates vote data was suppressed due to voter privacy settings.

Page 132 of 193 ends

San Mateo
San Mateo 2022 Statewide General Election
Statement of the Vote - Precincts
November 8, 2022
Section A

7.a
December 12, 2022 Packet Pg. 52

7.a

1 City of San Carlos Members, City Council
11111
Registered
Voters
Voters Cast
Turnout (%)
JOHN
DURKIN

ADAM RAK

PRANITA

VENKATESH
SARA

MCDOWELL

ALEXANDER
E. KENT
Electionwide Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 Board Of Equalization - District 2 Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 15th Congressional District Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 13th Senatorial District Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 21st Assembly District Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 County of San Mateo Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 3rd Supervisorial District Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256 City of San Carlos Total 20500 14632 71.38 % 4293 8543 6491 9510 2256

Page 57 of 94 ends

San Mateo
San Mateo 2022 Statewide General Election
Statement of the Vote - Districts
Election Date: November 8, 2022

SECTION B

7.a
December 12, 2022 Packet Pg. 54

San Carlos City CouncilDecember 12, 2022

San Carlos City Council
December 12, 2022