From:
To:
Cc: City Council (San Mateo); Alex Khoiikian;
Subject: San Mateo City Council Study Session
Date: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 12:29:00 PM
Attachments: image001.png
SOP 2024-2 Rev1 5May2024.pdf
Statement of Position 2024-1.pdf
Greetings,
On behalf of the membership and Board of Directors of Ethics San Mateo, I would like to extend our welcome to you. We believe your expertise in the facilitation of the San Mateo City Council Governance Workshop will be of great value.
Ethics San Mateo is a 501(c)(4) Tax Exempt California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation promoting ethical conduct by our city government and leadership, those seeking leadership roles, and businesses and organizations conducting transactions with or seeking to influence city government. Launched on October 19, 2022, our mission is to lead and support efforts by the residents of San Mateo to ensure our city is served according to the highest level of ethical standards and behavior.
We are issue agnostic. We do not take positions on building heights, traffic issues, code variances, zoning, etc. We DO take positions on HOW decisions are made, who is influencing the decision makers and the tactics the influencers are using.
Ethics San Mateo has been strongly advocating for a Code of Conduct and Ethics Standards that are clear, enforceable and contain consequences for violations. We believe our dedication to our mission and constant voice in the ears of the city council made this session happen. There is quite strong and vocal opposition to our goals, some from current city leadership. Our organization, and our members, have been barraged with false claims, personal insults, and threats from some that most likely benefit from the current lack of enforceable rules. We take these unacceptable acts as evidence we are succeeding at our work.
Currently the behavior of our City's elected and appointed leadership, the Council Members and Commissioners, is not subject to any disciplinary action short of removal due to crimes of "Moral Turpitude". In cases of clear and obvious conflicts of interest, even if identified by the City Attorney, Council Members and Commissioners can (and do) dismiss the conflict, many times without disclosure, and continue to participate in decisions. Removal by the City Council of an appointed commissioner for cause is all but impossible.
I have attached two of our recent Statement of Position as examples of the behavior we have observed and how we conduct fact-checking. We spend hundreds of hours researching and verifying information, and include foot noted references. Please visit our website, www.EthicsSanMateo.com, to learn more about us and view additional Statements of Position.
Ethics San Mateo is proud to know that our tireless advocacy was a driving factor in moving the City Council to begin a process of establishing enforceable Codes of Conduct and Ethics Standards. The residents of San Mateo deserve a local government that represents them.
Our expectations are high for the outcome of this session. If the Council does not formally agree to the basics for the rules to be established and commit to having them completed and implemented in a reasonable time frame, they will have failed the residents of San Mateo.
Regards,
Dave Cohen, President/CEO
Ethics San Mateo, A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT May 5, 2024
Statement of Position
Councilmember Lee and Rules
INTRODUCTION
Ethics San Mateo is issuing this Statement of Position to inform residents and the City of San Mateo of our concerns about Councilmember Amourence Lee's statements regarding historic districts.
The mission of Ethics San Mateo is to lead and support efforts by the residents of San Mateo to ensure our city is served according to the highest level of ethical standards and behavior. We advocate for the establishment of a comprehensive Code of Conduct for all city officials, including Council members, Commissioners and staff, establishing enforceable standards of ethical behavior.
Accountability on the part of our city's leaders is key to good governance. We believe the common core element to much of the turmoil observed by the residents of our city as that the current rules are insufficient. Several Statements of Position have previously been issued regarding the lack of ethical standards and behavior. Please refer to our website, www.EthicsSanMateo.com, for these publications.
SUMMARY
On April 18, 2024, Councilmember Lee added to her Facebook page' (image below) a posting which included a strong statement regarding historic districts, and specifically the proposed Baywood Historic District. Also included in the post is a video of part of her testimony before the California Assembly's Housing and Community Development Committee. Her introduction by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks and her complete statement is available on the State of California Media Archive?. Lee's testimony is in support of AB 2580, and a copy of the hearing document is attached. The Assembly Bill imposes requirements that would affect a city's historic district program.
Ethics San Mateo neither supports nor opposes AB 2580, historic district designations in general, or the Baywood Historic District in specific. As is our mission, we are concerned about ethical conduct and bias in decision making by our City Council, City Commissions, and staff. 1 https://www.facebook.com/LeeCityCouncil
^ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media- archive&ved=2ahUKEwi03YbGmeOFAxUAJkQ|HaB×Bp4QFnoECBoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1z-0 k5sGDrGsp3QLaX66i Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation All Rights Reserved
www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
Any copyrighted material or images contained in this Statement of position and attachments remain the property of the copyright holder and are included in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act, the Fair Use doctrine.
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT In the statements made by Councilmember Lee we cite, both written and in videos, Lee makes numerous clear and unambiguous declarations. These statements are in strong opposition to the Baywood Historic Distriet.
Amourence Lee, San Mateo Councilwoman & former Mayor
April 18 at 12:32PM
Testifying in Sacramento with California YIMBY and Assemblywoman Buffy Wix in support of AB 2580. Our City is being used as a testing ground for a perilous NIMBY strategy that strips away property rights and restricts housing.
The proposed Baywood Historic District sends us backward, exacerbating inequity and racial segregation and making housing further out of reach for our community members.
Sign the petition and say NO to the Baywood Historic District! https:/www.lessredtape.com veram
PRO-HOUSING LEADER
there's a small group of neighbors who have
specifically and
AMOURENCE
LEE
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo.
Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
Page |2
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT FACTS
It is indisputable Councilmember Lee made the referenced statements as a witness before the California State Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee. The contents of her statements are clearly disputable. Lee, herself or by an authorized person, posted the item on her Facebook page. ESM reviewed the complete video of Lee's AB 2580 testimony, and it appears that the video on Facebook is a true copy of the State of California's archived video. Her testimony matches between the two sources, although the Facebook video is truncated.
Before Lee spoke at the hearing, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks introduced her as "Councilmember and Former Mayor Amourence Lee from San Mateo". No statement of whether Lee was speaking for the City of San Mateo, or as an individual, was made. Lee identified herself as "Former Mayor and Current Councilwoman" and that she was there in support of AB 2580. Again, no statement that she was representing the city or herself as an individual was made.
The following three statements appear in Lee's Facebook post and reflect her testimony before the State Assembly's Committee:
• [Historic districts are] a perilous NIMBY strategy that strips away property rights and restricts housing.
• The proposed Baywood Historic District sends us backward, exacerbating inequity and racial segregation.
• That the majority of council members oppose the Baywood Historic District.
Additionally, appearing in the Facebook post text only:
• Sign the petition and say NO to the Baywood Historic District! https://www.lessredtape.com
The videos, written statements and posts speak for themselves, Councilmember Lee is clearly and adamantly opposed to the establishment of a Baywood Historic District.
The below screenshot taken from the Less Red Tape website further demonstrates Lee's ceaseless and aggressive opposition to the Baywood Historic District, as well as her refusal to abide by even the current guidelines set forth by the City to regulate the behavior of City Council members.
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
Page |3
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT Less Red Tape Home About FAQs Homeowner Stories News Details Contact San Mateo
A Baywosd Community Group Sign the Petition to Object!
Oppose Baywood Historic District
The Office of the Major
2023-11-27
MAYOR LEE
Amourence Lee
CITY OF SAN MATEO, CA
ity
Go to Article
Clicking on the link results in being directed to the statement below, in which Lee once again pushes her egregious claims that the people supporting the Baywood Historic District are complicit in a conspiracy to reestablish the long-banned land title covenants of the last century:
"The San Mateo Historic Alliance is pushing a divisive and exclusionary agenda that undermines our City's vision of inclusivity and diversity, and exacerbate socio-economic and geographic inequities. Baywood was founded as a white-only neighborhood, explicitly banning all people of color from ownership, and the legacy of racist zoning continues to divide our east and west neighborhoods."
These restrictions were abhorrent, but were implemented by housing developers of that time.
Many of those developers still exist and are active but have renounced those covenants and work diligently to provide equal opportunity in housing everywhere. It is fair to assume that none of the current residents of Baywood, or the other neighborhoods in San Mateo with such covenants, were party to establishing these reprehensible, and now illegal, rules. To even infer that residents have race as a criterion for ownership in their neighborhood is contrary to common decency, attacks without basis the constituents she was elected to represent, and is against the City's Guidelines for Conduct by City Council members
3 City of San Mateo, City Council Guidelines https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/View/46842/San- Mateo-City-Council-Guidelines?bidld=
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo.
Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
Page |4
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT In reality, Baywood is a highly diverse neighborhood. A review of statistics for the Baywood Neighborhood in the Statistical Atlas website shows, contrary to claims made by those opposed to the historic district designation, Baywood is not the "most segregated" neighborhood in San Mateo.* The neighborhood is very close to a 50/50% mix of "White" and "Non White" residents.
APPLICABLE PARTS OF THE GUIDELINES AND CHARTER
Ethics San Mateo has championed the revision of the current guidelines governing the conduct of city officials, including City Council members, and those revisions are now in process. In a City Council Special Meeting, on February 5, 2024, City staff presented changes, which included renaming the document to "City Council Rules and Procedures" S
In Chapter 1, Purpose and Overview, the currently in force San Mateo City Council Guidelines state:
[The guidelines are] "a compilation of all Council-related rules and procedures that have been formally adopted by Council." Clearly, the authors state that the document contains "rules" governing the conduct of City business and the actions of City Council members. This document was officially adopted by the San Mateo City Council.
The San Mateo City Charter reads, in part:
"The council shall adopt rules for conducting its proceedings, and shall provide for keeping a journal of its proceedings, which shall be a public record. A reasonable number of copies of such rules shall be made available in the office of the city clerk for inspection by members of the public, and copies shall be furnished by the clerk upon payment of a reasonable charge for same."
The Charter further provides for penalties for violations:
"The violation of any express provision of this Charter shall be deemed to be a misdemeanor as well as any violation specifically declared herein to be a misdemeanor. Such violations shall be punishable by fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars or by imprisonment for not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. The violation of an ordinance shall be punishable as in the ordinance. The city council by ordinance may establish civil penalty provisions. " 4https://statisticalatlas.com/neighborhood/California/San-Mateo/Baywood/Race-and-Ethnicity 5 Meeting Package attached
6 The San Mateo City Charter, 2.12 Rules and Journal
7Ibid 9.05 Violations of Charter and Ordinances
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo.
Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
Page |5
ETHICS SAN MATEO
SITICS SAN AN DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT The current "Guidelines", deemed rules by the document itself, have specific requirements applicable to Lee's appearance before the HCD Committee and her published statements®:
San Mateo City Council Guidelines 10/17/22
Chapter 6. Council Member Conduct
1. Members shall:
A. put constituents first at all times;
B. treat each other, staff, and members of the public with dignity, courtesy, and respect;
C. maintain confidentiality of all closed session materials and discussion; D. be attentive to others, limiting interruptions and distractions; E. encourage diverse viewpoints in debate while being mindful not to prolong discourse or block consensus;
F. agree to respectfully disagree;
G. keep comments clear, concise, and on-topic;
H. start and end meetings on time, work from the agenda;
1. present problems in a way that promotes discussion and resolution; and Chapter 10. Communication
11. Speaking for "the City"
Similar to written correspondence, when Council Members are requested to speak to groups or are asked the City Council's position on an issue, the response should reflect the position of the City Council as a whole. Of course, a member may clarify their vote on a matter by stating, for example, "While I voted against X, the City Council voted in support of it." When representing the City at meetings or other venues, it is important that those in attendance gain an understanding of the City Council's position rather than that of an individual member.
8 City of San Mateo, City Council Guidelines https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/View/46842/San- Mateo-City-Council-Guidelines?bidld=
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
Page |6
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT
12. Speaking as an Individual
On occasion, Council Members may wish to transmit correspondence on an issue upon which the City Council has yet to take a position or about an issue for which the City Council has no position. In these circumstances, members should clearly indicate in their communications that they are not speaking for the City Council as a whole, but for themselves as an individual member of the Council. City letterhead and office support may be utilized in these circumstances.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS
Ethics San Mateo has considered the facts and has arrived at the following findings and conclusions:
It is clear that Councilmember Lee is strongly opposed to the Baywood Historic District, and strongly indicates conditional opposition to historic districts in general. She states that "as a city official" she has observed that historic district designations can be used to block housing development. In her Facebook post, she includes: "Sign the Petition and say NO the Baywood Historic District" and provides a link to a group opposing the district.
In Lee's multitude of statements, written and verbal, she has violated several rules for conduct by Council Members contained in Chapter 6 of the San Mateo City Council Guidelines:
1. Members shall:
A. put constituents first at all times;
B. treat each other, staff, and members of the public with dignity, courtesy, and respect; E. encourage diverse viewpoints in debate while being mindful not to prolong discourse or block consensus;
F. agree to respectfully disagree;
It is also clear she violated the current Council Guidelines by not identifying whether she was testifying on the behalf of the City of San Mateo, or as an individual, at the State Assembly committee hearing.
Although the San Mateo City Council Guidelines for Councilmembers contain no enforcement or penalty provisions in that document, the Charter states the City Council may set rules, and per the Charter, violation of any provision of the Charter is a misdemeanor. The question of whether violation of City Charter-mandated rules can be charged as a misdemeanor requires further investigation and is outside the scope of this Statement of Position.
These serious and irrefutable actions, regardless of a determination of legality, must be considered as evidence of her bias and inability to abide by the City's rules.
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo.
Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT
OUR POSITION
Ethics San Mateo believes the statements made by Councilmember Lee are well beyond what the residents of San Mateo should hear or expect from any public official. The City Council, with the City Attorney, must take immediate action to rein in Lee's conduct and take steps to ensure fair, equitable, unbiased decisions are made about historic districts, the proposed Baywood Historic District, and the pending revision of the City's Historic District Ordinance. We believe only the complete recusal of Councilmember Amourence Lee from these discussions and decisions can provide any hope for a democratic process.
Furthermore, Ethics San Mateo believes, based on her testimony before the Assembly Committee and her clear and unequivocal position against the Baywood Historic District, that Councilmember Amourence Lee has demonstrated a more than sufficient bias which requires her to either completely recuse herself, or be removed by the Council from any and all Council discussions and decisions regarding historic resources, especially the proposed Baywood Historic District.
Finally, we ask that the San Mateo City Attorney investigate Lee's conduct to determine whether or not it has violated San Mateo City Charter and determine any potential legal consequences as a result.
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mateo Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of law.
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT
ATTACHMENT
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Hearing Package
ETHIC MATE
SAN
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation All Rights Reserved
www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Statements of Position and Ethics Watches are the opinions of Ethics San Mated Any person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until found guilty by a court of lav
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
Any copyrighted material or images contained in this Statement of position and attachments remain the property of the copyright holder and are included in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act, the Fair Use doctrine.
AB 2580
Date of Hearing: April 10, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Christopher M. Ward, Chair
AB 2580 (Wicks) - As Amended March 19, 2024
SUBJECT: Historical resources
SUMMARY: Adds information about a local government's historic preservation practices and policies to the constraints analysis required by housing element law, and requires a local government to provide in its Annual Progress Report (APR) a list of all historic designations listed on specified registers of historic places in the past year, including an assessment of how those designations affect the ability of the local government to meet its housing needs.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Requires each city and county to adopt a housing element, which must contain specified information, programs, and objectives, including:
a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs, including a quantification of the locality's existing and projected housing needs for all income levels; an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development; an analysis of potential and actual governmental and nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels; and a demonstration of local efforts to remove constraints that hinder the locality from meeting its share of the regional housing need, among other things;
b) A statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to affirmatively furthering fair housing and to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing; and
c) A program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, and timelines for implementation, that the local government is undertaking to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element, including actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the local government's share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the sites inventory without rezoning, among other things. (Government Code (GC) Section 65583(a)-(c))
2) Requires a local government's inventory of land suitable for residential development to be used to identify sites throughout the community that can be developed for housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need for all income levels. Defines "land suitable for residential • development" to include:
a) Vacant sites zoned for residential use;
AB 2580
b) Vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allows residential development; c) Residentially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher density, including sites owned or leased by a jurisdiction; and
d) Sites zoned for nonresidential use that can be redeveloped for residential use, and for which the housing element includes a program to rezone the site, as necessary and as specified. (GC 65583.2(a))
3) Requires a planning agency to provide an APR to the legislative body, the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by April 1 of each year that includes certain information, including:
a) The progress in meeting its share of the regional housing needs, including the need for extremely low-income households, and local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing included in the housing element;
b) The number of housing development applications received in the prior year, including whether each housing development application is subject to a ministerial or discretionary approval process;
c) The number of units included in all development applications in the prior year; d) The number of units approved and disapproved in the prior year; e) A listing of sites rezoned to accommodate that portion of the city or county's share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the housing element's site inventory and any sites that may have been required to be identified under the No Net Loss Zoning law; f) The number of housing units demolished and new units of housing, including both rental housing and for-sale housing, that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy, thus far in the housing element cycle, and the income category by area median income that each housing unit satisfies; g) Specified information related to density bonus applications; and h) Specified information related to Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 applications. (GC 65400(a)(2)(A)-(M))
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.
COMMENTS:
Author's Statement: According to the author, "AB 2580 enhances the transparency of the interaction between historic preservation and housing policy. It does so by requiring historic preservation policies and practices to be evaluated as potential constraints on housing in the Housing Element process, and ensures that cities disclose to HCD any newly adopted historical designations. By increasing this transparency, AB 2580 can help balance development of critically-needed housing production with protecting valuable historic resources." AB 2580
California's Housing Crisis: California is in the midst of a severe housing crisis. Over two- thirds of low-income renters are paying more than 30% of their income toward housing, a "rent burden" that means they have to sacrifice other essentials such as food, transportation, and health care.' In 2023, over 181,000 Californians experienced homelessness on a given night, with a sharp increase in the number of people who became homeless for the first time.? The crisis is driven in large part by the lack of affordable rental housing for lower income people. According to the California Housing Partnership's (CHP) Housing Need Dashboard, in the current market, nearly 2 million extremely low-income and very low-income renter households are competing for roughly 687,000 available and affordable rental units in the state. Over three-quarters of the state's extremely low-income households and over half of the state's very low-income households are severely rent burdened, paying more than 50% of their income toward rent each month. CHP estimates that the state needs an additional 1.3 million housing units affordable to very low-income Californians to eliminate the shortfall. By contrast, production in the past decade has been under 100,000 housing units per year - including less than 10,000 units of affordable housing per year.4
Historic Preservation: According to the US National Park Service, historic preservation is "a conversation with our past about our future," meaning it allows us to convey our understanding of the past to future generations. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which established a national preservation program and a system of procedural protections to identify and protect historic resources, was signed into law in 1966 as a result of the significant infrastructure and urban renewal projects taking place in the postwar era. Many cultural sites and archaeological resources were destroyed or at risk of alteration prior to enactment of the NHPA, so the Act took a multi-pronged approach to identifying, evaluating, and protecting historic and culturally significant properties. It established the National Register of Historic Places, which acts as the official federal inventory of historic sites across the country, and established a review process for federal agencies to consider the effects of their activities or programs on those historic properties. State and local governments, Native American tribes, and other cultural organizations also had roles and responsibilities under the Act, and California's Office of Historic Preservation, under the Director of California State Parks, implements our state's obligations under the NHPA.
Local governments and communities have an extremely important role in the historic preservation context as well, often identifying ways to adaptively reuse or preserve historic resources in local land use planning decisions. According to the latest version of California's Statewide Historic Preservation Plan, "Over the last 20 years or so, the scope of historic preservation planning practice has expanded beyond being concerned primarily with understanding the nature and significance of historic and cultural resources to integrating historic preservation into the broader land use planning and decision-making processes, and incorporating historic preservation into other social and economic concerns such as https://chpc.net/housingneeds/
https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ahar/2023-ahar-part-1-pit-estimates-of-homelessness-in-the-us.html https://chpc.net/housingneeds/
+ https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/housing-challenges.shtml 5 https://www.nps.gov/subjects/archeology/national-historic-preservation-act.htm 6https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=27961
AB 2580
sustainability, revitalization and community development, affordable housing, disaster preparedness planning and recovery, and environmental quality." Adoption and Implementation of Housing Elements: One important tool in addressing the state's housing crisis is to ensure that all of the state's 539 cities and counties appropriately plan for new housing. Such planning is required through the housing element of each community's General Plan, which outlines a long-term plan for meeting the community's existing and projected housing needs. Cities and counties are required to update their housing elements every eight years in most of the high population parts of the state, and five years in areas with smaller populations. Localities must adopt a legally valid housing element by their statutory deadline for adoption. Failure to do so can result in certain escalating penalties, including an accelerated deadline for completing rezoning, exposure to the "builder's remedy," public or private lawsuits, financial penalties, potential loss of permitting authority, or even court receivership.
Among other things, the housing element must demonstrate how the community plans to accommodate its share of its region's housing needs allocation (RHNA). To do so, each community establishes an inventory of sites designated for new housing that is sufficient to accommodate its fair share. Where a community does not already contain the existing capacity to accommodate its fair share of housing, it must undertake a rezoning program to accommodate the housing planned for in the housing element. Depending on whether the jurisdiction met its statutory deadline for housing element adoption, it will have either one year (if it failed to meet the deadline) or three years (if it met the deadline) from its adoption deadline to complete that rezoning program.
It is critical that local jurisdictions adopt legally compliant housing elements on time in order to meet statewide housing goals and create the environment locally for the successful construction of desperately needed housing at all income levels. Unless communities plan for production and preservation of affordable housing, new housing will be slow to build. Adequate zoning, removal of regulatory barriers, protection of existing stock and targeting of resources are essential to obtaining a sufficient permanent supply of housing affordable to all economic segments of the community. Although not requiring the community to develop the housing, housing element law requires the community to plan for housing. Recognizing that local governments may lack adequate resources to house all those in need, the law nevertheless mandates that the community do all that it can and that it not engage in exclusionary zoning practices.
One necessary component of the housing element is an assessment of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvement, fees and other exactions required of developers, local processing and permit procedures, and any locally adopted ordinances that directly impact the cost and supply of residential development. This analysis must also demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the development of housing at the income levels required by the RHNA process, as well as housing for people experiencing homelessness.
This bill would require the constraints analysis to include an assessment of the local government's historic preservation practices and policies, to push local governments to evaluate " California's Statewide Historic Preservation Plan 2019-2023 Update, https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/CAStatePlan_2019-2023_FINAL.pdf AB 2580
whether they are striking the right balance between the preservation of valuable historic resources and the production of essential new housing in their communities.
Annual Progress Reports: Current law requires all local jurisdictions to provide housing information annually to HCD via the APR, including the following information from the prior year and/or for the current eight-year housing element cycle:
• The number of housing development applications received, and whether those applications are subject to ministerial or discretionary approval; • The number of units included in all development applications; • The number of units approved and disapproved;
• For each income category, the number of net new units of housing, including both rental housing and for-sale housing, that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy;
• A unique site identifier (such as assessor's parcel number) for each entitlement, building permit, or certificate of occupancy;
• The number of applications submitted under the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022; and
• The overall progress in meeting its share of RHNA.
The APR also includes a housing element portion, which local governments must use to describe their progress in meeting their RHNA, local efforts to remove governmental constraints identified in their housing element, and actions taken toward completion of their housing element programs and the status of their compliance with the deadlines imposed in the housing element.
This bill would also require the APR to include a list of all historic designations listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic places by the local government in the past year, and further require that list to include an assessment of how those designations affect the ability of the locality to meet its housing needs. The committee may wish to consider whether the APR is the appropriate place to require a narrative-form analysis of how historic designations affect the locality's ability to meet its RHNA, as the bulk of information reported in the APR is quantitative and HCD's open data tools display information in many charts and graphs with data filters, rather than blocks of text.
Arguments in Support: According to California YIMBY, the bill's sponsor, "Historic preservation plays a vital role in protecting California's architectural heritage and conserving places of historical significance. Historic districts and buildings designated as "historically significant' receive special protections that subject new developments, building renovations, and design changes to a more rigorous and thorough review process to protect the integrity of historic elements. However, the ability to designate a building as "historically significant' or creating a new historic district often encourages abuse by individuals and small local groups who seek to prevent more inclusive and affordable housing development. There are also currently no measures in place to ensure local governments balance legitimate historic preservation with potential impacts on a community's ability to meet its housing needs. AB 2580 would require local jurisdictions to monitor how new historic designations could impact their ability to meet housing needs under existing state law and report new historic buildings and districts to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) during the Annual Progress Report of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment process." AB 2580
Arguments in Opposition: None on file.
Committee Amendments: Staff recommends the bill be amended as follows:
• Strike the assessment of how new historic designations affect the ability of a locality to meet its housing needs from the APR reporting, and instead move that component into the governmental constraints analysis of the housing element; and • In the APR, when localities are required to report a list of all new historic designations, also require the report to include information regarding the status of any housing development projects that were proposed for the sites newly designated as historic, including whether the projects have been entitled, whether any building permits have been issued for the project, and the number of units in the projects.
Government Code Section 65400(a)(2)(N). A list of all historic designations listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic places by the city or county in the past year and the status of any housing development projects proposed for the new historic designations, including an assessment of how those designations affeet the ability of the city or county to meet its housing needs. all of the following:
1) Whether the housing development project has been entitled.
Whether a building permit has been issued for the housing development project. 3) The number of units in the housing development project.
Section 65583(a)(5). An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, local processing and permit procedures, historic preservation practices and policies and an assessment of how existing and proposed historic designations affect the locality's ability to meet its share of the housing need pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), and any locally adopted ordinances that directly impact the cost and supply of residential development. The analysis shall also demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting its share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584 and from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities, supportive housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters identified pursuant to paragraph (7).
Related Legislation:
AB 2728 (Gabriel) of the current legislative session would make changes to housing element and APR requirements related to the production of housing under the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023, among other things. This bill is currently pending before this committee.
AB 2144 (Grayson) of the current legislative session adds evidence of compliance with existing law requirements for local governments to post fee schedules and other information on their websites to the list of information local governments must provide in their APR. This bill recently passed out of this committee on a 9-0 vote and is pending before the Assembly Committee on Local Government.
AB 2580
AB 2667 (Santiago) of the current legislative session would require the APR to include the number of housing units approved and disapproved in the prior year that are located within an opportunity zone, among other changes. This bill is currently pending before this committee.
Double Referred: This bill was also referred to the Assembly Committee on Local Government, where it will be heard should it pass out of this committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California YIMBY (Sponsor)
Abundant Housing LA
California Community Builders
Circulate San Diego
House Sacramento
Housing Action Coalition
John Ebneter, Planning Commissioner, City of San Mateo
Mountain View YIMBY
Noelia Corzo, San Mateo County Supervisor (District 2)
One San Mateo
San Mateo City Council Member Amourence Lee
San Mateo City Council Member Rick Bonilla
Seema Patel, Planning Commissioner, City of San Mateo
SPUR
Supervisor Warren Slocum
Uma Krishnan, President, San Mateo County Asian American Pacific Islander Alliance Willy's LLC
YIMBY Action
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Nicole Restmeyer / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085
ETHICS SAN MATEO
DEDICATED TO TRUTH, TRANSPARENCY AND ETHICAL CONDUCT IN CITY GOVERNMENT
ATTACHMENT
February 5, 2024_City Council Special Meeting Minio-Packet Note: The attached is a partial copy of the packet. The complete 114 page document can be prompting in
ETHICS MATE
S N
Copyright 2024 Ethics San Mateo - A California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation All Rights Reserved
www.EthicsSanMateo.com
Any person mcus of acrime presumed to be anent uninsun eries say cotert of law Any copyrighted material or images contained in this Statement of position and attachments remain the property of the copyright holder and are included in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act, the Fair Use doctrine.
COUNCIL MEMBERS
SAN
Lisa Diaz Nash, Mayor
CITY OF SAN MATEO Rob Newsom Jr., Deputy Mayor
City Council Special Meeting NATEO Rich Hedges
Amourence Lee
February 5, 2024
Adam Loraine
5:30 PM
CALIFORNIA
AGENDA ITEM
1. City Council Guidelines - Updates
Review and provide direction on proposed changes for consideration to the City Council's Guidelines.
CEQA:
CITY OF SAN MATEO City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Report
CALIFORNIN
Section Name: STUDY SESSION Account Number: 10-1111 File ID: 24-8419 Agenda Number: 1
TO: City Council
FROM: Alex Khojikian, City Manager
PREPARED BY: City Clerk's Office
MEETING DATE: February 05, 2024
SUBJECT:
City Council Guidelines - Updates
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and provide direction on proposed changes for consideration to the City Council's Guidelines and Code of Conduct BACKGROUND:
The City Council adopted its "Guidelines" to provide rules on how it conducts its business in August 2015. These were compiled from several stand-alone resolutions that the Council had historically relied on. The Guidelines have been amended seven times since its original adoption. This is due to several factors including law changes, process changes, experience with the rules and the realization of unintended consequences, trends in local governance practices, and in response to public concern raised on local issues. At the May 1, 2023 City Council meeting, a majority of Council supported bringing forward for consideration a more robust code of conduct in the Guidelines.
Staff is seeking direction from the Council on proposed language changes in the Guidelines in response to new or changing processes; to codify practices that have evolved since the last update in October 2022; and on the overhaul and update of a few major sections of the Guidelines having to do with meeting item hearing order, liaison assignments, and the Board and Commission appointment process. In addition, separate guidance is sought on replacing the current Council Member Conduct section with a more robust Code of Conduct that could entail a longer discussion and additional research.
The City Council has also adopted "Rules and Procedures" for its Boards and Commissions in a document aligned with the Council Guidelines (where applicable). At this study session, staff is looking for direction on the City Council Guidelines and then, as is our standard practice, will return for either another study session or for action on both the City Council's rules and with an updated Board and Commissions rules that mirrors changes directed in the Guidelines. If Council directs a Code of Conduct, one will be proposed and adapted specific to the Boards and Commissions also.
Name Change
Staff is recommending changing the name from "City Council Guidelines" to "City Council Rules and Procedures" to more closely align with the intent; which was to establish rules for conducting business. Calling them Guidelines diminishes the importance of this document and causes confusion. Keeping it a simple title and being more specific to the intent would be beneficial to everyone's understanding.
Council Rules - Current Practice Update
Attachment 1 is the current Guidelines ("Rules") with a tracked changes version of proposed changes to more closely match current practices which have evolved over the last year. These include:
CITY OF SAN MATEO
• Minor language neutrality updates, tense changes, and grammar changes throughout the document • Providing clarity on expectations and alignment of roles between the Mayor and the City Council • More specificity around decision making protocols on the dais • In response to experience with remote public comment, addressing limited public forum in public meetings • Standardizing the practice of speaker timing based on the number of speakers • Clarifying the appeal speaker order and rebuttal options Adding the AB 2449 check-in as part of the script at the beginning of every Council agenda • Removing some language that we don't practice and is not necessary, such as how many speakers under ceremonial items
• Aligning the Rules with current practices, for instance initially it was thought a majority vote was required to place an item on an agenda, but Council seems comfortable with a majority consensus without a formal vote • Updating the timing for publication for receiving public comment on an agenda item Note: Any section highlighted in yellow in the attachment will be discussed separately.
Order of Consideration on an Agenda Item - Chapter 7
Council is asked to provide direction on the proposed action to change the order of how an individual item is handled in the public consideration process. Staff is proposing exchanging the order of council questions with public comment as follows:
Currently:
1) Staff presentation
2) Council questions
3) Public comment
4) Council additional questions, discussion and deliberation 5) Vote or action
Proposed:
1) Staff presentation
2) Public Comment
3) Council questions
4) Discussion & deliberation
5) Vote or action
Council Liaison Roles - Chapter 12
Staff is seeking Council direction specifically on whether the designee of "continuity" continues to make sense for these assignments. There was very little movement on this year's assignment list from last year's assignments. The Rules actually state (Chapter 12, Section 5) that continuity is intended for external agencies liaison roles; but the Council had designated Planning Commission and the Sustainability & Infrastructure Commission as continuity assignments. Council elected this year to change Planning Commission from Continuity to Mayor and Deputy Mayor as the standard. An unintended consequence of these Continuity designations is that a single council member could be on a high-profile assignment for years and that may not be fair for other council members seeking a high-profile assignment. A discussion is desired on whether to continue the practice of Continuity designation or to limit or cap it in some way.
Board and Commission Appointment Process - Chapter 13
Several years ago, the City established an appointment sub-committee comprised of the Mayor and the Council liaison to the commission to be the interviewing body and to make the recommendation to the Council for any openings on the City's Boards and Commissions. Any Council Member could join any appointment sub-committee by requesting to do so.
All appointment sub-committee meetings are designated as Brown Act bodies and are open and public. In addition, they established the practice of creating a ranked eligibility list from those interviewed. The intent was to address long term vacancies that were occurring on commissions and be more efficient and timely in filling those vacancies. The staff liaison
CITY OF SAN MATEO
was also designated to be an advisor to the appointment sub-committee. The prior practice was for the full council to do all interviews. Staff is seeking direction on if the appointment sub-committee process is effective in the current environment, whether an eligibility list should or should not be used, and any other improvement in practices that need to occur.
Council Member Conduct - Chapter 6
Staff would like to receive direction on strengthening this section to provide more clarity on expectations, clearly laid out rules, relevant definitions to increase a common understanding, a process for public concern and complaints, and a discussion around repercussions for not following an adopted code of conduct.
First, many cities, towns, counties and states are actively looking at establishing or strengthening a Code of Conduct in response to the national trend highlighting a loss of civility and decorum in the political sphere and in public processes. In California, there is a significant increase in our professional ListServ inquiries to share codes of conduct as many organizations struggle with addressing this need. At the City Clerk's New Law conference this past December, "When Decorum and Civility Do Not Work, Then What?" which has not previously been an educational offering at past conferences. From the national to the local level there is a need to fearlessly address this. In the City of San Mateo, we have personally experienced issues on and off the dais and this has led to a loss of public trust. There is a great deal of public interest and comment in defining a robust Code of Conduct which includes a procedure to hold public officials accountable and includes an avenue and process to empower action when an inappropriate action occurs that will meet the needs of the City of San Mateo community.
It is incumbent upon the City Council to take the lead on establishing a robust Code of Conduct as the governing body sets the example for its appointed bodies, employees, and residents to follow. By modeling adherence to rules of civility and decorum, accountability, and ethics the City Council sets the tone for public discourse and action.
Code of Conduct - Research
In proposing some material for Council consideration of a code of conduct, we considered public comment received in meetings and in writing including information from residents. The City also relied on material from the Institute for Local Government (20 sample codes), and sample codes provided by the following cities in response to an inquiry on the Clerk's ListServ:
Behavior Sign an
Principles Communication* Enforcement
Values on the Affirmation
/ Purpose
Dais
x X
Belmont
2 Chowchilla X
3 Cypress x x
4 El Cerrito
5 Laguna x
Beach
6 Los Gatos
Redwood
7 City
Only for
nepotism or
8 Sacramento x violating
whistleblowing
9 San Carlos x X
10 Santa Cruz
X X
11 Sunnyvale
*Communication with colleagues, public, staff, advisory bodies
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Strategies to Strengthen Conduct
There are many ideas for strengthening Chapter 6 - Council Member Conduct to borrow from for Council consideration.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive or completely comprehensive list. Some strategies to think about include:
1. City Council Core Values - a listing of approximately six to ten values that are the underlying structure of the Code of Conduct and give guidance on how City officials conduct itself.
2. Principles - example: leadership and ethics must go hand-in-hand.
3. Development of an oath or member statement that includes the Code of Conduct requiring a signature affirming to have read, understood, and pledging adherence to the Code of Conduct for elected and appointed officials.
4. Begin the Code of Ethics with a clear purpose statement for its intended use.
5. Include a definition section defining the terms used to create clear and common understanding.
6. Better define the role and responsibility of Council Liaison to a commission
7. Establish an annual review of the Code as an ongoing practice.
8. Consider making the Code of Conduct be a separate stand-alone document to the Rules and Procedures.
9. Consider if all of the City's commissions be mandated to take AB1234 Ethics Training every two years.
Elements in a Code of Conduct
The following are some themes, and not proposed wording or staff recommendations, that Council may want to consider.
1. Code of Conduct for City officials (elected and appointed) a. Represent the entire City for the community good - Act in the public interest b. Comply with the spirit and the letter of the law and policy c. Model operating by the code in all conduct, on and off the dais d. Respect the public process and governance systems
e. Do not state opinion, until the public process has run its course (in all communication avenues) f. Be aware of speaking in your official capacity versus as a private citizen Do not use inflammatory language, be aware of your own bias h. Listen to all voices, all deserve to be heard
i. Ensure statements are factual
j. Assume good intentions of all
k. Be respectful of all roles and responsibilities (colleagues and staff) I. Be responsive to colleagues and staff with timely communication m. Operate with civility and decorum
2. Conduct on the Dais
a. Treat all with fairness and equity - specifically each other, staff, and members of the public with dignity, courtesy, and respect
b. Be attentive to others, limiting interruptions and distractions c. Encourage diverse viewpoints in debate while being mindful not to prolong discourse or block consensus d. Agree to respectfully disagree
e. Be open minded
f. Keep comments clear, concise and germane
g. Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate
h. Present issues in a way that promotes discussion and resolution i. Don't admonish or lecture
j. Keep campaign issues away from the dais
3. Actions to Enforce - some starter ideas
a. Private admonishment
b. Public admonishment Loss of committee assignments if repeated issues c. Automatic recusal if position stated ahead of the public process d. Other?
PAVARCAN RAATCA
4. Process to Enforce - need to define it
a. 'Who can report?
b. Who receives report?
c. How to report?
d. How is it acknowledged?
5. Boards & Commissions
a. Include all code and specify also advisory role not advocacy role b. Actions
i. Automatic reinterview for the seat
ii. Removal from commission per Charter
iii. Other?
Next Steps
Council to provide direction on the City Council Rules and direct for next steps:
1. Enough direction was given and staff will bring it back with a formal recommendation;
2. Or Council may choose to ask staff to schedule a second study session to continue to provide direction and feedback
3. Council could elect to appoint a Council sub-committee to work with the Clerk and key staff on crafting the additional code of conduct language for the Rules
4. Bring this back with a facilitator to assist with the conversation
5. Council could consider and direct a different process BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no budget impact from this administrative action.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This administrative action is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).)
NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - City Council Guidelines with Track Changes
Att 2-Sample Codes of Conduct https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/DocumentCenter/Index/5308 Att 3 - Public Comment
STAFF CONTACT
Patrice Olds, City Clerk
[email protected]
(650) 522-7042
CITY OF SAN MATEO
* *
ОМОГРОНАНА
City Council Rules and Procedures
Guidelines
Adopted on August 17, 2015
by Resolution No. 82(2015)
Amended by Council action on:
January 17, 2017, April 17, 2017, April 16, 2018, May 21, 2018, May 3, 2021, February 22, 2022, and October 17, 2022
City of San Mateo, Council Guidelines
Table of Contents
3 Chapter 1. Purpose and Overview.
4 Chapter 2. Authority of the City Council.
Key Governance Principles.... ..5
Chapter 3.
. 7
Chapter 4. Duties
.11
Chapter 5. Selection of Mayor and Deputy Mayor.
Council Member Conduct. 13
Chapter 6.
14 Chapter 7. Meetings
...20
Chapter 8. Meeting Agendas..
..23
Chapter 9. Financial Matters.
..28
Chapter 10. Communication
..33
Chapter 11. Legislative...
..36
Chapter 12. Council Liaison Roles.
Chapter 13. Boards and Commissions. ...39
..42
Chapter 14. References.
San Mateo City Council Guidelines Proposed Revisions 2/5/24 10/17/22 2 Chapter 1. Purpose and Overview
This handbook provides guidelines describes the way for the San Mateo City Council that describe the way the Councilto conduct dees its business and the expectations for members, staff and the public to operate and engage with each other and the community as a whole. It is a compilation of all Council-related rules and procedures that have been formally adopted by Council.
The purpose of these Rules and Procedures (Rules) guidelines is to set a standard of professionalism, civility and decorum-for the conduct of the City Council's business. San Mateo has a long and proud tradition of open government and civil, intelligent public discourse. These guidelines are intended to enhance public participation and Council debate so that the best possible decisions can be made for San Mateo.
Revisions to these Rules and ProceduresGuidelines
Amendments to these rules These guidelines, which must be approved by the City Council as a body, and are subject to review and future modification as needed.
City Council Vision
The City Council's vision and strategic goals can be found on the City's website:
http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/index.aspx?nid=167
San Mateo City Council Guidelines Proposed Revisions 2/5/24 10/17/22 Chapter 2. Authority of the City Council
1. The City Council is the policy and lawmaking body of the City. State and local laws define the powers and responsibilities of the City Council.
2. General Authorities and Applicability
Charter section 2.12 and the San Mateo Municipal Code provide that the City Council shall determine its own rules and order of business. When not in conflict with the Charter of the City of San Mateo, or the Constitution or laws of the State of California, these City •Council Guidelines ("Guidelines") shall be in effect upon adoption by resolution of the Council.
3. Revisions to these Rules
The Council shall review and revise these Rules Guidelines as needed.
Rosenberg's Rules of Order
To the extent these Rules Guidelines do not address an issue of parliamentary procedure for legislative body meetings, Rosenberg's Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedures for the 21st Century shall apply.
San Mateo City Council Guidelines Proposed Revisions 2/5/24 10/17/22