April 15, 2025
Mayor Alice Patino
City Council Members
City of Santa Maria
100 Cook Street
Santa Maria, CA 93454
RE: Request for Continuance – Quimby Fee Ordinance Amendment (Ordinance No. 2025-01)
Dear Mayor Patino and City Council Members,
As a local builder with a significant project on the City’s upcoming development pipeline, and as the current President of the Home Builders Association of the Central Coast, I respectfully submit this letter for the record regarding the proposed amendment to the Quimby Fee Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2025-01), scheduled for first reading.
While I fully support the City’s parks system and agree that improvements to its structure are warranted, I have serious concerns about both the substance of the proposed changes and the limited opportunity for stakeholder input. Neither I nor the majority of the HBA membership—outside of the Coastal Community Builders—was provided an opportunity to offer feedback or engage meaningfully in the development of these changes. Given the short notice and significant implications, I respectfully request that the City Council continue this item to allow time for additional review and collaborative discussion with the development community.
My primary concerns with the ordinance as currently drafted include:
1. Timing of Fee Payment
The proposed ordinance requires payment of Quimby fees at building permit issuance (Sections 11-9.05(k) and (54)), diverging from the current standard of payment at occupancy clearance. Advancing this payment obligation increases developers’ carrying costs and can ultimately impact project feasibility and housing affordability in Santa Maria.
2. Lack of Clarity on ADUs and SB 9 Projects
The ordinance does not address how fees will be applied to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) or projects pursued under Senate Bill 9. This omission creates uncertainty around compliance for these increasingly common housing types and may inadvertently discourage their production.
3. Potential Misalignment with the Quimby Act
Section 11-9.05(n) allows for fees to be used on “rehabilitation” of existing parks, which appears to conflict with the Quimby Act’s intent that such funds support new parkland acquisition or the development of new recreational facilities. This could dilute resources meant to serve growing communities.
4. Reduced Credit for Private Recreational Amenities
The proposed reduction in credit for private on-site recreational facilities—from 60% to 20% (Section 11-9.05(43))—disincentivizes the inclusion of clubhouses, pools, and other amenities that serve residents and reduce demand on public parks. This shift undermines a longstanding and effective approach to balancing public and private resources.
5. Insufficient Stakeholder Engagement
The development community has not had adequate opportunity to review or comment on the ordinance. Only one meeting was held on March 13, 2024, which was poorly noticed and sparsely attended—many key stakeholders, including myself, were unaware it was taking place. I am more than willing to help organize additional workshops to ensure the ordinance reflects broader input and builds on the City’s history of collaborative policy-making.
Additionally, I share the concerns raised by Urban Planning Concepts regarding the February 2025 appraisal and its applicability, as well as the ordinance’s potential impact on existing development agreements, including the Blosser Ranch project. These matters merit further review to avoid legal and practical complications.
On behalf of MD3 Investments, I urge the City Council to postpone action on this ordinance and direct staff to engage with the Home Builders Association, local developers, and other stakeholders in a more robust public process. I am happy to make myself available to set up an HBA meeting with local developers to provide feedback. A thoughtful, inclusive approach will help ensure the ordinance advances the City’s park goals while also supporting housing production and economic growth.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to working with you and City staff to improve this ordinance and welcome the opportunity to participate in future discussions.
Sincerely,
Michael Stoltey
MD3 Investments