Union City City Council
May 28, 2024

CITYOF UNION CITYAPPROVING AND RE-ADOPTING A MILITARY
EQUIPMENT USE POLICYAS STATED IN CHAPTER 2.62 “MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY” OF THE UNION CITY MUNICIPAL CODE; AND REVIEW OF 2023 ANNUAL MILITARY EQUIPMENT REPORT IN
COMPLIANCE WITHASSEMBLY BILL 481
Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and introduce by title only an Ordinance approving and re-adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy as stated in Chapter 2.62 "Military Equipment Use Policy" of the Union City Municipal Code in compliance with Assembly Bill 481.

Assembly Bill 481 requires the City of Union City Police Department (UCPD) to submit to the City Council an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval and annually thereafter, and based upon the annual report, obtain City Council approval to renew the military equipment use policy via adoption of an ordinance.

The City Council originally adopted this ordinance on June 14, 2022, and most recently approved and reaffirmed UCPD's policy on May 23, 2023, and is required to review the ordinance and re-adopt it annually at a public meeting to comply with Assembly Bill 481 and as required in Chapter 2.62 of the Municipal Code.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Goal C: Economic, Community development and Public Safety Strategy 13:Align public safety services with community needs

BACKGROUND
Effective January 1, 2022, Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481), codified at Government Code (GC) section 7070, et City Council/RSA Agenda 651 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
seq., requires that the City of Union City Police Department (UCPD) obtain City Council approval of a military equipment use policy via adoption of an ordinance before purchasing, raising funds for, acquiring or using "military equipment" as defined in Government Code §7070(c).

Under AB 481, the City Council may only approve the policy if it makes specific findings regarding the equipment including safeguards, cost effectiveness, reasonableness of use, and fiscal impact. In 2022 and 2023, the City Council unanimously approved the Department’s policy finding it meets the requirements under AB 481 and introduced an ordinance adding Chapter 2.62, “Military Equipment Use Policy” to the Union City Municipal Code. The City Council subsequently adopted this ordinance. The Policy establishes procedures associated with the continued and future use of military equipment by the Union City Police Department.

Additionally, under AB 481 the City Council must review the ordinance that it has adopted, approving of the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment, at least annually, and vote on whether to renew the ordinance at a regular meeting. During the review process, the City Council must determine, based on the military equipment report submitted under § 7072, whether each type of military equipment in the report has complied with the standards for approval set forth in §7071(d)(1) and §7071(e)(2). If it determines a type of equipment identified in the report has not complied with the standards for approval, the City Council must either disapprove of the renewal of the ordinance or require modifications to the military equipment use policy in a manner that will resolve the lack of compliance.

DISCUSSION
Annual Report
A law enforcement agency that has a military equipment use policy shall submit to the City Council an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment that has been approved over the past year, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The law enforcement agency shall also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on its internet website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. This annual report must include the following information:

A summary of any complaints or concerns received regarding the military equipment.

The results of any internal audits or information about violations of the military equipment use policy.

This includes any actions taken in response.

The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.

The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment.

If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.

A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

In addition, UCPD is required to re-submit the previously approved policy for re-approvalconsideration as an agenda item at a City Council meeting. The previously approved policy is attached to this report.

The attached 2023 Annual Use Report outlines UCPD's military equipment inventory and usage, community complaints over use of military equipment, and internalaudits. An inventory was completed in April of 2024, which identified all the Department's military equipment in preparation to fulfill the obligations set by Assembly Bill 481. Equipment used by the Department during the preceding year is found to be consistent with current Policy. No complaints concerning the equipment were made to the Department.

Renewal of Military Equipment Use Policy
City Council/RSA Agenda 652 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
UCPD is required to re-submit the previously approved policy for re-approvalconsideration, as an agenda item during a regular City Council meeting. The previously approved policy is attached to this report. The City Council must determine, based on the annual military equipment report, whether each type of military equipment identified in the report has complied with the following:

1. The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.

2. The policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.

3. If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.

Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.

UCPD does not anticipate any significant change in the previously approved policy or previously authorized military equipment. At this time, UCPD does not intend to acquire additional types of military equipment, however, future acquisition of new equipment will comply with procedures set forth in the Government Code and the approved Military Equipment Use Policy; this includes a public hearing and City Council approval prior to acquisition. At this time, forecasted purchases for UCPD in 2024 only include additional ammunition that needs to be replenished after being used in training environments. All items needing to be replenished are included in the policy and attached inventory that was previously approved by the City Council.

UCPD inventory and all costs associated with the use of this equipment is consistent with the Military Equipment inventory list, City policy, and the Department's budget, which also was approved by the City Council. It should be noted, these operating costs are reasonable estimates that are subject to changes made by vendors and/or manufacturers based on variables related to availability, shipping, and general market increases. Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing an annual military equipment report, UCPD is required to hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting where the general public may discuss and ask questions regarding the annual military equipment report and the law enforcement agency’s funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment. Outreach efforts to publicize the meeting include posting notices of this meeting on the Department's website and social media platforms. A community engagement meeting was held on May 20, 2024.

In compliance with the Government Code, the Military Equipment Use Policy has remained on the Police Department’s transparency portal continuously since prior to City Council adoption in 2022, and the Annual Military Equipment Use report was released to the community via the Police Department’s transparency portal on February 27, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund. The development and ongoing compliance with the provisions of AB 481 will be managed by existing staff and funded through the UCPD budget, which was approved by the City Council.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council waive full reading and introduce by title only an Ordinance Approving and Re-Adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy as Stated in Chapter 2.62 “Military Equipment Use Policy” of the Union City Municipal Code in Compliance with Assembly Bill 481.

Prepared by:

City Council/RSA Agenda 653 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Brian Baumgartner, Police Captain
Submitted by:

Brian Baumgartner, Police Captain
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proposed Ordinance Ordinance
Exhibit A - Military Equipment Policy Exhibit
Exhibit B- 2023 Military Equipment Inventory Exhibit
Exhibit C- 2023Annual Use Report Exhibit
2023 Military Equipment PowerPoint Presentation Attachment City Council/RSA Agenda 654 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

ORDINANCE NO. XXX-24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF UNION CITY APPROVING AND RE-ADOPTING A

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY AS STATED IN
CHAPTER 2.62 “MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY”

OF THE UNION CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, IN
COMPLIANCE WITH ASSEMBLY BILL 481
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 481 relating to the use of military equipment by California law enforcement agencies; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481 seeks to provide transparency, oversight, and an opportunity for meaningful public input on decisions regarding whether and how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used by law enforcement agencies; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, codified in California Government Code section 7070, et. seq., requires law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing body, by an ordinance adopting a “military equipment” use policy, at a regular meeting held pursuant to open meeting laws, prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment. The term “military equipment” is defined in California Government Code section 7070(c); and
WHEREAS, the policy must be a document covering the inventory, description, purpose, use, acquisition, maintenance, fiscal impacts, procedures, training, oversight, and complaint process applicable to the police department’s use of such equipment; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481 allows the governing body of a city to approve the military equipment use policy for continued or future funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it makes specified determinations specified in Government Code section 7071(d); and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance 899-22 approving and adopting a military equipment use policy identified as Union City Police Department Policy 709, having received the information required under Assembly Bill 481 regarding the Union City Police Department’s use of military equipment as defined in said law and upon a finding of the specified determinations required under Government Code Section 7071(d); and WHEREAS, Government Code section 7072 provides that a law enforcement agency that receives approval for a military equipment use policy pursuant to Section 7071 shall submit to the governing body an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved by the governing body within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use; and
WHEREAS, the law enforcement agency shall also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on its internet website for as long as the military equipment is available for use; and
City Council/RSA Agenda 655 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Ordinance No. XXX-24
Readopting Military Use Equipment Pursuant to AB 481

WHEREAS, the annual military report shall include the following information for the immediately preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment:
a. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use; b. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment;
c. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response; d. The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report;
e. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment; f. If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 7071(d) provides the governing body shall determine, based on the annual military equipment report submitted pursuant to Section 7072, whether each type of military equipment identified in that report has complied with the following standards for approval:
a. The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; b. The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties;
c. If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety;
d. Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance; and
WHEREAS, if the governing body determines that a type of military equipment identified in that annual military equipment report has not complied with the standards for approval set forth above, the governing body shall either disapprove a renewal of the authorization for that type of military equipment or require modifications to the military equipment use policy in a manner that will resolve the lack of compliance; and
WHEREAS, the governing body shall review any ordinance that it has adopted approving the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment at least annually and vote on whether to renew the ordinance at a regular meeting held pursuant to open meeting laws; and City Council/RSA Agenda 656 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Ordinance No. XXX-24
Readopting Military Use Equipment Pursuant to AB 481

WHEREAS, the Union City Police Department’s annual military equipment report and policy was posted on the department’s internet website on May 8th, 2024, and no more than thirty (30) days prior to the well-publicized public meeting concerning the renewal of the military equipment on May 20th, 2024, at issue in compliance with Government Code Section 7072 (b); and
WHEREAS, the Union City Police Department seeks renewal of Policy 709, presented to the City Council on May 28, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Union City Police Department's Military Equipment Policy (Exhibit A), the 2023 Military Equipment Inventory (Exhibit B), and the 2023 Military Equipment Use Report (Exhibit C) as part of this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Union City, having received the information required under Assembly Bill 481 regarding the Union City Police Department’s renewed use of military equipment as defined in said law, and makes the specified determinations required under Government Code Section 7070, et. seq., deems it to be in the best interest of the City to approve and renew the Union City Police Department’s Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy as set forth in the policy identified as Union City Police Department Policy 709.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

The above recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Ordinance.

SECTION 2. Determinations.

Based on the findings above, in addition to information provided to the City Council at the public meeting, the City Council determines as follows:

1. The military equipment identified in the annual military equipment report has complied with the standards for approval as set forth in Government Code section 7071 subdivision (d).

2. The Union City Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy is necessary because there are no reasonable alternatives that can achieve the same objectives of officer and civilian safety.

3. The Union City Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.

4. The military equipment identified in the Union City Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objectives of officer and civilian safety.

5. Prior military equipment use by the Union City Police Department complied with the Military Equipment Use Policy although it was not yet in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, City Council/RSA Agenda 657 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Ordinance No. XXX-24
Readopting Military Use Equipment Pursuant to AB 481

corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.

6. The Union City Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy, Policy 709, setting forth the City’s military equipment use policy is approved and renewed.

SECTION 3. Severability.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each of every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. CEQA.

Approval of the ordinance is exempt from further environmental review under the general rule in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. As a series of text amendments and additions that do not authorize any new activity, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 5. Publication and Effective Date.

Within fifteen (15) days from and after adoption, this Ordinance shall be published once in the TriCity Voice, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Union City, in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption.

City Council/RSA Agenda 658 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Ordinance No. XXX-24
Readopting Military Use Equipment Pursuant to AB 481

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on this 11th day of June by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
Attachments:

1. Exhibit A – Military Equipment Policy

2. Exhibit B – 2023 Military Equipment Inventory

3. Exhibit C – 2023 Annual Use Report
City Council/RSA Agenda 659 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 660 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 661 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 662 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 663 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 664 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 665 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 666 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 667 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 668 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 669 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 670 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 671 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 672 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 673 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 674 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 675 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 676 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 677 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 678 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 679 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 680 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 681 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 682 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 683 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 684 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 685 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 686 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
2023 MILITARY EQUIPMENT

ANNUAL REPORT
2023 MILITARY EQUIPMENT

ANNUAL REPORT
City Council/RSA Agenda 687 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

STRATEGIC
PLAN

ALIGNMENT
Goal C
Economic,
Community
Development, and
Public Safety
S t r a t e g y 13
Align Public
Safety Services
with Community
Needs
City Council/RSA Agenda 688 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

TIMELINE
J a n u a r y 1, 2 0 2 2
AB 481 requires our
city to adopt our
policy by way of an
ordinance
J u n e 14, 2022
Our policy was
adopted by City
Council
March 28, 2023
Held our first annual
Military Use Report
Community
Engagement Meeting
February 27, 2023
Our first annual
Military Use Report
was published and
posted on our website
City Council/RSA Agenda 689 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

CITY COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITIES
Review the policy
at least annually
Ensure our
equipment is
necessary and
without reasonable
alternative
Ensure our
equipment is cost
effective
Ensure our
equipment
safeguards welfare,
safety, civil rights &
liberties
Annually vote on
renewal
City Council/RSA Agenda 690 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

ALL ITEMS ASSIST US IN ACHIEVING
AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIVES:• Enhancing the tactical advantage of officers.• Aiding in the rescue of injured community members.
• Protecting life and property or improving the
likelihood that an incident would be resolved without the use of deadly force or other forceoptions. • Controlling and/or deescalating a violent
individual with less likelihood of seriousinjury to both the subject and the involved officers.

City Council/RSA Agenda 691 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.The results of any internal audits or information about violations of the military equipment use policy. This includes any actions taken in response.The total annual cost and quantity.The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment & forecasted purchases for the following year.A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

Per Government Code
§ 7072, our annual report was posted on our website and provided to Council on 05-28-24. The report included the following information:

City Council/RSA Agenda 692 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Complaints Violations Forecasted Purchases
City Council/RSA Agenda 693 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
• At this time, UCPD does not intend to
acquire additional military equipment
in 2024.
• We only intend to purchase items
needed to maintain inventory for previously approved military equipment. • Our department inventory and all
associated costs are believed to be consistent with our inventory list, policy, and department budget, previously approved by the City Council. • Fiscal Impact: All current military
equipment has been budgeted for and purchased. The development and ongoing compliance with the provisions of AB 481 with be managed by existing staff.

City Council/RSA Agenda 694 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Precision & AR-15 Rifles & Ammunition
Less Lethal Launchers, Kinetic Energy Devices, Smoke Canisters & Chemical MunitionsNoise & Flash Distraction Devices (Flash Bangs) Breaching Shotguns & Frangible Ammunition LENCO BEARCAT G2 (ARV)Mobile Command Center Vehicle (MCV) Unmanned Aerial SystemsROBOTEX House Clearing Robot Union City Police Department

MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
City Council/RSA Agenda 695 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
LENCO BEARCAT G2 (ARV)
City Council/RSA Agenda 696 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

MOBILE COMMAND

VEHICLE (MCV)
City Council/RSA Agenda 697 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (DRONES)

ROBOTEX ROBOT (HOUSE CLEARING)
City Council/RSA Agenda 698 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the CityCouncil waive full readingand introduce by title onlyan Ordinance Approvingand Re-Adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy as Stated in Chapter 2.62 ‘Military Equipment Use Policy’ of the Union City Municipal Code.

City Council/RSA Agenda 699 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
QUESTIONS? 510-471-1365
www.UnionCity.org34009 Alvarado Niles Road
[email protected]
City Council/RSA Agenda 700 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 5/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOAN MALLOY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: PROVIDE DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE SITE OF THE LARRY OROZCO TEEN WORKSHOP AT 33623 MISSION BOULEVARD AN

HISTORIC LANDMARK
Staff is seeking direction from the City Council on whether the City should consider the site of the Larry Orozco Teen Workshop at 33623 Mission Boulevard as an historic landmark that would be subject to Chapter 18.106 Landmark and Historic Preservation (LHP) Overlay Zone of the Municipal Code, and to prepare the appropriate documentation and application for the City Council to make a decision.

This consideration is forwarded to the City Council at the unanimous recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
There is no direct alignment with the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND
On July 12, 2023, Parks and Recreation Commissioner Chuck Kennedy requested that the Parks and Recreation Commission consider recommending to the City Council that the Larry Orozco Teen Workshop at 33623 Mission Boulevard be designated as an historical location to protect the site from future development or redevelopment (July 12, 2023 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes, attached). On October 11, 2023 the Commission considered the topic (October 11, 2023 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes, attached). In conclusion of the discussion about the history of the property, the Commission unanimously agreed that the City Council should consider the site to be designated as an historic location. Should the City Council designate the property as an historic landmark, it would be subject to Chapter 18.106 Landmark and Historic Preservation (LHP) Overlay Zone of the Municipal Code.

City Council/RSA Agenda 701 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

DISCUSSION
Property History
The site under consideration is the location of the old Mohawk Fireball Gas Station at 33623 Mission Boulevard that was built in the 1930s. At some time in the past, the gas station was decommissioned, and the gas pumps were removed. The underground storage tanks have also been removed.

In the 1970s, with the City’s support, a Youth Employment program that had been operating at satellite locations moved into the old Mohawk gas station property and continued operations rent-free. Staffed by Ruben Uriarte, Jaime Jaramillo, and Larry Orozco, the former gas station became the hub of community teen employment and provided job skill development that included sign making, screen printing, adobe brick making, sales, bike repairs, auto body repairs, moving, house and fence painting, babysitting, gardening, and recycling of newspapers, cans, and bottles. The Mural Project began as a chance design that would later result in the repainting of the exterior of the building.

In approximately 1981, the City purchased the building and eventually funded the Youth Employment program placing it under the Leisure Services Department. The site continued to be used for bicycle repair, screen printing, photography, and a teen employment referralcenter. A recycling program for aluminum and newspapers was established at the Youth Employment building. This location is where Richard Valle started the early days of Tri-CED.

Through the 1990s to the present, the Youth Program became the Teen Employment Program, and then the Teen Workshop. The Teen Workshop added creative and industrial arts projects including ceramics/pottery, welding, filmmaking, and video editing instruction. Weekend group biking trips have been popular with the teens. In recent years the Workshop restored the adjacent vegetable gardens with local volunteers; worked in collaboration with the Logan Art Department to restore the murals on the outside of the building, and hosting bi-annual swap meets, where localcar and bike enthusiasts come together to swap and or sellauto and bicycle parts.

The building was named after Larry Orozco in 2017 to honor his dedication and work for over 38 years in the Community and Recreation Services Department.

The property was recently rezoned to Corridor Mixed Use Commercial and has a similar General Plan designation of Corridor Mixed Use Commercial.

Landmark and Historic Preservation Zone
Municipal Code Chapter 18.106, Article 2, Landmark and Historic Preservation (LHP) Overlay Zone, lays out a process to designate a site and or building as an historic landmark. This is done through a Zoning Map amendment to add an LHP designation to the property, which is recommended by the Planning Commission with the City Council being the final decision maker. Chapter 18.106.120 includes specific findings that must be made by the Council in order to designate a site as an historic landmark. The findings focus on age, local significance, and architectural significance. The City would engage a historical consultant to prepare a study regarding the historical significance of the property that would be used as the basis to make the required findings.

Chapter 18.106 also includes requirements for when a landmark is upgraded or demolished. For privatelyowned historic landmarks, proposed major changes to interior and exterior architectural features are subject City Council/RSA Agenda 702 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
to Site Development Review. City-owned properties would be exempt from this process. However, Cityowned historic landmark buildings undergoing renovation would be required to conform to the Secretary of the Interior Standards, which seek to preserve and protect the integrity of the historic resource. The Secretary of the Interior Standards could limit the ability to modify the building or site. Demolition of a historic landmark would also require a discretionary review process and certain findings would need to be made in order for the decision-making body to approve the demolition.

Sites or buildings that are locally designated as an historic landmark are considered an “historical resource” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Changes to a historical resource, including renovation, additions, or demolition, are subject to CEQA review. The level of CEQA review will depend on the scope of the project. Typically, demolition of a historic resource triggers preparation of an EIR as there are no feasible mitigations to lessen the environmental impact.

Designating a property as an historic landmark would encumber the site and potentially restrict the use of the land and possibly complicate future modification to the building. Such a designation could also require that the property and building be maintained in a specific manner to retain historic features.

In lieu of formally designating this site with the LHP Overlay Zone, the City could mark the property with a monument, plaque, or interpretive panels as a way of highlighting the site’s rich history.

FISCAL IMPACT
Should the City Council desire to consider designating this property as an historic landmark, an analysis about the socialand architectural significance of the site and building should be prepared by a third party.

The cost of such an analysis is expected to cost between $10,000 and $20,000.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the request to designate the Larry Orozco Teen Workshop at 33623 Mission Boulevard as an historic landmark and provide direction to staff. Should the City Council wish to proceed with an historical analysis, staff would increase the professional services budget in the Economic and Community Development Department for the FY 2024-2025 to cover this additionalcost.

Prepared by:

Joan Malloy, City Manager
Carmela Campbell, Economic and Community Development Director Corina Hanh, Community and Recreation Services Director Submitted by:

Joan Malloy
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
City Council/RSA Agenda 703 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Attachment 1 -Application Attachment
Attachment 2 - Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes, July 12, 2023
Attachment
Attachment 3 - Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes, October 10, 2023
Attachment
Item7.b. - Written Public Comment - Received 2024-05-23 Attachment City Council/RSA Agenda 704 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 705 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-7-12

MINUTES

CITY OF UNION CITY

PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wednesday, July 12, 2023 - 7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER – 7:04 PM
II. ROLL CALL – David Acosta, Albert Chin, Chuck Kennedy, Steve Nichols, Daniel Rivera, and Chairperson Cheris Crocker-Root
• In Attendance: David Acosta, Albert Chin, Steve Nichols, Chuck Kennedy and Chairperson Cheris Crocker-Root
• Absent: Daniel Rivera
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Jun 14, 2023
• Commissioner Acosta motioned, seconded by Commissioner Nichols with unanimous approval with edit of item K, changing “renaming” to “naming” for potential site dedication for Supervisor Valle IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (3 Minute Limit) - none
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - none
VI. STAFF REPORTS
A. Recreation Program Report – Program Coordinator Rob Magbanua • Personal training has been very popular at the Sports Center • Coordinator Magbanua has been focused on CRS’s online pages and resources and has recently had all Sports Center flyers translated into Spanish • Parkinson’s grant provided $10,000 pay for 60 online virtual Parkinson’s Exercise programs • Online testimonials about the classes have been added to the web pages • July is Parks & Recreation Month has increased visibility of classes, courses and parks, including the Old Alvarado reopening
• Coordinator Magbanua played a video of the park reopening and highlighted the CRS YouTube page
B. Community and Recreation Services Report – Community & Recreation Services Director Corina Hahn
• Old Alvarado Park reopening and ribbon cutting had a nice turn out of residents • Upcoming Events
• Movie nights in the months of July, each Friday evening at the Kennedy Amphitheatre • Larry O Senior Car show to be held on Saturday, August 12th • National Night Out will be held at Union Landing on August 1st, starting at 4:00 • Studio 11 is running half day art camps and Aquatics is completely full for the summer • Camp Hedgehog had the Great America outing today, June 14th • Director Hahn reminded the Commissioners of Commission openings. Also, the City budget has been approved
• The volunteer summer Sandlot program, in partnership with Police, has been a great success at Townsend Park
• Supervisor Valuckas spoke of the previous evenings Council meeting and the Park & Recreation Month Proclamation
C. Public Works Report – Public Works Grounds Supervisor Jesus Banuelos • Weed abatement is 90% complete
• Large homeless encampments have been cleaned up, 21 truckloads of refuse were collected over a three day period
• Old Alvarado Park work is complete and the park is now officially reopen • Veteran’s Park ballfields are being worked on to keep them up for the season • Aerating at Seabreeze and Pioneer are underway
• Wood fiber is being added to playgrounds throughout the City • Seasonal interviewing is underway for open positions
• Minimal damage on Fourth of July. All Council Members conducted ride-a-longs with Police • Bob Calderon is the new Public Works Super Intendent
City Council/RSA Agenda 706 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-7-12
VII. COMMISSION MATTERS
A. Green Team Update
• Program Coordinator Cruz has scheduled the next meeting for next Wednesday, the 21st at 5:30, Commission will be emailed the Zoom invite
• Supervisor Valuckas will send the Casa Verde gardeners an invite to next Green Team meeting.

B. Update for Second Dog Park
• No update – remove from agenda
C. Kennedy Youth Center Café Coffee Shop
• No update
D. Sports Advisory Committee / Youth Field Rental Fees
• Small crowd at the last meeting. Soccer and cricket tournaments are being planned E. New Haven Unified School District (NHUSD) Updates
• Summer ends this week, no new updates
F. Old Alvarado Park Reopening Tuesday, July 11 at 11 am • Reopening was a success with a good turnout of local residents G. Repurposing Fields for Different Sports / Request for Dedicated Pickle Ball Courts • Current court resurfacing at Veterans Park will be for tennis only, potential separate locations for pickleball being discussed
H. Joint Meeting with the Youth Commission for Future Workshop • No update
I. New Haven School Foundation Scholarship Update and Promotion of the Daniel Camarillo Scholarship
• Further discussion at next meeting when Commissioner Rivera is back J. A Tribute to Supervisor Valle
• 11th Street plaza with fountain does not have an official name, so it is a possibility for a dedication to Supervisor Valle. Future Mid-Pen Housing location on Mission and Second is also a possibility
K. Unsanctioned Casa Verde Neighborhood Garden
• Resident Joe Leal – Supports the garden and spoke highly of the work that Laurie has done • Resident Josephine Pederson – Lots of work was done to clean up that section of the park, with many hazards removed
• Resident Dennis Chiem – Spoke of the health benefits of the garden • Resident Laurie Casebrer – Spoke on her education and work experience and why she is a good candidate for managing the garden
• Director Hahn has not found any existing examples of a neighborhood garden being on city park property. Next steps are to look at alternatives, adding additional community gardens and making this one an official garden that would fall under the current community garden guidelines
• Chair Crocker-Root outlined some of the requirements for the current program and asked about hurdles of pushing this forward
• Supervisor Banuelos spoke of the possibilities of creating a secondary community garden on a plot of land that isn’t currently zoned for a park
• Director Hahn suggested a sub-committee be created to explore options of a second community gardenl
• Commissioner Chin suggested speaking to the City Attorney • Commissioner Nichols questioned the legality and the liability should someone get hurt by the work that has been done
L. Fall Park Tour
• Commissioner Nichols would like to add the new Mid Pen planned development to the tour along with the Station District location and the 11th street landing • September 30th tentative tour date
M. Cancellation of August Commission Meeting
• Commissioner Acosta motioned with a second by Commissioner Kennedy, unanimous approval
City Council/RSA Agenda 707 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-7-12
VIII. ITEM(S) REFERRED BY COUNCIL – Councilmember Liaison Scott Sakakihara • No updates
IX. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• Commissioner Kennedy would like to explore designating the Larry O Bike Shop as a Historical Location to save it from potential development in the future and what those requirements are
• Supervisor Valuckas will research and advise the Commission at the next meeting on September 13th
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER
• Commissioner Nichols suggested Council and staff visit Hayward parks that have been updated. He would also like to find out if there was grant money involved and what the City could do to capitalize on grant funds
• Commissioner Kennedy mentioned the upcoming “Top Hat” Gala being held on October 14th by the Washington Hospital Foundation.
• Supervisor Banuelos researched commission request and confirmed there is no dedicated parking for bus riders using the Union Landing bus station behind Lowe’s.

XI. ADJOURNMENT
• 9:15 PM - Commissioner Acosta motioned, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy with unanimous approval
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding an item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Counter at City Hall located at 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City, California, during normal business hours. Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Interested persons must request the accommodation at least two working days in advance of the meeting by calling the City Clerk’s office at 510-675-5348.

City Council/RSA Agenda 708 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-10-11

MINUTES

CITY OF UNION CITY

PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wednesday, October 11, 2023 - 7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE – 7:02 PM
II. ROLL CALL – David Acosta, Albert Chin, Chuck Kennedy, Steve Nichols, Daniel Rivera, Madhu Singh and Chairperson Cheris Crocker-Root
• In Attendance: Albert Chin, Steve Nichols, Chairperson Cheris Crocker-Root and alternate Santiago Gonzalez
• Absent: David Acosta (excused), Chuck Kennedy
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – September 13, 2023
• Commissioner Nichols motioned, seconded by Commissioner Rivera with unanimous approval IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (3 Minute Limit)
• Ruben Uriarte – would like to have the bike shop considered as a historical site. Spoke of the history of the location and types of work that teens would do there. • Maria Ramirez – spoke against Quarry Lakes Parkway and saving the Ramirez Farm. She would like the City to conduct neighborhood meetings to discuss
• Liz Ames – also spoke of the history of the farm and that the Quarry Lakes Parkway should not happen
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
• none
VI. STAFF REPORTS
A. Recreation Program Report – Recreation Supervisor Maynard Estrellado • Supervisor Estrellado gave a membership recap of the Mark Green Sports Center • Membership has steadily increased over the fiscal year. The fiscal year began with 1,216 members and ended with 1,609. Goal is to be around 2,000 members • Revenue has also steadily increased. Fiscal year began with a monthly revenue of $17,000 and ended with monthly revenue of $29,000
• Member demographics was given
• Chair Crocker-Root suggested advertising that people’s health insurance may include a free membership to a gym. Supervisor Estrellado will add something to the website to point this out.
• Chair Crocker-Root asked that the staff presentation be emailed to the Commission; Supervisor Estrellado will send it out
B. Community and Recreation Services Report – Recreation Supervisor Maynard Estrellado • A recap of past events was given:
• Latinx Heritage Month at Studio 11
• Financial Wealth Building Workshop for Teens
• “Zentember” at the Mark Green Sports Center, which focused on the benefits of Yoga and Tai Chi
• Upcoming Events:
• Larry O Bike & Auto Swap Meet – October 14th at the Workshop from 8 AM to 2 PM • Annual Halloween Carnival – October 22nd from 1 PM to 4 PM at the Holly Community Center
• Running Dead 5K Fun Run and Walk – October 29th, begins at 9 AM at City Hall • Dia De Los Muertos Alter Contest at Studio 11. Deadline to apply is Friday, October 20th with alters being on display from November 1st thru November 4th • Community Park Clean Up Day – November 11th from 9 AM to 11 AM at Veteran’s Memorial Park
• Pop-Up on the Promenade – November 18th from 11 AM to 4 PM at Studio 11 City Council/RSA Agenda 709 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-10-11
C. Public Works Report – Public Works Grounds Supervisor Jesus Banuelos • Larry O Workshop was cleaned up in time for the weekend event • Weed maintenance is starting to subside
• Aerator has been fixed and aeration, seeding and composting will begin on the west side of town and move east
• PG&E is renovating the area at the community gardens which will affect the garden and the compost give away area. PW is looking to relocate the compost give away area to some, as yet selected, City owned location
• Wood fiber will be added to play structures, as needed. Again, starting on the west side of town, ending on the east
• There was a car accident at Shorty Garcia Park. Public works has been working to make the repairs and they are now waiting on new turf to be installed in order to reopen that area, hopeful by end of month
• Tennis court fencing quotes are being worked on for Veteran’s Memorial Park • Public Works is down two seasonal maintenance workers and two full time workers • Two brand new mowers are now in service
• The Public Works employee who maintains the pond at Civic Center is retiring • Community Member Maria Ramirez with Alameda County, who runs a job placement program, asked to be heard at this time. She offered up free recruiting services that she runs for the County to help fill open positions
• Community Member JJ Amaya thanked Public Works employees Julio Duran and Juaquin Gutierrez who went above and to clean up the Bike Workshop garden area VII. COMMISSION MATTERS
A. Green Team Update
• Next meeting is scheduled for end of October
• October 17th there will be a walk thru of the Ruggieri Senior Center Garden, time TBD B. Kennedy Youth Center Café Coffee Shop
• Supervisor Heuer – mop sink is being worked on now and hopeful to be done by next week with a possible vendor being interested in occupying the space • Commissioner Chin asked if there would be some kind of reopening ceremony, but Supervisor Heuer is still researching how to get a partner vendor into the location. When/if that happens, she will report back to the Commission
C. Sports Advisory Committee / Youth Field Rental Fees
• No new updates, next meeting 2nd Thursday in November D. New Haven Unified School District (NHUSD) Updates
• Councilmember Sakakihara spoke on the following:
• City is doing a traffic study around schools
• UCPD is stepping up traffic enforcement around school sites to educate regulations for pick up and drop off
• There is funding to improve safety around schools. The traffic study will point to areas that are in need of attention
E. Repurposing Fields for Different Sports
• No news
F. Joint Meeting with the Youth Commission for Future Workshop • Chair Crocker-Root spoke at the Youth Commission earlier today and they are hopeful they can meet up before April for a brainstorming session
• Supervisor Heuer suggested to both Commissions that each should draft up a document to list things that each is working on to see where there might be overlap where the Commissions could work together. Supervisor Heuer will start a template that Commissioners can use to log ideas. This document would be reviewed at the January Commission meeting with the goal to City Council/RSA Agenda 710 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-10-11
set a joint meeting early 2024
G. New Haven School Foundation Scholarship Update and Promotion of the Daniel Camarillo Scholarship to other commissions
• Chair Crocker-Root spoke to the Youth Commission about the history of the scholarship and how much is awarded each year. Invitation was extended to the Youth Commission to participate in the scholarship
• Commissioner Rivera shared his draft of the scholarship to help P&R Commissioners promote to other Commissions. He suggested that an email be sent to the other commissions and then to present to them
• Commissioner Chin suggested adding numbers to the email; how many scholarships have been given, what amount for each, how the Scholarship would like to offer larger are more Scholarships and how the other Commission could help in that goal • Senior Commission invited Crocker Root to attend their next meeting in November to present H. Tribute to Supervisor Valle
• Commissioner Nichols asked Council Member Sakakihara if the Council has discussed this topic yet
• Although the renaming of Veteran’s Park hasn’t come before Council yet, Councilmember Sakakihara has had contact with some Veteran’s groups who he feels would oppose any name change
• The Council has had broad discussions to do something special for Supervisor Valle but nothing concrete has come of it
• Chair Crocker-Root mentioned renaming the plaza at the park as a possibility. The Commission will discuss further to come up with options to present to the Council I. West Side Community Garden
• Liberty Park or adjacent area to the Red Devil Site seem to be the two best possible locations • Commissioner Rivera asked that the City to investigate both locations as two possible community garden locations since the east side community garden will be closed for up to two years with the work that PG&E will be conducting onsite • Supervisor Banuelos does believe that there would be enough interest for both locations.

He did mention there may be some hurdles at Liberty Park as it is not a City owned location so more research would need to be done
• Commissioner Singh who lives in the Liberty Park neighborhood, suggested concerns of the wild animals in the area. Supervisor Banuelos mentioned that a fence would be built to secure the Community Garden, wherever it ends up being J. Fall Park Tour Recap
• Printed notes were handed out to the Commission
K. Designating Larry Orozco Bike Workshop Historical Location • Community members, listed below, all spoke on the historic and cultural importance of the Larry O Bike Workshop, as well as their memories when they were teens. • Community members who spoke: JJ Amaya, Tony Rodriquez, Daniel Ramos, Greg Martinez, Juan Gomez, Rosie Miramontes, Lenny Perales, Maria Ramirez • Commissioner Nichols motioned to make a recommendation to the City Council to consider naming the Larry Orozco Bike Workshop as a historical location, Commission Rivera seconded with unanimous approval
L. Station East Plans
• No new updates
M. Mariner Park Play Equipment Upgrade
• Met with Game Time last week, Oct. 15th proposal for new ADA play structure. • There is a grant that needs to be approved by the 23rd of October so Public Works is preparing a proposal that would cover play equipment upgrades (24% ADA structure) for Mariner Park along with some additions to Heritage Park and Civic Center. The grant is a 100% match for funds the City Council/RSA Agenda 711 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
PRMN2023-10-11
City spends
VIII. ITEM(S) REFERRED BY COUNCIL – Councilmember Liaison Scott Sakakihara • Proclamation for Filipino American History Month was given • The Council adopted the Strategic Plan
• Presentation to the Council on Cyber security awareness month • Beer and wine sales updated to match State law
• During a special meeting, public comment process was discussed as hate groups have been dialing in via Zoom. The Council can’t discriminate unless violence is being espoused. New guidelines are being discussed to have online Zoom meetings be for viewing only, no public comments online • Strategic plan, Capital Improvement Plan. A climate action plan was added as a key priority. Facility needs were also addressed
• Crocker Root asked about line items budgets to see what funds are allocated to parks • Councilmember Sakakihara mentioned that the Strategic Plan is not funded, but a guideline for the upcoming 10-year period and that the Commission should be involved in providing long term goals
• Supervisor Banuelos has been involved in the long-term plan with City Engineers • Specific dollars are discussed during the two-year budget cycle and Councilmember Sakakihara will be the liaison with this Commission when those dollars are being planned • Bob Singer, in honor of his late son, would like to present to this Commission his wishes to create a bike park on the west side of Union City.
• Commissioner Nichols motioned, seconded by Commission Chin with unanimous approval to add Mr. Singer’s presentation to the agenda
• JJ Amaya asked about program funding for the Kennedy Youth Center. Supervisor Heuer explained that grant funds were attained to remodel the Kennedy Youth Center, but that did not cover funding for classes or programming
• Councilmember Sakakihara spoke of November voting item that would reduce municipal bond approval from 2/3rds to 55%, which may help the City get easier municipal bonds for some of these long-term plans
IX. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• none
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER
• none
XI. ADJOURNMENT
• 9:15 PM - Commissioner Chin motioned, seconded by Commissioner Rivera with unanimous approval
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding an item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Counter at City Hall located at 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City, California, during normal business hours. Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Interested persons must request the accommodation at least two working days in advance of the meeting by calling the City Clerk’s office at 510-675-5348.

City Council/RSA Agenda 712 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
From: Johanna Ota
To: Johanna Ota
Subject: Union City Council Members May 28th Council Meeting Teen Workshop Agenda Item Date: Thursday, May 23, 2024 11:49:42 AM
From: Larry Orozco <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 10:52 AM
To: Thai Nam Pham <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Union City Council Members May 28th Council Meeting Teen Workshop Agenda Item WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links.

Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Jose Lopez <[email protected]>
Date: May 23, 2024 at 9:25:25 AM PDT
To: Larry Orozco <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Union City Council Members
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jose Lopez <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, May 14, 2024, 12:07 PM
Subject: Union City Council Members
To: Larry Orozco <[email protected]>
Good evening,
My name is Jose Lopez, I worked for Mr Orozco when he was in charge of then
The Union City youth program. I repaired Bicycles along side my older Brother David. From 1980 - 1983, we also did many Summer projects in the community. As long as I can Remember, Larry O was and is a name that everyone knew and respected. He has devoted a Life time of service to union City. If he could help you in any way he would. And if he physically couldn't, Item 7.b. Written Public Comment
5/3/24 City Council Meeting
City Council/RSA Agenda 713 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
he would get you to the right person or organization that would help. The workshop/bike shop is a Staple and very Symbolic to Union City. Driving North or South on Mission Blvd brings smiles to many as they glance over and see this Historical Building. Back in my Time young teens looking for some extra cash in the summer could Call and hear a Friendly voice " Allison " ad she tries her best to connect you with a person looking for a babysitter or some yard work to be completed. This kept many young teens focused on learning on how to be good hardworking & honest members of our Community.

Larry O as he is so often referred by, and this Building are Historical to say the least. The building and Larry are like One... There was a movement years ago in our Community to bring the citizens together and unite them. Larry and this workshop did just that.

Jose L Lopez
City Council/RSA Agenda 714 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 5/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO, CITYATTORNEY
SUBJECT: WAIVE FULL READING AND INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AMENDING CHAPTER 2.06 “CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS IN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS” AND ADDING CHAPTER 2.09 “VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE LIMITS” TO THE UNION CITY MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council previously considered potential revisions to the current campaign contribution limits and establishment of voluntary campaign expenditure limits for city council candidates at its City Council meetings on February 27, 2024 and March 26, 2024.

After receiving information, the City Council provided direction to staff and the City Attorney’s Office to prepare an ordinance increasing the campaign contribution limits and establishing voluntary campaign expenditure limits for city council candidates. After receiving that direction, and following legal analysis regarding the City’s enforcement authority for a voluntary campaign expenditure limit ordinance, the City Attorney has draft an ordinance that complies with constitutional and legal requirements for City Council consideration.

Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and introduce by title only an ordinance amending Chapter 2.06 “Campaign Contribution Limitations in Municipal Elections” and adding Chapter 2.09 “Voluntary Expenditure Limits” to the Union City Municipal Code or provide further direction.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
There are no Strategic Plan goals associated with this agenda item.

BACKGROUND
At City Council’s request, staff presented an informational report on campaign contribution limits and voluntary expenditure limits at the February 27, 2024 City Council Special Meeting. The City Council sought City Council/RSA Agenda 715 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
further information regarding voluntary expenditure limit ordinances in other Alameda County cities.

Subsequently, staff provided further information at the March 26, 2024 City Council Special Meeting.

Following receipt of this information, the City Council provided direction to conduct further analysis and return with a proposed ordinance that would increase the campaign contribution limit to $800 and establish a voluntary campaign expenditure limit program with a limit of $75,000 for mayoral candidates and $35,000 for council candidates. The proposal was that candidates accepting the contribution limit could receive contributions of up to $800 from a single source while candidates that did not accept the contribution limit could receive contributions of up to $100 from a single source.

DISCUSSION
After receiving the City Council’s direction, the City Attorney’s Office conducted research regarding constitutional considerations. This legal research indicates that laws related to campaign expenditure limits which establish varying contribution amounts based on acceptance of the expenditure limits may be subject to legalchallenge. In light of that, the City Attorney’s Office has drafted an ordinance designed to accomplish the City Council’s stated goals while still being consistent with constitutionaland legal requirements. A summary is below.

Campaign Contribution Limits:

The City’s campaign contribution limit is established in Chapter 2.06, Campaign Contribution Limitations in Municipal Elections, of the Union City Municipal Code (the “Campaign Contribution Ordinance”). The City Council first adopted the Campaign Contribution Ordinance on September 13, 1994. The initial campaign contribution limit was set at $500 for any election. The City Council previously approved amendments to increase the Campaign Contribution Ordinance as follows:
• 2004: $600
• 2014: $720
Currently, the Campaign Contribution Ordinance limits campaign contributions from a single source to $720.

The proposed ordinance would increase the contribution limit to $800.00.

Voluntary Expenditure Limits:

The proposed ordinance also adds Chapter 2.09 “Voluntary Expenditure Limits” to the Union City Municipal Code. The purpose of the new chapter is stated as follows:

The purpose of this chapter is to minimize the potentially corrupting influence and appearances of corruption caused by excessive expenditures in campaigns by providing for a reasonable voluntary campaign expenditure limit for City Council candidates. Limiting overall expenditures in campaigns allows City Council candidates and incumbent City Councilmembers to spend less of their time on fundraising and more of their time communicating on issues of importance to voters and constituents. This chapter is also intended to provide impartial and non-coercive incentives that encourage City Council candidates to agree to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures.

Beginning November 2024, this new chapter would establish a voluntary expenditure limit in the following amounts per each election:
• $75,000 Mayor Candidates
• $35,000 Council Candidates
City Council/RSA Agenda 716 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
The City Council may revise these voluntary campaign expenditure limits by Resolution no later than February 1st of each even numbered year. Filing fees, legal fees related to litigation out of campaign for office, postelection party expenses and post office box expenses do not count toward the campaign expenditure limit under the proposed ordinance.

Candidates would, prior to the time they file their nomination papers with the city clerk, advise the city clerk whether they will opt to voluntarily limit their campaign expenditures. Candidates previously opting to accept the expenditure limit have until three business days after the deadline to file nomination papers to notify the city clerk that they have decided not to accept the voluntary campaign expenditure limit.

Candidates accepting the voluntary campaign expenditure limit receive the following benefits:

1. The City's website willclearly identify which candidates have agreed to the voluntary expenditure limit.

2. Candidates who agree to abide by the voluntary campaign expenditure limits may indicate this on their campaign materials.

Violations of the proposed ordinance would be subject to any other applicable penalties for violation of the Municipal Code. Additionally, any violation including the filing of false reports that entitle the candidate to the benefits of the ordinance shall be posted on the City's website and posted at a reasonably accessible location at city hall.

If adopted, the proposed ordinance would take effect 30 days after adoption and apply to the current campaign cycle.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this item.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and introduce by title only an ordinance amending Chapter 2.06 “Campaign Contribution Limitations in Municipal Elections” and adding Chapter 2.09 “Voluntary Expenditure Limits” to the Union City Municipal Code or provide further direction.

Prepared by:

Juliet Vaughn, Associate Attorney
Submitted by:

Kristopher J. Kokotaylo, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proposed Ordinance Ordinance
Exhibit A - Campaign Contribution and Voluntary Expenditure Ordinance
Exhibit
City Council/RSA Agenda 717 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 718 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

ORDINANCE NO. XXX-24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF UNION CITY AMENDING CHAPTER 2.06 “CAMPAIGN

CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS IN MUNICIPAL
ELECTIONS” AND ADDING CHAPTER 2.09
“VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE LIMITS” TO THE UNION

CITY MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, the City of Union City previously adopted provisions governing campaign contributions to any City Council candidate codified in Chapter 2.06 of the Union City Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the contribution limits are currently set limiting a candidate for City Council to $720 from an individual and the City Council desires to increase the limit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered adoption of a voluntary expenditure limit ordinance at City Council meetings held on February 27, 2024, and March 26, 2024; and WHEREAS, adoption of a voluntary expenditure limit program will allow candidates an opportunity to voluntarily agree to limit expenditures in exchange for specified benefits; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt this Ordinance to adjust the campaign contribution limits and establish a voluntary expenditure limit program.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

The above recitals (“Recitals”) are true and correct and made a part of this Ordinance.

SECTION 2. CEQA. Approval of the amendments is exempt from further environmental review under the general rule in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. As a series of text amendments and additions, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 3. Municipal Code Amendments. Chapter 2.06, “Campaign Contributions Limitations in Municipal Elections” is hereby amended, and Chapter 2.09, “Voluntary Expenditure Limit” is hereby added as displayed in Exhibit A, incorporated and made a part of this Ordinance.

SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, City Council/RSA Agenda 719 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Ordinance No. XXX-24
Amending Campaign Contribution Limits and Establishing Voluntary Expenditure Limits

subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable.

SECTION 5. Publication and effective date. Within fifteen (15) days from and after adoption, this Ordinance shall be published once in the Tri-City Voice, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Union City, in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on this 11th day of June 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
Attachments:

1. Exhibit A - Amendments to Chapter 2.06 “Campaign Contribution Limitations in Municipal Elections” and Addition of Chapter 2.09 “Voluntary Expenditure Limits” City Council/RSA Agenda 720 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

EXHIBIT A
Amendments (with revisions reflected for additional text in underline and removed text in strike through):

Chapter 2.06 Campaign Contribution Limitations in Municipal Elections …
Section 2.06.030 Campaign contributions—Limitations.

A. No person shall make a contribution to any candidate or the controlled committee of such a candidate, and no candidate or the candidate's controlled committee shall accept from each such person a contribution or contributions totaling more than seven hundred twenty eight hundred dollars for any election period.

B. No person shall make a contribution to any committee which makes independent expenditures to support or oppose any candidate, and no such committee shall accept from any person a contribution totaling more than seven hundred twenty eight hundred dollars during an election period.
…
§ 2.06.080 Return of campaign contributions.

The intended recipient of any contribution which would cause the total amount of contributions to a committee from a single donor to exceed seven hundred twenty eight hundred dollars shall, within forty-eight hours of receipt thereof, return any such excess to the donor. In the event an excessive campaign contribution is received and reported in the campaign report, the recipient shall, within forty-eight hours of notification by the City Clerk, return such excess to the donor; if such excess is not returned within such ten working days, the recipient shall promptly transmit to the City Clerk for deposit in the general fund of the City, a sum equal to such excess.

Additions:

Chapter 2.09 Voluntary Expenditure Limits
Section 2.09.010 Purpose and Definitions.

The purpose of this chapter is to minimize the potentially corrupting influence and appearances of corruption caused by excessive expenditures in campaigns by providing for a reasonable voluntary campaign expenditure limit for City Council candidates. Limiting overall expenditures in campaigns allows City Council candidates and incumbent City Councilmembers to spend less of their time on City Council/RSA Agenda 721 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
fundraising and more of their time communicating on issues of importance to voters and constituents. This chapter is also intended to provide impartial and noncoercive incentives that encourage City Council candidates to agree to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures.

Unless the term is specifically defined in this chapter or the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the definitions set forth in the Political Reform Act of 1974 (Government Code Sections 81000 et seq.) shall govern the interpretation of this chapter.

Section 2.09.020 Voluntary Campaign Expenditure Limitation A. Each candidate for election to the City Council in November 2024, and for each City Council election thereafter, shall, prior to the time they file their nomination papers with the city clerk, advise the city clerk in writing on a form provided by the City whether or not the candidate will opt to voluntarily limit their campaign expenditures in accordance with the voluntary campaign expenditure limits set forth in this section and by resolution. The agreement to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures shall pertain to all expenditures incurred by the candidate or the candidate's committee in support of their candidacy and shall include all such expenditures that a candidate or candidate's committee is required to report pursuant to the California Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, and as outlined in this section, whether those expenditures are made before or after the filing of nomination papers.

B. Within three (3) business days after the deadline to file nomination papers with the city clerk, a candidate that previously accepted the voluntary campaign expenditure limit will have one (1) opportunity to notify the city clerk that they have decided not to accept the voluntary campaign expenditure limit. The candidate shall thereafter be relieved of abiding by the expenditure limit.

C. Candidates who agree to abide by the voluntary campaign expenditure limit shall receive the following benefits and incentives:

1. The City's website will clearly identify which candidates have agreed to the voluntary expenditure limit.

2. Candidates who agree to abide by the voluntary campaign expenditure limits may so state on their campaign materials, whether tangible or intangible, such as mass mailings, advertisements, and signs. This subsection is set forth for clarity and is not intended to act as a regulation of campaign materials.

D. Expenditure Limits

1. A candidate for district City Councilmember who agrees to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures shall not make qualified expenditures exceeding City Council/RSA Agenda 722 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
$35,000 in the electoral district for each election in which the candidate is seeking elective office.

2. A candidate for Mayor who agrees to voluntarily limit campaign expenditures shall not make qualified expenditures exceeding $75,000 for each election in which the candidate is seeking elective office.

3. The City Council may revise these voluntary campaign expenditure limits by Resolution no later than February 1st of each even numbered year.

4. The following shall not count toward the voluntary campaign expenditure limit:
a. Filing fees related to the candidacy, including fees paid to the Secretary of State to open or maintain a committee, and fees to translate the candidate statement.
b. Legal fees and costs incurred in connection with litigation arising out of a campaign for City office.
c. Post-election party expenses.
d. Post office box expenses.

Section 2.09.030 Violation.

A. A violation of this Chapter shall be considered a violation of this Code and shall be subject to the enforcement remedies and penalties provided for in this Code. In addition to any other applicable penalties for violation of this Code, any violation of this section, including the filing of false reports that entitle the candidate to the benefits conferred by this section, shall within seventy-two (72) hours of the City's knowledge of the violation:

1. Be posted on the City's website; and

2. Be posted at a reasonably accessible location at city hall.

City Council/RSA Agenda 723 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 5/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CARMELA CAMPBELL, ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PROVIDE DIRECTION TO UPDATE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT

FEE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS
Staff is seeking direction from the City Council regarding potential updates to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee for single-family residential additions. At their March 26, 2024 meeting, the City Council provided direction for staff to bring back a report regarding the Affordable Housing Impact Fee, some potential options to reduce the fee, and an analysis of potential financial impacts of any proposed reductions.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
There is no direct alignment with the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND
Affordable Housing Ordinance Overview
Chapter 18.33 requires 15 percent of a project’s total units be affordable for both ownership and rental developments. More specifically, for rental developments, the units need to be affordable to very low- and lowincome households and for ownership developments the units need to be affordable to low- and moderateincome households. You can access Chapter 18.33 by clicking here.

In 2016, the City completed an Affordable Housing Nexus Study, in part, to use as the basis for updating and revising the Ordinance’s optional in-lieu fees. In early 2017, the City Council reviewed the Nexus Study and gave direction to revise the optional in-lieu fee provisions to a per square foot fee. To see the staff report click here. The intent was to simplify the process as Chapter 18.33 previously had three different in-lieu fee options and a per square foot fee is more equitable, as it adjusts fees based on unit size. On October 9, 2018, the City Council introduced an ordinance comprehensively amending Chapter 18.33, Affordable Housing, of the City’s Municipal Code and on October 23, 2018, the ordinance was adopted.

City Council/RSA Agenda 724 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
The updated provisions require developers to provide affordable units on-site but gives the City Council discretion to allow payment of an in-lieu fee instead of providing the units. This fee is referred to as a “Large Project Optional In-lieu Fee” and applies to projects that include seven (7) or more units. The fee is $27 per square foot applied to all habitable space within the residential development. There is also a “Small Project InLieu Fee”, which applies to projects that propose six (6) units or less. The fee includes a base fee of $24,000 per unit and an additional $8 per square foot fee is applied to habitable space in excess of 1,000 square feet per unit.

In regard to the “Affordable Housing Impact Fee”, consistent with City Council direction, the fee was set at $25 per square foot and applies to single-family residential additions over 500 square feet of habitable space, which was consistent with the fee amount recommended in the Nexus Study. At that time, there was no support for exempting “owner occupied” projects.

DISCUSSION
Affordable Housing Impact Fee Overview
As detailed above, the current Affordable Housing Impact Fee, which applies to residential additions, was based on the recommendations in a Nexus Study. The Nexus Study was a multi-jurisdictional effort to provide data that would allow the sponsoring cities to enact affordable housing impact fees on new development, including industrial, commercial, and residential. The study established a link between new development and the need for new affordable housing. For residential development, the underlying concept behind the Nexus Study was that newly constructed units would represent net new households in the City. The new households would increase spending in the local economy through the purchase of more goods and services. New consumption generates new local jobs, with a portion of those jobs paying a lower wage. The lower-wage jobs created are related to lower income households that cannot afford market rate units in the City and thus need affordable housing.

The fee was designed to apply to additions exceeding 500 sq. ft. to provide some relief for property owners who were constructing moderate additions. For example, a 500 sq. ft. addition could accommodate two standard bedrooms and a bathroom. The fee is only applied to habitable space included in the addition, which is defined as “floor area within a dwelling unit designed, used, or intended to be used exclusively for living and sleeping purposes.” The definition is meant to exclude square footage associated with garage additions, which are typically not considered habitable space. This is consistent with the discussion in the Nexus Study, which also excluded garage/parking areas in its analysis.

The funds generated through the Affordable Housing Impact Fee make up the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. The fee is applied to residential additions as well as the Small and Large Project Optional in-lieu fees, This Fund supports the production and preservation of affordable housing within the City and supports Housing Division staff. The City utilized affordable housing funds to support Lazuli Landing, which is a proposed 80-unit affordable housing project located in the Decoto neighborhood.

The overall funding generated by the Affordable Housing Impact Fee for additions over the last five years is approximately $220,950, or approximately $44,190 per year. The average fee paid was approximately $11,629, which roughly translates into an addition of approximately 965 sq. ft. The range in fees went from a low of $975 to a high of $28,950. For comparison purposes, the City received approximately $158,584 over the last five years associated with the Small Project In-lieu Fee associated with development of new single-family homes, which translates into approximately $31,716 per year in revenue. Please note that within the time frame, there were years when this fee was not paid because there were no new homes coming on-line and other years when the City had several new homes pay the fee. Funds generated by this fee vary greatly from year to year.

City Council/RSA Agenda 725 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Since inception of the Large Project Optional In-Lieu fee, we have not had a project pay it. Instead, the large projects that have been approved that were subject to the fee provided affordable units instead of paying the fee.

Summary of Affordable Housing Impact Fee Updates
Based on feedback from a concerned resident, at their March 26, 2024 meeting, the City Council provided direction for staff to bring back a report regarding the Affordable Housing Impact Fee with regards to additions, some potential options to reduce the fee, and an analysis of potential financial impacts of any proposed reductions. Council direction included some specific examples of potential options they would like to see analyzed, which are discussed below in more detail.

Increase Exemption Threshold. The current exemption threshold associated with the Affordable Housing Impact Fee is 500 square feet (sq. ft.). One option is to increase the square footage that is exempt to 750 sq. ft. or 1,000 sq. ft. In the last five years, the City has issued a total of 19 building permits for residential additions that have paid the fee. Currently, there have been six (6) permits for residential additions issued this year with one month left in the fiscal year. Although the Building Division processes a large amount of permits for residential development, most of the residential permits processed are below the size threshold of applying the fee; are an interior remodel only, which does not trigger payment of the fee; or are for construction of a new house. New homes pay the Small Project In-lieu fee.

Using the historic data as a framework, the table below shows how the impact of an increase in the square foot threshold can decrease the revenues generated from the Affordable Housing Impact Fee. This data reflects the last five fiscal years.

Permits Year
Revenue
Collected
Addition
Over 500
SF
Total SF of
Addition
$25 over
750 SF
$25 over
1000 SF
1 FY 24 $1,075 43 543 $0 $0
2 FY 24 $2,500 100 600 $0 $0
3 FY 24 $6,250 250 750 $0 $0
4 FY 24 $3,525 141 641 $0 $0
5 FY 24 $21,875 875 1375 $15,625 $9,375
6 FY 24 $4,300 172 672 $0 $0
7 FY 23 $14,500 580 1080 $8,250 $2,000
8 FY 23 $27,475 1099 1599 $21,225 $14,975
9 FY 23 $22,325 893 1393 $16,075 $9,825
10 FY 23 $1,500 60 560 $0 $0
11 FY 23 $9,700 388 888 $3,450 $0
12 FY 23 $28,950 1158 1658 $22,700 $16,450
13 FY 22 $13,025 521 1021 $6,775 $525
14 FY 21 $23,150 926 1426 $16,900 $10,650
15 FY 21 $1,900 76 576 $0 $0
16 FY 20 $14,275 571 1071 $8,025 $1,775
17 FY 20 $12,800 512 1012 $6,550 $300
18 FY 20 $10,850 434 934 $4,600 $0
19 FY 20 $975 39 539 $0 $0
City Council/RSA Agenda 726 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
TOTAL $220,950 $130,175 $65,875
If the threshold was increased to exempt the first 750 sq. ft., the fees collected would have been reduced by $90,775 over the past five years. If the threshold was set to exempt the first 1,000 sq. ft., the fees collected over the past five years would have been reduced by $155,075.

The table below calculates the average annual revenue generated by the Affordable Housing Impact Fee utilizing the current 500 sq. ft. exemption versus an exemption utilizing 750 sq. ft. and 1,000 sq. ft. As the threshold to exempt square footage is increased, the City would see a decrease in the Affordable Housing Impact Fee received as revenue.

Average Annual Revenue
500 SF exemption
Average Annual Revenue
750 SF exemption
Average Annual Revenue
1000 SF exemption
$44,190 $26,035 $13,175
If the City Council is interested in modifying the fee, the option to increase the threshold for the exemption would be the easiest to implement.

Clarify Definition of Habitable Space. The Affordable Housing Impact Fee is assessed on the amount of habitable space included in the addition minus the 500 square foot threshold. Chapter 18.33, Affordable Housing ordinance defines “habitable space” as floor area within a dwelling unit designed, used, or intended to be used exclusively for living and sleeping purposes. The significance of including definitions of terms within a Zoning Chapter, such as “habitable space”, is to signify that for purposes of implementation of the Chapter the applicant is to use the provided definition despite there being other accepted definitions of the term. The definition currently included in Chapter 18.33 for “habitable space” was purposefully left broad to include all interior space included in the addition for ease of implementation by the Building Division counter staff who are responsible for applying the fee.

There is a definition in the Building Code for “habitable space”, which defines it as “A space in a building for living, sleeping, eating or cooking. Bathrooms, toilet rooms, closets, halls, storage or utility spaces and similar areas are not considered habitable spaces.” The resident who had reached out expressing concerns over the fee provided feedback that the City was legally required to utilize the definition included in the Building Code.

Since the Building Code definition excludes certain areas of the addition as not being “habitable,” utilizing that definition would reduce fees by removing portions of the addition subject to the fee. As noted, the definition in the Zoning Chapter was intended to include all new square footage unless it was used as a garage or for parking. Staff is not able to utilize another definition of “habitable space” to assess the fee, such as the one included in the Building Code, unless the Zoning Chapter wording is amended.

Exclude Owner-Occupied Units from Fee. Another option is to exclude owner-occupied units from the Affordable Housing Impact Fee no matter the addition size. Staff does not have any data regarding the number of owner-occupied units who paid the fee so it is unclear how this change would impact the total amount of fees paid, which currently averages $44,000 per year. The City has one fee, the Capital Facilities Fee, which includes an owner-exemption if the unit is located in a low-income Community Development Block Grant target neighborhood and the owner lives in the home for a minimum of five years upon its completion.

The City has had issues with people agreeing to live in the home and then renting it out or selling it without the City’s knowledge, essentially circumventing the fee.

Should the City Council desire to amend the fee structure, each of the options require an update to Chapter City Council/RSA Agenda 727 Tuesday, May 28, 2024

18.33. Since the Ordinance is in Title 18, Zoning, the text amendment would need to go to the Planning Commission for recommendation and to the City Council who is the final decision maker.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund as a result of receiving this report. Depending on the direction provided by the City Council, there is potential to reduce the amount of revenue going into the City’s Affordable Housing Fund, which supports a variety of activities related to the production and preservation of affordable housing.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council accept the report and provide direction to staff regarding any updates to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee.

Prepared by:

Francisco Gomez JR., Housing & Community Development Manager Submitted by:

Francisco Gomez JR., Housing & Community Development Manager ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Public Comment - Erick Lee Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 728 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
From: Erick Lee
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment - Agenda Item 7.d. Provide Direction To Update The Affordable Housing Impact Fee For SingleFamily Residential Additions Date: Saturday, May 25, 2024 1:31:36 AM
WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links.

Dear City Council Members,
I am writing in response to the staff report on the Affordable Housing Impact Fee and to request a review and adjustment to the code to exempt additions that do not include new bedrooms or increase household size. Our planned 1100 square foot second-story addition aims to modernize our home by adding an office, a kids playroom, and an indoor laundry room, reflecting current living standards post-COVID without adding to the city's housing demand.

Key Points for Consideration:

1. No Increase in Occupancy:

Our addition is designed solely to enhance our living space without adding any bedrooms, thus not increasing the number of residents or the demand for local services, which are primary considerations for the fee.

2. Purpose of the Addition:

The planned second-story addition will convert existing space into an office, a kids playroom, and an indoor laundry room, bringing our 1970s home up to today's living standards. With more people working from home post-COVID, such improvements are essential and do not generate new households or increase the need for affordable housing.

3. Relevance of the 500 Square Foot Exemption:

The staff report indicates that the 500 square foot exemption aims to provide relief for moderate additions, specifically noting that 500 square feet could accommodate two bedrooms and a bathroom. This intent was to allow homeowners to expand their living space significantly before the fee applies. Since our addition does not add any bedrooms, we effectively align with this exemption by not increasing housing density.

4. Nexus Study Recommendations:

It is important to note that the Nexus Study did not provide any recommendations regarding single-family expansions or additions. The current code to impose this fee on additions was a staff recommendation, not a directive from the Nexus Study. The premise of the Nexus Study is that an increase in households leads to a higher need for affordable housing. Since our addition does not increase the number of bedrooms, it does not increase the possibility of more people living in the home. The current code's blanket application of the fee to additional square footage is overly simplified and does not consider non-bedroom additions, such as offices, laundry rooms, or larger closets, which do not impact the demand for affordable housing.

5. Financial Impact:

The average fee paid per permit over the past five years was $11,629, with only 19 permits over that five year period. This places a disproportionately large burden on a small number of homeowners, resulting in a much higher fee than any other city fee for homeowners. In our case, the current code requires us to pay $15,000. This heavy financial burden on a few individuals highlights the need for a more equitable fee structure.

6. Comparison with Neighboring Cities:

No other neighboring cities impose such a fee on additions, focusing instead on new developments. Neighboring cities like Newark do not impose similar fees on additions to existing homes. In Newark, additions to existing residential dwellings are explicitly excluded from the housing impact fee.
05/28/2024 City Council Meeting
Public Comment - Agenda Item 7.d - Erick Lee
City Council/RSA Agenda 729 Tuesday, May 28, 2024
Proposed Adjustment
We propose an adjustment to the Affordable Housing Impact Fee code to better align with its intended purpose:

Exempt Additions That Do Not Add More Than Two Bedrooms and One Bathroom: Reword the code to exempt additions that do not add more than two bedrooms and one bathroom, reflecting the original intent behind the 500 square foot exemption. This approach ensures that only significant increases in household capacity trigger the fee.

Adopt the Building Code’s Definition of Habitable Space: Clearly exclude hallways, bathrooms, closets, offices/dens, kids playrooms, laundry rooms, etc., from the definition of habitable space. This adjustment aligns with the intention of the Nexus Study and the staff, focusing on when an affordable housing need has been increased.

Revenue Considerations
I understand that adjusting the code in this manner may reduce the revenue for the Affordable Housing Fund. Affordable housing is a significant issue that requires our collective effort to address. However, the current code places a disproportionately large burden on a small number of homeowners seeking to improve their living situation.

A more equitable approach would be to impose a smaller percentage fee on all building permits. This method would spread the revenue collection across many more homeowners, resulting in smaller dollar amounts from each, thereby minimizing the financial impact on any one family while still generating necessary funds for affordable housing.

Conclusion
Adjusting the code to better align with the Nexus Study and the staff's original intent of only applying the fee when an affordable housing need has been increased would better serve homeowners who are updating their homes to meet current living standards without contributing to increased housing demand.

This change would align the fee application with its original intent, ensuring fair and equitable treatment of all homeowners.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter. I look forward to a favorable resolution that supports both homeowners and the city's affordable housing goals.

Sincerely,
-Erick Lee
05/28/2024 City Council Meeting
Public Comment - Agenda Item 7.d - Erick Lee
City Council/RSA Agenda 730 Tuesday, May 28, 2024