Good afternoon.

Welcome to the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committee meeting of October 8th, 2025.

Our committee liaison, Sarah Jordan will provide information and instruction for the public to participate in today's meeting.

Thank you, Chair Campio.

While members of the public are able to attend the meeting in person, this meeting is being televised and live streamed on the city's website, and the council administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform.

Members of the public who wish to provide virtual testimony must send to the virtual queue by raising their hand before the virtual queue closes.

This queue will close when the last virtual speaker finishes speaking or five minutes after in-person testimony ends, whichever occurs first.

This will allow for better meeting management between the two platforms and ensure the committee is able to manage and conduct city business business.

We appreciate the public's cooperation.

Chair.

Thank you.

I will now call the meeting of the Economic Development and Intergovernmental Relations Committee to order.

I'll now call the role.

Vice Chair Foster.

Council President Pro Tem Lee.

Here.

And I am also present.

Also present with us, Noah Fleischmann Fiscal and Policy Analyst from the Office of the IBA, Deputy City Attorney Kate Malcolm from the Office of the City Attorney.

And Chris Ackerman Avila, policy advisor from the Office of the Mayor.

Sarah, please continue with public comment instruction.

If you're in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and place it on the tray indicated at the front of the room.

Please do so in a timely manner to ensure proper meeting management.

In-person testimony will conclude before virtual testimony begins.

Members of the public can join the webinar by computer, tablet, or smartphone by accessing the link which is listed online in the preamble language of the agenda on the city's webpage.

To join the Zoom webinar by telephone, please dial 1669-2545252, inputting webinar ID 160-324-0614 pound.

This information is also available on the agenda and will appear on the screen during the public comment period for each agenda item.

Please note that if you're watching via City TV 24 or online, there may be delay.

Please participate via the audio on your phone and mute your TV or computer when it is your turn to speak.

And if you wish to speak to a particular item, please wait for that item to be called and then raise your hand to speak by tapping the raise your hand icon, or if you're a calling participant by pressing star nine on your phone.

If you raise your hand during a non-comment period, your hand will be lowered.

Chair.

Thank you, Sarah for reviewing those instructions.

A quorum now being present will take up non-agenda public comment.

Council members respect and appreciate the public's input and are fully committed to protecting every participant's free speech rights at council and committee meetings.

Sarah, let us proceed with non-agenda public comment.

Thank you, Chair Kempio.

Per rule 2.7 non-agenda public comment is an opportunity for members of the public to comment on items that are not on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of this committee.

Each speaker will have two minutes.

We will begin with Bob Lehman.

If you can please approach the lectern, you will have two minutes.

Someone who recognizes both the economic and social impacts of arts and culture on San Diego's well-being.

Jonathan Glus was that advocate.

His leadership and the city culture plan lay the groundwork for a more vibrant and equitable equitable cultural future.

His departure is a real loss.

But the progress he inspired can continue with the right leadership in place.

Someone who understands the needs and realities of San Diego's creative community, who has built trusted relationships with artists, organizations, and cultural partners who bring the strategic insight needed to strengthen our creative economy.

We need a leader who can connect policy with practice, vision, and with resources in the city's cultural goals with the people doing the work every day.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide non-agenda public comment at this time.

Beginning testimony with Becky Rapp, please unmute and begin.

My name is Becky Rapp, and today I wanted to bring to your attention the governor's recent signing of AB8.

This bill closes loopholes by banning highly addictive intoxicating hemp products, commonly known as Delta 8 and Delta 9, from being sold at local tobacco retailers, smoke shops, and convenience stores.

This news brings hope to communities as these products are blatantly sold to minors all around our city.

This is a critical step forward for public health, but it also raises a very valid question about enforcement here in San Diego.

For the past 18 months, California has had an emergency ban on these same intoxicating hemp products.

Yet there has been little to no enforcement.

Nearly half of all smoke, vape, and convenience shops across the city continue to sell them illegally, often right next to candy, energy drinks, and flavored vapes that appeal directly to teens.

Two shops within one mile of my home have been worn multiple times, but continue selling as if there are no consequences.

We're seeing an increase in youth using these products, showing up in schools and even emergency rooms with symptoms of intoxication and psychosis.

Now that AB8 is state law, enforcement can no longer be optional.

So my question to this committee is: how will the city of San Diego enforce AB8?

Will there be coordination between the city attorney, law enforcement, and the cannabis business division to inspect and penalize businesses that continue to sell these illegal products?

I ask you to prioritize AB8 and place this item on a future agenda.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Terry Ann Skelly.

Please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon, ED and I, or committee members, Chair Campillo.

My name is Terry Ann Skelly.

Thank you for your thoughtful 2025 work plan recommendations that reflected your interest in supporting young adults in their journey to meaningful employment.

As parent and youth group leader, I have expressed in the past my specific concern for 18 to 25-year-old males as they find work, education, perhaps internships here within the city.

On Tuesday, I shared some observation from a well-known podcast called Dreamland, hosted by a substance abuse counselor.

He spoke about the spread of psychosis he and his colleagues see regularly, especially among young men due to their use of cannabis products with highly concentrated THC component.

You can imagine, as a mother, I am pleased that the city has chosen to concentrate our city's resources to supporting internship programs for teens and young adults as part of its economic development platform.

Might I respectfully suggest that a presentation to the EDNIR committee would be most welcome.

A hopeful counterpart to the industrial and commercial innovate innovation of THC products into a mighty and devastatingly potent supply of dabs, waxes, and vapes that we see coming from marijuana storefronts here in the city.

Thank you for hearing my concerns this afternoon.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Madison.

Please unmute and begin.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Madison, and I'm here to speak about one of the many problems with encouraging marijuana businesses to open in San Diego.

Here are some astonishing findings about the impacts of allowing marijuana storefronts and delivery services in our city, especially as they relate to our youth.

A new study published this year in substance use and misuse, conducted by researchers from USC, Kaiser Permanente, and others analyze data from nearly 100,000 adolescents across California.

The study found that in cities that banned both marijuana storefronts and delivery, there was a 67% lower prevalence of psychotic disorders among teens.

When delivery alone was prohibited, anxiety disorders among adolescents dropped by 93%.

That's a huge effect on our teens' mental health, simply based on access and location of marijuana storefronts.

What's more, teens who lived more than 20 minutes from the nearest marijuana retailer had 47% fewer psychotic disorders compared to those living within five minutes of a shop.

What this shows is simple.

Proximity matters.

When pot shops open nearby, kids suffer.

When access to drugs is farther away, kids are protected by that buffer zone.

San Diego must weigh the short-term revenue marijuana businesses might bring against the long-term costs of increased adolescent mental health disorders.

Costs that hit families, schools, and our health system.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

The five-minute timer has concluded.

We have five hands remaining in the queue, and we'll take no other callers beyond these five individuals.

Peggy Walker, please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon.

Thank you.

As the ED and IR committee, I believe it should be of interest that the cannabis industry is reportedly in an economic funk with an uncertain future.

The Wall Street Journal reported POT stocks are a risky bet with the industry owing more than 2 billion in unpaid back taxes.

The national law review puts the figure higher at 6 billion, calling it the debt avalanche coming due by end of 2026.

The bottom line, according to the law review, is this debt will catalyze an industry shakeout with more sales of licenses, retail footprints, and cultivation assets.

The spillover could impact 400,000 plus industry employees.

Some businesses may not be salvageable.

Multi-state organizations may have to restructure, and smaller operators consolidate or exit the market and abrupt failure.

For cities like ours, who invested heavily in setting up the pot industry, expecting a financial boon from tax revenues, the news isn't so good.

The poor outlook outlook suggests need to review city investment in this industry.

And I ask a few what I asked of the audit committee earlier, greater transparency about what the city's investment in pot businesses has really cost residents.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Shelby Huffaker.

Please unmute and begin.

You will have two minutes.

Good afternoon.

My name is Shelby Huffaker, and I'm a lifelong San Diegan, a resident of District 3 and chair of the San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access, a nonprofit dedicated to advocating for safe access to medical cannabis.

I'm here today to express strong support for renewed focus on the city's cannabis social equity program.

Councilmember Lee, just yesterday I was listening to your conversation on the Voice of San Diego podcast.

The discussion resonated with me personally, and I appreciated your concerns around the rising costs of living, which disproportionately affect low and middle income San Diegans.

You mentioned that the city has a structural budget deficit and is in need of additional revenue sources to prevent further cost of living increases and the preservation of essential city services.

A well-designed cannabis social equity program is one such opportunity.

By increasing the number of licensed operators, particularly those from communities disproportionately impacted by the war on drugs, the city can generate new revenue, reduce reliance on costly enforcement of unlicensed activity, and support economic development where it's needed most.

When paired with local cannabis tax relief, a social equity framework can help level the playing field for legal operators, improve public safety, and ensure reinvestment in historically marginalized neighborhoods.

Thank you for your time and considerate consideration, especially among those council members who continue to support the revival of this program.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Megan Stewart.

Please unmute and begin.

Thank you.

Yesterday I was extremely pleased as the council proclaimed October as breast cancer awareness month.

Many council members spoke passionately about health disparities in women's health and the importance of prevention.

Today I'd like to build on that because women's health, especially maternal health, faces serious and growing challenges that cause a strain not only on communities but on the economics of our city as well.

When I was in college studying public health and health promotion, I interned for a coalition that focused on connecting new and underserved mothers to resources and support.

I was shocked by how many women were completely unaware of the harms of marijuana use during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

The same concern resurfaced for me personally early this year when I was pregnant and began receiving digital advertisements and indirect sponsorships promoting marijuana as a natural way to relieve nausea, stress, or sleep issues.

These messages targeted my situation directly, implying that marijuana was safe and even beneficial during pregnancy.

But recent data has shown that this is simply not true.

Just last week, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released a clinical consensus stating clearly that there are no medical indications for marijuana use during pregnancy or the postpartum period.

Marijuana exposure during pregnancy is associated with increased risks of spontaneous preterm birth, low birth weight, and developmental delays.

This issue is highly relevant to this committee because it sits at the intersection of economic development, regulation, and legislation.

When misinformation leads to poor maternal and infant health outcomes, our city bears the costs through higher health care expenditures, increased NICU admissions, lost workforce productivity, and long-term developmental services for affected children.

Prevention is not just good health policy, it's smart economic policy.

By aligning messaging between public health agencies, OBGYN providers, and community partners, we can ensure that women receive accurate information and compassion support.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Judy Strang.

Please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon, economic development and intergovernment relations.

I really appreciate your service on this committee.

I've been giving considerable thought this week regarding how we could increase revenue sources here in our city.

And many of you have spoken to this same issue.

I'm particularly concerned about that age group, 18 through 26, 27.

Right now, it happens that 12 of my 19 grandchildren are in that age group.

And as I watch my grandchildren make these decisions regarding how to pick an economic journey or pathway that will help them be successful.

I realize that they don't realize all of the um obstacles that are in their way.

And then concurrently on Fox News, Dr.

Daniel Eamon was interviewed regarding how marijuana can age the brain.

And he said something that really rang out to me.

As the brain of a young adult is not fully developed.

Engaging in cannabis use can set back young people mentally and cause anxiety and depression.

When you start using marijuana and other drugs, your development gets arrested.

Many people don't uh really appreciate how important the brain is when they're 17, 18, 21, 23.

And I can attest to that, my own experience with the grandchildren.

Because it doesn't really, because they don't really finish developing until the 25, 26, and other suggesting 27.

However, when you get hurt early because of your marijuana use, you might never catch up.

Thank you for your service to young adults and for the internship programs that you supply here in our city.

And thank you for understanding the obstacles of this age group and how devastating marijuana use can be to them.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

And the final speaker in the queue is Blair Beekman.

Please unmute and begin.

All right, thank you, Blair Beekman.

I hope my Zoom is working here.

My tablet.

Um thanks for the meeting today.

Um, to try to clean house for myself in my mind, how I uh spoken in public comment uh the past few days at City Council.

Um, I spoke a public comment yesterday about the future of uh how to deal with the gas lamp quarter.

Uh I talked a lot about surveillance.

I got a few of my backs wrong.

Sorry about that.

Um I guess uh firstly, with Oakland, um, the issues with Oakland, they're dealing with how to bring in uh private cameras within the ALPR process.

Uh that's the official line, but I think from that I we can still ask and question what exactly our AOPR is being used uh in both Oakland and in the future of San Diego.

And why is that is that I feel that you're having difficulty with the AOPR issue in San Diego and not being more clear in public because you're going into detail how the ALPRs can be used more than just AOPRs for license plates.

They can be surveillance uh larger scale, and you're having questions with that.

Good luck to really keep, I think, in narrow focus lanes on AOPRs as used for license plate readers and not other forms of surveillance.

Tough to work on that.

Good luck uh that you can.

Um, what are other issues I wanted to work on?

Oh, overall issues of war, uh dealing with war at this time.

We're at a crossroads with war.

Um we have choices how we can address the future of war.

The work we do towards accountability and best practices, I think can address peace and it makes an important statement about working towards peace and not war.

So good luck in those efforts.

And good luck that Israel.

Thanks.

Thank you for your testimony.

And as a reminder to any hands that have gone up, the five minute timer has concluded.

You can submit any comments to council committee at sandiego.gov.

Thank you very much.

Uh, and thank you to all the members of the public who spoke turning on agenda public comment.

We'll move to committee members, mayoral staff, city attorney, and IBA comments.

I don't see any.

And do we have any requests for continuances?

Seeing none, let's dispense with the approval of the consent agenda.

Do we have any requests to pull items from our agenda?

Seeing none, Sarah, let's proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for the consent agenda is now open.

The consent agenda includes item number one, approval of the committee minutes from September 3rd, 2025, and item number two, first amendment to the consulting agreement with Parchaology, formerly Catherine Clark for artist consulting services for creation of an original site-specific public artwork for Mira Mesa Community Park Public Art Projects Phase Two.

Each speaker will have one minute per item.

We have not received any slips here in the committee in the chamber.

So I will start the five-minute timer for anybody in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on the consent agenda.

We will begin with Blair Beekman.

Please unmute.

And if you can please indicate which item or items you'll be speaking to.

Both items, please.

All right, two minutes to manage, please begin.

Thank you.

Uh hi, Blair Beekman.

Uh, thanks.

I'm getting stuff off my chest.

I'm getting it out in a good order, I think.

My brain's been a little confused the past couple days, but I'm bringing it into focus.

So thank you.

Uh, for this item, um, I wanted to comment that uh uh on your uh past agenda, uh committee agenda for July.

You had or no, September, sorry.

You had items about Brownfield and working stuff out.

I wasn't at that meeting.

I really wish I attended, but I wanted to offer comment that um there are issues of working towards unleaded gas for the future of our smaller airports, uh, because most of the smaller airports are around uh centers of low income.

Uh it's an important issue that I hope we can be working on focused on, focusing on, and good luck in how Brownfield you can address that with the other airports in the area.

You know, the the accidents that happened at the previous airport, good luck that we can be reorganizing ourselves and being more open and accountable about issues around the airports.

Uh for item two, um I wanted to offer that artwork in the parks is really important and necessary and vital, and thank you for its efforts.

I felt I needed to just make the slight uh note that sometimes uh art projects in living in San Jose.

I learned a possibly weird thing that sometimes art projects uh uh can have a degree of uh surveillance technology involved with it sometimes.

Is that going to be the case for this item?

And if it is, there is a lot of uh art efforts that art can be democratic, and we can talk about our best practices of democracy through art.

So I I hope if that is the case for this item that we can have policy talk and about best practices of open policies with tech if that's involved with this art project in the park.

Just to mention, uh thanks for your time.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Andrea Ebbing.

If you can please unmute and indicate which item or items you'll be speaking to on the consent agenda.

Hi, my name is Andrea Ebbing, and I'll speak to both items.

Thank you.

All right, two minutes, please begin.

Okay, thank you.

So um, for the brown field, I would just say if we can really look at um auditing whatever the security measures are going to be um with that airport and with Lindbergh Field.

Um, there is a video on YouTube of Gil Cabrera, our airport chair, um, who had made special exceptions for the Afghan government to use our Lindbergh field um as a gateway to the rest of the country.

And he says, if you looked up Gil Cabrera, Afghan EvaC on YouTube, he does talk about um uh making special exceptions for um Afghani refugees and Afghani government to meet at the gate and also use the San Diego Airport as a hub to reach the rest of the country.

But 1600 of the uh refugees that were imported have been found to have direct ties to terrorist groups.

As far as the art project goes, it's great.

I just wonder if there is a way to look at um funding for uh for mothers or fathers who need childcare and elders that need help like with food delivery or rides and things like that.

I love public art.

I think it's a great idea.

I just, you know, with the times and the way that they are, I think it would be great to have something beautiful to look at and community engagement and that sort of thing, but everyone is struggling so so bad right now under the Gloria administration.

No, I'm not talking about you city council.

I understand you guys are under this administration.

So it's really unfortunate.

Um, and everybody's trying to make ends meet and basically white knuckling it.

So I don't know if that's a set thing, but I think that it would be great to have an art installation, but I also think that a lot of people would like to be mobile and work and well feed their elderly parents and have them have rides and things like that.

So thank you.

Thank you for your testimony and chair with no other hands in the queue.

This concludes comment for the consent agenda.

Thank you to the members of the public for the participation.

We will turn it over to committee members for questions and comments and entertain a motion, and we'll begin with uh council president pro tem Lee.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh, I'll go ahead and move the consent agenda.

Um, and just a note for the second item.

Um, just uh want to recognize that it is an amendment to an existing um agreement that we have for public art that's part of a pretty large-scale project we have in Mira Mesa, um, less than one percent of the budget.

Um, and uh we had a couple years of delay in terms of bidding out that project, and glad to see that this amendment allows us to cover some of the um cost differential, as we know things cost has gone up in the last couple of years uh for folks who get to check out the project by parcology.

Um, it was one that was inspired with a lot of community engagement, um, especially uh engaging with students and community members through a local organization, the ANTRA project, um, and happy to support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion.

Let's go to council member Campbell.

I'll second the motion.

We have a second.

If uh no other comments or questions, uh, we will call the vote, Vice Chair Foster.

Yeah.

Councilmember Campbell.

Yes.

Council President Pro Tem Lee.

Yes.

And I'm also yes.

Passage unanimously with all members present.

We'll now proceed to discussion agenda item number three.

Sarah, please introduce the item.

Thank you, Chair Campio.

Item number three is the annual recommendation on council discretionary portion of the transient occupancy tax.

And if you're watching on City TV, the live stream L9, you'd like to dial into the meeting to speak, please call 1669-2545252.

And when prompted, input webinar ID 160-324-0614 pound.

Thank you.

I will now hand it over to my staff, deputy chief of staff and director of policy, Sana Lewando.

Please let us know how much time you'll need.

Good afternoon, Sana Luando, Deputy Chief of Staff to Councilmember Campio, and I will need about four minutes for my presentation.

Very good.

Good afternoon, committee members, IBA, mayor's team, and city attorney staff.

Today I'm here to present the annual recommendation on the council discretionary portion of transient occupancy tax.

TOT is levied at 10.5 cents per dollar on taxable rent for a transient state of less than one month.

The municipal code outlines the permitted use of the 10.5 cent TOT, where 5.5 cents go to the general fund, four cents goes to special promotional programs, and one cent is council discretionary.

The penny for the arts goal was set in 2012 to restore arts and culture funding levels to 9.52% of TOT to arts and culture.

The council's one cent of the 10.5 cent levy is the same as 9.52% of total TOT.

So therefore, the amount needed to meet the penny is the same as the council discretionary one cent.

In 2023, council members Campio and Moreno, therefore led the city council in approving amendments to council policy 100-03.

These amendments created an annual process for the city council to recommend how the council discretionary portion of TOT funds should be allocated and created a formal mechanism to help achieve the penny for the arts goal.

The Office of the IBA based on latest actuals, the fiscal year 27 overall TOT projection is about 329.2 million dollars.

This translates into a projected council discretionary one cent of 31.2 million.

So in fiscal 26, the current fiscal year, the adopted arts and culture budget is 13.9 million dollars, which is also the same as 4.28% of the total TOT.

Now, since the fiscal year 27 TOT revenue levels will not perfectly match the fiscal year 26 actuals.

And we also don't have very refined projections for fiscal year 27 this early on in the fiscal year.

The council can opt to issue its recommendation on a percentage basis.

So the fiscal year 27 proposed recommendation is to maintain the fiscal year 26 level of 4.28% of total TOT revenue for arts and culture per current projections at this time that would amount to about 14.1 million dollars.

And the remaining funds would then be used to balance general fund needs, which at this time is estimated to be about 17.1 million dollars.

So staff's recommendation for today is to approve the fiscal year 2027 council recommendation on its preferred use of the one of the 10.5 cent transient occupancy tax and forwarded to the budget and government efficiency committee for consideration as follows.

4.28% of total TOT revenue for arts, culture, and community festivals.

Remaining funds to balance general fund needs.

That concludes my presentation.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much for the presentation.

We'll now go to public comment.

Uh actually, we'll first go to Noah Flashman from the Office of the IBA for comment.

Thank you, Chairman Campio.

Our office would like to note two quick things about the one cent TOT recommendation.

Firstly, TOT revenue from Measure C is not included in council's discretionary portion because it is a restricted revenue source that cannot be used for general or promotional purposes.

Lastly, our office forecast of total TOT and the council discretionary portion thereof are preliminary and will be updated as we get more data.

Thank you.

Thank you for that clarification.

Sarah, let's go to public comment, please.

Thank you, Chair Campio.

We've received four slips here in chambers.

We will begin with Christine Martinez.

If you can please approach the lectern, you'll be followed by Allison Morrissey, Amani Robinson, and Carlos Cristiani, and each speaker will have two minutes.

Good afternoon.

Thank you so much for having us here today.

My name is Christine Martinez, and I'm with Arts and Culture San Diego.

We've been a part of the process for many years now, but just to remind you that we are connected with more than 150 arts and culture organizations throughout the districts.

And I wanted to thank you for your very important TOT discussion and for the attention to the needs of the Cultural Affairs Division and specifically the needs of the arts and culture community.

You all know that we are a true economic engine in the city, and we drive tourism, we spur jobs, and we contribute to the very fabric of San Diego.

And one of the things I'm very proud to do this year as Arts and Culture San Diego is to bring forward and uplift stories from every one of the council districts and really highlight some of the arts and culture organizations who may not have the bandwidth to send somebody to sit at council meetings or committee meetings, but their voices deserve to be heard and they need to be highlighted.

And so look forward to that during this budget season.

But those videos and that effort is only possible through funding.

We're grateful to have some funding from this effort.

And I know we've been talking about Penny for many years, but our arts and culture organizations are doing more with less.

You know, the realities of inflation and the cost of living and the cost of operating business.

They're just a lot.

So even to keep things flat is really kind of scaling us backwards a little bit, but we do understand the realities of the position right now.

So we're asking that you please consider keeping us flat for fiscal year 27, which is 4.28%.

And just we really look forward to being part of this conversation and collaborating with you every step of the way.

We will be at every one of these meetings just to, you know, be a part of the process.

We really appreciate it.

So thank you so much.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Alison Morrissey.

Good afternoon, Council.

My name is Alison Morrissey, and I am the director of philanthropy and impact for Arts District Liberty Station in Point Loma.

We activate our dynamic and historic San Diego campus with enriching cultural experiences, impactful learning opportunities, and inspiring events accessible to all, very much in part due to funding from our study.

Thank you for this important TOT discussion and for your attention to the needs of the Cultural Affairs Department, specifically the needs of the ultra arts and culture community.

The arts are a true economic engine in our city, driving tourism, spurring jobs, and contributing to the very fabric of our beautiful study.

It's a tough time for our art sector.

We're being hit with cuts from every direction city, state, national, private sector, uh corporate funding, and inflation is such that even remaining flat and in funding truly means a cut.

We're very nimble sector, we're quite used to this, and also it's happening kind of collectively through across the board.

So uh the arts and cultural community is thus asking that you please keep our percentage of TOT funding flat for fiscal year 27 at that 4.8 4.28%.

We look forward to working with the committee and the entire council during every step in the budget process.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Imani Robinson.

Good afternoon, Council.

Uh I am Commissioner Imani Robinson.

I serve on the Commission for Arts and Culture.

I also serve on the Commission for Police Practice.

I am also a member of the San Diego Parks Foundation.

I'm a member of the La Jolla Playhouse Advisory Council.

Um I also um chair or vice chair the Southeastern Planning Group.

And so all of this comes to art, believe it or not.

Um, because we need a clean, we need a safe, we need activated spaces.

And so we definitely um would like for you to hold on to the 4.28 TOT.

And we have our um, which you all are aware of, you all agree how important arts and culture is with our new uh arts and culture plan.

And um, with that plan, I would love to challenge and ask that it's a 10-year plan, and we want to get to 10 cents.

Why don't we just say one cent per year?

Can we add that?

Um just being silly.

Um I also want to bring up a very important point, and I wasn't being silly, I just said that because I didn't like your response.

Um we have a creative city at hocke committee that we are really ready to put in the work and implement the plan, but we can't do it without our TOT funds.

And something else that is very important to us that I'm just realizing an application without.

We need um we would love to be a part of the executive director process.

It's important to us with the work that our um executive director Glus has um Jonathan has got us so far.

So we'd like I'm asking to be a part of that process in some way, the Arts and Culture Commission.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

And our final speaker here in Chambers is Carlos Christiani.

Thank you.

Chair Campillo, honorable members of this committee.

My name is Carlos Christiani, director of corporate and government affairs of the Fleet Science Center, board president of the Visual and Performing Arts Foundation, um, and former Arts and Culture Commissioner, then representing District 7.

Thank you so much for this causing TOT funding and the needs of the Cultural Affairs Department here today.

The cuts are coming from every direction.

NEA, NSF, NASA, NEH, IMLS, California CAC, the CLOBAC of the California Museum grants for two consecutive years.

For Fleet Science Center alone, just our loss in National Science Foundation is preventing also bringing 3.7 million dollars in programs that today should be being deployed in district four directly.

Keeping steady funding flat at least to at least the current um levels would be really required at this point, and we are grateful for your support in discussing this and bringing this forward to council.

For reference, over 10 years ago when I served at uh at the arts and culture commission, we were able to bring to increase the funding for arts and culture from around 7.5 million dollars to close to 15 million.

That was 10 years ago.

So not even considering those constraints of inflation alone.

We know that we can do it in really hard times and in really hard years.

You of course have all our support, and we continue to do really good work with uh again with your support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment for item number three.

Each speaker will have two minutes.

We'll begin testimony with Blair Beekman.

Please unmute and begin.

All right, thank you.

Blair Beekman.

I wish I had a bit more to say on this item.

It's a really important item.

Um I just wanted to note that at this time, and our I'll be listening uh at this time.

Uh thank you that you have this sort of item uh at the public meeting process.

That's all thank you.

Our next speaker is Andrea Ebbing.

Please unmute and begin.

Hi, I'm really pleased to uh hear you guys are looking at this.

I had mentioned previously when I was the marketing director for W Hotels at Conviz, the Convention and Visitors Bureau was so involved in like um, I guess helping to drive revenue in the city in this tax um this TOT.

And it was very helpful and it did like encourage and foster really great dialogue between um hotel brands and uh sister cities or sister cities, feeder market cities is a better word, um, and cross promotions and that sort of thing.

But I think there's a way to people do they want to uh people love San Diego number one, and they do want to contribute to the arts and culture scene.

Everybody's aware of budget constraints.

Um, and there is a movement to um for contributing to nonprofits and that sort of thing.

So I think there's a way that we could even market this TOT to be a positive thing.

It doesn't have to be a frightful thing.

Um, if every visitor helps fund the arts, music, and culture that makes this city so unforgettable.

We can give people a chance to go above and beyond that tax.

Like if we um if we market it properly, we can actually make it an exciting thing where others can invest.

They don't even have to be from San Diego, but they can voluntarily um decide to, I don't know, invest in um in these types of programs.

We can also uh look at what's the difference between like a Airbnb stay versus a hotel stay.

I know Airbnbs have really affected hotels, and I would say for sure Starwood Hotels, Marriott Hotels, they're all kind of really open to um these kinds of conversations, and they need room nights.

So they need heads and beds, and uh the small um tax.

If somebody's coming in from Ohio isn't as felt by a San Diegan, so that could be great.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Francine Maxwell, please unmute and begin.

You will have two minutes.

Francine Maxwell, Southeastern San Diego resident.

Thank you so much for the presentation.

We all know that arts and culture is just an equalizer throughout the county of San Diego, and we appreciate all those private entities that still sponsor.

We know that a lot of things dried up in 2025 as we prepare for 2026.

Please um keep us at our 4.28% for now.

And if you can, see if you could add a special uh night budget meeting when it comes to the budget.

The community is very appreciative of our two night budget meetings, but it sure would be nice to add a third one where we can um talk about arts and culture and other things and not be regulated to just one moment one minute.

So again, thank you so much for the presentation, and thank you for allowing me to speak.

Thank you for your comment and chair with no other hands in the queue.

This concludes testimony for item three.

Thank you to members of the public for your participation.

I'll go ahead and kick us off here.

I want to thank the members of the community who came in today and called in to illustrate the vibrant presence of arts and culture in all the communities of the city of San Diego.

Uh, the council has been unanimous in years past in making arts and culture a budget priority, uh, but the funding for many different reasons has not come through.

And of course, this is a problem because it means that the city fails to invest in a creative workforce that enriches our communities and drives innovation.

Creating and supporting good jobs should be a bigger priority for the city.

And for every dollar we invest, the arts community provides us with significant returns, supporting small businesses and nonprofits.

It boosts tourism, it supports households.

And by ensuring stable funding, we retain and attract talented individuals who might otherwise leave for better opportunities elsewhere.

Two years ago, Councilmember Moreno and I worked with the Office of the IBA to put in place a mechanism that is tied to the Council's adoption of its budget priorities resolution for the upcoming year, which in and of itself is an important step in the annual process.

But we felt that the council's discretionary portion of TOT, that one cent of the 10.5 warrants its own discussion that should start here at EDNIR at this recommendation as this recommendation deals with TOT revenue.

And per the council policy on TOT, the revenue should be used to advance the city's economic health, which includes supporting artistic and cultural amenities and endeavors.

The city policy, or rather, the council policy further states that the purpose of TOT is to support programs that promote the city as a place of creativity and innovation, which in turn results in the generation of more TOT revenue.

If a customer, whether they're a resident of the city who's paying TOT or a tourist who is paying TOT, because both pay TOT in many different ways, is paying a little bit more in a form of a tax to have an arts and culture amenity.

Well, that money should be reinvested in arts and culture to provide them with a better product overall over time.

Given the fact that the penny for the arts goal, which was set in 2012, just so happens to amount to the same portion of TOT as the Council's discretionary one cent, it was a no-brainer that Councilmember Morin and I that we wanted to use this mechanism and try to make meaningful progress towards that goal.

And so the council's discretionary one cent has historically been used to balance the needs of the general fund, understandably.

With this recommendation, though, I recognize the continued need to provide that relief as the city works to identify additional revenue streams that can support services funded by the general fund.

Fiscal year's 26 budget was passed, restoring critical neighborhood services, but the assumed revenues remain highly uncertain.

So both as part of the budget monitoring in the current fiscal year and development of the upcoming fiscal twenty-seven budget, the city will need to keep a very close eye on how revenues are trending to make sure we don't need to make additional cuts in the next budget.

That's why, with the best available budget projections at this time, thank you to the IBA, thank you to the Department of Finance for those.

I'm asking that the Council adopt a recommendation that the fiscal year 26 budget for arts and culture, that being 4.28% of the TOT be maintained for fiscal 27, and that the remainder of the TOT that is considered council discretionary be used to balance the general fund to pay for other neighborhood amenities like parks and libraries, sidewalks and street paving, and all the rest.

This recommendation is fiscally responsible and balanced and steady.

It insists that the 26 levels for arts and culture not be reduced in this upcoming year to ensure our creative community continues to survive in what is currently a highly volatile and uncertain funding environment.

So with that, I'll make the motion to approve staff's recommendation on this item, which is to approve the fiscal year 2027 council recommendation on its preferred use of the one of 10.5 cent transient occupancy tax and forwarded to the budget and government efficiency committee for consist consideration as follows.

4.28% of total TOT revenue for arts, culture, and community festivals and the remaining funds to the balance the general funds as needed.

That will be my motion, and we will go to other council members at this point, and I will call on uh only personalized right now is Pro Tem Lee.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh, and thank you, Chair for um putting this process together and um to your team for um putting a recommendation on the table as well.

Um I would just want to echo your remarks in terms of I think some of the frustrations we've all shared as the council uh in recent years when we see um total TOT um dollars go up, um, but the percentage of TOT that we've delivered to arts and culture, despite the commitment to try to withhold level percentages, that that percentage actually going down significantly.

Um and also want to echo with you that um that we do have a lot of uncertain economic headwinds, and so uh uh to our best knowledge at the moment, I think the objective of at least um maintaining the funding that we have had in this last year's budget would make sense.

Um I actually wanted to ask uh you a question from a technical standpoint, um, and the IBA could certainly help with this as well.

But I believe in in all of our recent years, the TOT funding that has been allocated towards arts and culture has always come out of specifically the special promotional programs pot of funds, correct?

Um in part because there are limitations to what SPP funds can be used for in terms of reimbursement, and this is one of those areas.

Yes, the the one cent council discretionary and the special promotional programs uh or special promotional pro portion of it all go into the special promotional programs uh business area, part of the transit occupancy tax fund, and then that from there goes out uh to fund the Cultural Affairs Department and other uh general fund reimbursements.

Um check I I guess I've always been understanding that the council's one percent discretionary is actually not part of the special promotion program's component, and it's it's separate of that portion so per the city charter it is.

Um it's a special, you know, it's that one cent versus four cent special promo, but in the fund that it all sits in for accounting purpose, it all sits in in the same fund and it's then up to council uh to take a step back.

Technically, the the entire fund is at council's discretion when you're making the budget, it just says that this one cent is explicitly want uh council to make a recommendation about it.

Understood.

Yeah, I I for me I I I know we've always tried to utilize SVP in particular because it it has limitations on what it can reimburse, whereas the one percent um that's discretionary to the council actually has much broader use.

Um and that's why it's actually available to backfill the general fund as well.

Um so this might be a technical thing, Chair if if you would welcome a friendly uh adjustment just to the language here.

Um but I would ask if um I don't know how we reflect this.

My thought is that the objective is to achieve the 4.28% of total TO2 revenue, um, but we only want to use the council's discretionary percent to backfill any shortfall to that 4.28% that is proposed in the budget.

Because ideally we don't want it to come from this one percent in its entirety, it should really come from special promotional programs.

But I absolutely agree with you that we want to uphold this percentage.

And so any shortfall we see from it is but I think this is how you designed the policy to work, that we utilize the council's discretionary one percent to backfill any shortfall.

If I understand you correctly, uh Council President Pro Tem, uh so what you're saying is that the recommendation should be changed so that we achieve 4.28, right?

That's the correct number, 4.28% of total TOT revenue, regardless of whether it's from council discretionary or special promotional programs, that in essence it doesn't have to simply come from council discretionary, it could come from a separate bucket as well.

Correct.

And I and you know my preference in the past.

I think I I've always wanted to see that in an era someday when the when the city might be on different financial footing that the council actually has greater authority over its one percent discretionary.

Um and so I I don't want to see a point in the future where arts and culture is only funded out of that one percent.

Um but certainly in cases where it comes short from what the council desires that we use it to backfill backfill that.

Um I I will also know I I think that's a way for us to really put a foot down this year to say that the council wants to see no less than 4.28% um uh funded towards arts and culture.

Again, as much of that from special promotional programs as uh can be budgeted, um, but that we are committed to using any proportion of our one percent to meet any gap if that exists under sense.

I think I hear what you're saying.

Uh my question for the city attorney is given the municipal codes, um the municipal code is a little strict about just how the TOT is allowed to be allocated in various ways.

Is this actually permissible?

Um I'm just trying to think back as to why we can't play around with the whole 10.5 cents, right?

It's one cent of the 10.5 cents is is discretionary for a purpose.

I'm just wondering what it says.

I'll ask uh deputy city attorney Marguerite Middaw to possibly answer that question.

Otherwise, it would be something that we have to look into and get back to you.

Hi, yes, council member, would you mind repeating the language of the motion?

You mean the council president pro temps adjustment to the motion?

Yes.

Okay.

This came up on the fly, so that I apologize that it's um not fully fleshed out.

Um let me let me read through just the to see it I can tell you the intent of it.

It's a little harder to tell you exactly what the language is should be.

I believe that um the recommendation should be to approve council's recommendation of its preferred use of the one of the 10.5 cent transient occupancy tax um to backfill or to achieve the 4.28% of total TOT revenue for arts and culture funding.

But Council President Pro Tem, maybe I can clarify.

I think I understand what you're trying to achieve, and I think with this recommendation, and if we just add clarifying language, it can be achieved.

So I think what you're saying is the recommendation stands just that it should be budgeted in special promo and if needed elsewhere.

But I think that was the intent of this mechanism as well.

That since arts and culture currently is in special promo, and IBA um can maybe clarify on this as well.

But since it's currently in special promo and not technically with the council's one cent, we're fine to keep it that way.

And then if increased funding comes in, that can technically be under that four cent, right?

So that it's equivalent and it it doesn't it can be budgeted for accounting purposes anywhere, right?

Um it doesn't the the recommendation that the the council has discretion over is the one cent, but for accounting purposes, it can technically be budgeted anywhere, is what the council policy intends.

Councilmember, I'm understanding your intent that the 4.28% of total TOT, you would like to see that come from the special promotional programs portion of the four cents of the 10.5 cent, and that the one cent remainder of TOT that is fully council discretionary, you would like to be able to have that be not necessarily assigned to arts and culture, but still be there available to backfill the special promo program if the mayor's proposed budget doesn't get to 4.25% out of just a special promo program.

Correct.

Yeah, I think I think the commitment I want to see out of this process is that the council is committing that we will that we would like to achieve the 4.28%, regardless of what is budgeted out of out of the proposed budget in the next year.

I I hear you on that.

You know, I'm gonna be a completely different meeting taught me this because I see where you're going here, uh, pro tem you want to make sure we're putting the roughly 13 to 14 million dollars that the slides show over to arts and culture, and you don't want to fail that.

I think because the item is literally noticed as annual recommendation of council discretionary portion of transient occupancy tax, we would actually be that amendment would actually be out of order because that would you what you're actually saying is to pay the money out of a totally different part of TOT.

I remember this because it was on the Mission Trails Regional Park Task Force.

You were in that meeting when we made actually you corrected that in order.

So uh Yeah, you're you're nailing the the what that's why technically I'm not saying that we should fund it because we can't tell the mayor what to what to approve in their budget or what to propose in their budget.

But I think if the language here suggests that we will fulfill the difference, no matter what it is, to uh achieve the 4.28 percent.

I I think you might be right that this language is intended to that.

So I think clarifying language heading into council might not hurt for that as well.

I hear you I hear you're lighting.

That might be a way to achieve it, just as a way to make sure that we don't we don't run afoul of brown act noticing because it does say council discretionary portion and not special promotional funds in the title of the item.

I I hear where you're going.

I support what your idea of what you're talking about, uh, because that would I think in my in my calculation right here, you you're creating not just the stability but the security of the funding, which I think everyone in the crowd would say is really important.

Um so what I think we can work together to make sure that that message is loud and clear and see if something in the final item can be adjusted.

I see Chris Ackerman Avlo over there nodding in his support of trying to find a good solution.

Uh and uh but the point is really really well taken.

Um I think just from a strictly speaking, from a noticing point of view that we adjusting that into the motion wouldn't uh be legally appropriate.

Totally understand.

Conveniently we have the budget and government efficiency chair here as well.

So I I'm hoping that as this progresses, then perhaps when it gets docketed for that committee that that some adjustment can be made to account for it.

The other um request that I would have just for consideration to open it up here, um, is that the other pool of funding that I think a lot of us use for arts and culture purposes or at least that supporting a lot of arts arts and culture organizations, one of which was funded this year, one of which was vetoed and not overridden, um, is our CPPS and ACCF funding pools as well.

And so again, I'm not gonna make a motion to change that here, but perhaps moving forward would wonder if that is actually another area in which um council's recommendation to use its one percent discretionary to fulfill any shortfall would be would be valuable because we've all desired to keep that kept see that kept each year and have fought for that, and um hope that by stating it upfront in the very beginning of the year, we get to ensure that that actually happens.

Certainly.

No, I agree with that.

I appreciate that you point that out as a long-term or excuse me, uh complementary goal of supporting arts and culture that the council has uh promoted over the last budget cycle.

Um happy to second the motion with that.

Thank you.

I appreciate that very much.

Uh good good questions and good suggestions there, uh, Pro Tim Lee.

Um I will go to Councilmember Campbell.

I second your motion.

Yep.

He got you to it by half a sentence, so but I appreciate it.

Yeah.

I think I know how you're gonna vote here.

Uh well, seeing no other speakers on the lights, uh, thank you.

Are you on the lights, Mr.

Foster?

No, yeah, okay.

Uh I appreciate uh the presentation and the hard work.

Uh thank you, Ms.

Lewondo, for your good work on this, and uh we will see that we get the clarifying language that's necessary as we as the budget uh season unfolds.

Uh we have a motion and a second, and I'll call the role.

Vice Chair Foster.

Councilmember Campbell.

Council President Pro Tem Lee.

Yes.

And I am a yes.

That can't, so that carries unanimously with all members present.

Thank you to members of the public for your participation today.

We now have an agenda information agenda item.

Sarah, please introduce it.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number four is the 2025 state legislative and budget update.

And if you're watching on City TV of the live stream online, you'd like to dial in to speak, please call 1669-2545252 and input webinar ID 1603 0614 pound, Chair.

Thank you.

Uh we will now have a presentation uh from uh our city's director of government affairs, Walt Bishop, and our city's state legislative consultant Moira Top.

Uh, thank you for being here.

And please let us know how much time you'll need.

Uh good afternoon, Chair Kim View and honorable members of the committee.

Uh, we'll need 10 minutes for a presentation.

Very good.

Great.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Um, joining me today is uh Moira Top, our state lobbyists in Sacramento.

Uh I'll turn it over to her here in a second, just take you through today's presentation to highlight an incredibly busy um and fast moving uh 2025 state legislation, uh state legislative session that that covered a whole lot and accomplished a whole lot somewhere.

I will turn it over to you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Chair and members.

Uh it was a very busy year uh this year.

Um as you know, we we note here it it started uh with a bang with the LA wildfires.

We kind of got back into a rhythm throughout the year and then ended with um the redistricting discussion.

Um so anyway, it's a very busy year.

Um you can see the topics that we um that I think we identify as some of the major topics that uh the legislature really focused on.

Um we engaged in a lot of these areas, and I'll just say this.

I've said this before, and I truly um feel it every single year, and that is that you all make my job very, very easy in Sacramento.

Your thought leadership, your uh policy direction that you give to us in government affairs um really does uh lead us uh in Sacramento and allow us to really be called upon as again thought leaders and policy leaders um throughout uh the discussions throughout the year.

The governor ended up with about 915 bills on his desk.

He has until next Monday to sign or veto all of them.

He's got a few hundred left.

Um some really big ones that are still awaiting his uh direction.

So we are anxious to see how the final outcome of these bills uh transpires, uh and uh we'll be uh providing those final updates for you as they come in.

Next slide.

Um of course the state budget is a huge discussion uh uh area within uh the legislative arena and governor's uh discretion throughout the year.

It was a slightly difficult budget year.

We did have a deficit in the state budget.

It wasn't huge.

Um it was a 12 billion dollar um budget deficit.

You can see that's um, you know, it it's not it's not huge compared to the 250 billion dollar budget that the state does look at.

Um but what they are looking at is the potential for out-year um budget deficits, which is concerning.

Um on the good news front, we continue to see strong revenues coming in to the state.

Um we're already about four and a half billion dollars up over those May projections.

Um there's still a great deal of uncertainty, however, and there also are huge um cost pressures for the expenditures of programs.

And then we keep hearing rumors about a false session on on the budget.

I I haven't heard anything in the last few weeks, um, but that rumor has been around.

Um I don't know if we'll see a uh a fall special special session, but you never know with the legislature.

Um certainly working with our strong San Diego delegation, a delegation of um diverse members that we appreciate working with.

We focused on these core areas.

Um we were uh fairly successful in a number of them.

Most of them we uh we did accomplish at least portions of our goal setting in preserving core programs and funding those things that we found most important.

Um moving on to kind of the legislative and the policy focus that really drives where we see and where what we're working on in Sacramento, and it's derived from the platform that you develop again.

It's such a strong platform that gives us a great deal of direction.

Um the HAP program, I know we talked about this several months ago when I was here.

Um the governor did not initially fund the HAP 7 round in his January 10 budget.

We negotiated and worked throughout the spring and summer.

Um the governor did and legislature did agree to a 500 million dollar allocation.

Um it does include some additional strings at this point, and we expect actually additional trailer bill legislation in January to round out some of the criteria that might be used by the administration.

Um we're certainly disappointed that it isn't the one billion dollars that has historically been allocated into the HAP program, and we're gonna continue to fight to see if we can bump up those numbers, especially as these strong revenues continue to come into the state.

But that's where we stand today.

We did focus on a few program efficiencies in the in homelessness.

Um I'll note SB 569, we did sponsor, the city did sponsor this bill to really deal with Caltrans properties.

It's now a two-year bill.

The legislature wanted to pump the brakes a little bit as we were continuing to work on the city's delegated maintenance agreement.

So we'll continue to work on that bill in the coming uh 2026 session.

And then just in housing generally, I'll just say it was a very big year.

I'm sure you've read a lot about the legislation in the past.

Um the governor really put a stake in the ground on some major housing legislation in the budget and trailer bills that was encompassed in AB 130 and 131.

I could probably take an hour to talk about what's in those bills.

It is a massive bill about permit streamlining, CEQA exemptions, and CEQA reform all focused on housing.

It's a tremendous bill.

Um SB92 is another sponsor bill from the city that we worked very hard on to address the loophole that we uh identified in the density bonus law that led to a particular project being pursued in the city of San Diego, um a large large tower that we thought was not appropriate, and I know that was something that was directed by uh the city council as well.

Another huge bill that is still sitting on the governor's desk is SB 79, um, it's a transit-oriented development bill.

And lastly, just wanted to note that there is discussion about a housing bond for the 2026 ballot.

It's stalled right now, which is not unusual since we weren't in the election year this year.

I think that discussion will pick up speed as we move into 2026.

Next slide.

Um, I won't go through each of these bills, but I would just note that um behavioral health, especially as it links into some of our homelessness issues, um, was continue to be a topic that we focused on and the legislature focused on.

There are a number of bills, there were even more.

These are bills that remain on that were uh pursued by the city.

There were others that uh have been pursued.

We've tried these a couple of these a couple years in a row.

We've kind of made some success on some of these this year, um, and uh do hope that the idea is to continue to build off of some of the programs and the um the bills that we've seen in the past, for example, care court enacted a few years ago.

And I just do want to note that your city attorney's office and your um behavioral health officer were tremendous advocates and real thought leaders as well in the state legislature, called upon as experts uh in the legislature to drive some of those pieces of legislation home and really give that real world experience.

And so it was it was impressive to see.

Um in the area of sustainable and environmental quality, um, there was a great deal of activity.

We had a few bills from our member, uh Senator or excuse me, Assemblymember Alvarez that kind of just improved local government bodies.

I would call your attention to another big kind of bucket of bills that the governor and legislature negotiated in the final stages of the legislative session, and that was on both the Cap and Trade, which is now called Cap and Invest program, as well as energy affordability.

Those were kind of two items and issues that were linked in the final stages of legislate of the legislative session.

But importantly, the Cap and Trade or Cap and Invest program was extended to 2045.

And most importantly, the expenditure plan that accompanies that extension.

So the use of the dollars that come in through the Cap and Invest program was negotiated, something that I know the city has cared about and in terms of ensuring transit programs and the AHSC program is maintained, that those dollars and that allocation remains part of the GGRF expenditure plan in statute.

Also, just to note the again the energy regulation, regulatory reform and affordability conversation dominated a lot of that last week of session.

Number of these bills were ones that I know you and the city council really drove policy to ensure the city took a supportive position on.

We're still waiting for the governor's decision on a number of the bills, although he has signed a few of the really big ones.

I mean, some of these bills, AB 825, which really creates regional energy organization.

These are really consequential bills that will take a number of years to take it to bring to fruition, but they really were pretty significant bills out there.

So hopefully reducing costs for Californians and improving our energy regulatory system.

I'll talk faster, sir.

AB 379 was a very important bill, sponsored by the mayor as well, that dealt with traffic human trafficking.

But the legislature did work together and come with the come to a compromise where we're very grateful for AB 379 to deal with a lot of the human trafficking issues that we do see here in Sacramento and throughout the state.

Also call your attention to an important traffic safety bill, SB 720.

This is reform to the red light camera program, creates a an alternative program for cities to use if they see fit that will hopefully reduce traffic accidents and fatalities due to red light violations.

There.

AB 752 has been signed by the governor, and it uh is a permitting reform when you've got housing or when you've got child care facilities co-located with housing.

It's really a smart government bill.

We're happy that that bill has been signed.

And Senator Blakespear had a bill to really coordinate the child care facilities on military basis when you've got DOD licensure and state licensure to really make sense there.

The bill is a two-year bill now, but we continue to look forward to working on that next year.

A few other economic development bills that were important to the city.

Fusion research is something that is uh we have a hub here.

Um we think that's an important growth hub for us, economic development-wise.

Um, and then uh lastly, just to note um SB 753.

The we we see I'm sure you've seen all the city of many urban cities see the uh proliferation of abandoned shopping carts, and this is another bill that tweaks existing programs to make it really work workable for local governments to deal with that um proliferation.

So looking ahead, um, you know, again, we there are there is budget uncertainty.

We're so thrilled that there are revenues that are coming in, but their LA taxes aren't due until they were put off from the April 15th deadline till October, so we don't know what that means.

And then, of course, the federal government's changes in federal in their federal funds that they send to the state will have some definite effect.

Of course, we've got a November election to deal with a redistricting issue, um, which could affect statewide races, um, and then we do have leadership changes coming about.

And then we do have leadership changes coming about.

The Senate Pro Tem will has just actually changed.

Just at the very end of session, there was a decision made to elect Senator Limon Monique Lamone from the Central Coast area.

Senator McGuire had been the pro tem.

So that change will officially take place right after the November election.

And we'll see additional changes as members' term out next year or look towards additional different offices to run for.

And then lastly, of course, response to federal actions that we will continue to have to kind of pivot and will probably dictate a lot of the policy direction next year, as it did this year.

So with that, Mr.

Chair, I'm happy to conclude and uh take any questions you might have.

Very good.

Thank you very much for the presentation.

Let's go to our public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

We've not received any speaker slips here in chambers.

So I'll be in the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment for item number four.

Each speaker will have two minutes, and we will begin with Andrea Ebbing.

Please unmute and begin.

Hi, thank you so much.

I wanted to talk about the behavioral health and alcohol addiction, that whole portion of the discussion, and just um highly, highly urged, highly urged that we uh perform an audit, a due diligence audit on the providers and contracts we have in place.

Because what happens is when there's a not only an ineffective provider but a dangerous provider, we wind up uh making the issue so much worse than it needs to be.

Um there was a uh county, multiple county contracts issued to Apex Recovery, um, despite numerous reports of fatalities, um, major narcotics being distributed throughout the facility, uh patients being turned into homeless people that they'd never even been to the city before, um threats, you know, insurance fraud, the whole thing.

Now that's not to say that every single um addiction treatment or rehab facility is nefarious and is uh body brokering, giving kickbacks and doing insurance fraud.

It's just that the five million dollar investment we made into apex recovery certainly is very, very dangerous to you know, not only um those closest to them, but also um the patients.

So I think we can make the issue so much worse and so much more expensive by not paying attention to um you know what who we're working with and who we're actually dealing with.

Um that's one thing.

Um the other thing is I I feel like uh these Narcan billboards and these 988 billboards and all the stuff that's I understand there's like a desire for grants and federal funding and all that stuff, but the city is starting to look like everybody's completely out of their mind and so drugged out and like not good.

So thank you.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Blair Beekman, please unmute and begin.

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

Uh thanks a lot for this item.

Um stood out for me uh on this item traffic safety, the red light camera program.

I have not read up on this new uh version of the red light program, but uh is it supposed to have a bit more features to it that's more a bit more humane, uh progressive.

Uh it sounds possibly interesting.

Uh, I'd like to read up more on our about it.

Good luck with this item uh in addressing uh our surveillance issues.

Um you also have an item here listed as working with uh Cal Mexico Border Relations Council issues, improving local government bodies.

Um I think we're at a really important time to be working on our relationships with Mexico, and that uh there's a really good presidential administration, obviously.

How we can facilitate an open dialogue, a trusting dialogue, and and that it's okay to do that.

There is just a long tradition in San Diego that we do not talk about our relationship border issues with Tijuana and Mexico.

Um I hope this is a time we can work through that.

And just it it's it's joyful to be open about the subject, uh, I feel so good luck in our efforts and what we can be doing with that.

Um, I also wanted to comment uh from my comments from yesterday about like things like uh surveillance and tech.

Um you were working on projects of the gas lamp area that are based um to me, I worry about the future of uh surveillance and tech use.

Um you had I what I tried to say yesterday is that you worked on items for the gas lamp around you know bicycle, the future, the you know, the bicycle uh program, you know, bicycle cart program for tourists and stuff like that.

Those are practices where you didn't have to involve technology.

I hope you can really make those efforts for the gas lamp and how we address um our issues.

Um yeah, uh thanks.

Thanks for your time.

Thank you, and Chair.

This concludes testimony for item four.

Thank you very much.

Uh, we will begin with Councilmember Campbell.

Thank you so much, Chair.

Um thank you for the presentation.

Thanks for all the good work you do up there.

I just have a few uh questions and comments.

First of all, I'm so grateful that Caltrans was willing to reimburse our people for cleaning up the camps that are on their property.

Uh but I would like to ask them where's the money to where we can move these people.

Uh it seems that as if they they have to come back to these areas, or they feel that they do.

They feel that this is their their only place to live.

And uh within a week, usually those camps are back.

So the answer really is housing, as we all know.

And the answer to homelessness is obviously housing.

When is the state gonna give us some?

I know they they it was 500 million, wasn't it, that they passed, thank heaven.

Um, and more hopefully will be coming.

Uh we certainly need it, and I'm so grateful that Measure C now has passed its last, hopefully last hurdle.

Uh five years trying to get that passed.

So um we've got measure C now that could provide us a steady budget for taking care of homelessness in our city, and that would be a godsend.

Um and hopefully it won't take us too much longer before we can tap into that.

But in the meantime, it's very important that we have housing with follow-up care for our homeless populations.

And I just wondered if uh if there's any thought in the state that well, we'll help you clean up the camps, but what do we do with the people after they we clean up the camps?

We need a place for them to live.

Thank you for the question, uh, council member.

Yeah, well, you're you hit the nail on the head.

Um one of the things that we're looking at, obviously SB 569 is a two-year bill that we're looking at making some adjustments uh to is exactly to your point.

Um one of the things within the agreement, those are SB1 dollars, so the guardrails on those dollars are very, very narrow.

So we are looking at different uh policy solutions that would create additional funding sources for jurisdictions with delegated maintenance agreements to be able to do the things you discussed, such as shelter, uh interim housing, etc.

Um, outreach.

Um something we continue to look at on the HAB front.

Uh couldn't agree with you more.

We're continuing not just ourselves, but also as part of the big city mayors coalition, uh the counties, COCs, etc.

Continuing to push for a billion dollars, not just this year-to-year fight that we've can uh continually had to have, but making it a permanent program, also creating some consistent accountability measures.

I feel like we've been going year to year on changing changes to the different accountability metrics that our folks have to report out on, which has been a challenge.

Um, but yeah, it's the continued fight.

I think uh if we will in this administrate current administration, I think it's gonna be a challenge to make that program permanent, but as we look to a new gubernatorial administration, that's gonna be our top ask for whoever's our next governors to make sure HAP is a permanent budgeted program.

Moira, I don't know if you have anything to add on that.

Excellent, excellent.

And I uh our housing commission is so excellent in our city, and they do such a good job, and they they have so many ideas and they can think outside the box.

And I hope that that you're working with them also for their ideas, and they they could help the state come up with some answers as well.

So thank you for that.

Um I wanted to ask you about the care courts.

Uh did they provide more care courts or they you know, it just seems everything gets stuck, and we we're not moving ahead with that.

The guardianships that may be necessary.

Uh how's that going?

Thank you for the question.

Um, I wouldn't say that there are quote more care courts.

The care courts are kind of what they are throughout each county um or within each county.

Um but the the there are um portions of the of the state law that um either hamper the ability to get someone recommended into care court to make care court each of the care courts function properly.

Um certain conditions there was a bill that um recognized chronic alcoholism and making sure that that's a component, you know, just small potential you know, seemingly small tweaks that really do hamper the program and that we're hoping that the you know this is a county program that the counties are able to uh fully implement them if we keep giving them all the tools through these legislative means that those uh that the county or that the care courts will become robust in time.

Thank you.

We can we can only hope so.

But I can tell you I did have a nice discussion with our county health department this morning, and they are very much uh willing to work with us to try and help uh with that situation as well as everything else in regard to health and safety, especially with the homeless.

So I thank you for that.

Uh I just want to put in a word about SB 79, which I hope the governor does not sign.

Um I am not aware of all the changes that have been done to it.

Um perhaps you can educate me on that, but I know originally it was an idea of dropping multifamily high units, high like high-rise units into single-family neighborhoods in between housing, which is a really um an idea here in San Diego that is extremely and totally unpopular, and uh would really change the nature of San Diego as a unique city.

And um people here are very much against SB 79.

So I um you know, I wish that San Francisco people would I wish all of us could just do our own local, take care of our local places with guidelines and guard rails.

And I believe here in San Diego we are working so hard to provide housing and affordable housing, and just tomorrow we're gonna ribbon cut on a brand new 69, 67 resident uh apartment house in Midway, where homeless people will be living and having their own homes and getting on their feet and having care following them.

So it's a it's a good thing.

Uh we continue to do that, gosh, I would say almost weekly in our city.

We're we're really quite good.

Just in my district too, we have at least 600 new affordable housing units just within the past couple of years.

And we welcome them in district two.

We're always glad to have them, and God bless the county, they they have the land.

They are opening three beautiful new apartment complexes there on Mount Antna that uh are really quite lovely, that will also help with this situation and house probably at least 400 different families and people.

So I really um appreciate all the help that we've gotten uh from the state on that as well as the county and the city, of course, is very grateful.

Uh but it SB 79, oh we don't like it.

So please tell me, were there any changes in it that make it easier to swallow if the governor signs it?

And is there a chance he might not?

Uh that's a lot of questions.

Um the uh the the crux of the bill is is to provide um it's tiered in in various ways, um height limits, um changes um depending on where you are with you know the technical aspects.

But yes, the crux of the bill is to do um as you described it.

Um but uh if the governor signs it, I I learned long ago not to speak for the governor of the state of California, even when I worked for one.

Um, you know, I I think it's fair to say that this is a controversial bill and that it's gonna be one that he's gonna um take a long time to weigh, you know, back and forth on it.

So um my guess is we'll see that towards towards the end of the week or weekend.

Um but I I I do want to address one thing if I may, and that is that I you're absolutely right, San Diego is recognized as a a true leader in housing in progressive housing development, and um Walt and I spend a lot of our time telling the legislature, explaining to the legislature, um, teaching, you know, trying to explain that any particular bill at any given time um while has might have great statewide application, um, you know, could have um unintended adverse impacts in a city like San Diego who's doing the right thing and really building, and so we really do have that in mind as we're talking about legislation and really trying to make sure that um that some of these statewide um applications don't harm what we're trying to do so well.

And so we really do have that in mind as we're talking about legislation and really trying to make sure that some of these statewide applications don't harm what we're trying to do so well.

So I did want to tell you that yet that is challenging, but it's recognized, and we do spend a lot of time talking about that.

Thank you.

And just to remind them my personal thing.

4,000 new housing units in my district, my bill for midway, for the midway neighborhood to be completely redone, and 2,000 of those to be affordable.

And that is gonna happen.

But we're getting there, and we're gonna start digging and turning dirt over and getting things done.

And uh if they think that San Diego is not interested in housing, well, uh district two is adding 4,000 more housing units just in that one neighborhood to make it beautiful again.

So I just hope that they will listen to us and let us do our thing because I think we know here what we're doing, and uh uh we would appreciate if they'd help us uh in that.

So um other than that, let me see.

I was gonna ask uh I think that's about that's about mainly what I was gonna ask about.

I wondered about AB 652.

If you could explain a little more what uh what um uh Alvarez was was uh bringing us with that's ABC, yes, thank you, um council member.

Uh this is a fairly technical bill.

It really enabled um the um appointees to have alternates and delegates and to kind of it makes it's a it's a it's a um governance ease of governance bill at this point.

There were some amendments that had been put in and then got taken out that were slightly controversial, but the bill was pretty much just about kind of the mechanic the mechanics of of the board.

So it wasn't uh changing any particular policy with related to the with relation to the district.

In regard to utilities, which you mentioned and and the price of energy, uh the PUC has been kind of a thorn in the side of San Diegans for a long time.

Um I don't know that there's really anything the legislature can do about that.

I know the governor appoints the members.

Uh does the legislature have to approve them?

Uh they are um they are um confirmed by this by the Senate.

However, um there are things it's uh it it is one of those uh interesting boards that is constitutionally protected, so there is a great deal of autonomy while despite the appointment process, um, a very significant autonomous um governance structure.

Um but that doesn't mean that the legislature cannot um legislate in this area, and I you know, just one bill that you know that we were involved with was AB 1017, a burner bill.

Um, you know, she's been quite outspoken about the need for transparency and right setting, and so you know, those types of bills um, you know, without taking over a utility, you know, that you you can do things to ensure transparency, uh, you know, various things, um, and and so there's one good example of it, I think this year.

Thank you so much, and thanks for all you guys are doing.

I know you're working really hard, and we appreciate it.

Thank you, Councilmember Campbell.

We'll now go to Vice Chair Foster.

Yes, thank you.

Um, just really quick as we talked about AB 79 and I guess well, my question is I just want to make sure we are filling in all the gaps because we have had recent settlements regarding concentration of poverty.

Um it seems like a lot of the legislation that's coming out is really focused around high trans transit priority areas and so forth.

And um, if you look at my district, just about all of my district is pretty much a high transit priority area, and so the impact is really severe.

And so I just want to make sure that as we are having these conversations, I don't know what the right path is or right what the right method is just making sure that we are conveying to the legislature regarding our settlements and certain things and what those impacts are, right?

As we talk about um statewide concerns and and um narrowing things down to where we are understanding some very specific nuances and um things that we are doing locally here.

So like to fall back, have some discussion and see how we can make sure we're filling that gap so that there's better understanding because even as the conversations are taking place and things are coming down, just to try and um I don't know if the proper word is relief, anxieties or or concerns as conversations are taking place in Sacramento the way things are being discussed here locally.

Um I think there's ways that we can better communicate that and and make sure that we're all on the same page and and taking into account these settlements and things as we are talking about.

Um making sure we're we're providing affordable housing in high, high resource type areas.

So thank you.

We were actually just before we walked in here, council member, having that exact conversation, looking ahead to the 2026 session and and ways we can possibly do some more work in that area.

Thank you, Vice Chair Foster.

Uh, thank you very much for our presenters for putting forward what's what is going on in Sacramento as it impacts our constituents here.

Uh obviously it's encouraging to see continued investments in public safety and in uh homelessness response and prevention, behavioral health reform.

Uh those are all things that my constituents have brought up continuously, and of course the enhancements to care court are especially important uh to help people who are in crisis.

Uh I do want to highlight the city's leadership on child care facility permitting reform, uh, AB 752, which our council formally supported earlier this year uh to make it easier to open child care facilities and support families across San Diego, and so I appreciate your partnership and putting that in front of us so that we could uh see it coming and then uh put our voice behind it.

Uh so thank you again uh to Moira and Walt for your good work, and uh we will see you when you have another update.

Uh that brings us to the end of our agenda today.

We'll now adjourn the economic development and intergovernmental relations committee meeting to our next regularly scheduled meeting, which is Wednesday, November 5th, 2025 at 2 p.m.

Thank you very much.