San Diego City Council Rules Committee Meeting - November 13, 2019

The San Diego City Council Rules Committee convened on November 13, 2019, at approximately 10:00 AM, with Council President Pro Tempore Gomez presiding, joined by Councilmembers Ward and Cate, with Councilmember Khriskey joining later. Also present were Sharon Speedback (City Attorney's Office), SIO Crespo (Mayor's Office), Jeff Kawar (Independent Budget Analysts Office), and Haley Lesser (legislative assistant). The committee considered two major items: proposed amendments to governing laws regarding city boards and commissions, and a resolution of necessity for a proposed general obligation bond to finance affordable and permanent supportive housing on the November 3, 2020 municipal special election ballot. The meeting was noted as the last regularly scheduled Rules Committee meeting of 2019.

Consent Calendar

• The committee unanimously approved the record of action from the September 18, 2019 meeting, on a motion by Councilmember Ward, seconded by Council President Pro Tempore Gomez. No opposition was voiced.

Public Comments & Testimony

Item 2 — Boards and Commissions Amendments:

• Mary Ann Ostman (Leadership Development Specialist, Mid City CAN) expressed support for implementing the auditor's recommendations and urged codifying the removal of background checks and credit checks so the changes become permanent. She also advocated for training in Brown Act and parliamentary procedures, dependent care services including child care, stipends, interpretation and translation services, transportation reimbursement, limiting simultaneous board service to one to two seats, and allowing all residents to serve regardless of citizenship status.

• Ana Laura Martinez (Organizer and Leadership Development Coordinator, Center on Policy Initiatives, CPI) read a prepared statement on behalf of CPI, which runs the Boards and Commissions Leadership Institute (BCLI). She expressed concern that the amendments do not address significant barriers to participation. She stated that credit checks perpetuate racial inequality, citing a BCLI participant prevented from serving on a city board due to debt incurred in graduate school. She urged removing credit checks, codifying the removal of background checks, removing questions about citizenship, and creating a system to communicate with applicants about application status.

• Maria Elena Morales (BCLI alumni; appointed to the California Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights) identified herself as a formerly incarcerated woman of color and stated her lived experiences matter for shaping policy. She urged the committee to codify the no-background-check policy so it does not change "at the whim of the next person in power," emphasizing that boards dealing with police misconduct and gang prevention are particularly important for formerly incarcerated people.

• Dr. Yessica Diaz Roman described obstacles encountered over two years applying for a boards and commissions position, including unclear online application processes, lack of confirmation that applications were submitted successfully, and a need for more transparency and follow-up guidance.

• Lorenza Rivera (recent graduate of Mid City CAN's Boards and Commissions Leadership Training Program) spoke about the importance of transparent processes to encourage civic engagement, stating she needs to be able to tell community members that their voices matter.

• Maggie Ta (resident of Bankers Hill, 12-year San Diego resident) described being appointed to the Parks and Recreation Board in 2016 but failing the background check due to the credit check portion, which was triggered by her student debt. She called the practice "invasive, discriminatory, ageist, and elitist" and stated that it ensures only a particular class can serve on a board. She noted she now serves on a county board, which only required an application, resume, ethics certification, and bio.

• Individuals registering support without speaking: John Brady, Anthony Pleva, and Mark Sheets.

Item 1 — Housing Bond Resolution of Necessity:

• Stephen Russell (Executive Director, San Diego Housing Federation) detailed the proposed $900 million bond, repaid through a property tax, which he described as the most broad-based way of sharing costs. He stated the action plan estimates that 90% of individuals and families identified in the 2019 point-in-time count need access to permanent housing options. He noted that 7 of the top 10 job categories being produced in the region over the next decade do not pay wages sufficient to rent a standard apartment. He explained that the ultimate cost would be $19 per $100,000 of assessed value, with a first-year cost of $2.87 per $100,000 if $150 million were issued initially, equating to approximately $17 per year for the median home valued at $597,000. He emphasized oversight through a citizens oversight committee, annual independent audits, and that each bond issuance would be a separate council decision.

• Jim Silverwood (President and CEO, Affirmed Housing; board member of the 501c4 formed for the Affordable Housing Bond) noted that since the dissolution of redevelopment agencies in 2012, San Diego County has lost about $700 million in redevelopment funds, and the $900 million bond is an attempt to "catch up."

• Debbie Fountain (Senior Program Manager, Corporation for Supportive Housing) expressed support, stating that solutions to homelessness must include housing with supportive services, and that higher densities and land use policies alone are insufficient without financial resources.

• John Brady (Regional Task Force on the Homeless board member; Yigby Task Force) provided historical context, noting the U.S. had an excess of half a million public housing units in the 1970s and now faces a severe shortage. He cited vacation housing taking 10,000 units off the market in San Diego alone. He stated the bond could support approximately 2,500 units of supportive housing, 2,500 units of low-income housing, and 2,500 units of affordable housing.

• Joe Barrett (HEAL — Homeless Experience Advocacy and Leadership Network, sponsored by the San Diego Housing Federation) shared his personal experience of homelessness and expressed wholehearted support for the bond measure, stating the only way to effectively address homelessness is to build more affordable housing.

• Rebecca Hickeld (San Diego LGBT Community Center) expressed support, noting the center is serving more people experiencing homelessness than ever before and that the city's action plan calls for more than 5,000 new homes for people who are homeless or at risk of being unhoused.

• Daniela Ogden (Vice President of Communications, Advocacy, and Fund Development, Eden Housing) stated Eden has almost 600 homes in the San Ysidro area, has over 200,000 people on its waiting list, and is ready to build more, emphasizing that local support is needed to complement state investment.

• Matthew Jumper (President of Interfaith Housing and President of the Board of the San Diego Housing Federation) called the bond "probably the best thing I've seen in the 28 years I've been doing this," emphasizing that local money can leverage billions of dollars in outside funding.

• Bob Cummings (Chelsea, provider of affordable and permanent supportive housing) urged support, stating the homeless crisis cannot be solved by anything other than providing homes.

• John Seymour (National Community Renaissance) stated the Housing Commission's Notice of Funding Availability, closing November 25th, will be "super oversubscribed," and that Northern California is outperforming San Diego in securing SB 1 and SB 2 funding. He noted his Encanto project in District 4 (66 units, approximately 60 units per acre) has 1,500 people on its waiting list and is already leased up.

• Roberto Alcantar (Chicano Federation) referenced the organization's 50-year history, noting that historically the community had to build its own housing in Barrio Logan, and urged San Diego to "roll up its sleeves" and approve the resolution.

• Ricardo Flores (Executive Director, LISC San Diego) compared the proposal to the convention center bond, stating the convention center proposal would build affordable housing in 20 to 30 years, and asked whether the council wants to solve the problem or allow another generation to solve it, noting that all money would go to affordable housing developers.

• Ken Sauter (President and CEO, Wakeland Housing and Development Corporation) thanked Councilmember Ward for attending the grand opening of The Beacon, a 42-unit permanent supportive housing project, and noted a 53-unit permanent supportive housing project for seniors in Councilmember Cate's district that recently received a 9% tax credit allocation. He emphasized that permanent supportive housing requires gap financing and that a local funding source is the key to making projects happen.

• Individuals registering support without speaking: Anthony Pleba, Mark Sheets, Sarah Jumper, and Sue Reynolds.

Discussion Items

Item 2: Potential Amendments to Governing Laws Regarding City Boards and Commissions

Corinne Wilson (Communications Manager and Policy Advisor, Council President's Office) presented proposed amendments stemming from the June 2017 Office of the City Auditor performance audit, which made 14 recommendations. Key recommendations and proposed implementations discussed included:

• Recommendation 7 (Brown Act training): Ensuring all board members view a training video within their first 30 days of service and again every two years, with an attestation. Draft language also includes training for staff liaisons and board members on records retention laws and the California Public Records Act, as noted by the City Attorney's Office.

• Recommendation 12 (Annual reports): Each city board and commission would submit an annual report to the Office of Boards and Commissions in the fourth quarter of each calendar year, including mission and duties, summary of actions, number of meetings held and cancelled, quorum issues, vacancies, expired terms, concerns, and estimates of city staff hours and costs. The proposal also adds voluntary self-reported demographic data collection, and requires posting reports on the city website for public access.

• Recommendation 14 (Formal review process): A formal review process for city advisory boards at least once every two years in February, considering reorganization, consolidation, membership requirement changes, sunsetting obsolete or redundant boards, and potential charter amendments for submission to voters.

• Recommendation 11 (Reports on new boards): The mayor's office would develop a standard format for reports to the city council regarding new advisory boards prior to their establishment, including analysis of whether functions could be incorporated into existing boards and estimates of staff hours and costs.

• Recommendation 5 (Vetting process documentation): Amendments to Council Policy 000-13 to formally document the vetting process for advisory board candidates, including responsibilities and timelines, and to address differences between mayoral and council nominee processes. Proposed additions include developing public documents explaining vetting steps and timelines, providing council offices with monthly nominee status updates, and creating a Brown Act-compliant process for council appointment when the mayor fails to appoint within 45 days following a vacancy (including a 10-day nomination period, IBA transmittal, and council docketing).

Additional stakeholder concerns included codifying that resignations are sent to the clerk for processing, ensuring FPPC compliance, removing background checks and credit checks as participation barriers, addressing meeting times and locations as barriers, improving communication of board work to council offices and committees, and increasing diversity given that the same people are often appointed to multiple commissions.

Joel Day (Executive Director, Office of Boards and Commissions) reported that many recommendations have already been administratively implemented, including department-wide Brown Act training, a standard annual report template, a new website (boards-commissions.sandiego.gov), and a new fillable online interest application. He noted that since July 2019, every applicant has received a personal email from his office. He stated that of 504 appointed positions, 242 are specific to council seats, and raised a reciprocity concern: if a council office does not provide a nominee within the 45-day window, the motion would remove the mayor's authority to make the appointment. He confirmed that background checks and credit checks have been administratively removed, except for secure facility access (e.g., the CRB).

Councilmember Khriskey expressed frustration that there are too many boards and it is unclear what they do, requesting that each board submit an annual one-page summary distributed to committees of jurisdiction so council members can track their activities. He also questioned why nomination memos would go through the IBA rather than the clerk's office; Council President Gomez explained the IBA was chosen to ensure Brown Act compliance, as council members cannot communicate directly with each other on nominees, though the office was open to alternative approaches.

Item 1: Resolution of Necessity for Proposed Ballot Measure (November 3, 2020 Election)

Molly Chase (Chief of Staff, Councilmember Ward) presented the resolution of necessity, developed with the city attorney's office and the San Diego Housing Federation following the committee's July 31st direction. Key findings presented:

• The January 2019 point-in-time count identified 5,082 homeless individuals within the city, including 572 chronically homeless individuals, representing 63% of the county's population experiencing homelessness.
• The Community Action Plan on Homelessness calls for creating 5,416 permanent housing opportunities over the next 10 years and 767 diversion resources per year, at an estimated cost of $1.94 billion.
• The 2018 housing inventory annual report found San Diego has 0.38 housing units per person, lower than comparable cities such as Denver (0.45) and Seattle (0.48).
• San Diego has constructed only 10.2% of the units identified in its housing element for very low-income persons and only 15.7% of the units identified for low-income persons.

The resolution of necessity provides the factual and legal justification for incurring bond debt and is the first of several steps. It does not include an ordinance for the ballot measure or commit the council to placing the measure on the ballot. Subsequent steps would include drafting ordinance language (by July 2020), a council vote requiring six votes, and a two-thirds voter approval.

Councilmember Ward moved to adopt the resolution of necessity and forward it to the full city council, stating that six other counties in California have successfully passed similar measures with a two-thirds vote in recent election cycles.

Councilmember Khriskey expressed concerns about per-unit costs, noting projects routinely come before the council at $400,000 to $500,000 per unit, and stated there is "frankly nothing affordable about that" when funded by taxpayers. He also expressed frustration that redevelopment was eliminated by Sacramento and that the state now asks for local tax matches. He stated he was a "reluctant no" on the item.

Council President Gomez seconded the motion, thanked Councilmember Ward and the Housing Federation, and raised a question about whether funds could be used for preventing the loss of existing affordable units (preservation), which was confirmed as possible through acquisition and rehab percentages in the ordinance language. Gomez noted the need to address income inequality and expressed hope for discussing preservation details in future deliberations.

Key Outcomes

Item 2 — Boards and Commissions Amendments: The committee unanimously approved a motion directing the city attorney to analyze and draft language amending applicable municipal code sections and Council Policy 000-13, including:

• Annual reporting to be heard by appropriate committees or the rules committee
• Amending municipal code 22.5301C (Office of Boards and Commissions) to include a duty to develop and keep current public documents explaining nominee vetting steps and estimated timelines, distinguishing between council and mayor nominee processes
• Duties to provide council offices with monthly updates regarding the status of their nominees
• A Brown Act-compliant council appointment process for when the mayor has not appointed after 45 days following a vacancy, potentially including a 10-day nomination period, IBA transmittal, and council docketing
• Codifying that resignations are sent to the clerk for processing and updating the register
• Ensuring compliance with FPPC requirements for boards filing statements of economic interest
• Codifying that background checks will not be required unless expressly required by governing law
• Forwarding all amendments to the full city council for consideration

Item 1 — Housing Bond Resolution: The committee approved the resolution of necessity and forwarded it to the full city council. Councilmember Khriskey expressed a "reluctant no" position during discussion, though the vote appeared to carry without recorded dissent. The next step is developing ordinance language for the ballot measure for the November 3, 2020 election.