Right, good morning.

Welcome to the rules committee meeting November nineteenth, twenty twenty-five on Joel Accalba, Councilmember for District One and Chair of the Committee.

Our committee's liaison Sarah Jordan will go over instructions for today's meeting.

And 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 enter the virtual queue by raising their hand before the virtual queue closes.

I will now call the rules committee meeting of Wednesday, November 19th, 252025 to order and call the role.

It's not here, is not expected to be here today.

Councilmember Campio, it's not here yet.

Councilmember Moreno.

Present.

Councilmember Elo Rivera.

And I am present.

Also attending the meeting today, Gillian Andalina with the Office of the Independent Budget Analyst, Kathy Steinman with the Office of the City Attorney.

Matt Yeagan with the Office of Mayor Tagoria and Abby Reuter committee consultant.

Sarah, please continue with public comment instructions.

Thank you, Chair.

If you're in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and place it on the top of the box indicated at the table 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, and members of the public can also 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.

If you need to participate via telephone, you may dial 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound.

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

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

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

If you wish to speak on 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 if you're a Zoom participant, or if you're a call-in participant by pressing star nine on your phone.

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

All right, thank you, Sarah, for reviewing those instructions for the benefit of the public.

A quorum is now present.

We will now 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.

Please uh Sarah, please proceed with non-agenda public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

Per Rule 2.7 on 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, and each speaker will have two minutes as the reminder of the number to call is 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound.

We'll begin testimony here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, if you will please approach the lectern.

You will be followed by Manny Rodriguez.

Each speaker will have two minutes.

Hi, thank you.

Uh Blair Beekman.

Uh happy Wednesday to everyone.

I reported yesterday that uh the uh city of Oakland was going to have their committee public safety committee meeting on uh moving on what will be the future of FLOC in Oakland and if it will move forward to its council committee for a final vote.

They deadlocked, it did not get approved.

Wow.

So we have a situation in Oakland where they have to really consider what is the future of Flock in Oakland.

I don't know what exactly um if the if the uh issue will move forward to the council.

Uh it's quite possible they have to create a uh an alternative uh amendment to uh and council item to uh ask to leave the flock contract.

That's how it's stipulated within their legal system.

I question that, but that's what's being how they may have to uh work it out.

So um I'm hoping that from this we we're learning important lessons that we can be reviewing Flock here in San Diego still.

And when I've mentioned in the next six months, we can very seriously find look start looking for a new vending service.

And I don't think that's uh an extraordinary, out of the ordinary ask at this point.

And we have I think let's get ready for that.

It's possible, it's happening, and uh it's interesting.

So good luck what you can be doing with it, and that we can there there can be uh a large number actually of vendors, and that we can look for a more responsible vendor than the superstar of Flock at this time.

And um, and that can be okay.

And uh I uh um it's it's a good fight, basically.

Good luck that we can talk about in terms of the good fight for ourselves, and uh we we can find uh upcoming best practices.

So thanks for your time.

What we're working on.

Um, obviously something is um happening.

So good luck in our works and and and what you can do in the meeting today as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Manny Rodriguez.

Good morning, Council President and Council members.

Thanks for taking the time this morning.

Um per the city charter, the council is a legislative body of the city.

However, I don't really see many council members actually proposing legislation.

Um, you know, there are some council members that I'm not sure of they proposed, you know, like an ordinance and their time here, but the city has a lot of problems to be solved.

But the city has a lot of problems to be solved.

I mean, street light takes hundreds of days to get fixed.

Why is nobody proposing an ordinance to fix that?

And I wonder if there could be a rules change where similar to the state assembly, like every council member has to submit like a dozen or so proposals by a deadline.

And I wonder if that would, you know, motivate council members to actually throw ideas.

And I think, you know, there are some council members here who do propose legislation, like Sean.

He's kind of carrying this whole council if you ask me.

But I think that other council members would have time to shine as well if there was, you know, concrete rules and expectations, like hey, you have to propose, I don't know, 10 ordinances by the state if you want to change anything in the city.

You know, council members also have a lot of policy advisors and staff that get paid very well.

You know, I think it's an expect reasonable expectation to want to see council members legislate more.

And you know, I think that if every council member, you know, had to propose, you know, 10 or so things.

We could see more ideas out there to tackle housing issues.

Maybe we'd see more land use proposals, maybe we'd see more street configuration proposals and things through that would just make the city move quicker and see the change that we want to see faster.

Um so yeah, I just wanted to raise that because I do think the city has a lot that needs to be fixed, but not a lot of legislation happening, in my view, at least, at least when you compare it to, you know, how much an assembly member proposes every year compared to how much a council member proposes every year.

Seems like a big discrepancy there.

But the city also has a lot of things that need to be fixed.

So thank you all.

Just wanted to share that idea.

Thank you.

That concludes testimony here in chambers.

So 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.

Each speaker will have two minutes, and we will begin testimony with Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Hello, this is Catherine Rhodes.

You are all violating your own city council policy CP 100-003 transit occupancy tax due to your failure to collect the full TOT paid by visitors.

That goes into the city's general fund.

I'm repeating what I have told you since 2014 and twice yesterday.

A simple way to fix your problem violations is to create amount and create a massive amount of new transit occupancy tax revenue is to put a ballot proposition for new ordinance to reclassify online travel companies as hotel operators into the municipal code through a public vote, which is not a tax increase to tourists, only a tax clarification to move your profits from out-of-state online travel companies such as Expedium Priceline instead of the city's general fund.

I do not agree with the IBA and Royal Campio that hotel lawyers will get less money from online travel companies or that they would have any problems with the ballot measure.

In fact, there are they they want they want to help you.

For example, another example in 2015, the county treasurer tax collector's office changed their um TOT ordinance without a public vote, which is illegal.

The county's top um TOT increased 26% the next year.

26% increase in TOT.

There were no there was no voting in 2015, and the 2014 ballots did not include anything from the county.

So they just did it.

And the um online travel agencies said nothing about it, neither did any of the hotel operators.

And I looked nationwide and I did not see that um online travel agencies went after the hotel years for the money that they were um you know getting, which should have been illegal, but you know, you lost your lawsuit.

Please also talk to Michael Catalano that did your lawsuit and consult him on this issue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh good morning.

And in the spirit of the season, I just want to say I am thankful for the public comments that have been offered today and for the opportunity that we all have to offer them throughout the year.

Uh I I am thankful for the the people who have brought forward the proposals today for the council to consider.

And uh I as much as I may criticize the activities of this council from time to time.

Um, yeah, I'm thankful that I have the right to do that without facing uh threats of lawsuits.

It says people around the country are facing from certain elected leaders at the national level.

Uh so we have a lot to be thankful for in this city.

We have uh a beautiful city, and you have been temporarily placed in a position of responsibility to manage many of the things that impact our daily lives.

And so I am thankful for the process that allows people to bring those concerns to your attention and for you to sit and listen to them.

Most, if not all of the committee members at least, to come in today and listen and uh consider the value and merits of the proposals.

There's quite a lineup.

Um a previous, I think it was Manny who mentioned how state legislators have dozens of bills that are proposed, and I will tell you that is having done that for six years.

There is a cost to that.

Um and there's a process to that for deliberation to consider all of those bills throughout the session.

Uh but it's a we have a professional legislature in the state of California that has made us now the fifth largest economy in the entire world.

So we are fortunate and I am thankful that we are in San Diego in California and have the resources to do many of the things that need to be done.

And now I would just ask that the council members who are attending this meeting today, keep all of that in mind as you look at the proposals before you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Zoom user.

If you can please unmute and state your name for the record and begin.

You will have two minutes.

Henry, thanks for Henry.

Thanks for taking my call.

Yeah, I was watching C-SPAN the other day and for a long time.

They have a thing called Prime Minister's questions in England, where they get the House of Commons, and for a couple hours they ask the Prime Minister questions.

What how come San Diego?

Why don't we have ask the mayor questions?

Like once a week, get them up there for an hour, and so the people can ask him a direct question.

Because I know you guys are kind of a front to the mayor, but the mayor actually does the program.

He's running the show, but he's very not accessible to actual questions.

Like he's got three bodyguards and stuff like that.

He never sits in the front, he always sits in the back, kind of hiding out.

So why don't you pass a rule that let's have uh mayor questions like prime minister questions in England, they have that in Canada?

Where you can just sit up there and ask them direct questions.

You can ask them and also the people can ask them and get some answers like where's the money going?

How come you spent 450,000 dollars going to the Philippines?

Could you stay with your relatives in the Philippines, save the city some money?

You know, what's going on with that?

We you guys need to ask them some direct questions to get answers in front of the public too.

Instead of like it's always under the table kind of thing, and all that shows up, and that's the way it's gotta be.

So just thinking about it.

So thanks a lot for your time.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comment.

With the five-minute timer expiring and no other hands in the queue.

This concludes non-agenda public comment.

All right.

Thank you, Sarah.

So we'll turn it over to uh my council colleagues, the mayoral staff, city attorney, independent budget analysts if any of the comments.

Not seeing any.

Uh are there any requests for continuance on today's agenda?

Not seeing any request.

Uh, as a note to the public, we will be hearing our agenda out of order today.

We will begin with consent item one and then take information item five, and then follow with discussion items two, three, and four.

So with that, we will now take up the consent agenda.

Sarah, please introduce the item.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number one, approval of the committee minutes from October 22nd, 2025.

These items will remain on the consent agenda unless the committee member request to pulling the item off.

I see no request to pull the item.

Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for the consent agenda is now open and the consent agenda includes item number one.

We've received one slip here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, if you'll please approach the lector, and you will have one minute to speak to the past committee minutes.

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

You had an item at your uh meeting minutes last time on uh for October about the future of the short-term and long-term rental issues in San Diego.

It's a contentious issue, it can be.

And um results were trying to be uh reached for.

I I was hoping that the explanations that we're trying to describe for the current uh uh raising of wage for people working in the downtown uh for for maintenance workers and stuff.

I hope the same economic formula that was applied and brought to the council of Europe.

I hope that can be better shared here in chambers in the future.

Um good luck to all sides in that debate.

I just like to be around that debate just to hear it.

These things are new to me and uh it's a good learning process for myself, and uh I hope my explanations can help bring uh an information process to it.

Uh good luck in those efforts.

Thanks.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment to the past committee minutes.

Each speaker will have one minute and we will begin testimony with Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

At last month's meeting, uh, there were comments made, uh public comments made by Paul Kruger uh regarding surplus land and uh city council oversight.

And I just want to acknowledge that Paul is also recently written uh about this issue when it comes to the process and how the city uh council puts items on the closed session agenda.

Um I think it is important that people like Paul who bring forward important issues uh have more of a standing with this committee because I think he's frankly going to save you some money when it comes to potential litigation that come up could come about as a result of some of the things that happen, especially regarding surplus land.

And uh I also last month commented on the automated license plate readers.

Thank you, Blair Beekman, for bringing up the Oakland example.

Uh I hope this council will consider that carefully when it comes to the full counsel for a vote at some point next month.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Chair, this concludes comment for the consent agenda.

All right.

Um thank you, sir.

Uh, can I get a motion to move the minutes?

A motion of you.

So we have a motion by council member Campillo, second by councilmember Moreno.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed.

That passes unanimously with council president pro tem Lee absent.

All right, we're gonna go to information item the information agenda item five.

Sarah, please introduce item five.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number five is the informational presentation on the citywide inclusive public engagement guide.

And if you're watching on City TV or the live stream and you'd like to call in, please dial 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound, Chair.

All right, thank you.

Staff, I see you're settled in there.

Please introduce yourself for the record and let us know how much time you will need.

Hi, my name is Anisha Gian Shindani.

I'm the public engagement program manager with the city planning department.

Um, and we'd like to have 15 minutes.

All right, you might want with a microphone a little bit closer to you.

I want to make sure we all can hear you and people on remotely can hear you.

Again when you're ready.

Great.

Um so I'm happy to provide an overview of the citywide inclusive public engagement guide this morning.

So the primary audience for this guide is our city staff in all of our operational departments.

We've intended this to be a useful resource that will be helpful for staff at any level and with any degree of prior experience in public engagement.

We've also made this guide public so that the public can fully understand how the city engages with them.

This guide was intentionally formatted on a website.

It is also searchable to increase its functional use, and we've submitted a PDF as part of this item as well that will be made available on the guide website.

The engagement guide is not intended to mandate any particular form of engagement, but rather intended to be a resource to help city departments engage the public in effective and inclusive ways.

This guide includes information about engagement we have conducted over the past several years, including why inclusive public engagement matters and what are our principles or values of public engagement.

We have history and background on public participation within the city, including existing regulations at the federal, state, and city levels about public participation and the history of how certain groups of people have been excluded from decision making.

We have identified who is less represented in decision making so that we can better reach and engage them.

We have information about how to implement public engagement and work with different stakeholders and partners to do so.

We've also collected more than 30 different ways for staff to share information with and collect input from the public in our engagement techniques and approaches section.

There's also information on clear and inclusive communication because this helps the public understand what the city is doing in order for them to be able to provide input.

And finally, we have a specifically public facing section of the guide called Get Involved with the City that provides the public with tips and resources for how to get engaged with the city and best make their voices heard.

To distinguish some terminology, in the guide, we define public participation as the overall process through which the public both receives information and shares input.

Public outreach is defined as the one-way process where the city is educating or informing, whereas public engagement is a two-way process in which the city both shares information and also collects input or feedback for decision making.

This guide covers best practices for both public outreach and public engagement.

The purpose of this guide is first of all to make better and oftentimes more sustainable decisions over the long term when we have the benefit of community input.

It's also an opportunity to better reach and engage groups that have been less represented and have had their voices less heard by decision makers.

We're also aiming to increase our operational efficiency across the city.

We know that many of the projects our city departments work on require public engagement, but we have lacked a standardized way of doing it.

And finally, it's an opportunity to build trust where we know trust has diminished with government over time.

In 2023, we started public and internal engagement on what people hope to see captured in this guide.

That included asking internally our city departments.

We've also conducted significant public engagement, including convening a group of 10 community members to advise on this topic from communities across the city and varied experiences.

We had an online survey available.

We've also met with groups including planning groups, boards and commissions, and working groups.

We started drafting this guide in 2023, and that continued through this year.

We opened the draft guide for public review on September 10th, and that was available through for public comment through October 19th of this year.

That included having an online comment feature available as well as several public workshops in September and October.

We have now incorporated public input into the guide and what is being presented today to the rules committee.

To touch on some of those themes of input that we received during our comment period between September 10th and October 19th, which have since been incorporated into the guide or in just one case is still in the process of being incorporated.

We heard that lack of trust can be a barrier to participation, that engagement should be welcoming and comfortable.

We heard to partner with community leaders and organizations and also schools to reach students and families.

We've also heard that it's important to share the benefits of providing input and how input was used and also to share information in well-frequented areas.

We have made a full change summary available on the guide website showing the changes that were made as a result of this input and additional input.

To continue covering what the guide includes, first of all, we have principles in the guide that reflect the city's high-level values for public participation.

There are five of them.

The first is build community relationships.

By that we mean fostering authentic and sustained connections between staff and the public to cultivate trust.

The second is communicate clearly, so communicating information in accessible, understandable, and relatable ways so that people know what's at stake.

The next is commitment to engagement process, which accounts for things like thoroughly research researching, which stakeholders may be impacted and following up after input has been provided.

The next is inclusion, which means actively inviting and welcoming participation from all people and groups and inviting diverse perspectives.

And then finally, transparency accounts for clearly articulating the goals of engagement, providing regular updates throughout a project, and sharing how input was considered.

The underrepresented group section of the guide includes both qualitative and quantitative research we've conducted to determine who is less represented in city decision making, meaning again, their voices have been less heard by decision makers.

In looking at this information, we found that people of color and youth were the least represented groups, which understanding this allows us to plan for different ways to effectively engage with and communicate to these groups to better include them in our decision making in the future.

This guide includes specific considerations for how to engage groups like the ones I just mentioned.

That includes specific tip sheets for groups including youth, older adults, veterans, and members of the military, members of the LGBTQIA plus community, and several more.

The engaging diverse groups section includes information to know in advance before engaging these groups and also ways to tailor our strategies to make public outreach or engagement more effective.

Over the last few years, through our internal and public engagement process, we have identified some common barriers to participation.

Some that we identified included a general lack of awareness and understanding of the city and its responsibilities, as well as gaps and information on opportunities to participate, language and technology barriers, limited time and competing demands, and trust.

These barriers informed the development of the guide, which includes processes that we believe can help alleviate these barriers.

By implementing the guide and its recommendations, we anticipate more people will be able to participate in engagement processes in the future.

When project budgets can accommodate it, the city may provide participation support to decrease barriers to participation.

We have information on this, including guidance for things like gift cards, prizes, meals and refreshments, and child care to make it possible for more people to participate.

The guide also defines eight steps for conducting effective public participation to provide a standard process while still allowing for flexibility depending on the type of project that a city department may be working on.

It includes five steps for how to plan for public engagement, tips and templates for implementing public engagement, and then steps for how to follow up from and evaluate the success of public engagement.

We've also included tips for working with different engagement partners, such as community-based organizations, community planning groups, neighborhood associations, and businesses.

On each of these pages, we outline a little bit about what these groups are, how we can create partnerships with them, and why it's important to share information with them.

The guide also includes more than 30 different techniques and approaches for public outreach and engagement.

This includes things like arts-based engagement, community cafes, public service announcements, vision walls, but we also have more traditional techniques such as public meetings, open houses, workshops.

The guide walks staff through how to implement each technique, including before, during, and after, as well as how much time, money, and staff capacity we anticipate those techniques to take so that we can choose appropriate techniques in light of our available resources.

The communicating with the public section contains guidance to help staff make information clear to the public.

This includes information on clear, simple and inclusive language.

We also have information on translation and interpretation best practices and how to access those services, as well as how to make documents accessible for people with disabilities.

This section also includes information on the facilitation of engagement events, which provides guidance on how to create an inclusive and welcoming engagement environment that's also respectful of all participants.

We've also included information about how to reframe perceived behaviors of the public through a trauma-informed lens and specific strategies for how to prepare for and effectively manage conflict situations in public engagement.

And finally, the get involved with the city section provides an overview of what the city does, the public's role as voters and constituents and shared decision making, different ways to volunteer or get involved, and specific guidance for how to effectively participate at public hearings.

We hope that this information helps the public understand how to effectively get involved in city decision making.

During the guide's development, we identified some opportunities for future enhancements to internal processes or new programs which could further strengthen citywide public engagement as funding and resources become available.

This includes things like creating an online hub with a single place for information about public engagement events, online surveys, and information about how to volunteer on boards and commissions, a community connectors program, which would involve hiring liaisons who build on trusted relationships with their community to help advise on and conduct public engagement.

Two-way text messaging to provide this option for community members to receive updates or share input, and additional staffing and resources for public outreach and engagement, including support for community members and community organizations to effectively engage with the city.

As far as our next steps, we have grant funding from SANDAG to train our staff on this guide so that especially those in public-facing roles feel confident using the guide in their work.

We are currently coordinating with the human resources department on the creation and implementation of this training.

Funding will also go to go toward public workshops in 2026, where we will continue to share information about what the city does, why it matters, and how the public can get involved in shaping city decisions.

And the engineering and capital projects department is currently finalizing a new administrative regulation for community outreach for work in the public right-of-way.

They have used the inclusive public engagement guide for uh to help them develop this AR, and we anticipate that that will provide more specific guidance on that topic.

That concludes staff's presentation on this item.

All right, thank you very much for the presentation and the very good work on that.

Uh I understand the Office of the IBA has some comments as well.

Julian.

Yes, thank you so much, Chair Lakava.

I'm gonna pass it over to Selena Viegas with the Division of Race and Equity within the Office of the IBA.

Good morning, Chair Lacava and members of the committee.

My name is Salina Villegas, and I'm with the Office of the Independent Budget Analyst, the Division of Race and Equity.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the inclusive public engagement guide, also known as the IPEG.

The race and equity team has spent considerable time working with the IPEG, providing recommendations throughout its development, and continues to advise on how its implementation and data use can best serve San Diego's communities.

Our team focused our review and recommendations on four equity factors access, assets, neighborhoods, and processes.

We approach equity as both a commitment and as an outcome.

One that requires identifying and addressing disparities, closing participation gaps, correcting systemic barriers that have historically limited access for many communities.

For access, we asked who can actually participate in these engagement processes.

Are there hidden barriers like meeting times, transportation, language, child care, or technology that prevent people from showing up and being heard?

From a budget perspective, we recommend continuing and where needed, expanding funding for translation and interpretation services.

Child care during meetings, transportation stipends, and digital access.

These are often critical to ensuring equitable participation.

Operationally, departments may need to revise how and when they hold meetings and coordinate across districts to ensure consistency.

We also flagged the need to standardize how engagement surveys are administered because inconsistent methods affect who participates and the reliability of our data.

For acts for assets, we asked are we recognizing and leveraging the strengths that already exist in our communities?

Are we using city assets like parks, libraries, and community centers to support engagement?

And are we valuing community knowledge as a resource?

We recommend that engagement resources be prioritized in underinvested areas and that city and that the city consider compensating community members for their time and expertise.

This means considering potential stipends and ensuring that funding reaches the neighborhoods that need it most.

Operationally, departments should adopt equity-weighted planning tools and provide cultural competency training for staff.

We also recommend creating clear processes for identifying and activating community assets.

For neighborhoods, we emphasize the importance of specificity.

We encourage the use of tools like the climate equity index and the need to name impacted communities directly rather than using vague or coded language.

Budget decisions should be informed by neighborhood level data.

That means allocating resources to collect and analyze disaggregated data by geography and demographics.

So we can set meaningful baselines and track progress.

Operationally, outreach strategies should be tailored to the unique history, culture, and needs of each neighborhood.

A one-size-fits-all approach will not work.

For processes more broadly, we asked: are we collecting the right data?

Are we using it to inform decisions?

And are we being transparent about how the community input is used?

We recommend that the city consider including line items for inclusive engagement, such as stipends, interpretation, accessibility supports, and food or child care in its budgets, as well as for building internal capacity to collect and use data effectively.

Operationally, departments may need to revise internal workflows, provide staff training and establish accountability mechanisms.

We recommend developing standardized procedures for reporting back to communities on how their input influenced decisions.

Lastly, we would appreciate opportunities for departments to look at their tactical equity plans for strategies that help center inclusive public engagement in their ongoing work.

We appreciate the council's attention to these important details and remain committed to supporting the implementation phase, including the training component for city staff.

Our team stands ready to assist with the ongoing process of ensuring that the guide delivers on its promise of a more inclusive and equitable public engagement for all San Diegans.

That concludes my comments.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Great, thank you.

We always appreciate the office of the IBA, especially as it's newly configured on this particular issue.

So with that, Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

We've received two slips here in chamber.

So we will be in testimony with Blair Beekman.

If you can please approach the lector, and you will have one minute.

You will be followed by Mary Young.

Hi, thank you.

Thanks a lot for this item.

It sounds really good.

Um it's the kind of thing I really like.

I'm trying to work towards accessibility and public sharing community process.

So it sounds really good.

Um it wouldn't be nice to think Deanna Puentes has had something to do with this, her work.

Um in attending uh Oakland meetings in the past few weeks now.

Excuse me, I'm burping.

Um I've been learning uh and being reminded that they are working on language issues within council, within their police activities, and um you know, bringing different languages to the city government process.

That got really, really lost because of the English only laws creating California in the 1980s.

Um we have to do everything in English, and it completely excluded people from other languages in our communities from from the process here.

So good luck how to include other languages in your guidebooks and uh make it look inclusive, inclusive process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Mary Young.

I thought we were gonna have two minutes, one minute.

Okay.

Each speaker will have one minute, and there will be a clock right here at the end of the lectern for you to watch your time.

Right here.

Okay, so Mary Young, Southeastern San Diego.

We were part of the focus group.

Wonderful opportunity.

I hope this just doesn't become uh a pretty book, right?

Um, the real engagement happens here, right?

People would love to be here in front of you to have the opportunity for them to see you.

I'm gonna tell you that I have four opportunities of being here.

I'm a full-time employee.

I'm exhausted.

It costs me a hundred dollars for this one minute for this one minute to be in front of you to ask you for anything.

So I don't know, you know, really what to say, but that's why you don't say it full.

It's it's it's really difficult.

It can't be retirees, it's not it's not the it's not their fault.

So it is it needs to be something that everybody needs to look at.

Um because the buck really does stop here.

Okay.

Thank you.

That doesn't include your time.

Thank you.

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

And as a reminder, each speaker will have one minute and we'll begin testimony with Anne Feggy.

Please unmute and begin.

Yeah, I'm Ann Fage, a certified urban and community forester and past chair of the community forest advisory board.

This guide can be a practical and powerful tool for both staff and the public.

But we have several examples where involve and consent could have dramatically increased the outcomes of the $10 million urban forestry grant for the ready set program.

Why does it matter?

Because we know that tree survival size and benefits are greatest when there's community stewardship and when residents provide supplemental water.

The involved didn't happen as the city wrote the application without asking any community groups, council members of CFAF.

No funds were requested for community-based organizations to help plan or implement the project, which thus eliminated the voices and values of underserved communities.

The next level was consent, which could have been used for tree locations, yet the city decided where the first 2000 street trees were planted.

I will champion the guide, continue to advocate for community forestry, and now help compensate for the low public participation in this grant.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Catherine Rhodes, please unmute and begin.

I like and agree with the non-agenda public speaker who stated that, although Mayor Todd Gloria is responsible for all city departments and the direction of the city.

He does not regularly attend city council meetings or meet with every city council member and is never available to the public.

Never.

And so he can direct his staff to follow through instead of ignoring you in the public.

This may require a ballot measure to change the city charter to force the mayor to answer basic questions.

Um that the city council and the public may have in a public forum.

Also, I don't do not remember the name of the meetings that you have um before city council where the mayor gives presentations to your staff.

But I would like for those to be um those to be recorded and put online and zoom so that we can participate.

And also I think you have agendas for them, but I just can't find them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Lori Saldania, please unmute and begin.

Uh thank you.

This is an excellent start to doing this type of outreach and training.

It includes, I would encourage that language training, vocabulary matters.

For years we called people who are homeless transients, even though they were our neighbors struggling to live in San Diego in housing.

And I think the police department may still use that term to describe unhoused people.

So language excludes when it's used to exclude people, it makes it more challenging for them to feel welcome and show up.

Um, likewise in City Hall, I've been watching as fewer and fewer spaces are available to the public.

Rooms and seats are now being shot shut off from public use.

You can't sit in certain areas, you can't go inside.

Rooms that used to be available and overflow from the council.

And at the state of the city, only 20 people were allowed inside from the public to hear the mayor's presentation.

All other seats were allocated to friends of the mayor, apparently.

So I I agree with previous speakers.

This mayor is increasingly isolated.

That is a bigger concern to me than some of the engagement issues being addressed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Zoom user, please unmute, state your name for the record and begin.

You will have one minute.

Howard, hey, thanks for taking my call again.

Yeah.

I was thinking about the mayor thing, the talking and stuff, but hey, the building department just recently moved down to Mission Valley, and they have free parking down there.

It's like two blocks off the trolley station.

It's really accessible to get to.

There's a lot of places in Mission Valley where we can move the city council meetings to Mission Valley where there's parking.

It's really hard for someone to get on the trolley downtown and go to the meeting where you guys are sitting.

It's intimidating.

There's urine, get out of the thing.

It smells like urine.

The trolley is not the safest place downtown.

You know, granted, come on.

And you expect people to come down there and do it, but lady takes a day off work to get down there.

You know, how about moving it over to Mission Valley?

There's plenty of vacant commercial buildings there that the city could lease and give it a try.

A more accessible.

And I don't know who's going to read that book anyway.

Who's going to read the brochure?

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Tanisha Jean Martin.

Please unmute and begin.

Hello, good morning.

My name is Cynthia Jean Martin.

I was in the presence of the environment committee last week as a climate advisory chair, and now I come to you today as a San Diego native, born and raised in Southeastern San Diego.

I'm an environmental climate equity justice consultant and serve all of San Diego and sit on several steering committees and boards and collaborate with mini CPOs, nonprofits, county, and city departments.

I had the honor of being involved with this public engagement plan since the beginning.

It's planning and design by being a part of that focus group that assisted in creating this guide.

I've also been invited to be in panels to speak about the guide.

They say to say I've been involved throughout this process and would like to continue as we move into the phase of training the city staff.

Staff should not be teaching staff how to better engage with the community.

Instead, having a competent and community leader lead the trainings and be able to authentically answer questions.

Staff may have.

I've mentioned to several city staff, including Anisha, which I appreciate all that she's done and the staff, and that I would like to assist in this facilitation.

I believe having someone that has been involved since the beginning can strengthen this endeavor.

I'm more than happy to submit my resume and application for the position.

Also, just to say this needs to be ever evolving, and especially for a lot of our community.

I apologize.

I thought I had two minutes, but with the one thank you.

Thank you.

The five-minute timer has concluded.

We have one hand remaining in the queue, and we'll take no other callers beyond this remaining individual.

Please unmute and begin.

Good morning.

I wish to associate myself with the comments of May Young and also the staff from the IBA Office of Race and Equity.

I think they covered most of it.

I was part of the uh focus group, and I have to say that I thought that from the beginning it was a good first step, but I didn't really see a real commitment to making sure that the community had informed consent.

And even in this guide, it's really directed towards the staff, not really the public.

And I was kind of disillusioned from the beginning that there wasn't going to be any mandatory operation, specifically because I'm running out of time and I'm not going to try to fit in everything.

Specifically because I'm running out of time and I'm not going to try to fit everything.

Um I have tired, and I think that the City of San Diego should be tired of hearing staff say that they have not had a statistically significant sample size.

This is the eighth largest city in the United States.

I think if you have public engagement, it should be statistically significant.

That concludes my comment.

Thank you for your testimony.

And Chair, this can't comment for item number five.

All right.

Thank you very much, Sarah.

And thank you for those members of the public that weighed in.

Again, this is an information item, and no motion is needed, but I'll turn it over to committee members for questions and comments, and we'll start with Councilmember Elo Rivera.

Uh thank you, Council President, and appreciate um this item being being brought to us here.

It is a really important conversation, and I'm glad that we're taking the time to create this guide.

Um I want to say to thank you to the work that was done.

Selena, thank you for your work in uh providing the analysis from um the division of race and equity.

Um I I want to address one of the comments I heard.

I under fully understand why it feels like this is the place in this room where it's most important to get to have engagement.

And I I think that everything that leads up to items being brought here, decisions being brought here, is actually just as important, if not more important.

In fact, I I'd say transparently, it's more important.

And the voices in the room matter for sure, but how we engage in the development of policy, um, how we're hearing community needs that drive policy decisions and the way that we do work um is is critical.

Um so and I I say that as someone who worked with community members to be here in the room, and um so much is done before an item gets in front of us in this room.

Um and our ability to make changes, um, we fought hard as a council to give ourselves you know more power on that on that front, but um it's still limited at times.

Um so that makes what's in the guide even more important to me.

And so um certainly as council offices, uh, we have a responsibility, and I think each of each of the nine offices have our own style in terms of how we attempt to include community in um the decisions we make, the proposals we bring forward.

Uh but I I think there's a lot of good stuff in here.

I I think what I'm curious about, and I think most community members who try to be engaged and hear about this will want to know is that it's not just going to be a a pretty book, um, that it's not just gonna be another document that sits here.

And so my question's actually the my first question is for Matt, and just trying to understand um the extent to which this guide will establish standards that the mayor will then direct different departments to adhere to.

Um that's just as I'll just speak for myself.

As a council member, that's really helpful for me to understand.

Um when it's and every department is different for certain for different reasons.

Like different departments have different levels of technical um needs.

But that being said, it can also feel very unwieldy in understanding what community engagement looked like before something's brought to us at the community level.

Um the way information is shared out about what's going on in the community, and so um standardizing that seems um like it could be really useful for our office and certainly for the community in terms of establishing expectations.

So can you kind of share the extent to which um direction will be given to staff as to how to uh implement the guide and and what expectations will be.

Yeah, thank you for the question, Councilmember Ilo Rivera.

Uh there's been a tremendous amount of work that's been put into this process and into this guide, and we agree that it should not just be another pretty book that sits on a shelf.

Uh the intent of this guide is to ensure that it's being used by city departments across the administration to inclusively engage in our communities, and the mayor will provide direction to department directors uh through our executive team to ensure that the contents of the guide are being utilized as we are engaging with community communities across the city.

Uh the city planning team has already briefed our department directors uh on the contents of the guide, uh, and we will continue to do so and make tweaks as necessary um as we go through this process.

Thanks, Matt.

I think um one of the things that I hope can come from this is us establishing spaces where one expectations can be set for how someone's how how folks' voices will be incorporated.

I I think I think about this a lot that in a city of this size, it is not hard to find a lot of people who agree with you and still be in a minority in terms of what you are sharing.

Um that is especially true because of social media.

Um tens of thousands of people could agree with you on an issue, which certainly feels like a lot, and you could still be a fraction of the voices that um of only representing a fraction of the the city in terms of the opinion you're holding.

And the more that we can create spaces for folks to hear other perspectives, I think would be really valuable.

Um, and I I'm saying that as uh someone who has a responsibility to do that as a council member for sure, but um in in doing that as a city, I think it could be really useful because given how siloed the conversations often are I think that and we see this so often where folks show up here and truly do not understand why the city is taking the position that it's taking, given that everyone I know agrees with me on this issue.

And every room I've stepped into, every conversation I've had online, um, and it it truly does look like we are ignoring everyone.

I don't think we've done that.

Um we certainly don't ignore everyone, but you know, I just think about a single council district level in the city, 155,000 people, again, 50,000 people could believe something and be represent only a third of the community and holding that position.

And so um I very much hope and hope for and look forward to this being implemented in such a way that allows for folks to have not just a better understanding of process and how things are happening and why things are happening, but also um hopefully a way that um helps folks break out of the informational and conversational silos that we're currently existing in um so that you know at least here at the local level, um our democracy can be a little bit healthier.

So, anyways, thank you, Council President, for bringing this conversation forward.

I really appreciate it, and I'm glad to hear that there are plans um for implementation uh at the staff level.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Yola Rivera.

We'll go next to Councilmember Campio.

Thank you, staff.

Uh I think this is going to be a really important thing for the public.

Uh and I appreciate your very hard work on it.

I do want to say to the member of the public who came forward who explained the financial sacrifice that it takes for people to come to city council.

Um that's extraordinary.

Uh and so I think that um the creating the spaces as council member Ilo Rivera mentioned is important, publicizing when those are so that the discussion at the small group level, medium-sized group level, uh, that multiple perspectives are heard is is the key here.

And I just want to say that um for the person who came up and spoke at the at the microphone.

I'm sorry, it costs you a hundred days, a hundred dollars to for one minute.

That's that is six thousand dollar an hour rate.

Yeah.

I appreciate you for being here.

Thank you for pointing that out for us.

Thank you, Steph.

Thank you, Councilmember Campio.

We'll go next to Councilmember Moreno.

Uh thank you for the presentation.

Um I was glad to see this guide before us today.

Um, as there's been a serious lack of communication from the city to the community regarding a variety of projects and proposals in recent years.

Um this includes the Balboa Park paid parking, the Kettner and Vine Homeless Facility, major CIP project changes, and community parking districts.

Um can you please give me an example of a real life scenario such where the engagement guide would be used and how it will prevent a lack of communication to the community about projects such as um the ones that I just mentioned, um how would they use this in the future?

Yeah, thank you for the question.

So we've outlined in the guide the use case uh for this includes policies, uh programs, plans, of course, um, city plans and infrastructure projects.

So for all of those things, um, this guide is intended to be used.

I can say right now in city planning, we have been using this guide in the development of our upcoming neighborhood homes for all of us initiative and the Balboa Park Master Plan update.

So we're actively using the guide to follow those eight steps that I mentioned, plan out what engagement should be looking like, identify our stakeholders.

Um it's being used already.

And I understand how planning is utilizing this, but Balboa Park, Kettner and Vine, major CIP projects and community parks districts don't come out of planning.

So take me down the road of where transportation or engineering, how would they utilize for the projects that I just how would they use utilize this plan for the projects that I just mentioned?

Council member, um I do uh thank you for the question, and this was intentionally uh designed to be a useful tool for all city departments in the communication.

Um so there's different levels of engagement as my team has presented.

Um, some of them are you know to inform and educate the public, the other uh parts are to actively engage and receive feedback uh through a loot process.

Um Ranya Anma, Ranya Amen are uh is joining us uh representing the engineering capital projects department.

Uh we have worked closely with that department through the development of this guide as they um have developed procedures to be established through administrative regulation with respect to engagement for work that is done within the public right of way.

Um so she is here to answer questions.

Um but as examples uh for other departments, uh, we have um coordinated with every department across the city as we have developed this guide that is reflected in the flexibility that does exist within this, reflecting the wide range of items that the city works on to be able to communicate inform and engage with our community members.

And so the answers to your questions will vary depending on the particular item that a particular department is working on, um, and it is uh designed to be able to allow for that flexibility to meet the needs of that particular item.

Of course, for major initiatives, so we want to be able to work with the council offices as well to be able to tailor the level of engagement and the types of engagement that occur in that uh circumstance.

So is it the department's responsibility or will it be the mayor's administration staff that would roll out this communications plan given the last um the examples that I gave?

Sure.

So each of the departments um are responsible for engagement on each of their initiatives.

There's not you know one separate department of community engagement across the city.

Um, all of the work that we do in that engagement is coordinated through a communications department as well as the mayor's office.

Okay, so at the end of the day, it's gonna be the responsibility of the mayor's office.

Should a department not, let's say transportation, should they not roll out a should they not utilize this platform, not platform, this guideline.

Um, it will be it will fall under the mayor's.

That is correct.

All of the department heads do report to the mayor.

Thank you for saying that for the record.

Um, I'm also interested in um knowing what kind of communication you had with our very robust communications department.

Yeah, so we've collaborated as Heidi mentioned with all of the city departments in the creation of this guide.

Specifically, it was very important for us to collaborate with the communications department on all of the techniques within the guide that have to do with things that they implement.

So that includes things like news releases, flyers, fact sheets, public service announcements, uh, inclusive graphic design.

We have a section on that that we collaborated with them as well.

Paid advertising is also in the guide.

We collaborated with them as well.

Um so I think they have played a very helpful role in the creation of the guide and will be very helpful as they have always continued to implement um public outreach.

So when I mentioned kind of the one-way uh information sharing, they play a critical role in uh doing that for all of our city departments.

So the communications department will be available for the various departments that we mentioned.

Uh will they be available to utilize once again go going back to transportation?

Uh will the communications department be made available should the transportation department like to bring something forward like community parking districts.

So each department has an assigned public information officer, and all communications are coordinated uh in um collaboration with that public information officer.

So the answer is yes, they're gonna be okay.

And then um we utilize um PANDA or I have been to some of the um CIP out.

I think there was a CIP outreach um meeting, community meetings that the city had a few years ago, and it was mentioned that a lot of the data that they utilize or not a lot, but some of the data that they utilize is through data that's collected by PANA.

What kind of involvement did PANDA have with this the production of this outreach?

Yeah.

So we collaborated with them as well specifically on we have a technique in the guide on surveys and polls.

So the performance and analytics department has provided standard guidance on things like demographic questions that we should be asking across all of our surveys, when to consider.

I know there was a comment in public comment about making them statistically significant.

So when that's important to do, they also helped make I think very visually appealing tables within in the guide from Tableau that provide standard information on our citywide demographics, as well as guidance on how to retrieve that information at the community or census track level.

Okay.

Thank you for responding to my questions.

Outreach and communication is a very um important part of my district.

So this engagement guide, I think is a good step towards improving communication with residents in the city.

However, I I cannot stress enough how important traditional grassroots outreach is.

Many residents within my district depend on being informed through paper flyers, door-to-door knocking, tabling events, um, et cetera.

And I think it's important that the city go out to where the people are and not rely mainly on electronic forms of communication.

Um, as many people throughout my district have to hurdle uh for their voices to be heard.

Um in addition, many residents in my district predominantly speak only Spanish and need the same services.

So I would recommend that staff consider adding toolkits that include multilingual grassroots marketing in this guide for city staff to equitably communicate to residents, businesses, and also community partners.

Um I am happy to see that this um that this guide uh that there is a plan for community connector program where residents will have a liaison between the city and community to advise on and conduct public engagement.

Um I do think it's very important to have people participate uh with city decision um making as they also know what is occurring in their neighborhood, right?

We want them to communicate.

So I look forward to seeing in depth what the inclusive public engagement guide has more to offer for city staff to break down communication barriers in the community.

Uh that concludes my comments, uh, Council President, and thank you.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Moreno.

Um I'll add, I guess, a few comments on my own.

Thank you for the very good work uh in product this.

Um I appreciated the challenge of how you develop a guide for so many things of what the city does every day going forward, and maybe that's why it's 293 pages because there's so many different situations going forward.

Um having spent now 20 years in community engagement, probably the first 15 before I got elected to office.

I've seen a lot of good stuff.

I've seen a lot of challenging things.

Some of it was just city staff in good faith going out and not realizing they've tapped into something that is a sore point for a community.

Um and I've watched very good um folks pivot and understand that.

Um now I'm a council member and I look at the world a little bit differently.

Um what I like about the four of us is we all kind of different backgrounds.

Um I'll be kind of blunt saying I think if a constituent comes up to us and asks us for something, the council offices have failed.

This is not the place to bring a unique problem that a constituent is facing.

The council offices, unlike what state legislature does, is there for our constituents and are the opportunity to have that one-on-one conversation.

That may be unfair.

Uh that probably doesn't cover every scenario, but that's kind of how I look at what my job is as a council member.

Um this is certainly a place for people to bring up it's not a general public comment, something that they're struggling with.

They don't know who to talk to as council member Ila Rivera, I think that's one of the hardest things is that most people don't want to pay attention to what the government is doing.

They want to trust the government is doing it right until it becomes personal.

Then they suddenly wake up and say, Oh my gosh, how do I do things?

Everything from coming here for people showing up at the 10th floor, trying to show up at the 11th floor because they think that's what I'm supposed to do when I have a problem.

Um so we can all do better, and it's a it's a tough conversation because it's hard to engage people when they're not angry, they're not motivated to get involved.

Um that it's tough to have that conversation because they're already uh angry.

Um as much as I believe in this, I really appreciate what the work that has been done.

I'm also cognizant that what this does and what what everybody wants government to do, and then what everybody gets mad at government to do is what they want us to do is we want us to slow down, what engage, get her involved kind of stuff.

And then they get mad because we move too darn slow.

Um, and so I wonder in terms of whether there has been an assessment or what may have been considered in terms of how this will affect timeline of delivering, whether it's a master plan, a community plan update, a project, um, and what that might impact that might have on cost.

Do we think the extra budget for community engagement is going to add one percent to our project budget uh budgets?

Have we thought about that element?

Um so again, there is a lot of flexibility that is provided because of the depth and breadth of the items that the city departments across the whole organization work on.

Um so engagement will look different on every single item that is communicated or engaged with the community.

Um there are going to be instances where additional time and costs are appropriate, and there will be times where additional time and cost do not result in any additional outcome and therefore would not be appropriate.

Um so there's no specific analysis because of how many different what if scenarios uh would exist in that situation.

Um, but one of the things that is identified and definitely for transparency to this committee is that the level of engagement is dependent on staffing and availability of funding and resources.

Okay, I appreciate that.

And it certainly was not intended to be a criticism about why haven't you done it, but the challenge we have about how do we move as fast as people want us to, but not too fast because they wanted to be more involved or understand earlier earlier on.

Um the only other thing I think you've probably I haven't read the 293 pages.

Uh but the one of the things I learned very, very early on was uh, especially when we're doing something different, um, is you have to convince people that there is a problem to be solved before they'll actually start entertaining the solution that we're coming forward with.

Um I see that as a big challenge for government because we identify a problem, we start working on possible solutions, and then we want to proudly roll out that solution.

And public goes, what are you talking about?

I didn't even know there was a problem, or I don't agree if there's a problem.

I think you're doing something different.

Um so it continues to be a challenge, and things that we actually do to outreach to people, it doesn't sink in.

They don't realize what we're trying, the steps that we're trying to take because we're going to introduce something next.

Um I appreciate Council Member Moreno's comments in in that direction.

Um I think I'll stop there, but thank you for the very good work.

I know this is an attempt to be very comprehensive, and as you said, Heidi, that each case, whether it's a planning document or whether it's an infrastructure project will have its own unique circumstances depending on the neighborhood, depending on the public's understanding of why we're even doing this, um, and we'll see how that gets rolled out.

I think the last part of this, because I was quickly going through trying to search how many times the word city council members shows up in this document, um, whether the communications department has been advised to coordinate with council offices, because they I often get surprised by what I read in the paper about what the communications has rolled out that I wasn't aware of.

Um I think having said that, I think over the past year, I think I've seen great improvement on that and very much appreciate that.

And again, it's always that tricky part between the department thinks they're doing something good and the council offices, oh my gosh, you cannot say that out loud until there's more prep work or lead up into that kind of thing.

So the more coordination with the council offices uh before communications uh rolls out.

Um and I think the other last part, I don't think there's a delicate way to say this, but I think also advising staff what they say when they're out in the field doing their work is really important, and that a flipped comment by a staff member, and I love all our employees, can really set us all back going forward.

Uh easy to say that, hard when you've got 12, 13,000 employees out there doing field work or contractors.

So all we can do is try to do better, and I think this is a huge step in doing better.

So thank you for the good work.

All right, this was an information item.

We don't didn't need a motion.

I appreciate the public's comments, I appreciate my colleagues' comments.

Thank you for the good work by staff.

All right.

We will now take up the discussion agenda.

So as an FYI for those in council or in chambers and those listening in, this is something we do twice a year during election cycles where the public has an opportunity to bring forward uh potential ballot measures.

So we're going to go through quite a few proposals brought forth by the public.

Um unlike our usual protocol.

If you are interested in speaking on this, we will be taking each sub-item separately.

So we will hear to item 2A, and then the public will be invited to comment on 2A, and then we will go to 2B.

So if you're in chambers and you have to put out a speaker slip, you have to actually indicate which sub-item you want to speak to.

So we make sure that we can we can hear from you.

So how are we going to do that?

So given how many measures we have to get through today, proponents will have to will have up to but no more than three minutes to prepare their proposal.

And as I said, each sub-item will be taken separately.

Members of the public will have one minute to comment per sub-item.

Sarah will periodically remind the committee and the public of these instructions.

And in accordance, as also a reminder to me and my colleagues and the public, in accordance with council policy 000-21, the rules committee, after hearing a proposal, may take one of the following actions.

One, the committee may request that proponents of a of a proposal furnish background information, provide an analysis of the proposal, and report back to committee.

Two, the committee may refer the measure to the city attorney's office to prepare a ballot measure.

Once the ballot measure has been drafted, the measure will return to the committee for a second discussion, including any additional policy direction necessary to complete a draft of the measure before the measure is forwarded to the council for consideration.

Third, if the committee takes no action on a proposal, then the consideration for that proposal is simply ended.

And we move on to the next sub-item.

So with that, um so introduce item two for the record, Sarah.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number two is the initial committee review of ballot measure proposals for the June 2026 election in accordance with council policy 000-21, Chair.

Um why don't you go ahead and read that next?

And then if you are watching on City TV or live stream and you'd like to call into the meeting to speak, you can dial 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound, Chair.

And that next section, thank you, Council President.

And for item two, as mentioned, we have quite a few sub-items.

We have 15 sub-items, and they will be introduced and heard individually by the committee.

The sub-items will be heard in alphabetical order, and due to the number of items being heard, proponents will have up to but no more than three minutes to present their sub-item.

And I will be keeping time.

Public comment will then follow the presentation for each sub-item.

And again, due to the number of items heard, members of the public will have one minute to speak to each sub-item.

Please keep this in mind when preparing and providing your comments.

And with that, I'll begin with sub-item A, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to require new development in high resource neighborhoods to include on-site affordable housing.

All right.

I do not see Mr.

Campbell online.

Okay, since uh we do not have a presentation by uh Mr.

Campbell, uh Sarah, please proceed with public comment on sub-item A.

Thank you, Chair.

We'll be again testimony with Mary Young.

Good morning.

I I'm pretty sure you would prefer having Rob here, but Rob is at work.

And and basically all the three of them are going to be combined together.

And um we just would like to have the opportunity of having more folks be able to live in high resource areas.

Um we're in a community that uh has a high concentration of poverty.

If you look at um where redlining was in you know 1932, it hasn't changed.

It's still the same.

So when you build developments, they're not being billed in the highest resource areas.

They're being built in um the lowest resource area.

And what happens is you continue to concentrate poverty.

And folks are selling as well, you know, there's not you know the trolleys or the buses or anything like that.

Thank you.

Our next speaker for sub-item A is Blair Beekmann.

Hi, thank you.

Blair Beekman.

For sub-item A.

Um, wow, I think it's a really good item.

I mean, I talk here often about uh mixed income ideas.

There can be many ways to use mixed income, and uh I know you guys work on some forms, but what's offered here I think is is awesome.

Um I think, and in fact, I think we're kind of mandated to almost work towards these goals by 2030 here in California, 2029, and it's being placed on the ballot now.

This is exactly what I'm hoping you can learn to better talk about.

How do we bring people from lower incomes into places of higher incomes?

It's a bit of an uncomfortable subject matter, but it it's a subject that needs to be more talked about regularly, and this is trying to do that for us.

Um so I'm really good luck how we have that conversation in our future.

It's a beautiful conversation to have.

We shouldn't fear it, I feel.

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 to sub-item A 2A.

We'll begin testimony with Hethera.

And you will have one minute to provide your testimony.

I support this proposal uh for the reasons already stated by the first and second speaker, that it affirmative affirmatively furthers fair housing.

And as I recall, the last hearing on HAC 2.0, that was one of the biggest bones of contention that the inlufu fee would be allow developers to do the inclusive housing, the affordable housing off site, and they most often located in areas of concentrated poverty.

So I think we do need a ballot initiative that will further affirm that will affirmatively further fair housing and bring some parity to all of the neighborhoods within the city of San Diego.

That concludes my comment.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Catherine Rhodes, I've given you permission to speak.

Please unmute and provide your comment for sub-item A.

Hello?

We can hear you, please proceed.

Oh, wonderful, thank you so much.

Um, first, um, if you could actually tell us what the sub-items are, like just tell us the name of it if he's not here, um, or even before the person comes up.

If you could tell us exactly what the sub-item is.

There's so many of them, and I'm just doing this by phone um just audio.

So um if you could do that, and then I agree with other people.

You know, everybody does the um in lieu fees or to have off-site affordable housing, and it's not fair.

And if this was a ballot measure, and we could actually have it where they build build the luxury condos, um, we could actually get more affordable housing in areas where people work.

So um I agree with this, and hopefully you could look at it further.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh yes, I support this.

We we need inclusionary housing on site versus allowing developers to put money into a fund which may or may not be utilized properly to build affordable housing off-site.

And uh it is as a previous speaker said, it is a form of ongoing uh redlining.

And we see the outcome of redlining generations uh down the road where in low-income communities do not have the resources and the people to fully develop their opportunities the way we see in other neighborhoods around San Diego.

Um, this is a great example of how the community sees what's happening very clearly, but the council members and planning and development for whatever reason are not reacting to the reality that we see and the the poverty continues.

Um, in order for communities to build intergenerational wealth, they need to have opportunities to have invest in housing, and that should be citywide, not just allocated to certain neighborhoods.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Chair seeing no other hands in the queue.

This concludes testimony on sub-item A.

All right.

Thank you, Sarah.

Thank you, the members of the public participating.

I'll turn it over to my committee members for questions, comments, and entertain a motion for subitem A.

We'll start with Council Member Ilo Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

First, just a procedural question.

If you could remind us the procedural options before us, it's a little bit different, I think, um, for today for this item and the sub-items than what we normally have in front of us, right?

Yeah, just to uh give a little bit shorter uh one option is to say to the proponents we like your idea, but there's not enough substance to it.

You need to spend a little bit more time.

Um come back with more detailed information that's in this case there was none at all.

Uh but to come back with us and we'll take another look at it.

Another option is we think there is sufficient merit.

We think we understand the gist of what's being proposed.

Um we would request that the city attorney now start drafting a ballot measure and then bring that back to the committee.

Um and the third option is to say make whatever comments we want to make, but not move the item forward in any way.

If that makes sense.

Yes, thank you.

Uh just want to make sure we're on the same page there.

Um I appreciate the definitely appreciate the goal here.

Um it was a subject of significant conversation when we discussed and considered HAP 2.0.

Um I do think that there seems to be some misunderstanding about where we landed uh during the HAP 2.0 conversation.

Um it is not the case that a that affordable units can be off-sided in uh from high resource areas into low-income communities anymore.

Uh the the we change that um in HAP 2.0.

So I'll just read very quickly just to make sure we're working from the same information.

Um required dwelling units on site, the required rental dwelling dwelling units may be provided on a different premises from the development subject to all of the following requirements.

The required rental dwelling unit shall be located on a receiver site that is located uh one within a sustainable development area, and two the following resource opportunity areas.

Um high resource opportunity areas, highest resource opportunity areas, moderate resource uh areas if located within the same uh community planning area and city council district, or a moderate resource area within three miles of the premises of the development.

Um so what is not allowed is to off-site from high resource areas into low resource areas.

Um we did away with that.

Um that does not mean the problem has been solved for completely.

Um again, the intent here of ensuring that there is affordable housing in high resource communities is a super important one.

What I do think is important though is to have an understanding of what's actually being generated with the policy that's on the books now.

Um so um I'm not I don't have a motion here.

I just want to acknowledge um agreement with the goal.

And um I would ask Matt if this is something that um the council could have some um if there's a way to pull some some data in terms of where, if and where um affordable units are being off-sited um since HAP 2.0 has taken effect.

I think that'd be useful for us to know, for the public to know.

Um I think the shared goal here is ensuring that there's more housing opportunities, affordable housing opportunities in our highest resource uh areas um to affirmatively fair further fair housing um and just address the affordability issue more generally.

We can request that data and report back to the council.

Thanks.

I appreciate that, Matt.

Uh, that concludes my uh my comments, Council President.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Uh Count uh Councilmember Ila Rivera.

We'll go next to Councilmember Campio.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh I want to thank Mr.

Campbell for his submissions uh A through G.

Um I won't repeat my sentiments on each of them in support of of what he's pointing to financial reality of putting a lot of very good ideas on the ballot, is that it it is incredibly expensive for the city to pay the registrar voters to put together all the uh all the the printings and the mailings and all that, uh all that goes into having an election um you know to the extent for well on on some of these it would uh it would cost a lot more than the money that would end up being saving, for example, uh like uh successful uh appeals from planning groups.

But I'll just uh I'll I'll say that a lot of what Mr.

Campbell has put in front of us is merely asking the voters to hold the city to following laws that we're required to follow already, particularly as it relates to affirmatively furthering fair housing laws.

Um and so I appreciate everything he's putting up in front of us.

Uh won't repeat myself on each each of the items, but uh Mr.

Campbell has put in front of the council multiple times uh excellent suggestions and and uh has worked to make sure that the community's voices are heard.

Um and I I sincerely agree in my questions to staff at multiple items have asked about high resource uh affirmatively furthering housing in high resource areas and how we're meeting the Baker settlement.

So uh just want to acknowledge that and appreciate the the work he's done now and throughout.

Um I won't make a motion at this time given the financial considerations, but I'm committed to absolutely working to see each of these ideas uh implemented in one form or another uh given the cost uh restrictions and other economic uh ramifications of them.

They might need to be tailored a little bit, but sincerely appreciate him.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Campy.

I will go next to Councilmember Moreno.

Uh thank you to Mr.

Campbell for the uh ballot proposal.

Um I I am gonna speak to sub item A and sub item B at this time, and as I believe that these two items um are legitimate issues that the city should be discussing.

Uh it was clear from the 2025 report on homes that not enough homes are being built in highest and high resource areas throughout the city.

Uh 68 percent of the city is considered a high or highest resource area.

Uh this is where really where we should be focused on building more affordable housing.

Since 2021, only 19 percent of all homes permitted were in the highest resource areas, which compromises about um, I'm sorry, comprises about 52 percent of the city.

Um this is where we need more affordable homes to be built because there should be an ample supply of affordable homes distributed throughout the city.

Uh additionally, when low-income community families live in homes that are in areas with more access to resources, it provides more opportunities for things like education and employment.

Um, however, I I do not believe that um these two items should be on the ballot.

Um these really should be discussed via the city's land use and housing committee.

Um, and I will be supporting that.

So while I will not support these items being placed on the ballot, I do thank you uh for raising these topics as they're important for the city uh to consider.

And that concludes my comments on items A and B.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Moreno.

Um I'll kind of jump in too because these are important things and it's important uh as we talk about um community engagement um and having the conversations.

This is another opportunity to talk about something that I think we all struggle with, and unlike one of the public commenters, uh my district is probably all high or highest resource areas, and I've struggled with the conversations about how to bring truly affordable units uh into uh District One.

Um although Pacific Highlands Ranch is 20 percent of the units in Pacific Islands Ranch are truly affordable uh units, often forgotten.

Uh the other um layer I'll put on here in addition to what my colleagues said is that there has been litigation on whether the city is doing furthering fair housing, and we are under a court mandated settlement uh in which the court is watching us over the next three years to see whether the promises that we made we will actually deliver on.

Uh so part of what the intent I think of this sub-item and perhaps the next one as well has already been achieved through that uh settlement process.

The other thing I think it's worth mentioning is that the courts have also been very clear that you have to be very careful in terms of mandating what a property owner can do with his property, uh, and that you have to allow, I'm not an attorney, so I think I got the gist of this correctly, but you cannot mandate what they can do with their property, and you have to offer alternative compliance, which is why we fall into the trap of inclusionary fee, uh, which doesn't re result in building units where the uh market rate units are showing up.

Um, and that isn't even speak to the challenges of being able to deliver them in our high resource neighborhoods.

But we've made a commitment through the settlement.

Um I have every confidence the city is going to be able to deliver on that uh commitment going forward.

So, Mr.

Campbell, we're there.

Um we're working very much towards that, uh towards that goal.

Um and you can watch our progress to see if we're actually delivering.

Uh so with that, and I will motion on this uh that will complete consideration of sub-item A.

Uh and before we um introduce sub-item B.

Um, I do want to acknowledge our respect uh Mr.

Campbell's um the submittal of all these ballot proposals.

The committee consultant um Abby Reudert spent quite a bit of time with Mr.

Campbell um choosing between showing up here uh for a long day in chambers uh or going to work is a tough conversation for a lot of people as we discussed in the previous item.

So I certainly respect his uh decision to both submit this um and his choice not to be here this morning.

Um so with that, Sarah, please introduce sub-item B.

Thank you, Chair.

Sub-item B consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to redistrict new low-income housing in low resource areas to affirmatively further fair housing.

Again, we know Mr.

Campbell is not available to present his items, so Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you.

Mary Young, if you'll please approach the lector, and you will have one minute to speak to sub-item B.

So up on the screen.

This is a produce uh produce department for our community.

This services 1,500 folks.

This is right across the street from uh 225, um, very low income folks.

There's five other developments, very low income.

And two elementary schools, one high school, and um there's not another grocery store within a mile.

So when we talk about the concentration of poverty, and when we talk about redlining, this is what we're talking about.

We're talking about not having access to resources, and when you build thank you large development, this is what we're talking about.

Thank you for that final remark.

Our next speaker is Blair Beekman.

Hi, Blair Beekman.

Thanks a lot for the uh explanations by uh Council President Lacaba.

Um the California mandate system for 2029.

I'm not explaining that fully right, and he has explained it much better.

So thank you.

Um thank you for the explanations uh from the previous public commenter.

Um I I'm somewhat in favor of this.

I understand its purpose.

Councilor Prison Eliveira nicely explained how this sort of item can work for uh for affordable housing and things um on-site and off-site affordable housing things.

Really nice to hear.

Someone described um at a recent public meeting that Father's Joe Father Joe's Villages is coming up with new housing ideas.

Um they applied that the this theory to Father's Joe Villages things.

And I it just gave me a slight worry for some reason.

And I just wanted to note that at this time that um uh we can't throw away all our housing to support this measure as important as it is.

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 to sub-item B, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to redistrict new low-income housing in low resource areas to affirmatively further fair housing.

We will begin testimony with Hetheru.

If you can please unmute and begin, you will have one minute.

So I am in support.

I realize that the sub-item B is related to sub-item A, but I think it's there is a crucial difference here, and it I think it pertains to the um clarification that Chair Lakava made.

Because a lot of the low-income housing is uh using government money to finance it.

And if it's using government money, it seems to me that they should be constrained to the law of affirmatively furthering fair housing.

So a lot of the uh non-discretionary low-income housing is going in in areas of concentrated poverty.

That's continuing to happen because it can happen because it can be done without any approvals.

And so that's why I'm in support of this because that just needs to be cut off and stopped.

It's not happening.

You know, everybody has this faith that the city will comply with the settlement and with the law.

But you know, this has been going on for a lot a long time, and people the the I think the city.

This does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh I appreciate this proposal, and and I hope the council members will perhaps you have updated us on the status of lawsuits related to this, because uh the the housing commission has been sued over this problem, which is increasingly um not providing resources for people to move out of certain communities if they choose or they need to live in other areas because of education needs, uh under-resourced communities being piled on top of under-resourced people.

Um it it's a downward spiral for many families.

And so this may not be the perfect solution, but I it shows that people want this council to take some actions and make sure that people are not simply being forced into neighborhoods, areas that don't provide for their needs uh because of decisions made by this council and the housing commission.

Thank you.

Francine Maxwell, please unmute and begin.

You will have one minute to speak to sub-item B.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you, please proceed.

Thank you so much.

Francy Maxwell, Southeastern San Diego resident.

Um, completely in support of this.

We remain the area of concern because our city council and our mayor's office allows us to continue to be the areas of concern.

You have an opportunity to do something, and we need bold leadership to make it happen.

Um appreciate the chair's uh comment about somebody choosing work to make money over attending a meeting when you have the power, council president, to move the meeting.

If you wanted working class people at some of your meetings, they would not be held during working hours.

Look across the nation.

People are moving meetings so that you have more community engagement.

So what a salaried person can come in at 11 and work until seven.

Give us the opportunity to turn our city around and speak to the constituents when they're done working.

You guys have the power, please consider this.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Hello, this is Catherine Rudd.

And um this sounds pretty um good to me.

You know, I'm not sure what um if you put it forward and you kind of push it forward.

Um maybe we'll get the report from the um the mayor's office.

Yes, you guys at the city council might get information, but what about us?

Um, you know, sometimes they just tell you and then don't tell us, and then we have no clue what's going on.

And then also I agree with the other person who who was talking about ministerial approvals.

A lot of um a lot of things have ministerial approvals and the only um for affordable housing, and all they need is a um, you know, it's no fequa and no public hearings, and the only public hearing is for money.

And so um, you know, I just had a question with that.

And so if and then also if um a developer is just you know building on his own, and I just don't really know.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Chair, this concludes testimony on sub-item B.

All right.

Again, we'll uh thank the members of the public for weighing in, and I apologize if my comment about Mr.

Campbell was misunderstood.

We had thought he was going to be able to attend and kind of organize ourselves around it, but uh it didn't work out that way.

So uh but I fully respect his decision.

Uh so with that, uh we'll turn it over to committee members for any comments.

Um and Council Member Illovera.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh again, mostly just want to acknowledge the the goal here.

Um it is completely understandable to want to break away from uh long-standing practices of concentrating poverty in lower resourced um and oftentimes ignored communities.

That is completely um understandable.

It's a desire I share as well.

And um without more detail, um the idea of placing on the ballot a restriction against new housing of any sort.

Um I I would have significant reservations about um you know, perhaps a conversation at the community level um of the pros and cons.

Uh there's just like there's so much here that's not here in terms of detail.

Um, you know, I I think about the possibility of a of a development that has primarily um market rate housing and some affordable housing in a currently lower resourced area that we were trying to lift up to a um to a a higher level of resources.

Um that doesn't sound like a bad thing to me in the communities that I represent.

Um there's a lot of different ways I could see I could see configurations that do include um affordable housing, and that could be a a win uh for the community, a win for the folks who live in those homes.

I think about the um multi-bedroom uh homes in that are being built in city heights right now that are providing opportunities for multi-gener generational families uh to live together.

Um that is a lower resource community that has oftentimes been um ignored, forgotten, and and disrespected, and um those homes are creating opportunities for families to stay intact and communities stay stay intact uh in in ways that that are not currently that do not currently exist um and displacement is is becoming a real issue.

So uh again understand the goal.

I want to recognize that.

I don't want to ignore that goal and ignore that concern.

Um, but don't uh certainly don't consider don't approve of putting this on the ballot just yet, um, and we would be open to additional cons uh conversation at the community level.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Yelo Rivera.

Not seeing anybody in the slides, I'll jump in.

A lot of the comments I made for A still apply here.

Uh, but I want to thank Mary for actually highlighting something that too often is forgotten that when we talked about under-resource, we often talk about sidewalks and parks and libraries.

Um we often don't forget about the social component, whether it's grocery stores.

Um I remember working with some folks about the lack of an emergency room or a urgent care facility, uh, something that most of us take for granted.

But when we talk about under-resource grocery stores and things of that ilk um within walking distance um or um public transit or even driving something that's in your neighborhood.

Um I still remember my mother talking about taking two buses to take me to the doctor that she wanted to address my childhood illnesses.

Um my understanding is that the settlement agreement that I referred to earlier actually has a component for the city to incentivize a grocery store in our under-resource communities.

Um that's fairly recent that we entered into that settlement agreement, Mr.

Yeah again.

I don't know if we have any update on that, because still pretty early.

I don't have an update at this time, Council President.

Okay.

Um incentivize sometimes works with private industry and sometimes it doesn't, but uh I think there is a strong interest in terms of council members, whether they represent that district or not to weigh in and try to be supportive.

Um I did have a number of conversations with uh hospital districts about, and everybody was like, yes, I want somebody else to go first uh to test the idea, but um I think we have to try to figure out how we can do better to incentivize those private entities to provide that kind of resources beyond the infrastructure that we have more control under.

So again, I think join my colleagues in thanking Mr.

Campbell for bringing this idea up.

I think the conversations are being held.

Um the ballot measure may not be the best way to achieve that.

So with that, um we'll conclude subitem B.

Next we'll go to sub item C.

Sarah, please introduce.

Thank you.

Subitem C is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to approve a park equity bond for funding new open space in underserved neighborhoods.

All right.

Again, we've acknowledged that Mr.

Campbell is not here to make the presentation.

Uh so Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

We have received one speaker slip here in chambers.

So Mary Young, if you would please approach the lectern to speak to item C.

You will have one minute.

Again, I thank everybody for their time.

The community members who are listening and uh everybody before me.

Um, again, that's what we're doing right now.

Is uh we're just in fear that there's not going to be any any land because of all the development that's going on.

Um, and we don't know who's coming in because uh the planning group, you know, we're we we're not receiving anything.

So we just believe that uh open spaces are very important to our um community.

We know that we are underrepresented uh when it comes to uh parks, and and we're not just talking about parks with a couple of slides.

We would like to see open parklands there, and since um a lot of our family members will not be able to go to Bellwolf Park, um, we would like them to have some open spaces.

That's not uh, you know, a poke at y'all, but um we just need to create spaces for kids.

All right, thanks.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on sub item C.

We will begin testimony with Hetheru.

Please unmute and begin.

And this is for subitem C consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to approve a park equity bond for funding new open space in underserved area neighborhoods.

Please begin.

I do support it for all the reasons that were just elicited by the previous speaker, Mary Young.

And you know, we there are park elements in community plans, but we need funds to be able to acquire the land, and I think this is a good way to do it.

That concludes my comment.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh thank you.

I realize any bond proposals and a current economic situation will probably be dead on arrival.

But I I will say that this reflects again a form of redlining.

If we look at the communities that already are over-resourced, we never hear that term, but they are over-resourced, especially coastal communities.

Uh, and frankly, tourism areas, they receive the bulk of funding.

They want to put the best face forward on San Diego when visitors come and stay uh in our coastal areas.

And increasingly, areas that are not considered high tourism, uh where people are spending their time when they're here on vacation.

Um, they don't support the needs of the residents who live there.

So perhaps there should be some nexus between those communities that are coastal and that are uh especially the hotels and the transient occupancy taxes, could somehow be folded into supporting parks in other neighborhoods for people who cannot make it to those coastal areas.

Thank you.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

Our next speaker is Francine Maxwell.

Please unmute and begin.

Sorry, I didn't see the clock.

My apologies.

Francine Maxwell, District 4.

Um, I'm I'm in support of this, and also a council person made a comment about you should care more about others, not just yourselves and the districts that you represent.

And so in Candle Recreation Council, the park and rec system has land across the street where they could build a skate park, but instead they're taking a space that could be utilized for outdoors for teenagers and turning it into a skate park.

And so there is the difference how a community that continues to be under-resourced and underserved gets a skate plaza instead of a skate park.

We care about children, we care about space.

What about the park and rec land that's sitting across from Encanto Rick empty that was supposed to be a pool, will not ever be a pool because it doesn't meet the specs anymore.

So I am in full support of this, and I would love your consideration.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Zoom user.

Please unmute, state your name for the record and begin.

Henry.

I want to know, Senator May uh with the gray hair there, Matt.

That's a great comment about the people there can't go to Balball Park because they can't afford a park.

You know, come on.

That was that was kind of saying at street level right there.

How about an Encano?

What in Canada needs is a great factory.

They need great jobs there.

Trump did these tariffs.

The Toyota Motor Company is gonna put in 10 billion dollars, move factories to the United States.

How about if Encanto gets a Toyota factory to build light bulbs or to build bumpers or to build whatever the factory is, but it could be other companies that have got billions of dollars coming into America to build factories and build products, and they could build a factory in Canada with whatever company and put a park on top of the factory.

That'd be a double, a double whammy.

But look for some we need companies that move to Encanto and build a factory given jobs.

Thank you.

This does conclude your time.

Thank you for your testimony.

And Chair, this concludes comment on sub-item C for the public comment.

Um and uh we'll go to committee members.

Councilmember Moreno.

Um once again, thank you to Mr.

Campbell for the ballot uh recommendation.

Um I do appreciate the suggestion.

Um underserved neighborhoods do not receive the same access to resources that uh more affluent areas in San Diego do.

Um in fact, an audit done on equity and recreation programming a couple years ago showed that recreation programming spending per recreation center is 40 percent higher in affluent areas north of the eight than areas south of the eight that are um underserved.

Uh recreation centers north of the eight offer twice as many programs and have twice as many participants as those in underserved areas south of the eight.

So it's clear that we need more investment in parks and park services in lower area um lower income areas.

Um the proposal would issue a bond to fund new open space and underserved neighborhoods, which is certainly desirable.

Um, I would hesitate to move forward with this, however, because as the audit showed, the city cannot manage to offer equal access to recreation services at existing parks.

Um, so I would need to see a city plan on how resources would be provided to any new city parkland uh to serve residents and perform uh brush management.

Um that concludes my comments.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Moreno.

Um I also want to um give a shout out to you for your relenting and relentless, relentless efforts to get uh secure parks um in your in your neighborhoods.

You've done a fantastic job, and um it's really a testimony to what an engaged council member can really deliver for uh their uh their district.

Um I will also mention to uh in light of one of the public comments, uh this was one of the reasons that we got rid of the old developer impact fees that concentrated dollars in communities, whether they needed those dollars or not.

Um, and so we've gone to the citywide.

Um, and I know just recently we took a big chunk of money out of the library bucket uh to fund a library, I guess, expansion in city heights.

That would not have been possible under the old system.

So while government tends to move too slow, uh we can recognize where there are inequities and leaving buckets of money that are not going to anybody's benefit um and try to move it in the right direction.

Um, and I think one of the public commenters kind of nailed it.

I think a park equity button on the uh June ballot uh would not likely uh find the votes and support at this time going forward.

I think the city needs to do a little bit about building that's credibility uh and confidence um before we can get the the will of the voters.

So uh with that, um that will conclude.

There is no motion, so uh uh thank again, Mr.

Campbell for item C.

So we will go next up to sub item D.

Sarah, please introduce that.

Thank you, Chair.

Sub-item D, consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to require ADA compliant sidewalks to transit for complete communities projects.

All right, thank you again.

Mr.

Campbell is not here, uh, so we'll go direct straight to public comment.

Thank you.

We have received one slip here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, if you will please approach the lecture and you have indicated you wish to speak to sub item D, and you will have one minute.

Hi, where Beekman.

Um, this is a nice item.

Uh uh, yeah, uh San Diego has done some really good work with with mobile issues, ADA compliant issues, and you even have a uh a commission on the processor committee.

And you even have a commission on the process or committee.

So this is part of all of that good work.

Good luck in these sort of continued good efforts.

It's my sincere hope in working on these sidewalk issues that can be ADA compliant that you know the mobility community and the bicycle community, that they um that there's so much new tech involved that um they want to work towards the practices of openness and accountability and and best practices, and that it's a real shared process with the community.

We can be building and learning those concepts and really you know working together towards those concepts.

Uh I'm hopeful in what that that that's building our organic holistic future and all the good steps.

So uh thank you for this item.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those who wish to speak to sub-item D, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to require ADA compliant sidewalks to transit for complete communities project.

Each speaker will have one minute and we will start testimony with Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh yes, I I unclear if this is currently a requirement or not, and if not, that seems like a no-brainer because the the idea behind ADA compliance, universal access in building codes is to support everyone's access.

Yes, people with mobility issues benefit, obviously, but so do parents pushing strollers or um you know children on bicycles and people carrying children.

I mean, all of these groups benefit from these and are uh living in presumably some of these houses that do not provide parking and are close to transit, and people therefore will rely more on using transit.

So I I'm uh I would support this concept, but I would be surprised if it has to go to a vote of the people.

I thought ABA compliance and mobility for safe neighborhoods was part of the deal already.

Uh so perhaps that can be discussed by the council members.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And with no other hands in the queue, this concludes testimony on sub-item D.

All right, thank you to members of the public.

I'll turn over to committee members, not seeing anybody else in the lights.

I'll make a quick uh comment uh that will segue from the last public caller.

I think it was an issue that we did identify with the complete communities that often talks about walking distance uh from a property or a proposed development to transit uh and um did not consider the fact that in some communities there isn't sidewalks.

Uh and that language has been changed, and if it I will follow up personally, and if it hasn't been changed to make sure that it is changed.

Um, and I think uh city planning kind of caught that and has uh fixed that.

Uh so we don't need that uh as uh ballot measure.

Uh we can do that through uh the languages in our ordinances, but I'll double check.

Mr.

Eigen, can you confirm that we have?

Council President, I believe we have Heidi von Bloom City Planning Director on the line, and she can confirm that for you.

Okay.

Ms.

Baumblum.

She's not on, but I I'll circle back with her.

But I believe I've heard her spoke speak eloquently about uh the need for an ADA compliant sidewalk uh to meet the complete community's uh requirement.

So seeing no one else in the lights, uh we will dispense with sub item D.

Go to Sarah, please introduce sub-item E.

Thank you, Chair.

Sub-item E is consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to reimburse community planning groups for successful appeals of city discretionary decisions.

All right.

Uh, Mr.

Campbell's not here, so we'll go straight to public comment.

Thank you.

I do not have any slips submitted here in chambers, and I'm not seeing any hands go up in the virtual oh, we've got one hand up in the virtual queue, so I will begin that five-minute timer in case anybody else would like to submit uh a comment for consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to reimburse community planning groups for successful appeals of city discretionary decisions.

So we will begin testimony with Lori Saldania.

Please begin.

Uh thank you.

As I have mentioned, and the council knows, I chair the assembly housing and community development committee, and encourage communities to have more of a say in how their neighborhoods are developed.

I agree with the premise of this proposal because what has changed over time in the city of San Diego, and maybe unique in the state, is that you now require, I believe, a thousand dollar payment to appeal a decision.

And that is really charging people twice.

I believe that we have revenues that support the appeal process, and now you're putting the burden on community groups, which are often from under resource communities.

They use that term again.

And it is a burden, and people have to really think hard about do we have the resources to go forward with an appeal, even if that appeal has merit and is up if it is ultimately upheld.

I think it makes sense from a legal perspective.

If you prevail, your fees and costs are covered.

So I think that makes sense, if not through a ballot measure, through council action.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Hathru.

Please unmute and begin.

I've given you permission to speak.

Okay.

I guess I can be heard.

Uh I don't have anything further to say.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Francine Maxwell, please unmute and begin.

Francine Maxwell, District 4 in full support of this.

Hope that it does move forward so that the community can speak, because it was not very nice when this council uh president, along with others, gutted their power to have people present to them about their community where they live and would hope to work one day.

But since they just live here, then they should um have say.

But the council gutted us, hit us in the stomach, and they've taken the power away.

The least you can do is stop double dipping and allow people that you were trying to push to the bottom and discourage from doing the appeal.

A thousand dollars in another district may not be a lot, but when there's community members that work three jobs to keep a roof over their head and participate in civic engagement and donate to these causes, and we're gonna have many more because district four is the great thoroughfare to get people to downtown.

So I am in full support of moving this forward.

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Catherine Rhodes, if you can please unmute and provide your comment to sub item E.

I'm sorry.

Um hi.

I'm not sure if this is one where they're asking that community planning groups get back their $1,000 fee when they appeal something to the city council and they win.

I actually think that's a great idea because if they win, um that's something that should have been done.

But when the city council gets more information, that's something that should have been done before.

So I totally agree that um if if this is a one where they recoup their $1,000 if they win, that would be great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And this concludes testimony on sub item E.

All right, thank you for the public comment.

We'll go to Council Member Campio.

Thank you, Council President.

Um, just one statement very briefly.

I think this is this is an appropriate thing.

I think there was some advice from the city attorney's office back in the day about the nature of reimbursing or uh covering the cost of appeals.

Uh, I disagreed with that opinion back in the day, and I do think that as a matter of policy, it's uh the point of reimbursing if it's successful is a matter of equity that I would support.

Um, but it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to put this on the ballot.

Uh so I I don't think that's the appropriate mechanism forward, but I sincerely uh do agree with this as an idea.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Campia.

Not seeing anybody else on the lights.

Um we'll go on to sub item F.

Uh Mr.

Campbell's not here, so go to public comment on sub item.

Introduce sub item F and then go to public comment, Sarah.

Thank you, Chair.

Subitem F is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to mandate City of San Diego use of mailed notices to inform impacted persons of public hearings.

We have received a speaker slip here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, if you'll please approach the lector, and you will have one minute to speak to sub-item F.

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

I'm curious if this item has arisen from the um ADU issues and the uh trash issues from uh this past spring and summer.

Because uh that that was brought up, and I what I learned from that time was that San Diego City government does send out a certain amount of mailers, but it's not a very organized system.

They tend to work within the the small little enclaves within San Diego.

And uh hopefully this is an item that they want to create a better organizational system overall for how uh city government uh puts out their mailers.

So if that's the goal, uh really good luck and that and then sort of good intention and how to talk about that with city government.

Uh it's important.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to raise their hand if they wish to provide comment on sub-item F, the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to mandate City of San Diego use of mailed notices to inform impacted persons of public hearings.

Lori Saldania, please unmute and begin.

Uh, just as this is phasing out the newspaper notices, um there are certainly electronic notification methods that would not cost the city much.

Either people can sign up to receive them and opt in, or they can be generated automatically if they're uh electronic mail or other information is available.

But more of a concern about this to me is the ADA issues.

If you are relying on printed notices, there are people who there may be language difficulties, but there may also be a lack of ability to read something that it needs to be provided in other formats.

I don't know if that has come before the council, if people have challenged their uh right to have something in other than uh text format as a notification.

Uh, but it is of a concern, just as we mentioned public outreach and in a previous uh agenda item.

Uh, I think that everyone has a right to be notified about something impacting their communities, regardless of their ability to read or hear a notice.

Thank you.

And with no other hands in the queue for sub-item F.

This concludes testimony.

All right, thank you to the public again.

I don't see anybody else in the lights on sub-item F.

So uh we will consider that dispensed.

Uh Sarah, please introduce sub-item G.

Sub-item G, consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to create a stormwater runoff fee to fund essential stormwater infrastructure.

Again, Mr.

Campbell's not here, so we'll go straight to public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

I've not received any speaker slips here in chambers for sub-item G.

And I will begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Robert Campbell to create a stormwater runoff fee, fund essential stormwater infrastructure.

We will begin with Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh yes, I appreciate Mr.

Campbell and submitting these issues that as a whole address the imbalance in resources available to communities that are uh including when it comes to stormwater.

And we're coming up on the two-year anniversary of people in the Choyas Creek area losing their homes, businesses, uh in some cases, you know, lives and health, um, and they still haven't recovered.

And I think that this is going in a direction that is important.

I know it's been proposed and uh looked at by the council, but it it shows the ongoing disparities in how we manage our stormwater.

And uh so it makes perfect sense.

An infrastructure deficit disproportionately harms those in under resource communities, and the city needs to do a better job of protecting their homes, their property, their lives, their health.

Uh so if you're not willing to put this on the ballot, please discuss what options you are willing to put forward to protect people in these neighborhoods.

Thank you for your testimony.

Hetheru, please unmute and begin.

You will have one minute to speak to sub-item G.

Yes.

So thank you, Miss Aldania.

If you're not willing to consider a ballot measure to address these issues, please let us know what you're willing to do to address the these issues.

And I do think that this one intersects, this proposal intersects with the first two or three proposals by Mr.

Campbell that if you had uh a citizenry here or residents in the underserved areas that need the infrastructure for stormwater uh runoff.

Um if if you had higher income folks here, I don't think we'd have the problem.

So while I appreciate the comments that council member Ilo Rivera made about wanting to do things that would keep uh affordable housing out of the underserved districts.

Listen, it's a numbers issue.

It's so far disproportionate that you it's algebra.

You can't put any more here until you make it much more uh equal.

That's it.

Thank you.

And with no other hands up in the queue for sub item G.

This concludes public testimony.

All right, again, thank you to the public.

We'll go to Councilmember Moreno on sub-item G.

Thank you.

Once again, uh thank you, uh Mr.

Campbell for the proposal.

Um I do appreciate the suggestion and have supported past efforts to increase stormwater fees.

Um in fact, I have pushed hard the last few years to get the city to invest in the stormwater reinspection team that would go out and reassess the impact of any given properties impact on the city's stormwater system.

Um this team would cost a few hundred thousand dollars per year and eventually result in significant revenue for city stormwater projects.

Um, however, hasn't happened, which is um unfortunate.

Um, in response to this proposal, I do think we need to ask voters to approve a fee increase.

Uh, but I think that such a proposal may need more time to develop to be successful because I think there is a significant amount of public education that needs to take place before placing a measure before the voters if we want it to be successful.

Um so that concludes my comments, Council President.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Councilmember Moreno.

Uh, not seeing many lights, I'll kind of echo your comments that uh council has discussed this.

I think there was support at the council level, uh, but we also uh face the reality of how these polled.

Um, and I don't think uh anything has changed that 2026 would be a ripe year to bring a stormwater thing without uh as council member Redo said, a robust public engagement process to understand what it would mean.

Um perhaps more importantly, uh change in legislation in Sacramento that would treat stormwater as a utility, uh, much like sewer and water is a utility, but uh we're not there yet.

We may not get there, uh, but that would help us move a lot more nimbly to do exactly what the public tells us that they want us to do, which is actually treat stormwater as a utility in terms of uh conveying water, protecting homes and businesses going forward.

Uh and I hope the date will come when we'll get there.

Uh Councilmember Elo Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

I just very quickly to piggyback on that.

I I I think it's important that we continuously say the issue polls there's significant public support.

It's hovered around 60 percent for many years now.

And the threshold is is is really the issue rather than lack of a public support and um these um long standing rules that were put in place by what I would call um conservative extremists um that put rules in place to protect their own wealth, um that make it more difficult for us to resource the city, uh resource the city in specific ways like uh stormwater.

Um so um, you know, we had the hope that that threshold would change.

Um that didn't work out in Sacramento.

Um, but one of those um unique situations where um similar to affordable housing uh in the city's history, about sixty percent of the of the public strongly supportive, um willing to um to to invest in that, um, but that not being uh quite enough to overcome a very, very high uh uh threshold hurdle.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh thank you for that clarification.

That is uh a distinction that's worth remembering.

So thank you for for reminding us all.

All right, so uh we will dispense with sub item G, and that will also conclude the ballot measures submitted by Mr.

Campbell.

Again, you thank you for your good work in bringing these forward.

So, Sarah, please introduce item sub-item H.

Thank you, Chair.

Sub-item H is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to propose a garage and storage space tax.

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

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound, Chair.

All right, thank you.

I believe Mr.

Stump is available on online.

Could you formally introduce yourselves or yourself for the record?

And then begin your presentation.

I'm John Stump, an attorney in private practice.

My family have the microphone on.

Yes, we can hear you.

Ah, excellent.

My family resides in district four and nine.

And uh I'm not showing my video.

There we go.

You see me?

Yeah.

Okay.

Um just some general comments that'll apply to all the propositions I've made.

I want to thank the uh committee and the council for this uh continuing a process that provides the uh public with an opportunity to suggest ideas for council consideration.

I fully understand the council's current focus on budget shortfall, but budget shortfall doesn't mean that you shouldn't have vision.

Uh and some of the ideas may be addressed by adoption of a policy, uh adopting a municipal code, or finally maybe an actual ballot measure.

You know, uh Mr.

Campbell suggested some very good ideas, and the appropriate thing probably would have been for some of them to refer them to uh committee council committees or departments uh for a further study and report because eventually the council is going to need to address every one of the ideas Mr.

Campbell has had.

Um council members could request or motion that the proposal be referred to a council committee department or agency, and then as far as the chairman's last comment concerning the law not being there in Sacramento, again, this is a comment or an action that the this committee could take to refer this to the city lobbyist or city attorney to say, oh, this is a good idea.

We want to report back on how we get this law.

Are my pictures showing double here?

I am I okay.

You're okay, please continue.

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, on the proposal specifically, and do I get a uh timer?

How many minutes do I have left?

I had started your time.

You have two minutes remaining to speak to your sub-item.

Okay.

Um I started hearing the council's uh desperate actions to find resources.

I said, okay, well, besides parking and uh uh taxing or putting a fee on parking in uh the beach or Belleville Park, are there any other places where we could tax or put a fee on parking uh that would carry out city policies for climate change.

Uh, you know, that's the work live um enjoy uh concept, uh so people are not driving, and uh also give us housing.

And so the concept here is that the council could adopt a policy, refer to committee, uh look at um imposing a fee on parking spaces, particularly in parking structures, which would be then used for creation of housing.

And I did some of the research on this, and of course, that's quoted in um my proposal that if you had a five thousand dollar fee on every structured parking space, it would generate about a hundred and thirty-five million dollars.

So I hope that the council can consider this idea and refer it to a committee if it's not quite right for ballot measure.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Stompen.

Uh as a quick aside, um, it is part of our legislative platform to try to convince Sacramento that Stormwater auditing utility and enjoy the uh language of Prop 218, which is a little tricky since it is a voter-approved ballot measure, but we are working on it.

Uh so with that, Sarah, please proceed with public comment on sub-item H.

Thank you, Chair.

We have received a slip here in chambers for sub item H.

Blair Beekman, if you will please approach the electron, you will have one minute.

Uh hi, thank you.

Um I didn't quite understand um item H.

I'm sorry about that.

So I'll just uh simply comment that uh thank you for the initial introduction by Mr.

Stump.

It's nice to I haven't seen him in person before.

He's offered a good list, and he offered a good comment about Robert Campbell's items that uh definitely items that I hope are uh council can be discussing more.

And uh thank you.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to speak to sub item H, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to propose a garage and storage space tax.

We will begin testimony with Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

I I do appreciate uh Mr.

Stump's vision of seeing pop possibilities and opportunities in this.

Um I agree with him and the council president.

Stormwater is a resource, it should be treated as such.

Uh but as far as the storage goes, um, I think there's some merit to that because people run businesses out of their garages and their personal property, and they do that to avoid uh paying for business taxes and other properties.

I think there need to be some distinctions uh as in a time of housing shortage.

There are some people converting their garages, some with and some without permits.

Uh so garages have become a luxury, and we see that as new development is excluding parking, uh, not just garages, but parking spaces all together.

So I think looking at that is something that is worthwhile and should be analyzed, and I agree it should be passed on to uh have this take a good closer look, have the city take a closer look at this proposal.

Uh and so I support it in that regard.

Thank you for your comment.

And chair saying now their hands up in the queue.

This concludes testimony on sub item H.

All right, thank you for the item, and thank you for the public's comment.

We'll turn it over to committee members.

And I don't see anyone on the lights on that.

So uh we will consider sub item H dispensed.

Sarah, please introduce item sub item I.

Thank you, Chair.

Subitem I is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to reduce the cost of living for families with a public power utility.

All right, again, Mr.

Stump, could you please introduce yourself for the record and begin your presentation?

Hi, John Stump.

Uh the proposal is to phase in public power and to reduce the cost of uh living for families, make San Diego more affordable.

I submitted to the committee, and I'd like posted the chart that shows that San Diego gas electric is the highest cost utility in the nation.

And why is it highest cost?

Well, basically, the the when you pay a profit, they're guaranteed making 10% profit.

Nonprofit utilities uh don't make a profit, and in Sacramento, they're paying 17 cents a kilowatt hour.

Well, here we're paying 48 cents.

So what my proposal does is start, you see, in paragraph two, is that initially the city would organize itself where it has a public utility approach to generating its own power, and the city does generate a lot of power in it at the uh landfill with solar cells, but it's not organized as the step to a public utility.

San Francisco has done that, and uh I hope that you would do that.

Uh, as far as the public utility, you know, there have been this will happen eventually, and I understand that the council is very money concerned at the moment, and they think that they're getting franchise fees from S D GE that net them more money than uh they put out.

But I've done an analysis, and council should continue to do this analysis that shows that most of the franchise fees that come in as a revenue uh are eaten up as an expense.

And I project by 2030, it'll be 100%.

So that SDG, the city will be paying SDG and E more in fees or expense than they will in revenue.

So this needs further study.

I hope that you'll uh refer this matter to um the appropriate committee department uh for further study.

And um thank you very much.

All right, thank you, sir, for that.

Uh Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for sub-item I is now open.

And we have not received any speaker slips here in chambers.

So I will begin the five minute timer for all those to indicate if they wish to provide a comment on this sub-item, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to reduce the cost of living for families with a public power utility.

We will begin with Jay Powell.

Please unmute and begin.

You will have one minute.

Hi, Jay Powell.

Um I participated in the campaign that brought over 24,000 signatures on a petition for the council place a measure on the ballot to create a public power electric distribution utility.

The city council did not support placing that measure before the voting public.

The city's in a structural budget crisis.

How much is the city paying to SDGE for electricity delivery to all its facilities and operations?

How much would the city save by control and delivery of electricity and real control of the costs and the other zone of the electrical distribution rights?

In October 2021, the rules committee endorsed a proposal to form a public power study citizens review and advisory group.

That advisory group was never formed, and the city has spent several millions on a study that has now been shown.

It did not properly evaluate the real costs and benefits of creating a public power electric distribution system.

Please refer this measure for review that provides for a public power study advice.

Thank you.

This does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Catherine Rhodes, I have given you permission to speak to item sub item I.

Hello, can you hear me?

We can hear you.

Please proceed.

Oh, wonderful.

First of all, I want to thank John Stunt for all his ballot proposals he brings every year.

Um it gives me a lot to think about.

And of course, I agree with him for a public um choice or less expensive electricity because San Diego actually overcame Hawaii to be the number one most expensive utility, and they have so much profit.

It's insane.

So anyway, in your underground surcharge and your fund ballots, you have 394 million dollars in cash that is just sitting there.

And tomorrow you're going to be talking about your CIP mid-year budget monitoring reports and year-end reports.

And it seems like you only um have you only spend about three million dollars or so a year when you have 394 million dollars literally sitting there.

It's insane.

So what I was thinking is this does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Laurie Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Uh thank you.

And I concur with the pre prior statements by Jay Powell.

Thank you to Mr.

Stump for making this proposal.

Uh, we pay the highest utility rate, San Diegans do.

Meanwhile, we have some of the lowest salaries thanks to hospitality tourism.

It is a very clear disparity that this council struggles with when you're trying to bounce our budgets.

And a big way to manage that is to create a public utility.

The upfront costs would be substantial, but the long-term benefits would help every San Diegan keep their a roof over their head and not have to pay twice or even three times for utilities to the city, to businesses as well as to their their home utilities.

I'm on the board of a foundation that won a Supreme Court case with a unanimous decision regarding uh the solar energy policies in the state.

S CGE lobbied to get that passed to take more money out of people's pockets.

They are bad actors.

And I encourage the city council to pass this forward for evaluation and save taxpayers millions.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

And chair, this concludes testimony on sub item I.

All right.

Thank you to the public for weighing in.

Um I don't see anybody in the light, so maybe I'll jump in.

Uh Mr.

Stomp and introduce this as kind of a phased approach.

Uh the city has already done phase one.

Uh we already produce electricity uh under a joint powers agreement with other cities uh in the county.

It's called San Diego Community Power.

That's keeps seems to be forgotten.

Um not only a commitment to today to produce power at a lower cost, but actually produce uh power through renewable resources.

Not only a commitment to Chai to produce power at a lower cost, but actually produce power through renewable resources.

And can community power, which I was proud to uh chair the board for a couple of years there has done a remarkable job of getting itself up and running and trying to be sensitive to the price points there.

So we've already achieved that.

Also forgotten these kinds of conversations as we're not talking about natural gas, which still a lot of people rely on, uh, and the cost of transmitting that electricity uh which is uh produced uh by solar farms and wind farms.

Um and of course, all those are threatened by the current federal government actions uh to undercut uh that smooth transition.

Um the third is we've actually uh have agreed to actually move this item forward through um a study.

Some people don't like the study or the results of the study that have been done so far.

Um but if I'm not mistaken, I think phase two is going, it's about ready to be wrapped up.

We're working on finalizing phase two of the public power feasibility study with New Gen Art the City's consultants, and we expect to bring something forward to the city council sometime early in the calendar year.

All right, great, thank you.

So actually, all the items proposed by Mr.

Sump is already underway, and no further action in my opinion uh is necessary, but I appreciate uh raising the issue because I think it is an important one.

Uh Councilmember Ila Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

I just wanted to say thank you for the additional context there.

I think all three of those things you walked through were important to mention.

The the first piece I've I've I found that um I too have found that San Diego Community Power is often kind of ignored or overlooked in these conversations.

It's a nonprofit, there's there's no profit built in.

Uh, you know, I have the opportunity to serve there now.

Um affordability is front of front of mind.

Um I just think that's an important thing to keep in mind in this discussion, um, and as well as the other components uh you mentioned as well.

Um so the goal again, as with many of these ballot measures of you know, addressing affordability um is a laudable one.

And it's something that we need to stay focused on, and um it's being pursued um through multiple avenues um as we speak.

So uh thank you, Council President.

All right, thank you.

So it's not seeing anybody else in the lights.

We'll move along and uh dispense with item subitem I and Sarah, please introduce sub item J.

Thank you, Chair.

Subitem J is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to address campaign and ethic rules for both the school board and city.

All right, with that again, Mr.

Stump, could you formally introduce yourselves for the record and uh begin your presentation?

Um John Stump.

Uh resident and inhabitant of the city of San Diego and a taxpayer.

Um this is called one set of rules for all.

And we make the first thing is the San Diego City Charter in sections 65 and 66 provides for control of the school board and establishment of the school board.

It is one of the most frequently amended sections of the charter.

Why?

Because schools are very important.

If you're trying to determine correct the inequities within communities, you have to address schools.

Um excuse me.

You have to address schools.

When any family decides to purchase a home or move to an area, they first look at the affordability of the area and its convenience through their work or whatever they're doing.

Excuse me, whatever they're doing.

They find a place that's really good.

And they say, Oh, yeah, we can afford this house, we can afford this rent.

Then they ask the realtor or the rental agent, what about the schools?

And at that point, the inequity is really clear.

City Heights, for example, has no high school.

There is no high school in the zip code 92105.

Even though it's the most diverse and largest populated zip code in the city.

Um adjacent uh neighborhoods and zip codes.

But if you look at the materials I submitted, they're all failure.

Ah, here we go.

They're all failing high schools.

You know, this is an article that was in the paper earlier this week.

If you look at the second page, you'll see the scores right at the bottom.

For Hoover High School, that's in 92115, Crawford High School, and Lincoln High School.

They're all uh in the orange and yellow.

They're not green.

There's no equity here.

Um so we made progress because we went to district election, and now the campaign contributions for schools uh have to follow the city rules, but we're still inequity because the number of districts is less than the city council, and uh we need to make some changes to uh increase the the next time we have the decennial census to increase the number of school distall districts to this be the same as the city of San Diego.

So uh that's the proposal and uh thank you, Mr.

Stump.

That does conclude your three minutes.

Oh, that's my whole three minutes.

That was the three minutes.

Thank you very much.

I'll answer any questions.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Stump.

We'll go to public comments.

Thank you, Chair.

I have not received any speaker slips here in chambers, and I am not seeing any hands go up in the virtual queue to speak to sub item J.

So this concludes testimony on sub item J.

All right, turn it over to committee.

I don't see anybody on the lights.

I will only add uh Mr.

Stump.

I know I've talked with you about this in the past.

I think removal of CNU unified out of our city charter is really what makes the most sense.

Um there are many other school districts that overlap city boundaries, and it doesn't seem to make sense to me to have one district in our charter and the other districts not.

Um they should stand alone, and we could have those good fights that you identify uh that would better serve the students and the families of uh San Diego or those who live within the school district.

Uh, but I don't see anybody on the light, so we'll continue considerem J dispensed, and we'll now go to sub item K.

Thank you, Chair.

Subitem K is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to create five neighborhood elementary school districts and a high school district community college district.

All right, thank you again, sir.

Please introduce yourself for the record and begin your three-minute presentation.

Uh John Stump.

The proposal here is to what is it called?

It's the San Diego Unified School District.

It's unified because it includes both the elementary and the high school district.

At one time it included the community college in that, uh, but that's been spun off.

What the proposal is to make reunify the school district, reunify it into elementary school districts, like are done in as the chairman mentioned in um San Diego.

We have both a unified district and then several elementary school districts and a couple of high school districts.

And this would give the ability to have the elementary school districts locally controlled, and then on high school, it would be unified and continuous with the community college, so that people could go to that high school unified high school community college district wherever they wanted within the city.

So I think that's the basic um proposal.

Uh, it's going to become very important when uh La Jolla splits off because they're going to make a choice to fully control their high school and elementary school district once they become a separate city.

Thank you very much.

If I'll answer any questions if you don't fully understand the concept of local political control.

All right, I'll just say if.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for sub item K is now open.

I have not received any speaker slips here in chambers, so I will start the five-minute timer for anybody that would love to provide comment on the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to create five neighborhood elementary school districts and a high school community college district.

Each speaker will have one minute, and we will begin testimony with Lori Saldania.

Thank you.

I I I encourage the council to be respectful in your comments as the morning grows late.

Elementary schools are increasingly part of city operations.

There are joint use fields, there's proposals for housing that the city will have to work with the school district about.

They have a lot of solar power setup on the school land that generates and supports our local grid.

And again, I mentioned that change in solar power has diminished the returns to the schools as well.

So there are many areas of overlay with the school and the city, and parents in particular are concerned about a good start in elementary school.

I would encourage the council to consider uh this proposal within the nexus of all those concerns.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Sump for bringing this forward.

Our schools are the best investment we make in our children's future, and uh public education is a resource that that needs excellent management going forward.

Uh so despite personality differences, I hope the council will take this seriously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Hetheroo.

Please unmute and begin.

Thank you, Mr.

Stump.

Yeah, I'm sure that every area of the city wants to have local control of their schools.

And I think that uh the folks up in La Jolla that want to split off know more than better than anybody else, the facts that are uh laid out in Matthew Desmond's work, Poverty by America, that children who go to school at high resource schools, state of the art that are located in low opportunity areas, do significantly worse academically and health wise than those who go to non-well resourced schools in high opportunity areas.

So I think starting with making all the schools perform well means bringing parity to where people are living.

And so I think that it falls right into the stuff that Mr.

Campbell brought forth.

That concludes my comment.

Thank you for your testimony.

And seeing another hands up in the queue for sub-item K, that concludes testimony.

All right, I'll turn it over to my council colleagues on sub-item K.

And not seeing any, I'll I'll repeat that I think our energy should be spent in separating the unified out of our city charter and take up these very important issues that Mr.

Stump outlined.

Um again, not seeing anybody else, will consider sub item K dispensed, and we'll go next to sub-item L.

Thank you.

Subitem L is consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to create neighborhood-based elementary school districts and a high school community college district.

Um again, this is a different approach on the same problem.

You know, when the people of Poway decided to set up their own city, they made sure they have their own school district.

When the people of San Diego set up the city, they originally had the council as the school board.

Schools are an absolute uh indicator of the quality of a city.

You know, in City Heights, Southeast San Diego, uh, and some parts of uh district eight.

The schools are the reason people there's no equity.

So we need to have an ability to elect school board members uh from our area.

That's what the rich communities do.

They create their own school board and their own school district so they can control it.

And as uh, you know, uh the people in La Jolla are very dissatisfied with the services they're getting from the city.

And given the opportunity when they split off as uh a separate city, they're gonna want full control of their schools.

That's just the way it's the in government, it's one of the largest and most significant uh activities.

So, you know, I hope that council, particularly between now and the next redistricting, looks at opportunities to increase the number of uh school board districts and school board seats, and um provide uh a vehicle to gain equity in district nine and district eight parts of uh and fully district four.

As I said before, there is no high school in city heights 92105, and we need a high school, and if we had our own uh district, we'd be creating the Frida Hollow Kahlo High School for City Heights 92105.

Thank you, and I uh hopefully you can do something about the schools and provide equity for the lower income lower resource communities.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Stump.

Uh Sarah, please go to public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for subitem L is now open.

I have not received any slips here in chambers, so I will start the five-minute timer for anybody in the queue to raise their hand if they wish to speak to the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by John Stump to create neighborhood-based elementary school districts and a high school district community college district.

We will begin testimony with Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Thank you.

Uh, some of the comments by the council member about splitting off the responsibilities from the school district is a concern because schools provide such an important foundation for everything.

Civic education, public health, everything that goes forward.

And we have seen again the nexus with our schools with poverty, Title I schools, the number of students that rely on uh public assistance SNAP program benefits.

Um, and that's a policy concern for the city council.

So splitting them off entirely, I think is going in a dangerous direction because the the needs of families are so intertwined with what the schools are now providing.

So I want to thank Mr.

South for bringing this forward to have a more robust discussion about this.

And especially at a time when the Department of Education is under attack, that harms the city when families are less secure because of education programs.

The city and the county have to backfill those resources.

So there's a strong nexus.

I was disappointed to hear those comments, and I thank Mr.

Stump for this proposal.

Thank you for your testimony.

And seeing now there are hands up in the queue.

This concludes comment for sub item L.

All right.

Um we'll now go to council members, council members and not seeing anybody else on the lights, so we will dispense with sub item L.

Uh, so with that, that concludes all the ballot measures uh submitted by Mr.

Stump.

Thank you for the good work you do this every cycle.

Actually appreciate it because I think it does stimulate conversations, even if some of the ideas don't actually manifest themselves in a ballot measure, but you keep the conversation alive on things that are extremely important uh to the city and to the residents and businesses of the city.

So with that, Sarah, please introduce item M.

Subitem M.

Thank you, Chair.

Subitem M is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Respect Bird Rock to update the coastal height limit.

And if you're watching on City TV or the live stream online and you'd like to call into the meeting to speak, please dial 1669-2545252 and when prompted, input webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound.

Chair.

And you have three minutes, sir.

Thank you very much.

I'm Harry Bobbins.

I'm a former president of the La Jolla Community Planning Association speaking on behalf of Respect Bird Rock in District One.

Uh thank you, rules committee members today.

In my experience, it can seem easier to approve a 13-car second home mansion than build a 13-unit town home for local families.

This isn't fair.

A rigid, minuscule 30-foot height limit across an enormous swath of our highest resource areas, often miles from the shore.

This policy makes no sense for a modern San Diego, and I urge you to let the people vote on a fix in 2026.

Next slide, please.

For over 50 years, this Watergate era law has divided San Diego with a concrete red line along the I-5.

Its chief proponent admitted the line was, and I quote, an arbitrary decision.

This 53-year-old mistake has actively fueled our housing crisis and deepened inequality.

Next slide, please.

This line has created a tale of two cities.

West of I-5, neighborhoods have approved a mere 25 affordable homes in three years.

East of I-5, communities bear a disproportionate burden, are providing for our housing needs.

This all leads to inequity, longer commutes, greater sprawl, reduced revenues, and inflated costs.

Next slide, please.

This rule is so broken, it almost blocked Rose Creek Village, a mere five-story housing for veterans located over two miles from the shore.

Old Prop D locks out the teachers, nurses, and first responders who power our city from living near their work or students living near their universities.

Next slide, please.

Our world has transformed since San Diego voted for Nixon.

Technology now allows for sensitive, sustainable mid-rise development that wasn't possible in the 1970s, and our city has grown into a beautifully diverse metropolis.

Yet, this restrictive policy remains frozen in time, denying opportunities for generations.

Next slide, please.

We are not proposing instant skyscrapers on the beach.

We're helping this conversation and encouraging a public process for a smarter plan.

And we have ideas to provide and bring back, or you can move to the city attorney to draft.

We can provide homes for our workforce, generate revenue for services, and promote sustainability to build a more unified city.

Next slide, please.

I urge you to continue this transparent public process to achieve a balanced measure for a 2026 ballot.

Don't let a 53-year-old arbitrary mapping error based on a highway red line and not the actual coastline dictate and continue to constrain our future.

Let us vote.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Sarah, please proceed with public comment on sub-item M.

Thank you, Chair.

We have received a speaker slip here in Chambers.

Manny Rodriguez, if you will please approach the lector, and you have one minute to speak to sub-item M.

Thank you, Council President and Council members.

There was a lot of talk today about affirmatively affirmatively furthering fair housing in higher income, higher resource neighborhoods.

And this proposal right here is the way to do that.

You get rid of that height limit, a lot of new housing is built, and there is an inclusionary rate in the city, and you get more affordable rent-controlled units on the coast.

I love California.

I am Southern California, born and raised, and I do think that we should welcome more people on the coast.

It is a vibrant place, and it can be an even more vibrant place with more people.

So I look forward to seeing y'all's discussion, and I hope that this can be moved to a ballot measure so that we can affirmatively further fair housing on the coast.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on sub item M, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Respect Bird Rock to update the coastal height limit.

We will begin testimony with phone number ending in 0172.

Phone number ending in 0172.

You can press star six.

Hello.

Hello, my name's Michael.

I was born and raised in La Jolla.

I'm speaking in strong support of placing this high limit reform measure on the ballot.

The current 30-foot height limit casts an incredibly wide net across neighborhoods west of the five, including areas that are nowhere near the coast.

That outdated boundary does not preserve coastal character.

It simply prevents us from building the homes that our residents desperately need.

By aligning the high limit zone with true coastal areas, we preserve what needs protection while unlocking sensible growth everywhere else.

Building more housing is the single most effective action this city can take to address affordability, reduce displacement, and improve traffic.

When people live closer to jobs, schools, and services, we shorten commutes, cut congestion, clean the air, prevent ocean pollution, and strengthen neighborhood vitality.

This reform is one of the most meaningful data-driven steps San Diego can take to ensure a more affordable future.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Laurie Saldania.

Um, thank you.

I I'd like to speak as a lifelong San Diego who was actually born at Scripps Hospital when it was on Prospect Avenue in La Jolla.

Now, of course, it's moved along with other medical centers up to the Mesa near the UCSD campus.

I reference that to say that for the people promoting this, and I lived in Bird Rock for 10 years.

I understand the commitment behind what you're proposing.

Affordable housing will simply not happen in coastal areas.

If hospitals are pushed out of coastal areas to be transformed into luxury housing, then even when these high rises, if they were approved and built, they would never be affordable.

There are so many residents that in that area that were using the uh they they're not inclusionary at present.

I admire the commitment behind this, but in my lifetime of experience with how this works, the coastal areas will not build affordable housing.

Even if they are given a new height limit, it will simply not happen because of other problems we've addressed in previous items today.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Hello, this is Catherine Rhodes, and I oppose this ballot measure, mainly because if um bird drop people, if they want to um put on a ballot measure, they could pay for it themselves.

They're rich enough to pay it for themselves.

And the city has a budget deficit problem.

And so um, if they want to go ahead and pay the three um, you know, pay to um put it on to the ballot, like a whole whole bunch of other people did, they could actually afford to do that.

And then also, you know, um, you know, with the density bonus law and all that kind of stuff, you know.

I forgot if we have that 24-story tower in um in Pacific in the nearby Pacific Beach.

Everybody's against it.

So I think that if they put it forward to or the or the midway area, I think if they put it forward um to get rid of the coastal height limit, it will fail.

So let the money so let them pay for um any failure of a ballot.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Michael, please unmute and begin.

Yes, hello.

I just wanted to say that um not everyone is against the tower.

Um, I think it's good to build more housing in the area.

And also I'll add that um whether or not it leads to the building of more affordable housing uh in the western area of San Diego, uh, it cannot be just assumed, but instead you can look at data and see that dense housing being built in high resource areas leads to more affordability uh everywhere due to what is known as the um like uh do due to people moving out of other houses because people just don't become created out of thin air.

So the falsehoods that were just said earlier uh need to be recognized as falsehoods.

Um, and we need to just simply put this on the ballot because building more dense housing increases affordability for everyone and conveniently increases the tax base for the city.

So it's really a win-win for everyone.

Thank you.

And with no other hands in the queue, this concludes testimony on sub-item M.

All right, thank you to uh members of the public.

I don't see anybody else I suspect uh it will be up to me.

Um so I live in Bird Rock.

I'm not part of respect Bird Rock, although I respect Bird Rock.

Um and I appreciate your work on trying to reduce speed limits on La Jolla Boulevard.

We're not gonna give up that fight yet.

Um I think there's particular challenges.

I think the most uh daunting challenge is what we saw in the midway.

Um community plan attempting to change the coastal height limit and how the courts have twice struck um two successful ballot measures down.

Um and so what it would take, I think is still being developed as to what the courts are actually expecting and interpreting CEQA in terms of these kinds of ballot measures.

I don't think we would want to do anything uh going forward.

Um I think the also not introducing where a new line could be drawn.

Says you want to put something big like this forward, you build to come community support, and you put some idea on the table.

I don't think people actually I don't, you know, while the original drafter of the ballot measure said it was arbitrary, I don't think it was arbitrary at all.

It was a nice clean break to separate neighborhoods.

I wouldn't want a line to be drawn midway through the blocks of Pacific Beach or La Jolla or any points north.

Um while the ballot measure original one was in 1972, the world has not stayed still.

Uh Sacramento has done a pretty good job of saying there is easy ways uh to update um or to pierce the coastal height limit.

Rose Creek Village was not almost blocked by any stretch of the imagination.

I was a sole voice in that conversation.

Nobody else agreed with me.

Piercing the coastal height limit if one can meet the regulations put in place by Sacramento for ministerial permits will continue to pervade us.

This is not the way to go.

There's no need to go through that.

Sacramento has made sure of that.

And if you actually said let's put the coastal zone as the new height limit boundary.

That excludes most of La Jolla.

And most of Pacific Beach for that matter.

So it's unclear again what limit you would draw where, but again, until the dust settles on the midway community plan and the attempt to remove that from the coastal height limit.

I think it would be uh premature to even uh have any further considerations.

So I'm not seeing anybody else on the lights.

Uh we will thank Mr.

Bobbins for bringing this idea forward for those who spoke in support and in opposition to this will consider it dispensed.

And uh we will now move on to sub item N.

Sarah.

Thank you, Chair.

Sub-item N is consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Shane Harris to balance budget priorities, human services and housing versus police, prosecutors, bail, and jails.

If you are watching on City TV or the live stream online and you'd like to call into the meeting to speak, please dial 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound.

Chair.

All right, Mr.

Harris, thank you for bringing this item forward.

Please introduce yourself for the record and let uh please begin your presentation.

Thank you, Chair.

Would you please uh place the briefly the uh So my name is Shane Harris.

Um Chair uh and rules committee.

I'm the uh head of the Office of the Public Advocate.

It's a non-governmental, non-organizational office I established, which serves as an independent community center watchdog group that amplifies residents' voices, increases government accountability, and ensures transparency in how city makes decisions that impact taxpayers.

You could take the slide down, thank you.

Thank you for hearing this proposal.

My office submitted under Council Policy 0021.

00021.

Today I'm asking you to advance a ballot measure to bring or to bring this as an ordinance.

Uh, Councilmember Ilo Rivera, Vivian Moreno, uh some of you sit on this uh on the budget and government efficiency committee.

Um that is long overdue to bring clarity to one of our city's budgets least understood items, how much San Diego City uh taxpayers are paying for the San Diego Central jail annually.

This proposal is not about defunding the police, something I have always opposed.

I have been and remain a strong supportive voice of law enforcement and funding for law enforcement.

My advocacy today is not a critique of the men and women serving our city as a call for transparency in one of the areas of our city's budget are payments related to the San Diego Central Jail.

For years, the city has quietly carried this cost, yet most residents have no idea it exists.

The annual budget does not clearly or openly disclose the amount that the city pays to the county for the jail facility.

This measure simply ensures that taxpayers can see that number plainly and transparently.

Media investigations and policy studies from the Los Angeles Time, KPBS, and Union Tribune have documented the concerns within the county jail, including our jail deaths.

The city charter mandates that we provide public health services and authorize the support for the poor historically.

Those responsibilities balance how the cities approach public spending before the shift death decades ago that incarceration filling uh that left incarceration filling roles it was never designed for.

The proposal seeks the following.

The city to take two for two straightforward uh steps.

One, conduct a decade by decade public analysis of all public safety expenditures related to the jail property.

Two, consider charter clarifications to ensure that our budget priorities are aligned with our responsibility and fully visible to the public.

This measure is not about shifting funds and absolutely not about defunding the police.

It is about truth, transparency, and taxpayer trust.

Right now, our city residents cannot look at the city's budget and see how much of their money goes towards the jail property, and that should never be the case in a modern accountable government.

Advancing this measure simply ensures San Diego can find financially see a clear accounting of their tax dollars in regard to our city in regard to our county jail.

Members of the committee, I ask for your full support to send this to either the budget committee or the full council.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, sir.

Uh Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

We have received one slip here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, you have indicated you wish to provide public comment on sub item N.

Hi, Blair Beekman.

Um this sounds like an interesting item.

I don't uh know how to better understand the depth of it, I'm afraid.

But um uh from what I hear, uh it's doing a nice thing.

It's definitely on the right track.

And um I was um the fact that I've been attending Oakland meetings uh as of late and uh recent San Diego meetings on on uh tech accountability practices with the OPRs and stuff.

It really has made me thinking about you know all the the work in these law enforcement tech things.

How does that connect with um our social services and human services and what is that bridge and connection?

And I think maybe is this item trying to do that also a bit?

And um how do we talk about our our law enforcement more and more in terms of uh human services and uh good luck how we can always be thinking in those terms?

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 to sub-item N, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Shane Harris to balance budget priorities, human services and housing versus police, prosecutors, bails, and jails.

We will begin testimony with John Stump.

Please unmute and provide your comment.

Well, uh Shane Harris has uh dedified something that is really important, and that's transparency and what it whose charge and who and what what are we paying for?

The those on the council who are relative newbies.

One time the city operated its own jails and its own municipal court system.

Um in one of those kind of republican um let's save money ideas.

The county took over the whole jail system.

What are the payments we're making to the county and what are we getting for it?

Uh I think Shane's right.

It should be this should be referred to a committee, probably the budget committee for further study.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Catherine Rhodes.

Please unmute and begin.

Hello, this is Catherine Red.

First, I want to thank Shane Harris.

You know, I've been um looking at all the financials of the city of San Diego for decades, and I have no clue about this.

I literally never heard about this.

And so what I would like to know, and maybe the IBA can, you know, give a little bit of a number is how much money annually do we give the county of San Diego to run the jails?

Because this seems like an agreement between the city and the county.

So um I would like you to send it to a committee, maybe even public safety committee, to see how much money the city of San Diego taxpayers it's paying for a county building and and when we don't have any opportunity to do anything about it because the sheriff is in charge of the jails, not the city of San Diego.

And um, so anyway, I had no clue about this, so thank you again, Shane.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Lori Saldania.

Please unmute and begin.

Yes, and in a time when masked men, primarily men, some women are abducting people off the streets of our city with no accountability and won't show their faces.

Transparency and law enforcement becomes more essential and more important than ever.

So thank you to Mr.

Harris for bringing this forward.

I want to ask that people pull out your Google maps and put in the geo group, a private correctional corporation that's profits have skyrocketed since the election last year, and they are located according to the maps at 202 West C Street in downtown San Diego, adjacent to the city's operational center and the jails.

And I would ask are the geo group who are profiting off criminalizing people at a rapid rate.

Are they part of the city's budget?

Are we subsidizing their corporation?

So thank you for bringing this forward.

Transparency and law enforcement is at a law historic low.

Please work to bring it up.

Thank you.

Thank you for that concluding remark.

And that concludes testimony on sub-item N.

All right.

Thank you, Sarah, and thank you to the members of the public for weighing in.

I'll turn it over to my colleagues, Councilmember Elo Rivera.

All right.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you for the submission.

I certainly understand what we're aiming for here.

I think it's important.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

I have significant concerns about what happens in the San Diego County jails and what that means on a human level for the folks who are in there, but also for us as a city on the liabilities that we're assuming.

That being said, I'm not sure ballot measure is the way to go here.

I I also know that the IBA over the last several years has done a lot of analysis on different type, I mean, every year on different are different types of spending, but has drilled down on public safety spending as well.

Um so um before requesting additional research and analysis, I think it'd be useful for us to know what work has already occurred, how that can be compiled.

Um I think far too often the IBA does work.

Um they produce a report and then we ask them to basically do the same thing that they've done before.

Um so Gillian, I don't know if you know kind of offhand what exists already that gets to the to what seems to be the spirit of the request here.

Um I'll pause there and see if you have any thoughts.

Thank you.

What comes to mind immediately is um in Baku Battel in our office did a deep dive on the police department budget, I believe, in 2020.

Um so we I think it's about 100 pages long.

Um that is on our website.

I I am not sure if it covers how much uh money is spent on county jails or addresses that question.

I'd have to refresh my memory on that piece.

Okay.

Perhaps there's an opportunity for for you all to kind of see what work has been done on that already, um, and then share that with us uh with the uh the council um to get basically get an assessment of what um what work already exists um in terms of detailing spending and what that's looked like over time.

Once we have that, um, and I will make a commitment that once we we hear that um we will share out what exists already um and and then um we can make some decisions to go from there.

I um I what I don't want to do though is send the IBA on a new research assignment for if the work has already been done.

Um and I like I said, I I don't think that this is the um a ballot measure is the way to achieve this goal, but I think it's a fair question to ask.

Um all of our budget needs to be analyzed and scrutinized, especially given the the the issues that we're having in terms of the structural budget deficit, um, and that this uh certainly um is even more true when um we are essentially contracting out work and that work seems to be costing the city um in both a financial way and again in a in a human way.

So um I'll leave that there, council president.

Um again appreciate uh the goal here.

Um certainly share the the desire to see um transparency and a full accounting of all of all of our funds um and we'll go from there.

All right, thank you, council member.

Uh not seeing anybody else in the lights.

I'll kind of jump in.

As I said uh at the um very first item that we heard, uh, whenever a constituents, Mr.

Harris or anybody else uh comes to council chambers, goes through the trouble of putting a ballot measure for some very basic questions.

City hall is failing.

Uh I'll take uh part ownership of that.

Um so uh you council member Yelovera, you asked uh the IBA.

Mr.

Yeah Yagan, you knew this was on.

Did you happen to have an opportunity to do any research on where this number is buried in the overall public safety budget?

I don't have any of that data at hand currently, Council President.

All right.

Um that being the case, um, I'm gonna make a request to our budget chair uh to docket this item to actually just do the disclosure uh for us to tease out.

Maybe the IBA can either dig up their old analysis or maybe refresh it.

Um a little bit of a heads up to the mayor's office that will be looking into this.

Uh I appreciate Mr.

Harris um clarifying that it's not an attempt to defund the police department.

Uh and if the budget committee um can't find the time because they're going to start getting very busy, uh, we will docket this at um rules committee.

So we'll see.

Uh so thank you, sir, for bringing this forward and uh highlighting things.

Um I know I think my colleagues appreciate that uh for all the good work we do and all the staff we have, a lot of things we don't catch our attention.

So when the public brings it up, it's very much appreciated, and we will follow up and then see what we want to do once we have that information.

I think that's the important part.

So that will close uh some item.

Uh we will now go to again Mr.

Harris for sub-item O.

Uh Sarah, please introduce the item.

Subitem O, consideration of ballot measure proposed by Shane Harris for free public parking at Balboa Park on Sundays.

All right, again, Mr.

Harris, please introduce yourself for the record and then begin your presentation.

Thank you so much, uh Chair, for uh agendizing the last discussion.

Um as you said, Councilmember Elo Rivera, um, it does cost a lot of money to put ballot measures up, so if there's another way we could deal with it, that would be great.

Chair, council members, thank you so much for the opportunity to share with you uh once again another proposal that my office has made.

My name is Shane Harris from the Office of the Public Advocate.

I'm here to present a community-driven ballot measure that does something simple but meaningful uh and it lets the people of San Diego decide whether Balboa Park should offer free public parking on Sundays.

Yesterday, as you know, way before I booked uh or proposed this measure for this meeting, the council approved new annual parking permit rates for both residents and non-residents.

But we all know daily parking rates aren't going anywhere.

Families who don't buy an annual pass will still face uh daily costs ranging from five to ten dollars for up to three hours uh in most spaces.

For many San Diegans, uh specifically going to Balboa Park, our seniors, working families, and residents on limited incomes, these fees add up and they become one more barrier to accessing accessing one of our city's greatest public treasures, Balboa Park.

My proposal doesn't ask the city to eliminate weekday revenues.

It doesn't upend our fee structure.

It simply says this once a week on Sunday, the park shall truly belong to everyone.

Let me explain why Sunday.

Sunday is the day when most families are off work.

It's a day when seniors plan outings, the day that kit when k kids are free, the day many cultural and community activities occur.

Across the country, cities have long recognized Sunday as the most equitable and accessible day for free or reduced cost civic access.

Los Angeles offers free metered parking on Sundays in many districts.

San Francisco, Portland, Phoenix, and Denver offer some form of Sunday or weekend parking relief in their cultural zones.

Washington, D.C., and I live, I have lived there, suspends meet meter parking on Sundays in many public corridors.

And in none of these cities have we seen a financial fiscal crisis because one of one free day.

In fact, most report increase weekend visitation, stronger museum attendance, and more foot traffic supporting local vendors.

Here in San Diego, the need is clear.

Public feedback consistently shows that family seniors and everyday residents are visiting Balboa Park and are considering visiting less often because of the rising cost of parking, which Councilmember Campillo, thank you for noting that yesterday.

And our own internal assessments will show that the city would lose roughly 0.03 percent of which is a minimal cost at the public benefit.

Balboa Park was created as a public comments, a piece of culture, a place of culture, nature, history, and togetherness, a place that should feel open everyone.

Free parking Sundays honors that purpose while maintaining fiscally responsibility.

Today I ask that you move this measure to the full council, and let's give the voters their say on Balboa Park.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Harris.

Uh with that, Sarah, please proceed with public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

We've received a few slips here in chambers.

We will begin with Blair Beekman.

You will be followed by Paul Krueger and the Chair of Ruby's.

Blair Beekman.

This is a nice item.

Nice to hear it.

Nice that uh these sort of items can be brought to uh council eventually.

Uh thank you for that.

And just uh city government practices.

What I'm interested in uh yesterday we had uh items on this on uh uh Balboa park uh parking futures uh future issues and uh the idea of sunsetting uh the parking program is uh was an important concept.

Keeping prices uh uh low and always having that on our minds uh that we work to keep the prices as low as possible, as low as two bucks, work to the two buck policy.

Um with a lot of these items, if we if we have them in the front of our minds is how we talk about our community issues, that goes a long way.

And I hope that that was what we can be doing with uh these sort of uh parking items.

And this item here, this ballot measure, I think is a really good one.

It's smart.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Paul Kruger.

Uh thank you.

I'm here uh uh Shane's request, and I'm happy to echo everything he said.

I think it was uh extremely well argued uh presentation for placing this on the ballot.

Uh you have endured many public forums in which an overwhelming number of people yesterday there was not a single proponent for the parking uh in Balboa Park have raised numerous concerns that have led to numerous amendments to the parking plan.

And yesterday, uh three of you um sided with those who have argued strenuously against parking.

I think uh anything that furthers a democratic voice in this issue uh is really fundamental to what we do, and I would urge you to put this on the ballot.

I'd like to hear each of you take a position on this, and certainly uh it warranted further study.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Ruiz.

Hello, my name is Latisa Ruiz, and thank you for your time.

Um I'm in favor of this proposal.

As we all know, our finances are really hitting every single one of us.

The economy is really creating uh difficulty and challenges for all of us, and families are not only having to pay for their kids to go to junior theater to go to ballet to valet to go to uh the zoo.

So we're asking as a parent and as a family community member um for you guys to consider one day of providing parents and families and even our young adults who are out there uh a relief from having to pay at least one day where they could go and enjoy our the nature and really enjoy our community.

So I would like for you to really consider in providing some relief to families because the burden financial burden is only growing among our community, and we all families should all have access to that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those to indicate if they wish to provide comment to sub item O, which is the consideration of a ballot measure proposed by Shane Harris for free public parking at Balboa Park on Sundays.

We will begin testimony with John Stump.

Please unmute and begin.

Hey, Shane's got a new great idea again.

And I agree with Paul Kruger.

You know, it's an embarrassment.

The city spent all this time to put in parking meters and issue placards and uh get enforcement for two or three million dollars in this two or three million dollars is a family who is so desperate for money, they're now looking for spare change in the couch commissions to keep the house mortgage going.

Please refer this to a committee, put it on the ballot.

Or eventually we're gonna have a revolution at the city of San Diego and a whole new charter going forward.

Shane, thank you very much.

Thanks for looking out for things.

Have a good day.

Thank you for your testimony.

Catherine Rhodes, please unmute and begin.

Hello, Catherine Rhodes.

I'm also here at the request of Shane Harris.

I'm also here at the request of Shane Harris.

I agree with this, but I think you should put it straight to the city council.

Um excuse me, since you um had it um at City Council for when Balbo Park.

Um excuse me, I guess it already went to the city council yesterday.

That was um not a thing.

So anyway, I think that you should um put it straight to the city council.

You know, the the people at the bridge club, they got their exemption, and people who are um who are volunteers and staff got their exemption, but I think you guys forgot about the public.

I think the public should have an exemption too.

And so what I think you should do is the same as them.

You should be able to park in level two or level three, just like um the visitors can on Sundays for free.

And so when you make your signs, you can say level two and level three are free for the public.

And I really like the Pepper Grove one is um right next to the playground, would be free.

Thank you.

Laurie Saldania, please unmute and begin.

Uh yes, thank you to Shane Harris for proposing this.

Uh there are three museum days uh that the various museums offer throughout the month.

Um, and being a retired older person on a fixed income, I pay close attention to that schedule.

And if they were to coordinate that with free parking as well, I think you would see an increase in participation.

And uh people who take their children who maybe would go to the museums for the first time uh because of that nexus of free museum day and free parking day.

Uh, I think they would then become customers and members ongoing.

So I would encourage the council as a way to boost attendance and make it more accessible and affordable for San Diegans to take up this proposal to make Sunday a free parking day and to encourage the various galleries, museums, and other businesses in the park to coordinate and offer free days as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And chair, this concludes testimony on sub item oh.

All right, thank you to members of the public, and thank you, Sarah, for that good work.

Uh, for those in chambers, you will note that we have lost quorum and we can no longer do any business of the uh committee.

Uh, this item didn't get finished.

Uh there was two other items being brought forth by councilmember Tempio that we didn't do.

Uh, under the regular uh calendar, this committee would not meet again until uh 2026.

Uh and as the chair of the committee, I will look at the possibility of a special convening a special meeting uh to fish finish out this year's business this calendar year.

Uh so stay tuned for news of that.

But uh until there's any other consideration of a special meeting, I will now adjourn this the meeting of the rules committee until next regularly scheduled meeting to be held Wednesday, January 28th, 2026 at 9 a.m.

We are adjourned.