OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

San Diego Rules Committee Meeting - February 18, 2026

Rules Committee — Wednesday, February 18, 2026
BodySan Diego, California
SessionRules Committee
DateWednesday, February 18, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 3:09:01

Transcript — Verbatim
28:07

That theme one, two, three four.

29:21

All right, good morning and welcome to the Rules Committee meeting of February eighteenth, twenty twenty-six.

29:26

So let me uh start out by apologizing to those of you in the audience that have been waiting uh waiting patiently.

29:34

And a special apology to those that have been part are participating remotely that have been wondering just what the heck's going on.

29:42

In simple fashion, um, we had some IT updates in the system yesterday that apparently were not actually double checked to make sure it worked.

29:52

Um we all know um I'm sure we've had personal experiences in that regard.

30:00

Um and we are unable to solve that problem this morning.

30:03

It may be fixed later this morning.

30:08

But we've consulted the fact that a lot of good people have worked very hard to be prepared for this committee.

30:14

This committee has important business to conduct.

30:18

Um, and so we are going to proceed with the meeting with several caveats.

30:26

If you are connecting remotely by Zoom, you will not see a presentation, you will not see a video.

30:36

Um, but we can hear you, and hopefully you can hear us.

30:42

If you call in remotely, we can hear you.

30:47

So listen in to the meeting.

30:52

For those of us here in chambers, the screens that we usually look at to display the slide deck presentations do not work.

31:03

So you will not see the slide deck presentations either on the four screens that we have here in chambers, nor will you see it on the live feed there in the back.

31:16

If anybody wants a copy of a slide presentation, please let us know, and we will endeavor to get you a hard copy that you can follow along.

31:27

Uh if you have a computer or a phone, of course, you can get into the city's website and look at the slide deck that way.

31:37

But we feel confident that both the committee can conduct its business, the public can weigh in, whether it's here in person or remotely, and we can do the business of the committee.

31:50

Um again, I want to thank everybody for their patience.

31:56

And we will now start.

32:00

So, Jo Lakava, Councilmember for District 1, Chair of the Committee.

32:04

So, special instructions, so please listen carefully, Sarah about how the public can participate in today's meeting.

32:13

Thank you, Chair Lakava.

32:15

I'm sorry.

32:16

Is that okay?

32:16

Okay, checking with the city attorney's office.

32:19

Thank you, Sarah.

32:21

Thank you, Chair Lakava.

32:23

And while members of the public are able to attend the meeting in person, this meeting is also being televised on City TV 24, and the council administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform.

32:37

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

32:44

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

32:51

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

32:56

We appreciate the public's cooperation.

32:58

Chair Lacava.

33:00

Thank you, Sarah.

33:01

And I may have forgotten to mention, but if you watch uh City TV, whether you do that on your computer or on your TV, you will be able to see the conduct of what is happening in chambers, but you will not see a slide deck appear during the presentation stages of the committee meeting.

33:20

So without objection uh from my colleagues, I will call the role for the rules committee meeting of Wednesday, February 18th, 2026 to order.

33:30

Vice Chair, Council President Pro Tem Kent Lee.

33:34

Here.

33:34

Councilmember Raul Campillo.

33:36

Here.

33:37

Councilmember Vivian Moreno.

33:39

Present.

33:40

And Councilmember Sean Ilo Rivera.

33:44

I am present.

33:45

Can I uh go ahead and read the disclaimer?

33:48

Please.

33:49

All right.

33:50

I'm notifying the rules committee that I will be attending the meeting today remotely due to just cause related to contagious illness.

33:56

Pursuant to the Brown Act, I am disclosing that there are no individuals 18 years of age or older present in the room with me.

34:03

I will update this disclosure if it changes during the course of the meeting.

34:08

All right.

34:09

Thank you, sir.

34:10

Uh also attending the meeting today, Gillian Andalina with the office of the independent budget analyst, Hilda Mendoza with the Office of the City Attorney, Matt Yeagan with the Office of Mayor Tagloria, Abby Reuter, the committee consultant.

34:24

Sarah, please continue with public comment instructions.

34:28

Thank you, Chair.

34:29

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

34:35

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

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Public Engagement█████████████████████████████████████████████46%
Procedural█████████████████████21%
Public Comment█████████████████17%
Technology and Innovation████4%
Cannabis Regulation███3%
Public Safety███3%
Budget Equity Analysis██2%
Public Health██2%
Parking Management█1%
Summary of Proceedings

San Diego Rules Committee Meeting - February 18, 2026

This meeting of the San Diego City Council Rules Committee, chaired by Councilmember Lakava, addressed transparency and public participation in city fee and ballot measure processes, as well as compliance with new state law SB 707. The meeting experienced significant technical difficulties with IT systems, but proceeded with in-person and limited remote participation. Key outcomes included the failure of two proposed policy changes to strengthen fee transparency, and an informational discussion on updating council rules to align with SB 707, with broad support for preserving group presentation and time-seeding options.

Consent Calendar

  • Item 1: Approval of the committee minutes from January 28, 2026. Passed unanimously with a voice vote (all members present voting yes).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Non-Agenda Public Comment:
    • Jan Bourjois urged the city not to rely on tax increases, opposed paid parking in East Village and Balboa Park, and called for budget cuts.
    • Paul Krueger expressed disappointment that the council had not held a vote to reverse Balboa Park parking charges, noting 81% public opposition and signature efforts for a ballot measure.
    • Blair Beekman (via Zoom from Hawaii) discussed tech accountability and the need for local practices to address global issues.
    • Madison warned against federal marijuana rescheduling, citing harms to youth and calling for local policy centered on public health.
    • Becky Rapp urged the committee to prioritize enforcement of existing laws, especially tax collection from marijuana businesses, as a step toward budget stability.
    • Terry Ann Skelly asked about law enforcement decoy operations and code enforcement for flavored marijuana products, stressing the importance of rules and policies for youth protection.
    • Kathleen Lippitt criticized the city council for disenfranchising residents and planning groups, citing increased appeal fees and ministerial project processing.
    • Judy Strang raised concerns about the optics of county leadership and urged the Democratic council members to address inclusivity in the county board.
  • Public Comment on Items 2 & 3:
    • Paul Krueger strongly supported the proposals, citing the lack of accurate information in the trash fee notice and the importance of clarity to rebuild trust.
    • Jeff Hoider supported the proposals for setting clear expectations to reduce contention.
    • John Stump supported the action, arguing that the trash fee is effectively a tax because property owners cannot opt out, and urged the council to control spending.
    • Catherine Douglas supported the proposals with the acronym ACT: Accountability, Clarity, Transparency, citing the "bait and switch" in the trash and Balboa Park issues.
    • Blair Beekman supported the proposals, emphasizing the need for clarity and new economic models to avoid over-reliance on taxation.
  • Public Comment on Item 4 (SB 707):
    • Jeff Hoider (submitting a presentation) urged keeping time-seeding and group presentations, opposing a minimum group size of 5-10, and suggested allowing smaller groups and preserving the current process.
    • Christine Martinez (Arts and Culture San Diego) supported keeping time-seeding and group presentations, but noted the 5-10 person minimum could be difficult for smaller groups.
    • Paul Krueger strongly opposed eliminating time-seeding, citing its positive impact on democracy (e.g., the bonus ADU program) and noting it is used by both community groups and industry groups.
    • Victoria Labuzo (Chair, Community Planners Committee) presented the "Seat at the Table" proposal, arguing that community planning groups should receive structured presentation time similar to project applicants, as they provide detailed neighborhood-scale analysis.
    • Peggy Walker favored option A (formalizing group presentations) and opposed eliminating the virtual queue at the end of in-person testimony, as it could confuse remote participants.
    • Sally Small supported group presentations and time-seeding, emphasizing the need for virtual access for disabled, seniors, and working people.
    • Becky Rapp urged keeping virtual public comment strong and accessible, supporting equal time but not at the expense of reducing access.
    • Peter Komiski (Balboa Park Cultural Partnership) supported option A with amendments, urging retention of time-seeding and lowering the group minimum.
    • Judy Strang objected to ending the virtual queue when in-person testimony finishes, as it would disadvantage remote participants balancing work and family.
    • Catherine Douglas asked for clarification on the 5-10 person group limit and opposed suspending time-seeding.
    • Blair Beekman emphasized the importance of decorum and respectful public participation.
    • John Stump called for one rule for all, criticizing unequal treatment of lobbyists and supporters, and urged consistency.
    • Madison asked to keep the five-minute virtual queue timer to ensure fair access for remote speakers.

Discussion Items

  • Items 2 & 3 (Joint Presentation): Councilmember Campillo's staff presented two proposals: (2) amendments to Council Policy 000-21 to require a cost of service study or economic impact analysis before placing a ballot measure that could enable future fees; (3) a new council policy to require clear language in Prop 218 notices, including an explicit statement that a fee is proposed, explanation of protest rights, and public review of the notice before mailing. The Independent Budget Analyst (Gillian Andalina) noted that the proposals could create timeline and cost impacts, potentially delaying future ballot measures, and that the city currently complies with Prop 218. Council debate: Councilmember Lee questioned the broad scope and operational implications. Councilmember Moreno opposed both items, arguing they create unnecessary hurdles, limit legislative authority, and that the city already exceeds legal requirements. Councilmember Lakava noted the lack of a fiscal analysis in the staff report and the inconsistency between the title and text of Section 6. Councilmember Campillo defended the proposals as essential for transparency and trust. No second was offered for the motions on either item, so both motions failed.
  • Item 4 (Informational – SB 707 Compliance): Senior Policy Advisor Abby Reuter presented proposed changes to council rules to comply with SB 707, effective July 1, 2026, covering agenda translation, a policy on disruption to public access, and equal treatment of in-person and virtual public comment. Options for equal time allotment included: (A) formalizing group presentations for both in-person and virtual participants (with a proposed 5-10 person minimum, 48-hour sign-up, and 2-hour advance submission of materials), (B) temporarily suspending time-seeding, or (C) ending time-seeding. The city clerk noted operational impacts on staff workload and resources. Councilmembers and the public overwhelmingly favored Option A, with calls to remove the 5-10 person minimum and to maintain the virtual queue until the end of in-person testimony. Councilmember Campillo asked the city attorney to research the legal implications of a minimum group size. Council President Lakava stated his opposition to eliminating time-seeding and emphasized the importance of balancing efficiency and public participation. No action was taken as the item was informational.

Key Outcomes

  • Item 2 (Amendments to Council Policy 000-21): Motion to forward to city council failed due to lack of a second. No further action.
  • Item 3 (New Council Policy on Property-Related Fees): Motion to forward to city council failed due to lack of a second. No further action.
  • Item 4 (SB 707 Rules of Council Amendments): Informational only. The committee received public input and direction from members. The item will return as an action item at the March 18, 2026 Rules Committee meeting, with a proposed first reading at the April 2026 City Council meeting to meet the July 1, 2026 compliance deadline.
  • Meeting Adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at approximately [time not specified] to the next regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, March 18, 2026, at 9:00 a.m.

Meeting Transcript

That theme one, two, three four. All right, good morning and welcome to the Rules Committee meeting of February eighteenth, twenty twenty-six. So let me uh start out by apologizing to those of you in the audience that have been waiting uh waiting patiently. And a special apology to those that have been part are participating remotely that have been wondering just what the heck's going on. In simple fashion, um, we had some IT updates in the system yesterday that apparently were not actually double checked to make sure it worked. Um we all know um I'm sure we've had personal experiences in that regard. Um and we are unable to solve that problem this morning. It may be fixed later this morning. But we've consulted the fact that a lot of good people have worked very hard to be prepared for this committee. This committee has important business to conduct. Um, and so we are going to proceed with the meeting with several caveats. If you are connecting remotely by Zoom, you will not see a presentation, you will not see a video. Um, but we can hear you, and hopefully you can hear us. If you call in remotely, we can hear you. So listen in to the meeting. For those of us here in chambers, the screens that we usually look at to display the slide deck presentations do not work. So you will not see the slide deck presentations either on the four screens that we have here in chambers, nor will you see it on the live feed there in the back. If anybody wants a copy of a slide presentation, please let us know, and we will endeavor to get you a hard copy that you can follow along. Uh if you have a computer or a phone, of course, you can get into the city's website and look at the slide deck that way. But we feel confident that both the committee can conduct its business, the public can weigh in, whether it's here in person or remotely, and we can do the business of the committee. Um again, I want to thank everybody for their patience. And we will now start. So, Jo Lakava, Councilmember for District 1, Chair of the Committee. So, special instructions, so please listen carefully, Sarah about how the public can participate in today's meeting. Thank you, Chair Lakava. I'm sorry. Is that okay? Okay, checking with the city attorney's office. Thank you, Sarah. Thank you, Chair Lakava. And while members of the public are able to attend the meeting in person, this meeting is also being televised on City TV 24, and the council administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform. Members of the public who wish to provide virtual testimony must enter the virtual queue by raising their hand before the virtual queue closes. This queue will close when the last virtual speaker finishes speaking or five minutes after in-person testimony ends, whichever occurs first. This will allow for better meeting management between the two platforms and ensure the committee is able to manage and conduct city business. We appreciate the public's cooperation. Chair Lacava. Thank you, Sarah. And I may have forgotten to mention, but if you watch uh City TV, whether you do that on your computer or on your TV, you will be able to see the conduct of what is happening in chambers, but you will not see a slide deck appear during the presentation stages of the committee meeting. So without objection uh from my colleagues, I will call the role for the rules committee meeting of Wednesday, February 18th, 2026 to order. Vice Chair, Council President Pro Tem Kent Lee. Here. Councilmember Raul Campillo. Here. Councilmember Vivian Moreno. Present. And Councilmember Sean Ilo Rivera. I am present. Can I uh go ahead and read the disclaimer? Please. All right.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com