HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-10; City Council Legislative Subcommittee; 03; Draft City of Carlsbad 2025 Legislative PlatformMeeting Date: Dec. 10, 2024
To: Legislative Subcommittee
From: Jason Haber, Intergovernmental Affairs Director
Staff Contact: Jason Haber, jason.haber@carlsbadca.gov
Subject: Draft City of Carlsbad 2025 Legislative Platform
District: All
Recommended Action
Discuss and determine proposed amendments to the City of Carlsbad Legislative Platform,
including the proposed 2025 Legislative Priorities, to recommend to the City Council.
Discussion
The attached redline Draft City of Carlsbad 2025 Legislative Platform (Exhibit 1) presents proposed
amendments recommended by city staff and incorporates feedback provided by the City Council
Legislative Subcommittee at its meeting on Nov. 12, 2024.
Revisions proposed in response to Subcommittee feedback are found in the following position
statements in Exhibit 1:
1.Page 4 – Community Services – Seniors (c)
2.Page 5 – Environmental Quality – Climate Change (b)
3.Page 7 – Environmental Quality – Solid Waste, Recycling and Diversion (i)
4.Page 14 – Governance, Transparency and Labor Relations – Governance and Ethics (e)
5.Page 23 – Public Safety – Homelessness (g)
Climate Change
The Subcommittee, at its Nov. 12 meeting, requested additional information about proposed position
statement (c) under Environmental Quality – Climate Change, which reads as follows:
Environmental Quality – Climate Change
(c)Support measures that credit Metropolitan Planning Organizations for emissions
reductions associated with regional electric vehicle adoption.
According to the San Diego Association of Governments website (www.sandag.org), in accordance
with state law (SB 375 of 2008, Steinberg), SANDAG developed a Sustainable Communities Strategy
as part of the 2021 Regional Plan to address key challenges threatening our environment and quality
of life: congestion, social inequality, air pollution, and climate change. The plan addresses these
problems by integrating the regional transportation system with land-use patterns that
accommodate our region’s future employment and housing needs while reducing greenhouse gases
and protecting sensitive habitats. The Sustainable Communities Strategy demonstrates how
LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 1 of 56
development patterns and the future transportation network, policies, and programs work together
to achieve greenhouse gas emission targets for cars and light trucks established by the California Air
Resources Board. As the region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, if SANDAG cannot meet
targets set through the Sustainable Communities Strategy, they are responsible for developing an
Alternative Planning Strategy that demonstrates how the emission targets could be achieved.
SANDAG staff support the proposed position statement because electric vehicle adoption is not
directly credited to Metropolitan Planning Organizations within the Sustainable Communities
Strategy due to the California Air Resources Board's interpretation that electric vehicle adoption is a
result of statewide law, policies, and incentives, not regional ones.
Coastal Issues
In response to public comments received at its Nov. 12 meeting concerning position statements (l)
and (m) under Environmental Quality - Coastal Issues, the Subcommittee requested to revisit these
items and receive an update from staff on coastal protection devices such as seawalls. The position
statements in question read as follows:
Environmental Quality – Coastal Issues
(l) Support legislation that provides direction to the California Coastal Commission through
changes to the Coastal Act that would allow for construction of seawalls or other
shoreline protection devices for existing structures, as defined by a local jurisdiction’s
Local Coastal Program and up to the date of adoption of amendments to the Local
Coastal Program.
(m) Oppose legislation that would backdate the consideration date of existing structures to
only those that existed prior to establishment of the Coastal Act (January 1, 1977).
Recognizing that the construction of seawalls can negatively affect natural beach nourishment
processes, these position statements provide policy guidance on the difficult choice of prioritizing
property rights and city infrastructure versus concerns about coastal erosion and sand retention.
These statements are included largely in response to the California Coastal Commission staff’s
interpretation and application of the California Coastal Act in a manner that prioritizes coastal
protection over the protection of private property and public infrastructure investments. As cities
such as Carlsbad have attempted to amend their Local Coastal Plans to address the impacts of sea
level rise, Coastal Commission staff have required the inclusion of policies that would not allow for
construction of seawalls or other shoreline protection devices for new and existing development
that was legally constructed following the establishment of the Coastal Act (Jan. 1, 1977).
In Carlsbad, including such policies could leave several homes and businesses in the northern part
of the city, as well as public infrastructure improvements along Carlsbad Boulevard (i.e., roadways,
utilities, etc.) subject to and unable to be protected from potentially catastrophic coastal flooding
and erosion. Council Memos, dated Sept. 12, 2024, and Nov. 2, 2023 (Exhibits 2 and 3) provide
more information on the city’s comprehensive Local Coastal Plan Amendment covering sea-level
rise policies.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 2 of 56
Labor Relations
The Subcommittee also requested additional information about proposed position statement (f)
under Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations - Labor Relations. This statement reads as
follows:
Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations - Labor Relations
(f) Support measures that increase local authority to take adverse employment actions while
an active complaint or grievance is being investigated.
Provisions in the California Labor Code, including the California’s Whistleblower Protection Act,
make it unlawful for an employer to retaliate against an employee who engages in “protected
activity.” “Protected activity” includes filing a complaint or grievance. It also includes disclosing
information the employee reasonably believes involves a violation of law, or refusing to participate
in activity that would involve a violation of law. If an employer takes “adverse action” against an
employee within 90 days after the employee engaged in protected activity, the adverse action is
presumed to be retaliatory unless the employer proves otherwise. “Adverse action” includes
disciplining or discharging an employee. It may also include reassigning an employee, placing an
employee on leave or giving an employee a negative performance review.
The position statement was proposed by the Human Resources Department because it is
sometimes necessary for an employer to take immediate action against an employee who has
engaged in protected activity to ensure a safe and/or productive work environment for others. The
retaliation presumption discourages an employer from taking this necessary action even when the
action is well-supported and unrelated to the protected activity.
Governance and Ethics
The Subcommittee also requested additional information about the proposed position statements
(e), (f), and (g) under Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations – Governance and Ethics.
These statements read as follows:
Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations – Governance and Ethics
(e) Support measures that clarify whether the records of minors are subject to release
pursuant to the Public Records Act, with a goal of protecting the identity of minors.
(f) Support measures that prohibit abuse of the Public Records Act as a means to obtain
periodic market data.
(g) Support measures that prohibit abuse of the Public Records Act as a means to advance
serial lawsuits.
Position statement (e) was proposed by the Police Department in response to concerns stemming
from an investigative reporter’s public records request for the names of the juvenile victims of the
2010 Kelly Elementary School shooting who are now adults. The California Public Records Act
provides that the identities of crime victims who are minors shall not be released. However, the law
is silent as to whether that information is subject to release once those victims reach adulthood.
This statement is proposed in the interest of protecting juvenile crime victims from future
detrimental impacts that could arise from having their identity exposed once they become adults.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 3 of 56
As noted above, this proposed statement has been modified to reflect its intent more clearly.
Position statement (f) was proposed by the Office of the City Clerk to address what has become a
regular, recurring practice of private businesses to request public records (such as the name and
addresses of new business licensees, or the subjects of code enforcement actions) for marketing
and business development purposes. A prohibition on this practice is recommended due to the
excessive time burden these requests demand of the city’s limited resources.
Position statement (g) was also proposed by the Office of the City Clerk to address another
problematic trend whereby requestors file excessively complex and/or numerous public records
requests in the hopes of documenting agency non-compliance with the Public Records Act for the
purpose of filing lawsuits and collecting damages for legal fees. A prohibition on this practice is also
recommended due to the excessive time burden these requests demand of the city’s limited
resources.
Public Safety – Miscellaneous
The Subcommittee also requested additional information regarding the San Diego Law Enforcement
Coordination Center as it relates to position statement (h) under Public Safety – Miscellaneous,
which reads as follows:
(h) Support measures to provide funding to support the San Diego Law Enforcement
Coordination Center, a collaborative partnership among federal, state and local law
enforcement/public safety agencies focused on enhancing coordination, information
sharing, regional preparedness, training and investigative support/analysis for first
responders and other public and private partners in the region.
According to the agency’s website (www.sdlecc.org):
The San Diego Law Enforcement Coordination Center (SD-LECC) is the all crimes, all hazards
fusion center and serves as the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (SD/I HIDTA) Investigative
Support Center (ISC) for the San Diego and Imperial County region. The SD-LECC also serves as
the Regional Threat Assessment Center (RTAC) for San Diego and Imperial counties and is part
of the California State Threat Assessment System (STAS). The SD-LECC operates as a
collaborative partnership among federal, state and local law enforcement/public safety
agencies focused on enhancing coordination, information sharing, regional preparedness,
training and investigative support/analysis for first responders and other public and private
partners in the region.
Additional information highlighting the San Diego Law Enforcement Coordination Center’s mission,
service territory, and operations is provided in Exhibit 4.
This item will provide an opportunity to discuss any additional Subcommittee recommendations
and provide feedback to staff to prepare the document for City Council consideration.
Next Steps
A resolution approving the City of Carlsbad 2025 Legislative Platform is planned to be presented for
City Council consideration on January 14, 2025.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 4 of 56
Exhibits
1. Redline Draft City of Carlsbad 2025 Legislative Platform
2. Council Memorandum dated Sept. 12, 2024
3. Council Memorandum dated Nov. 2, 2023
4. San Diego Law Enforcement Coordination Center information (www.sdlecc.org)
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 5 of 56
Exhibit 1
CITY OF CARLSBAD
20254 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
The Legislative Platform provides a foundation for the City of Carlsbad’s
Intergovernmental Affairs Program and enables the city to efficiently and effectively
address intergovernmental and legislative matters affecting the city and its
communities. The purpose of this Legislative Platform is to clearly express the city's
position on, and provide a basis for prioritizing and acting upon, a broad range of
intergovernmental and legislative matters that may impact the city's ability to operate
effectively.
The City Council has identified the Guiding Principles, Legislative Priorities and Position
Statements comprising this Legislative Platform to guide the city’s advocacy efforts. The
city’s legislative positions are organized under a framework modeled after the League of
California Cities’ Summary of Existing Policy and Guiding Principles. The Legislative
Platform will be reviewed annually by the City Council Legislative Subcommittee and
amended as needed by the City Council.
Contents
•Guiding Principles
•20254 Legislative Priorities
•20254 Legislative Platform: Position Statements
1. Community Services
Arts, Cultural Resources, Historic Preservation
and Education
Child Care
Park Bond Funds
Public Parks/Recreational Facilities
Public Libraries
Seniors
Healthy Cities
2.Environmental Quality
Climate ChangeCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Hazardous Materials
Solid Waste, Recycling and Diversion Utilities
Coastal Issues
3. Water
General PrinciplesWater ConservationWater Recycling
Water QualityWater Storage & Conveyance SystemsNew TechnologyFinancial Considerations
4.Governance, Transparency and Labor Relations
Labor Relations
Workers’ Compensation
Governance and Ethics
Elected Officials
5.Housing, Community and Economic Development
Planning and Zoning
Housing
Subdivision Map Act
Economic Development
6.Public Safety
Fire Services
Emergency Services and Preparedness
Law Enforcement
Drugs and Alcohol
Homelessness
Miscellaneous
7.Revenue and Taxation
State Mandates
8.Transportation, Communication and Public Works
Transportation
Public Works
Contracts
Telecommunications
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 6 of 56
2
Guiding Principles
I. Preserve Local Control - The city supports the broadest authority for our citizens and
the City Council to make decisions and provide public services locally. As cities are
voluntarily created by the residents of a community to provide local self-government
and to make decisions at the local level to best meet the diverse needs of the
community, the city opposes preemption of local control.
II. Maintain Fiscal Responsibility — The city supports legislative and budget measures
that protect and enhance its existing funding sources, revenue base and control over
local government budgeting. The city opposes efforts to shift local funds to the county,
state or federal governments, diminish its revenue base or impose new mandates that
are unfunded or inadequately funded.
III. Protect Quality of Life — The city supports state legislation and funding that
preserve the safety, security, cultural resources and well-being of our residents,
workers, businesses and visitors. The city opposes efforts that would negatively impact
the infrastructure, public health and safety, community development, equitable
community services, cultural integrity and environmental programs and other city
efforts to maintain and enhance the quality of life in Carlsbad.
20254 Legislative Priorities
The city’s advocacy efforts will focus primarily on advancing the strategic goals adopted
by the City Council, including:
1. Community Character
2. Quality of Life & Safety
3. Sustainability & the Natural Environment
4. Economic Vitality
5. Organizational Excellence & Fiscal Health
20254 Legislative Platform: Position Statements
1. Community Services
Arts, Cultural Resources, Historic Preservation and Education
(a) Support funding and legislation that support local arts and culture,
acknowledges the community’s history and current conditions and
recognizes the need for preservation and education.
Child Care
(a) Support measures that reduce regulatory complexities and the burden of
insurance costs for child care providers.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 7 of 56
3
(b) Support funding for the construction, renovation and maintenance of
child care facilities.
(c) Support the provision of reasonable tax incentives for employers who
offer child care services.
(d) Support legislation that restores local control over child care services in
areas such as licensure, staffing, education and training.
Park Bond Funds
(a) Support statewide park bond measures that include a component that
provides per capita grants to cities and counties.
(b) Oppose statewide park bond measures that tie local eligibility for grant
funds to non-park related issues, such as rent control or housing element
status.
Public Parks/Recreational Facilities
(a) Support increased and sustainable funding for community park facilities,
open space, and recreation programs.
(b) Support legislation that preserves the ability to implement integrated
pest management practices, a science-based, decision-making process
that combines biological, physical and chemical tools in a way that
achieves pest control objectives while minimizing economic, health, and
environmental risk.
(c) Support measures that clarify and streamline the process for obtaining a
long-term lease/operating agreement to allow a city to assume the cost
and responsibility for maintenance and operation of State Parks lands
within its jurisdiction.
Public Libraries
(a) Support increased and sustainable funding for local public libraries and
the State Library.
(b) Oppose Internet filtering laws that apply to publicly funded libraries.
(c) Support legislation that preserves library patron privacy.
(d) Support legislation that preserves net neutrality.
Seniors
(a) Support legislation that fosters independence of older Californians.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 8 of 56
4
(b) Support legislation that advances the objectives of the Age Friendly
Carlsbad Action Plan, including increased and sustainable funding for
senior transportation services, social and civic engagement programs and
senior housing.
(b)(c) Support legislation that empowers cities to protect access to essential
services (i.e., grocery, pharmacy, housing) for senior residents.
Healthy Cities
(a) Support legislation that recognizes and prevents adverse impacts
affecting public health and the welfare of all residents, visitors and
workers, and especially the young.
(b) Support initiatives that encourage cities to help parents make healthy
family choices; create healthy schools; provide access to healthy and
affordable foods; and adopt city design and planning principles that
promote physical activity.
(c) Support initiatives that encourage cities to involve youth, especially
middle and high school students, with city health-related programs,
including those promoting mental and psychological well-being.
(d) Support initiatives that encourage cities to address the needs of an aging
population through local and statewide planning, education and
programming.
(e) Support legislation that preserves the authority of local agencies to
establish their own rules and regulations pertaining to community
recreational activities.
(f) Support funding for local communities attempting to address the needs
of migrant workers.
2. Environmental Quality
(a) Support legislation that complements the city’s Environmental and
Sustainability Guiding Principles.
(b) Support funding and legislation to improve and protect recreational
water quality from contamination, support effective habitat management
practices, and create and maintain public open space.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 9 of 56
5
(c) Support funding and legislation that facilitates and protects local control
of habitat management planning, maintenance and administration.
(d) Support legislation that identifies the use of restrictive covenants as an
acceptable instrument for documenting open space dedications,
including for mitigation purposes.
(e) Support funding and legislation that supports climate change adaptation
and resilience efforts.
Climate Change
(a) (a) Support funding and legislation that promotes market penetration
and infrastructure expansion for zero emission electric and alternative
fuel vehicles and small off-road engines, such as those found in
landscaping equipment and generators.
(b) Support measures that promote clean fleet transitions while providing
flexible compliance timelines for vehicles and equipment based on
documented limitations in product availability, and cost-prohibitive
market conditions.
(c) Support measures that credit Metropolitan Planning Organizations for
emissions reductions associated with regional electric vehicle adoption.
(a)(d) Support funding and legislation that facilitates energy efficiency and
decarbonization practices and actions to mitigate the sources of
greenhouse gas emissions in buildings.
(b)(e) Support funding and legislation that promotes greenhouse gas emissions
reductions and/or the capture, removal, sequestration and secure
storage of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
(c)(f) Support legislation that reduces the amount of ozone depleting
compounds discharged into the atmosphere.
(d)(g) Support funding and legislation that promotes the use and purchase of
clean alternative energy through the development of renewable energy
resources and waste-to-energy technologies.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
(a) Support legislation that either requires citizen initiatives to comply with
CEQA before being placed on the ballot or exempting from this
requirement a City Council initiated ballot measure dealing with the same
subject matter on the same ballot.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 10 of 56
6
(b) Support legislation that streamlines federal and state environmental
review, eliminates procedural redundancies, and limits court reviews of
environmental documentation.
Hazardous Materials
(a) Support efforts for the proper and cost-effective disposal of solid,
hazardous and medical waste.
(b) Oppose legislation that makes local municipalities financially responsible
for the removal, abatement or mitigation of hazardous materials.
(c) Support funding and legislation that addresses concerns regarding the
safe handling and storage of nuclear waste generated at the
decommissioned San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, particularly as it
relates to the vulnerability to damage from seismic activity, landslides,
tsunamis and sea level rise.
Solid Waste, Recycling and Diversion
(a) Support legislation that preserves the ability of local governments to
regulate solid waste and recyclable materials.
(b) Support measures that promote procurement and market development
of recyclable and recycled materials.
(c) Support legislation that promotes source reduction, sustainability and re-
use measures.
(d) Oppose legislation regulating "flow control" of solid waste materials.
(e) Support measures that promote the recycling and reclaiming of natural
resources, including water, timber, oil, gas minerals and earth metals.
(f) Support measures that would make low-interest loans and grants
available to local agencies for programs that encourage the recycling and
reclaiming of resources.
(g) Support measures that would reduce the use of single-use plastics and
Styrofoam packaging and prevent these materials from entering the
waste stream, including public education and community partnership
initiatives.
(h) Support legislation that facilitates development of local and regional
recycling and composting facilities.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 11 of 56
7
(e)(i) Support funding to help cities and small businesses comply with state-
mandated extended producer responsibility regulations that require
manufacturers of single-use packaging and plastic food service ware to
address the environmental impacts of plastic pollution.
Utilities
(a) Support legislation that establishes regulatory and market mechanisms to
maximize the state’s energy self-sufficiency and security.
(b) Support legislation that establishes regulatory and market mechanisms
that promote competition and reasonable, justifiable energy prices with
programs to support low-income groups.
(c) Support legislation that aggressively pursues refunds to consumers for
rates that have been determined to be unjust or unreasonable.
(d) Support legislation that expedites the development of needed
infrastructure (e.g., generation, transmission, and distribution) to create
robust and functional markets.
(e) Support legislation that increases the diversity of the state’s and region’s
energy resources, particularly increasing the use of higher-efficiency,
clean distributed generation (e.g., combined heat and power) and
renewable resources.
(f) Support legislation that encourages and incentivizes the adoption of new
and emerging technologies that provide real-time pricing to promote
better price response by consumers.
(g) Support legislation that promotes municipal renewable energy
development.
(h) Support legislation that preserves and protects net energy metering to
continue incentivizing investments in rooftop solar energy systems.
(i) Support legislation that provides funding to increase energy efficiency,
improve reliability and reduce peak demand, including for demand-side
management programs.
(j) Support legislation that provides funding for renewable energy
generation and energy storage projects.
(k) Support legislation that minimizes adverse environmental impacts of the
state’s and the region’s energy use.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 12 of 56
8
(l) Support funding and legislation that promotes the development of
alternative energy sources.
(m) Support legislation that prohibits the California Energy Commission from
issuing any license to operate a power plant unless and until it has
received the report required by the California Coastal Commission under
the Warren-Alquist Act.
(n) Support legislation that protects competitive neutrality, procurement
autonomy, ratepayer affordability, reliability, decarbonization and social
equity initiatives of community choice aggregation.
(o) Support legislation that establishes rules under which Public Safety
Power Shutoff events can be undertaken.
Coastal Issues
(a) Support measures that provide funding for urban waterfront restoration
and enhancement.
(b) Support legislation that would promote and provide funding for the
restoration, preservation and enhancement of beaches, beachfront
property and bluffs, including climate change adaptation efforts, local
and regional sand replenishment efforts, as well as coastal access, public
infrastructure and parking.
(b)(c) Support measures that allow Coastal Zone wetland mitigation to occur
outside of the impacted jurisdiction.
(cd) Support measures that would preserve and extend the authority of cities
over land use regulations concerning the placement of onshore facilities
which service offshore oil drilling.
(ed) Support legislation that requires the double hulling of oil tankers.
(fe) Support legislation that promotes aquatic research, education and
aquaculture.
(fg) Oppose any new offshore oil and gas leasing, drilling and exploration in
all State of California and U.S. waters in the Pacific Ocean.
(hg) Support decommissioning of existing offshore oil drilling and pipeline
infrastructure in all State of California and U.S. waters off the California
coast.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 13 of 56
9
(ih) Support legislation providing that if Coastal Commission staff has an
opportunity to participate in local and or regional habitat management
plans, there is a presumption of consistency with the Federal Coastal
Management Act.
(j) Support legislation to allow cities to issue all coastal development
permits within their jurisdiction consistent with a previously certified
coastal plan.
(k) Support legislation that allocates state and federal funds for the
construction of facilities to capture and treat the flow of raw sewage
entering San Diego from Tijuana.
(l) Support legislation that provides direction to the California Coastal
Commission through changes to the Coastal Act that would allow for
construction of seawalls or other shoreline protection devices for existing
structures, as defined by a local jurisdiction’s Local Coastal Program and
up to the date of adoption of amendments to the Local Coastal Program.
(m) Oppose legislation that would backdate the consideration date of existing
structures to only those that existed prior to establishment of the Coastal
Act (January 1, 1977).
3. Water
General Principles
(a) Support measures that provide for the equitable allotment and
distribution of preferential water rights.
(b) Support legislation that protects and improves the reliability,
affordability, self-sufficiency, quality and security of local and imported
water supplies.
(c) Support legislation that ensures the San Diego County Water Authority
and its member agencies receive the water supply benefits of their
investment in local water supply sources.
(d) Support legislation that provides for the development of a
comprehensive state water plan that balances California’ s water needs
and results in a reliable and affordable supply of high-quality water for
the San Diego Region.
(e) Support legislation that supports regional projects through Integrated
Regional Water Management Planning.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 14 of 56
10
(f) Support legislation that streamlines environmental review processes for
water and wastewater infrastructure projects and provides exemptions
for emergency activities when the continued delivery of safe and clean
water is threatened.
(g) Support legislation that establishes a more equitable voting structure at
the San Diego County Water Authority, such as by providing that Board
decisions be approved by both a tally vote majority and a weighted vote
majority of the member agencies.
Water Conservation
(a) Support measures that will encourage water conservation practices by all
water consumers.
(b) Support measures that ensure conservation credit for municipal
investments in water recycling systems and development of alternative
sources.
(c) Support legislation that promotes water conservation and water use
efficiency while preserving district and public water rights and the
authority of local agencies.
(d) Support legislation that provides incentives, funding and other assistance
to water agencies so that they can meet state water demand
requirements.
(e) Oppose legislation that imposes water use efficiency criteria for
conservation-based water rates, standards, budget allocations, and
programs that do not recognize local differences, quality impacts, and
existing programs, or that override the authority of local agencies to
adopt management practices that are appropriate for the needs of their
agency.
(f) Support legislation that provides flexibility in complying with drought
regulations and recognizes variations among communities with respect to
their ability to withstand the impacts of drought.
Water Recycling
(a) Support measures that promote the production and distribution of
reclaimed water.
Water Quality
(a) Support legislation that protects the quality of drinking water and
supports local agency efforts to meet state and federal water quality
standards based upon sound scientific principles.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 15 of 56
11
(b) Support legislation that incorporates sound scientific based water quality
requirements for wastewater discharge into surface water and
groundwaterall discharges to surface water or that could percolate to
groundwater to safeguard public health and protect beneficial uses.
(c) Support legislation that implements source control and protects
reservoirs, lakes, and coastal waters.
(d) Support legislation that enables local agencies to regulate the discharge
of contaminants into the sewer collection system based on discharge
permit requirements, detrimental effects on infrastructure, and adverse
effects on recycling and reuse.
(e) Support legislation that provides state and federal funds for monitoring,
research, treatment, and infrastructure investments needed to address
new and emerging and other regulated contaminants.
Water Storage and Conveyance Systems
(a) Support a balanced water transportation and regional storage system
that provides for the needs of San Diego County, while protecting the
Delta and Central Valley regions with minimal impact on agriculture and
the environment.
(b) Support measures that increase water supply and storage facilities within
the region and allow for economically feasible water transfers within the
system.
New Technology
(a) Support legislation and regulations that encourage the use and
development of alternative water sources.
(b) Support funding and legislation that promotes the development of
engineering solutions and alternative uses to eliminate wastewater
treatment ocean discharges.
(c) Support legislation that encourages and provides state and federal
funding for the development of new technology in water use, reuse,
quality monitoring, and treatment.
Financial Considerations
(a) Support legislation to develop an ongoing funding source to implement
the federally mandated Clean Water Act of 1987 and to ensure
protection of local resources.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 16 of 56
12
(b) Support legislation that would exempt stormwater and urban runoff
management programs from Proposition 218 requirements.
(c) Support legislation that allows Water Districts to award contracts in
conformity with the provisions of the local City Charter.
(d) Support legislation that provides state and federal funds to local agencies
for programs and projects that provide for the supply, storage, recycling,
reclaiming, reuse and quality improvement of water resources.
(e) Oppose any new tax or fee on water that does not benefit ratepayers.
4. Governance, Transparency, and Labor Relations
Labor Relations
(a) Support legislation that allows cities with civil service/personnel systems
to contract out services to the private sector to save taxpayer dollars.
(b) Support legislation that limits the ability of employees to receive workers'
compensation benefits for occupational injuries/illnesses that result from
stress, disciplinary action, or performance evaluations or consultations.
(c) Support any measure that would reverse the imposition of compulsory
and binding arbitration with respect to public employees.
(d) Oppose any measure that would grant employee benefits that should be
decided at the local bargaining table.
(e) Oppose any legislation that would reduce local authority to resolve public
employee disputes, and support legislation that would preserve court
jurisdiction, and/or impose regulations of an outside agency (such as
PERB).
(f) Support measures that increase local authority to take adverse
employment actions while an active complaint or grievance is being
investigated.
(e)(g) Oppose measures that propose a standard higher than the normal civil
standards in disciplinary proceedings for peace officers.
(f)(h) Support legislation that clarifies existing labor laws concerning whether
an individual is considered an employee rather than an independent
contractor.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 17 of 56
13
(g)(i) Support measures that promote recruitment efforts and educational
practices to advance and retain workplace diversity, equity and inclusion.
(h)(j) Oppose measures that would expand release time for union business.
(i)(k) Oppose measures that would establish confidentiality privileges for union
representatives.
(j)(l) Oppose measures that would require municipalities to pay erroneous
retirement benefits.
(m) Support funding and legislation that helps cities provide employee
support programs, increased personal protective equipment (PPE) and
other programs that promote employee overall wellness—particularly
for underrepresented and frontline essential workers.
(k)(n) Support measures that protect employee choice in obtaining state-
mandated insurance policies either through employer- or state-
sponsored programs and insurance products (such as for long-term
care insurance).
(o) Support funding and legislation that would enhance efforts to prevent
third-party harassment and workplace violence.
(p) Support legislation authorizing electronic filings and virtual
appearances for workplace violence restraining orders and workplace
harassment restraining orders.
(q) Support measures that clarify public meeting requirements related to
employee recruiting and retention efforts.
Workers’ Compensation
(a) Oppose legislation that expands or extends any presumptions of
occupational injury or illness and support legislation that repeals the
presumption that the findings of a treating physician are correct.
(b) Oppose legislation that increases workers' compensation benefits
without providing for concurrent cost controls.
Governance and Ethics
(a) Oppose legislation or constitutional amendments that weaken or
interfere with the powers of charter cities and diminish local autonomy
or home rule authority.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 18 of 56
14
(b) Support legislation that reduces and provides for recovery of costs,
maintains privacy and eliminates attorney's fees for administering public
records laws.
(c) Oppose legislation that broadens the scope of the Public Records Act
without providing adequate funding for compliance.
(d) Support measures that clarify standards to allow records management
systems to qualify as a “trusted system.”
(e) Support measures that clarify that the records and identities of juvenile
crime victims are not subject to release once those individuals reach
adulthood, pursuant to the Public Records Act.
(f) Support measures that prohibit abuse of the Public Records Act as a
means to obtain periodic market data.
(c)(g) Support measures that prohibit abuse of the Public Records Act as a
means to advance serial lawsuits.
(d)(h) Support legislation that improves access to, and reduces the cost of,
healthcare for public employees, including part-time and seasonal
workers.
(e)(i) Support measures that reform California's tort system to reduce and limit
liability exposure for public agencies and restore the ability of public
agencies to obtain affordable insurance.
(f)(j) Support legislation that recognizes or broadens immunities for public
agencies and oppose legislation that attempts to limit or restrict existing
immunities.
(g)(k) Support legislation that requires plaintiffs to make a good faith showing
of liability prior to filing a lawsuit against a public entity.
(h)(l) Support legislation that would increase civic participation and
engagement, including the continued allowance of subcommittees,
advisory committees, and boards and commissions, local and regional, to
participate virtually without physical location posting requirements
under the Ralph M. Brown Act.
(i)(m) Support amendments to the Ralph M. Brown Act that allow for the use of
alternative and cost-effective methods of meeting posting public noticing
requirements, including the use of electronic and digital media.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 19 of 56
15
(j)(n) Support legislation to limit advertising costs charged for public noticing.
(k)(o) Support legislation that would permit a minority number of council
members to virtually participate in meetings without having physical
location posting requirements, so long as a physical in-person meeting
quorum is present.
(l)(p) Support state funding efforts to assist with enhanced public access for
members of the community.
(m)(q) Oppose legislation that increases the cost of municipal meetings and
hearings through unnecessary new requirements.
(n)(r) Support legislation that would allow cities to conduct closed sessions on
matters posing a threat to cybersecurity.
(o)(s) Support funding and legislation to assist local agency cybersecurity
enhancement efforts.
(p)(t) Support legislation that strengthens cities’ ability to foster civil and
respectful participation in public meetings and provides tools to help
legislative bodies address disruptive behavior, including hate speech,
while ensuring the public’s First Amendment rights are protected.
Elected Officials
(a) Support legislation that prevents threats to the security of public officials
in their homes by extending or providing protection to elected and
appointed officials from the unauthorized publication of their home
addresses or telephone numbers in newspapers or similar periodicals.
(b) Support legislation requiring both elected local and state officials to
maintain their place of residence in the jurisdiction they were elected to
represent.
5. Housing, Community and Economic Development
Planning and Zoning
(a) Support legislation to strengthen the legal and fiscal capability of local
agencies to prepare, adopt and implement fiscal plans for orderly growth,
development, beautification and conservation of local planning areas,
including, but not limited to, regulatory authority over zoning,
subdivisions, annexations, and tax increment financing areas.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 20 of 56
16
(b) Support measures in local land use that are consistent with the doctrine
of "home rule" and the local exercise of police powers in planning and
zoning processes.
(c) Support measures that authorize local land use planning and zoning law
to override conflicting state law.
(d) Support measures that ensure local land use planning or zoning initiatives
approved by voters shall not be nullified or superseded by the actions of
any local or state legislative body.
(e) Support legislation requiring environmental review of initiatives to
amend a general plan or zoning ordinance before the initiative is placed
on the ballot or enacted.
(f) Oppose legislation or constitutional amendments that would restrict the
power of California cities to use eminent domain for public purpose
projects.
(g) Support measures that allow local agencies to condition mobile home
park conversions from rental to resident ownership pursuant to local land
use regulations including a requirement to provide public improvements
and infrastructure where necessary to promote the health, safety, and
welfare of park residents.
(h) Support legislation that preserves the authority of local agencies to
regulate short-term vacation rentals.
(i) Support legislation that enables local agencies to effectively address
issues concerning public safety and proper management of group homes,
including proposals to require the presence of on-site managers and/or
security personnel at all times, while being mindful of group home
residents’ potential vulnerabilities.
(j) Oppose legislation that would diminish local control to set and assess
development review and building inspection fees.
Housing
(a) Support efforts to develop federal and state participation, financial
support and incentives (tax benefits, grants, loans) for programs which
provide adequate, affordable housing (home ownership and/or rental
opportunities) for all economic segments of the community including the
elderly, persons with disabilities, and low-income persons.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 21 of 56
17
(b) Support expansion of tax credit and bond opportunities for affordable
housing.
(c) Support legislation that provides incentives (tax benefits, grants, loans,
credits for affordable units) to local agencies, private developers and
non-profit groups in order to rehabilitate residential units and
commercial properties.
(d) Support legislation that would provide additional funding for rental
subsidy assistance programs (such as the Housing Choice Voucher
Program, the federally funded rental subsidy program for low-income
households) via more sustainable vouchers or certificates.
(e) Support repeal of Article 34 (Public Housing Project Law) of the California
Constitution, which requires local voter approval of housing projects that
are intended for low-income people and that receive funding or
assistance from the federal and/or state government.
(f) Support legislation that allows entitlement cities to use Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for new construction of housing
units.
(g) Support state legislation that strengthens local inclusionary housing
programs for lower-income residents.
(h) Support the repeal or modification of the Davis-Bacon Wage Act, as it
relates to charter cities, that set a prevailing wage scale for public
projects, substantially increasing the cost of publicly assisted housing
developments.
(i) Support legislation that will consolidate and streamline the
administration and reporting requirements for the CDBG program.
(j) Oppose legislation that would give the State financial administrative
responsibilities for the CDBG program.
(k) Support legislation that recognizes the impediments to infill housing
development due to inadequate and/or deteriorated infrastructure, and
provides funding and/or cost recovery mechanisms for local agencies to
complete the necessary upgrades.
(l) Support measures that would establish a formula-based Regional Housing
Needs Assessment allocation methodology that reflects the unique needs
and practical capacity of local communities.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 22 of 56
18
(m) Oppose measures that diminish local authority to implement growth
management initiatives that ensure communities do not exceed carrying
capacities and the provision of adequate public facilities.
(n) Support measures that would exempt affordable housing projects from
complying with the California Environmental Quality Act while continuing
to mitigate residents’ potential exposure to health and safety hazards.
(o) Oppose legislation that would expand the Coastal Commission’s authority
over state and local housing policy, which would result in administrative
inefficiencies and policy conflicts.
(p) Support legislation that modifies existing housing laws to remove
inconsistencies, clarify the decision-making authorities granted to various
state agencies (i.e., California Coastal Commission and California
Department of Housing and Community Development), and improve
clarity in application.
(q) Support housing legislation that would allow density increases to satisfy
the state’s “no net loss” requirements, when the increases occur
concurrent with or prior to a density reduction.
(r) Support legislation that more equitably applies rent control laws to
various types of rental housing, such as condominiums.
(s) Support legislation that prohibits property owners who are awarded tax
credit financed projects from charging Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
clients a higher rent than the rent charged to non-Section 8 Housing
Choice Voucher clients.
(t) Support legislation clarifying that replacement housing required of a
density bonus project that demolishes existing low or moderate units on
the parcel is in addition to the affordable units required under density
bonus law.
(u) Support legislation that ensures that affordable and market-rate
accessory dwelling units and units in projects receiving development
standard waivers, concessions created underor density bonus law are not
used for vacation rentals.
(v) Support legislation clarifying a city’s ability to enforce a local inclusionary
ordinance on the total units, inclusive of units obtained through a density
bonus.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 23 of 56
19
(w) Support legislation that maintains local decision-making regarding the
development of Accessory Dwelling Units.
(w)(x) Support measures that allow cities to deny or condition housing
development to reconcile documented deficiencies in water, wastewater,
or transportation system service capacity.
(x)(y) Support legislation that allows for local decision-making regarding
parking requirements.
Subdivision Map Act
(a) Support legislation that would automatically extend approved or
conditionally approved tentative, final and parcel maps under the
Subdivision Map Act during and for a limited time period after a
statewide financial or public health crisis, or other declared State of
Emergency.
Economic Development
(a) Support legislation that facilitates economic development efforts and
encourages local business investments, job creation and retention.
(b) Support legislation that would establish new tax increment financing
tools.
(c) Support legislation that helps businesses who have had business
interruption insurance claims denied, or otherwise incur unrecoverable
revenue losses resulting from a financial or public health crisis, or other
declared State of Emergency.
(d) Support legislation that protects small businesses from extraordinary
health insurance premium increases being applied during and for a
limited time period after a financial or public health crisis, or other
declared State of Emergency.
(e) Support legislation that would remove impediments to the automatic
extension of local permits during and for a limited time period after a
financial or public health crisis, or other declared State of Emergency.
(f) Support legislation that provides eviction protections and funding for
rental assistance programs for residential and commercial tenants and
property owners impacted by a financial or public health crisis, or
other declared State of Emergency.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 24 of 56
20
6. Public Safety
Fire Services
(a) Oppose legislation that would restrict or reduce the ability of local
government to determine the extent or method of fire hazard mitigation
necessary in or around wildland areas.
(b) Oppose legislation that would diminish local control to set and assess fire
inspection fees.
(c) Oppose legislation that circumvents building or fire code requirements by
statute, including through the provision of a “deemed complete” or
“deemed approved" status when local agencies exceed maximum
application review timelines.
(d) Support legislation that would enhance statewide wildland fire safety
infrastructure.
(e) Support legislation and funding for firefighter wellness programs.
Emergency Services and Preparedness
(a) Support legislation granting immunity to or limiting liability of
governmental entities and their employees who provide emergency
medical instructions and/or treatment as a part of their public safety
dispatch system.
(b) Oppose legislation that would restrict a local government from revising
the delivery of emergency medical service to its citizens and support
measures that broaden these powers.
(c) Support legislation that would enhance cost recovery or provide funding
for emergency medical services and pre-hospital care.
(d) Support legislation that would strengthen awareness of and access to
resources concerning community and disaster preparedness, public
health, safety, and resiliency.
(e) Support legislation that provides state and federal emergency funding
and regulatory relief that allows cities to devote the necessary resources
and meet the operational challenges of protecting the public health,
safety and welfare in response to a declared State of Emergency.
(f) Support legislation that clarifies the requirements for operating city-
owned ocean rescue watercraft.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 25 of 56
21
(f)(g) Support legislation allowing public safety officials to drive off-highway
Utility-Terrain Vehicles (UTVs) on city streets.
Law Enforcement
(a) Support legislation that strengthens a diverse local law enforcement.
(b) Support measures that would provide a greater share of seized assets to
localities and increased discretion for local spending.
(c) Support legislation that would allow for the destruction, confiscation, or
extended safekeeping of firearms or other deadly weapons involved in
domestic violence incidents.
(d) Support legislation that strengthens penalties for violent offenders,
including sentencing enhancements for violently resisting or brandishing
a weapon during the commission of a property-related crime.
(e) Support legislation that strengthens penalties for violent crimes
committed by juveniles.
(f) Support legislation that would increase accountability and transparency
among law enforcement agencies and personnel.
(g) Support legislation that encourages or mandates police training to
include mental health awareness, implicit and explicit bias and de-
escalation techniques.
(h) Support legislation and funding to continue the state Citizens’ Option for
Public Safety (COPS) Program and federal Community Oriented Police
Services (COPS), and to provide funding for local agencies to recoup the
costs of crime and increase community safety.
(i) Support legislation that strengthens penalties for participating in any
coordinated effort to disrupt the use of public roads and publicly
accessible parking lots (e.g. as part of a street takeover, sideshow, or
racing exhibition).
(j) Support legislation and funding for police officer wellness programs.
(k) Support legislation that provides for the proper and timely intake,
without unnecessary delay, of arrestees.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 26 of 56
22
Drugs and Alcohol
(a) Support measures which strengthen present state or federal laws to
increase penalties and give local governments the power to restrict or
regulate the sale, manufacture, or use of dangerous drugs.
(b) Support legislation that discourages, prevents, and penalizes driving
under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
(c) Support legislation that enhanced local agencies ability to recover costs
from guilty parties for damage to public property and services in
accidents involving driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.
(d) Support legislation that would provide funding for addiction
rehabilitation treatment.
(e) Support any measure that protects children and youth from exposure to
tobacco, secondhand smoke and tobacco- and nicotine-related products.
(f) Support legislation that preserves local control over medical and adult-
use cannabis businesses, and enhances and protects maximum local
regulatory, land use, and enforcement authority in relation to such
businesses.
(g) Support legislation that prevents or reduces the adverse effects of drug
addiction.
Homelessness
(a) Support funding and legislation that provides resources, including
enriched referral services, and outreach and case managers to help
ensure local governments have the capacity to address the needs of
persons experiencing homelessness in their communities, including
resources for regional collaborations.
(b) Support measures that provide resources to address the mental health
needs of persons experiencing homelessness.
(c) Preserve local control by increasing funding opportunities for housing
programs/projects that suggest, rather than require, compliance with the
Housing First model.
(d) Support measures that would revise the definition of “Housing First” to
allow mandated case management as a condition of occupancy in
publicly funded permanent supportive housing.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 27 of 56
23
(e) Support measures that require occupants of permanent supportive
housing units funded by Behavioral Health Services Act or Mental Health
Services Act programs to agree to receive case management services.
(f) Support legislation that streamlines and clarifies the review process and
criteria for determining that a subregional placement priority for
placements into permanent supportive housing does not violate fair
housing laws.
(g) Support measures that allow H-2A Visa holders (seasonal workers) and
individuals experiencing homelessness to occupy congregate shelter beds
funded through the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program.
(c)
(d)(h) Support legislation that creates streamlined protocols and metrics to be
used by homeless service providers and local agencies, providing more
accurate statistics of individuals experiencing homelessness, including in-
flow and out-flow information, cost-reporting of services rendered, and
individuals successfully housed.
(e)(i) Support measures that facilitate regional and city-driven solutions to
address homelessness through crisis response, mental evaluation,
and homeless outreach teams.
(f)(j) Support the expansion of conservatorship laws allowing for increased
guardianship control and health supervision of those suffering from
mental illness and recognizing mental illness and addiction as
contributors to chronic homelessness.
(g)(k) Support continued funding for housing, outpatient beds and treatment to
further behavioral and mental health services programs, including
Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Court.
Miscellaneous
(a) Support legislation that would assist local safety agencies in
regionalization of activities such as training, crime labs, specialty
responses such as hazardous materials and technical rescue, and other
appropriate functions.
(b) Support legislation that provides financial assistance to local agencies for
Homeland Security.
(c) Support the enactment of legislation to prevent gun violence.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 28 of 56
24
(d) Support measures to expand and fund mental health and social-
emotional health services, including the provision of such services and
safety education in schools.
(e) Support measures to provide resources to develop school safety
guidelines, conduct comprehensive school safety audits and maintain
continued vigilance and monitoring of safety matters in schools.
(f) Support legislation to eliminate restrictions on the collection and
compiling of data related to violence perpetrated with firearms, including
research into the causes and consequences of gun violence.
(g) Support measures to provide funding to support 911 communication
centers.
(h) Support measures to provide funding to support the San Diego Law
Enforcement Coordination Center, a collaborative partnership among
federal, state and local law enforcement/public safety agencies focused
on enhancing coordination, information sharing, regional preparedness,
training and investigative support/analysis for first responders and other
public and private partners in the region.
(i) Support legislation that provides financial assistance to local law
enforcement agencies for staff assigned to a regional task force.
7. Revenue and Taxation
(a) Support legislation that assists cities to enforce and collect local taxes.
(b) Support measures that protect the fiscal independence of cities and
safeguard existing revenue sources from preemption by any other public
agency
(c) Oppose any change in revenue allocations which would negatively
(current or future) affect local government, including the redistribution of
sales tax, property tax, transient occupancy tax and other taxes and fees.
(d) Support legislation that makes funds to support public facilities (i.e.,
buildings, roads, utilities, open space) more available to local
municipalities.
(e) Oppose legislation that attempts to eliminate the “pay first and litigate
later” provisions of law and oppose any bill that proposes to reduce or
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 29 of 56
25
eliminate the obligation of any online travel agency to pay transient
occupancy taxes under state or local law.
(f) Support measures which would strengthen cities' ability to reorganize
and consolidate water districts, sewer districts, school districts, and other
special districts that operate within or provide service to a city.
(g) Oppose federal measures which remove the deduction of all state and
local taxes for federal income tax purposes.
(h) Support measures that implement basic structural changes in state
government that result in state budget expenditures being brought into
balance with state revenues.
(i) Support measures which relieve taxpayers of the burden of paying for
services which could be charged directly to the service user, and which
simplify the process of establishing such fees.
(j) Support legislation that would provide greater accountability on the part
of counties for the distribution of funds back to municipalities, including,
but not limited to, fines and forfeitures.
(k) Support measures to reinstate flexibility in the administration of Article
XIII-B (The Gann Initiative), which establishes an annual appropriations
limit on the state and most local governments.
(l) Oppose any measure that restricts or limits a public entity’s ability to use
tax exempt debt for the purchase or construction of public purpose
improvements.
(m) Oppose legislation that shifts state and county criminal justice costs to
cities.
(n) Oppose the use of the federal gas tax for federal debt reduction.
(o) Support legislation that streamlines permitting processes without
undermining the ability of local government to apply and be
compensated for the enforcement of reasonable building, planning and
fire protection standards.
(p) Oppose measures that propose significant economic changes without the
completion of a balanced, comprehensive economic analysis.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 30 of 56
26
(q) Support funding and legislation that provides direct financial support
to cities to offset cost increases and lost revenues resulting from a
financial or public health crisis, or other declared State of Emergency.
(r) Support legislation that promotes regional collaboration on response
efforts addressing the impacts of a financial or public health crisis, or
other declared State of Emergency, including funding to support local
businesses.
(s) Support legislation that provides flexibility concerning the disposition
of municipally owned real estate assets to promote economic
development and other public purposes.
State Mandates
(a) Support legislation that would eliminate unfunded state and federal
mandates or would require timely reimbursement to cities.
(b) Oppose measures that would impose mandates for which there is no
guarantee of local reimbursement or offsetting benefits, or would shift
the cost of government services to cities.
(c) Oppose legislation that creates surcharges for state oversight of state
mandated programs.
8. Transportation, Communication and Public Works
Transportation
(a) Support measures that would increase the ability of local agencies to
finance local and regional transportation facilities and improvements,
including alternative modes of transportation and transportation demand
management systems and transportation systems management
initiatives.
(b) Support legislation that provides for safe, effective and efficient
transportation alternatives for all travel modes.
(c) Support funding and legislation that provides direct support to cities to
advance roadway safety through education, engineering and
enforcement.
(d) Support legislation that establishes requirements for E-bike rider safety
training and licensing.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 31 of 56
27
(e) Oppose transportation proposals that would adversely affect the quality
of life in North San Diego County by causing traffic congestion, air
pollution or other problems.
(f) Encourage and support double tracking of the rail corridor within the City
limits in a manner that:
1. Improves public safety access and response times.
2. Eliminates or reduces existing at-grade rail crossings within the rail
corridor.
3. Improves local, regional, and coastal access for all travel modes
(bicycle, pedestrian, vehicle, transit).
4. Minimizes impacts to neighborhoods.
5. Maximizes community and neighborhood connections.
6. Protects and/or improves the economic vibrancy of surrounding
neighborhoods and the city.
7. Protects and/or enhances environmental resources.
(f) Oppose legislation that diminishes local control over the regulation and
deployment of micro-mobility solutions.
(g) Oppose measures that would result in the consolidation of the North
County Transit District and Metropolitan Transit System.
(h) Support measures that protect residents, businesses and visitors from the
adverse impacts of aircraft operating at McClellan-Palomar Airport.
(i) Oppose changes in aviation policies that would allow McClellan-Palomar
Airport to expand without authorization from the city.
(j) Support legislative and regulatory initiatives to study and mitigate the
noise and air quality impacts associated with air traffic overflights.
(k) Support legislative and regulatory initiatives that promote market
penetration and infrastructure expansion to expedite the transition to
lead-free aviation fuels and eliminate the use of leaded aviation gasoline.
(l) Support measures that would increase local control over airports located
within municipal boundaries.
Public Works
(a) Oppose legislation that would erode or purport to erode a charter city’s
ability to design, implement, determine wage rates or fund any and all
public works projects within its jurisdiction.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 32 of 56
28
(b) Support funding and legislation that supports utilities undergrounding.
Contracts
(a) Support legislation prohibiting firms from bidding on City projects if the
firm is currently involved in legal proceedings against the City arising
from prior projects.
(b) Oppose measures that would eliminate state licensing requirements for
professionals involved in designing public and private developments.
(c) Support measures that would clarify the roles and responsibilities of
public agency officers and employees as related to the prohibition on
entering into or participating in making contracts in which they have a
financial interest.
(d) Support legislation that clarifies when the award of a contract would
constitute a conflict of interest relative to Government Code Section
1090.
(d)(e) Support measures that increase flexibility in delivering grant-funded
project completion due to conditions beyond the city’s control (i.e., for
partnering agency or market-driven delays).
Telecommunications
(a) Support legislation and regulations of telecommunications facilities and
services that:
1. Maintain local control over the public right-of-way.
2. Provide just compensation for the use of right-of-way and overseeing
public service standards.
3. Ensure public, education, and governmental access is available,
equitable and affordable.
4. Provide free access for public information services and
announcements.
5. Maintain local control, including but not limited to discretionary
permits over wireless communications facilities.
6. Reinstates competition in the telecommunications industry.
7. Enhance access for all community members to fast, reliable,
affordable and high-quality internet, which can spur innovation and
help close the digital divide in California.
8. Support net neutrality to prevent internet service providers from
blocking, throttling, degrading, or providing for paid prioritization of
lawful content, applications, or services.
9. Clarify cities’ ability to implement development standards for trench
coverage depth.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 33 of 56
29
(b) Support legislation that requires cable television companies to assure
that audio and video portions of adult entertainment channels are
completely blocked 24 hours a day in the homes of non-subscribers.
(c) Oppose any measure or legislation that prevents local franchising of cable
television or video services, regardless of the technology used to deliver
the cable television or video services to the subscriber.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 34 of 56
Exhibit 2
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 35 of 56
{city of
Carlsbad
Memo ID# 2024068
Council Memorandum
September 12, 2024
To:
From:
Honorable Mayor Blackburn and Members of the City Council
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Via:
Jeff Murphy, Community Developmentpi{ector
Geoff Patnoe, Assistant City Manager ~
Re: State Housing Regulations & Coastal Act Compliance (Districts -All)
This memorandum provides information related to the city's continued efforts to maintain
compliance with state housing regulations consistent with the Coastal Act and the city's
adopted Local Coastal Program, and recent challenges associated with California Coastal
Commission staff review of certain housing related Local Coastal Program Amendments.
Background
In addition to complying with state housing
regulations, the city must comply with the
California Coastal Act. In short, the Coastal
Act, which was adopted in 1976, guides how
land along the coast is developed/preserved
with an emphasis on maintaining public
coastal access and the protection of sensitive
coastal and marine life.
To this end, coastal cities develop a Local
Coastal Program (LCP), which is a policy and
planning document that lays out a framework
for development and coastal resource
protection within the city's coastal zone area
(see image to the right). Once an LCP is found
consistent with the Coastal Act and approved
by the California Coasta l Commission (Coastal
Commission), the city may issue permits and
authorize development on behalf of the
Coastal Commission in the coastal zone, so
long as the development is consistent with the
codes, policies, and guidelines specified in the
LCP. The City of Carlsbad's LCP was initially
Community Service Branch
Community Development Department
CITY OF CARLSBAD
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 442-339-2600 t
I
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 36 of 56
Council Memo -State Housing Regulations and Coastal Act Compliance (Districts -All)
September 12, 2024
Page 2
approved by the Coastal Commission in 1980, and several subsequent amendments to the LCP
have regularly occurred since then.
In response to the high cost of housing development in California, the state legislature has
increasingly flexed its authority and adopted ---and continues to adopt ---legislation that
increases development opportunities thereby making it easier and quicker for homes to be
built. However, to date, state housing laws have generally continued to require projects to
comply with the Coastal Act. As such, for many of these housing laws to be implemented in the
coastal zone, cities must amend their respective LCPs to address these new housing laws.
Over the past 18 months, city staff has noticed that recent LCP amendments, most of which
include state mandated housing code changes, are not being timely processed or are being
significantly altered by Coastal Commission staff.
Discussion
The City of Carlsbad has been aggressively updating local codes and policies to comply with new
state housing laws. This is completed through implementation of General Plan Housing Element
programs and updates to Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC),
informational bulletins, and other planning related documents.
Over the past few years, staff has processed, and the City Council has adopted several required
housing codes changes. Refer to Attachment A for a listing of the various state law changes
that have been incorporated in the city's land use regulations. However, many -of these code
changes are still pending Coastal Commission's approval of the associated LCP amendments
and therefore are not yet effective in the coastal zone. Refer to Attachment B for the status of
these projects.
What staff is noticing is that updates to the city's LCP, including the Zoning Ordinance and
Village and Barrio Master Plan, have been consistently delayed until the last statutory month
that Coastal Commission staff is allowed by law to review applications. This gives city staff very
little time to review and negotiate through our differences and disagreements in proposed
code language changes. In fact, there have been recent situations where Coastal Commission
staff proposed modifications to the city's pending code changes and city staff questions
whether Coastal Commission's proposed changes would comply with state housing law.
In two recent cases, Coastal Commission staff have encouraged the city to withdraw its
applications and resubmit due to state statutory deadlines. This is a common strategy used by
Coastal Commission staff when they are unable to complete their review of an application by
state mandated hearing deadlines ---withdrawing the application and resubmitting restarts
their processing timeline. If the application is not withdrawn, the Coastal Commission staff will
be required to schedule the application before the Coastal Commission with a recommendation
of denial or significant modifications proposed without opportunity for city staff review and
discussion.
This is what happened to the comprehensive LCP amendment that was approved by City
Council on October 12, 2021 (Attachment C). At the request of Coastal Commission staff, the
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 37 of 56
Council Memo -State Housing Regulations and Coastal Act Compliance (Districts -All)
September 12, 2024
Page 3
city withdrew its LCP amendment application under the promise that Coastal Commission staff
would provide the city with its final comments the following month. Once received, the
application could be resubmitted to the Coastal Commission, and its review would be
expedited. However, it took Coastal Commission staff roughly 10 months to return with t heir
final comments, which city staff is currently discussing with Coastal Commission staff.
Additional information on that LCP amendment will be provided under a separate Council
Memorandum.
There are several concerns and issues these code modifications and growing delays in LCP
amendment processing cause the city and its citizens:
• Th ese delays create confusion for applicants required to comply wit h state regulations
and city staff for enforcing t hese regulations. This is particularly frustrating w hen one
set of rules outside the coastal zone are different from rules inside the coastal zone.
• State housing laws have specified effective dates, most of which have since passed.
Delays in LCP amendment review only increases the city's risk of noncompliance with
the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
• Based upon past actions, city staff lacks confidence that Coastal Commission staff will
expedite city LCP amendments following withdrawal of the application. Additionally, city
staff is concerned about how HCD would perceive the city's proactive withdrawal of a
housing related LCP amendment.
Staff has discussed this issue with other coastal cities within the San Diego region including the
cities of San Diego, Del Mar, Encinitas and Oceanside, and found that these cities have been
experiencing similar challenges. Statewide, other jurisdictions across the coast have
experienced delays with LCP amendments.
Next Steps
The city w ill continue to monitor state housing regulations to ensure that the housing
regulations and processes that are entirely under city control are up-to-date and in compliance.
The city will also continue to work closely with the Coasta l Commission on projects currently
under its review to help reduce/prevent further delays and ensure progress is being made on
these reviews.
However, city staff does not intend to withdraw any housing related LCP amendments because
of Coastal Commission staff's failure to timely process the city's application. Rather, should the
Coastal Commission deny an LCP amendment application, staff will advise City Council of the
decision and then inform HCD of the Coastal Commission's failure to t imely adopt state
mandated housing law changes. As with past LCP amendments, any modifications made by the
Coastal Commission will be brought back to the City Council for consideration and action before
t hose changes can become effective in the city.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 38 of 56
Council Memo - State Housing Regulations and Coastal Act Compliance (Districts -All)
September 12, 2024
Page 4
Attachments: A. List of state housing code changes
B. City housing projects status update tables
C. Council Memorandum dated June 15, 2023, on file with City Clerk's Office
(https://records.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6433230&dbi
d=0&repo=CityofCarlsbad)
cc: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Allegra Frost, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Jason Haber, Intergovernmental Affairs Director
Mike Strong, Assistant Director
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Robert Efird, Principal Planner
Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Shelley Glennon, Associate Planner
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 39 of 56
Attachment A
Provided below is a list of the recent housing laws passed by the state and what the city is
doing to ensure its regulations and processes comply with these state regulations as well
as the California Coastal Act. The list is primarily grouped by state law categories and
organized in ascending order of the city's review and approval. Note that some categories
have several actions which are addressed at different times. As listed, many projects are
still pending Coastal Commission's certification and therefore are not yet effective in the
Coastal Zone.
1. Housing Element Programs (AB 2011, SB 6)
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 6 and Assemble Bill (AB) 2011 , the state requires
jurisdictions to allow residential uses in commercial/office zones and to allow density
bonuses and streamlined review for affordable units. These laws apply within the
Coastal Zone. The city currently allows density bonuses pursuant to CMC Chapter
21.86 "Density Bonus" which requires compliance with state regulations. In April 2021,
the city adopted an update to the city's General Plan Housing Element which included
programs to implement new state housing regulations.
On April 19, 2022, the City Council approved amendments to the zoning ordinance to
implement Housing Element Programs 1.6 and 1.8 to allow mixed-use development
(residential and commercial uses) in all commercial zones and to streamline housing
production (Exhibit A). On January 30, 2024 the city implemented Housing Program 1.1
to rezone sites to accommodate the city's Residential Housing Needs Assessment
(RH NA) dwelling units (Exhibit 8). No other changes are proposed or necessary to
implement AB 2011 and SB 6. The Housing Element Programs project is effective in the
Coastal Zone however the Housing Element Rezoning Program is pending Coastal
Commission approval.
2. Temporary and Alternative Housing Uses (AB 101 , AB 2339)
The state requires cities to implement programs through the Housing Element that
allow for temporary and alternative housing uses in residential areas. Temporary
housing includes emergency shelters and low barrier navigation centers. Alternative
housing includes group homes, residential care facilities and employee housing. These
laws apply within the Coastal Zone. The city approved two amendments to the zoning
ordinance to implement Housing Element Program 1.3 by addressing temporary and
alternative housing. The first amendment was through the 2022 Zoning Ordinance
Cleanup Project approved by City Council on April 19, 2022 (Exhibit C). It amended the
zoning ordinance to address employee housing and residential care facility parking. On
May 23, 2023 a second amendment was approved by City Council to define and allow
temporary and alternative housing types such as family daycares, employee housing,
group homes, residential care facilities, emergency shelters and low barrier navigation
centers (Exhibit D). No other changes are proposed or necessary to implement AB 101
and ABB 2339. The 2022 Zoning Ordinance Cleanup project is effective in the Coastal
Zone. The Temporary and Alternative Housing Project has a Coastal Commission
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 40 of 56
Attachment A
hearing date set for Sept. 12, 2024 with no proposed suggested modifications and
therefore consistent with the city's project submittal.
3. Encouraging Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Development (AB 976, AB 2221, AB
1223, SB 897)
State regulations passed through AB 2221 and SB 897 were intended to encourage and
expedite ADU and Junior ADU production. All state ADU laws apply within the Coastal
Zone. AB 2221/SB 897 were addressed through the city's 2023 Accessory Dwelling Unit
Amendments project. The most notable changes included increasing detached ADU
height limitations, allowing front yard protrusions for by-right AD Us and streamlining
the permitting review process. City Council approved this amendment on May 23, 2023
(Exhibit E).
AB 1223 requires cities to provide Permit-Ready ADU plans and to update these plans,
as needed, to be consistent with state building standards. The city launched its Permit-
Ready ADU program in May 2023 and it is co.nsistent with the 2022 California Building
Standards Code. The plans did not require approval by City Council; it did however
require a professional service agreement with a consultant to prepare the plans which
City Council approved on October 19, 2021 (Exhibit F).
AB 976 prohibits jurisdictions from enforcing ADU owner-occupancy requirements. The
city is currently processing the 2024 Zone Cleanup project that removes ADU owner-
occupancy requirements from the zoning ordinance. On July 30, 2024 City Council
made a motion to approve the 2024 Zone Cleanup project with modifications (Exhibit
G). It is anticipated that the city will process another comprehensive ADU ordinance
update to address new state regulation changes, including SB 477 (effective March
2024) to reference the new ADU government code section (Title 7 Chapter 13
"Accessory Dwelling Units"), as well as SB 1077 (pending state approval), which is
intended to change ADU permitting requirements in the Coastal Zone. The next
comprehensive ADU Ordinance update is anticipated in 2025. Both the 2023 ADU
Amendments project and 2024 Zone Cleanup project is still pending Coastal
Commission approval (2024 Zone Code Cleanup is also pending City Council's final
approval).
4. Streamlined Housing Development & Increased Density Allowance (SB 9, SB 35, SB
_aJO}
SB 9 allows lots zoned for single-family residential (R-1) to be split into two lots or
allows two residential units to be built on one lot, thereby allowing an increase in
density for traditionally single-family residential zones. Coastal Commission's
guidance on SB 9 outlines that projects in the Coastal Zone are still required to comply
with the Local Coastal Program and process Coastal Development Permits. SB 35
allows certain residential development projects to be approved ministerially and SB
330 also allows residential and mixed-use development applications to be
streamlined. The city has created informational bulletins for SB 9, SB 35 and SB 330 to
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 41 of 56
Attachment A
ensure the public is informed of the requirements necessary to process projects under
these new state regulations. There is no requirement to change any regulation to allow
projects to be processed under SB 9. More information is provided in the SB 9, SB 35
and SB 330 Information Bulletins found on the city website.
5. Objective Design Standards {SB 35. SB 330. SB 423)
All projects eligible for streamlined review pursuant to SB 9, SB 35 or SB 330 must be
approved or denied pursuant to adopted objective design and development standards
(ODS). The city was awarded two State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) grants in 2019 and 2021 to complete objective design standards
for eligible multifamily housing development projects pursuant to SB 35 and SB 330. On
August 29, 2023, City Council approved objective design standards for multifamily
housing projects in the Village and Barrio Master Plan ("Master Plan") area and for all
areas outside of the Master Plan area (citywide), pursuant to Housing Element Program
1.11 (Exhibits H & I).
When City Council approved the ODS projects in August 2023, projects eligible for a
streamlined ministerial permit review process pursuant to SB 35 excluded projects
located in the Coastal Zone. However, after city staff submitted the ODS Local Coastal
Program Amendment (LCPA) applications to Coastal Commission for review, Coastal
Commission staff notified the city on June 14, 2024 that the city is required to modify
the ODS LCPA applications to incorporate objective LCP standards pursuant to new
state legislation (SB 423) passed in October 2023. SB 423 extends SB 35's eligibility
criteria to projects located in the Coastal Zone effective Jan. 1, 2025. Therefore,
Coastal Commission staff will not process the ODS LCPA applications as submitted
even though SB 423 is not yet in effect. This additional review to incorporate objective
standards pursuant to SB 423 will cause a delay as staff must do additional analysis
and wait to receive official guidance from both the Coastal Commission and HCD as to
how to implement the new SB 423 guidelines. Both Coastal Commission and HCD staff
indicated that statewide guidance will be provided before the end of the year. City staff
will continue to work closely with Coastal Commission staff to process the ODS LCPA
applications currently pending Coastal Commission's approval.
6. Parking Exemptions Near Transit Stations {AB 2097)
AB 2097 requires jurisdictions to exempt commercial and residential projects from
minimum parl<ing requirements if located within½ mile from a major public transit
station. The city has two qualifying transit stations: the Poinsettia Coaster Station and
the Carlsbad Village Coaster Station. City staff has created an AB2097 Informational
Bulletin which includes information on whether an applicant can apply AB 2097 parl<ing
exemptions based on the project location and proposal. Additionally, Coastal
Commission recently provided guidance for projects exempt from minimum parking
requirements pursuant to AB 2097 which states that projects and LCPs must be
consistent with the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act. Therefore,
the city can impose mitigation measures for projects that would have an adverse
Attachment A
impact to beach access. It is anticipated that the city will process another Village and
Barrio Master Plan amendment to address AB 2097 in 2025. More information is provided
in the AB 2097 information bulletin found on the city website.
Exhibits:
A. City Council staff report dated April 19, 2022, on file with City Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6265368&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=c80abb9f-8112-4207-9bad-6d06a9221474)
B City Council staff report (Housing Element Rezoning Program) dated January 30, 2024, on
file with City Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=7237799&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=873bba4f-e3a3-4ced-bc83-2cb963fa66e9)
C. City Council staff report (2022 Zone Cleanup) dated Sept. 13, 2022, on file with City Clerk’s
Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6322753&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=5382b7b6-814a-48ed-9df0-73b177f69e02)
D. City Council staff report (Alt & Temporary Housing) dated May 23, 2023, on file with City
Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6419848&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=67708f84-ad25-40e5-b8c6-59e88b31e533
E. City Council staff report (2023 ADU Amendment) dated May 23, 2022, on file with City
Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6419853&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=67708f84-ad25-40e5-b8c6-59e88b31e533)
F. City Council staff report (PSA, Permit-Ready ADU) dated October 19, 2021 (on file with City
Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=5493688&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=8ae42e7b-f7c3-4611-a466-dab205af8637)
G. City Council staff report (2024 Zone Clean Up) dated July 30, 2024, on file with the City
Clerk’s Office
https://records.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=9942879&dbid=0&repo=Cityof
Carlsbad&searchid=25e90546-5d15-419d-9fae-a4f65fba6a7c'
H. City Council staff report (Village and Barrio Objective Design Standards) dated August 29,
2023, on file with City Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6475132&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=8e41752f-a665-4d82-9489-e5eb052cd244)
I. City Council staff report (Citywide Objective Design Standards) dated August 29, 2023, on
file with City Clerk’s Office
(https://cityrecords.city.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=6475067&dbid=0&rep
o=CityOfCarlsbad&searchid=8e41752f-a665-4d82-9489-e5eb052cd244)
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 42 of 56
-
-
-
---
-
---
--
...
••
•
•
,
r
•
:
■
1u
•. ,
■
:
1
!
'
.
-
-
:•
1
1
1
1
1
r
:
1•
tu
�
!
_
:
.
.
•
1
.
.
rM
�
�
J
.
•
t
.
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
St
a
t
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Re
g
ulat
i
o
n
No
.
Pr
o
jec
t
N
a
m
e
Bi
l
l
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
Go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
Co
d
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
SB
6
.
AB
2
0
1
1
1
(Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
i
n
Co
m
m
e
rci
a
l
zo
n
e
s
)
20
2
2
Zo
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Cl
e
a
n
u
p
AB
1
0
1
,
A
B
23
3
9
2 3
Ac
c
e
s
s
o
r
y
D
w
e
l
l
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
AB
22
2
1
,
SB
8
9
7
20
2
3
Al
t
er
n
a
t
ive
an
d
T
e
m
p
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
p
d
a
t
e
AB
1
0
1
an
d
AB
23
3
9
4 5
Ci
t
y
w
i
d
e
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
De
s
i
gn
St
a
n
d
a
r
ds
SB
3
5
a
n
d
S
B
3
3
0
6
Vil
l
a
g
e
a
n
d
B
a
r
r
i
o
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
De
s
i
gn
SB
3
5
an
d
SB
3
3
0
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
7
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
Re
z
o
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
am
Imp
le
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
8
20
2
4
Zo
n
i
n
g
C
o
d
e
C
l
e
a
n
u
p
AB
9
7
6
No
.
I
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
Bu
l
l
e
t
i
n
Na
m
e
1
AB
2
0
1
1
A
f
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
&
H
i
g
h
R
o
a
d
s
Ac
t
2
AB
2
0
9
7
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
3
Ac
c
e
s
s
o
r
y
D
w
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
4
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
s
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
De
s
i
g
n
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
6
SB
4
Af
f
o
r
dab
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
&
f
a
i
t
h
b
a
s
e
d
L
a
n
d
s
A
c
t
7
SB
6
Mid
d
l
e
Cl
a
s
s
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ac
t
8
SB
9
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
M
o
r
e
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Ac
t
o
f
2
0
2
1
9
SB
35
Mu
ltf
a
m
i
l
y
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
A
c
t
10
SB
3
3
0
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
Cr
i
s
i
s
Ac
t
o
f
2
0
1
9
--
-
--
-
;Q!lllr♦III.
::..•
1
1■'
,
,
_
"
'
(
l
•
•
•
�
!
t
'
�
l
l
l
1
1
a
:
.
.
.
.
.
Cit
y
of
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
i
n
t
h
e
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
i
n
t
h
e
Ca
r
l
s
b
a
d
•�···
·
-
:
:
®
.
:
m
l
=
j
)
®
J
m
,
,fl
.
i
J
b
1
a
J
�
m
m
w
LC
P
A
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
R
e
v
i
e
w
LC
P
A
Ap
plic
a
t
i
o
n
Du
e
D
a
t
e
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
Su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
t
o
De
e
m
e
d
(60
wo
r
k
i
n
g d
a
y
s
Re
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
In
l
a
n
d
Ar
e
a
s
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Z
o
n
e
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Co
m
p
le
t
e
by
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
N
o
.
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Co
a
s
t
a
l
IP
-
9
0
w
o
r
k
i
n
g
Da
t
e
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
da
y
s
L
U
P
)
4/
1
9
/
2
0
2
2
6/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
Or
d
CS
-
4
2
2
11
/
7
/
2
0
2
2
12
/
2
3
/
2
0
2
2
3/
2
3
/
2
0
2
3
3/
9
/
2
0
2
3
9/
1
3
/
2
0
2
2
6/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
Or
d
C
S
-
4
3
1
,
11
/
7
/
2
0
2
2
12
/
2
3
/
2
0
2
2
3/
2
3
/
2
0
2
3
3/
9
/
2
0
2
3
Or
d
C
S
-
4
3
2
6/
6
/
2
0
2
3
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Ord
C
S
-44
8
10
/
3
1/
20
2
3
1/
3
/
2
0
2
4
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
4
3/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
6/
6
/
2
0
2
3
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Or
d
CS
-
4
4
9
10
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
3
1/
3
/
2
0
2
4
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
4
3/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
9/
1
2
/
2
0
2
3
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Or
d
CS
-
4
5
7
10
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
3
1/
3
/
2
0
2
4
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
4
3/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
9/
1
2
/
2
0
2
3
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Or
d
CS
-
4
5
8
10
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
3
1/
3
/
2
0
2
4
5/
9
/
2
0
2
4
3/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
1/
3
0
/
2
0
2
4
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Re
s
o
2
0
2
4
·
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
4
5/
3
/
2
0
2
4
9
/
1
1
/
2
0
2
4
01
5
.,
O
r
d
C
S
-
-
46
5
a
n
d
O
r
d
CS
-
4
6
6
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
Pe
n
d
i
n
g
-
-
.
-
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
le
St
a
t
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Bu
llet
i
n
N
o
.
Re
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Bi
l
l
s
IB-
1
3
4
AB
2
0
1
1
1B
-
13
1
AB
2
0
9
7
1B
-
1
1
1
12
2
3
18
-
1
1
2
1B-30
2
SB
3
5
a
n
d
S
B
3
3
0
IB
-
1
3
9
SB
4
18-
1
3
6
SB
6
1B
-
1
3
3
SB
9
1B
-
1
3
5
SB
3
5
a
n
d
SB
42
3
IB
-
1
3
2
58
3
3
0
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
B
Ex
t
e
n
d
e
d
Re
v
i
e
w
D
u
e
An
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Da
t
e
Co
a
s
t
a
l
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
(1
y
e
a
r
p
o
s
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
He
a
r
i
n
g
D
a
t
e
Ac
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
.
re
v
i
e
w
da
t
e
}
3/23
/
2
0
2
4
6/14
/
2
0
2
4
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
w
i
t
h
Mo
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
LC
P
-
6
-
C
A
R
-
2
2
-
00
5
3
-
2
3/
2
3
/
2
0
2
4
6/
1
4
/
2
0
2
4
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
w
i
t
h
LC
P
-6-CA
R-22·
Mo
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
00
5
2
-
2
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
5
20
2
5
LC
P
·
6
·
C
A
R
·
2
3
·
00
4
8
-
1
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
5
9/
1
2
/
2
0
2
4
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
LC
P
-
6
-
C
A
R
-
2
3
-
ci
t
y
'
s
I
n
i
t
i
a
I
00
4
9
-
1
Su
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
3/
2
9
/
2
0
2
5
20
2
5
LC
P
-
6
-
C
A
R
-
2
3
·
00
5
0
-
1
5/
9
/
2
0
2
5
20
2
5
LCP-6
-
<
V
R-2
3
-
00
5
1
-
1
202
5
LC
P
-
6
-
C
A
R
-
2
4
-
00
1
3
-
1
20
2
5
-
2
0
2
6
-
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 43 of 56
'
I
I
5
8 8
0
B '
8
0
□
I A
•-.
I
'►
~
...
►
I
I
I
h'
J"'
r.
''
L
LI
Exhibit 3
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 44 of 56
To the members of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Dat~'1-l2.3 CA ✓ CC ✓
CM _ACM LDCM (3)..JL'
November 2, 2023
Cou ncil Memorandum
To:
From:
Honorable Mayor Blackburn and Members of the City Council
Jeff Murphy, Community Development Director
Via:
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, C~unity Services
Geoff Patnoe, Assistant City Manager ~v •
{city of
Carlsbad
Memo ID# 2023112
Re: Local Coasta l Program Update -Coastal Commission Review Status (District -All }
This memorandum provides an update on the status of the city's comprehensive update to its
Local Coastal Plan (LCP) that was approved by the City Council in late 2021.
Background
The city submitted an application to the Coastal Commission for its comprehensive LCP update
in December 2021. That application was deemed complete by Coastal Commission staff in April
2022. Under state law, and with a one-year time extension granted in August 2022, the Coastal
Commission had until August 2023 to act on the application. In March 2023, the city received
Coastal Commission staff comments on three out of eight chapters of the LCP update. In
May 2023, Coastal Commission staff informed the city that they would not be able to complete
their review of the LCP update before the August 2023 state mandated hearing deadline, and
therefore, requested the city withdraw the application to provide them more time to review
and comment. Coastal Commission staff informed city staff that they would have comments on
the remaining five chapters available in July/August 2023. The city withdrew its LCP update
application on June 16, 2023.
Refer to Attachment A for additional background, including the implications if the city did not
honor Coastal Commission staff's request to withdraw the application, and Attachment B for a
copy of the withdrawal letter.
Discussion
Since withdrawal of the application in June 2023, the city received !n September 2023
comments from Coastal Commission staff on only one additional LCP chapter. As of the writing
of this memorandum, city staff are still awaiting Coastal Commission staff comments on four of
the eight LCP update chapters. As described in Attachment A, these remaining chapters include
certain policies and topics that likely will raise issues of concern that may be challenging to
resolve, such as policies related to lower-cost visitor accommodations and sea level rise.
City staff continues to meet monthly with Coastal Commission staff, and they indicate it is a
priority to complete their review of the city's LCP update. However, Coastal Commission staff
have not identified an estimated completion date. They have also stated that, after completing
Community Services Branch
Community Development Department
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-5088 t
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 45 of 56
Council Memo -Local Coastal Program Update -Coastal Commission Review Status
November 2, 2023
Page 2
their initial review and comment on all chapters; they may have additional comments on
chapters the city has previously received comments on.
Next Steps
Once all comments are received on all chapters of the LCP update, city staff will attempt to
work through areas of disagreement with Coastal Commission staff and will schedule a City
Council presentation to share the comments received, responses, and options on how to move
forward with the LCP update, particularly those policies where there continues to be
disagreements and/or adverse impacts to the city.
It is anticipated that this process will take several months and a presentation to the City Council
would occur in late Spring 2024 at the earliest, assuming the city receives final comments from
Coastal Commission staff by the end of this calendar year. At that time, the City Council will be
asked to decide whether to direct staff to resubmit the application and should the City Council
decide to move forward with the update, city staff will work with Coastal Commission staff on a
target hearing date before the Coastal Commission.
Attachment: A. Council Memorandum dated June 15, 2023
B. Letter to California Coastal Commission withdrawing Carlsbad LCP Land Use
Plan Update dated June 16, 2023
cc: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Ron Kemp, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Mike Strong, Assistant Community Development Director
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Robert Efird, Principal Planner
Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner
Attachment A
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 46 of 56
To the members ofthe:
CITY COUNCIL
Date~cA ✓cc ✓
cM LAcM . vocM (3) u
June 15, 2023
Council Memorandum
To:
From:
Honorable Mayor Blackburn and Members of the City Council
Jeff Murphy, Community Development Director
Via:
{city of
Carlsbad
Memo ID# 2023057
Re:
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Geoff Patnoe, Assistant City Manage,2§?
Local Coastal Program Update -Coa~ Commission Review Status (Districts -All)
This memorandum provides an update on the status of the city's application to the California
Coastal Commission to comprehensively update the city's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan
(LCP). At the request of Coastal Commission staff on May 30, 2023, the city will be withdrawing
its application to provide more time for Coastal Commission staff to complete their review and
comment on the LCP update. This is a common strategy used by Coastal Commission staff when
they are unable to complete their review by state mandated hearing deadlines. Prior to
. resubmitting the application, city staff will schedule an item for the City Council to review and
provide direction on the comments received, responses, and options on how to move forward
with the LCP update, including application resubmittal.
Background
The City Council approved a comprehensive update to the city's LCP on October 12, 2021
(Attachment A). Since that time, the following milestone_s have occurred:
o December 23, 2021-City staff formally submitted its LCP update application to the Coastal
Commission for processing.
o April 22, 2022 -Coastal Commission staff deemed the city's application complete for
further processing. Under state law, Coastal Commission staff had until August 31, 2022, to
present the application before the Coastal Commission for decision, unless the deadline was
extended by the Coastal Commission (maximum of 12 months).
o August 10, 2022 -The Coastal Commission executed the time extension, thereby extending
the deadline to act on the city's application from August 2022 to August 2023. No further
extensions are allowed under state statute.
-o March 30, 2023 -City staff received the Coastal Commission staff's preliminary questions
and comments on three (out of eight) chapters of the city's LCP update application.
o May 30, 2023 -Coastal Commission staff requested the city withdraw and resubmit its
application (Attachment B). The email states that the withdrawal is necessary to allow
Coastal Commission staff additional time to provide the city with comments and address
differences prior to a Coastal Commission hearing, which they anticipate would occur in
Community Services Branch
Community Development Department
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-5088 t
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 47 of 56
Council Memo -Local Coastal Program Update -Coastal Commission Review Status
June 15, 2023
Page 2
October 2023 if the city immediately resubmitted the application. The reason why Coastal
Commission requested the withdrawal was due to ongoing staffing limitations, current case
levels, and the Coastal Commission staff member assigned to process the LCP application
left the organization.
Discussion
Due to the complexity and volume of changes proposed in the LCP update, the best option is to
withdraw the application and provide more time for Coastal Commission staff to review and
comment on the proposed changes, and to give the city time to review and consider the
comments adequately. This is a common strategy used by Coastal Commission staff when they
are unable to complete their review of an application by state mandated hearing deadlines. If
the application is not withdrawn, the Coastal Commission staff will be required to schedule the
application before the Coastal Commission in August 2023, with a recommendation of denial or
significant modifications proposed without opportunity for city staff review and discussion.
At the time of writing this memorandum, city staff are awaiting comments from Coastal
Commission staff on five of the eight chapters of the city's proposed LCP update. Within those
chapters are certain policies and topics that staff anticipate will result in disagreements and
raise issues of concern that will be challenging to resolve. Some of the more significant policies
in the LCP update include the following.
• Lower-cost visitor accommodations policies -Coastal Commission staff is requesting
that the city add policies that mandate new or redeveloped hotels provide 25% of the
rooms at a low-cost rate, and that the city prohibit the loss of existing low-cost hotels
unless the low-cost rooms are replaced at a 1:1 ratio. The addition of such policies raises
significant concerns about impacts to existing and new hotel uses.
• Sea level rise policies -the city has not received comments on these policies yet,
however, anticipated issues of concern include:
o Defining which existing structures would be eligible for protection by a sea
wall. Although not specified in the Coastal Act, Coastal Commission staff have
stated that they want the city to no longer allow existing structures along the
shoreline to be eligible for protection by a sea wall, unless the structure existed
prior to the Coastal Act (1977).
o Limitations on redevelopment of existing structures. Coastal Commission staff
have stated that they want existing structures to be viewed as new development,
subject to the new sea level rise policies, if an improvement to the existing
structure is proposed and that improvement, as well as all past improvements
since 1977, cumulatively result in a change to the original structure of more than
50% to a major structural component or a cumulative increase in gross floor area
exceeding 50%.
Council Memo -Local Coastal Program Update -Coastal Commission Review Status
June 15, 2023
Page 3
Next Steps
City staff will be withdrawing the application on June 16, 2023, but will not resubmit a new
application until the city has received and evaluated all Coastal Commission staff comments on
all chapters of the LCP update, expected now by the end of July 2023. City staff will attempt to
work through areas of disagreement with Coastal Commission staff to obtain concurrence on
acceptable language.
Shortly thereafter, city staff will schedule an item for the City Council to review and provide
direction on the comments received, responses, and options on how to move forward with the
LCP update, particularly those policies where there continues to be disagreements and/or
adverse impacts to the city. Through that process the appropriate time to resubmit the LCP
update application will be determined. When the city resubmits its application, city staff will
work with Coastal Commission staff on a target hearing date before the Coastal Commission.
Attachment: A. Staff Report dated October 12, 2021:
https://records.carlsbadca.gov/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=5485451&dbid=0
&repo=CityofCarlsbad&cr=l
(Due to the size of Attachment A, it is being provided electronically via the link
above, and a hardcopy is on file in the Office of the City Council, as reference)
B.Email dated May 30, 2023, from Coastal Commission staff to City Planner
cc: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Ron Kemp, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Mike Strong, Assistant Community Development Director
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Robert Efird, Principal Planner
Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 48 of 56
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 49 of 56
Eric Lardy
From:
Sent:
To:
Carney, Kaitli n@Coastal < kaitlin.carney@coastal.ca.gov>
Tuesday, May 30, 2023 9:29 AM
Eric Lardy
Attachment B
Cc: Jennifer Jesser; Schwing, Karl@Coastal; Lilly, Diana@Coastal; Leslie, Kanani@Coastal; Ross,
Toni@Coastal
Subject: Request to withdraw Carlsbad LCPA LCP-6-CAR-21-0087-3
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Eric,
As we discussed last week, while Commission staff continues to work diligently on review of the LUP update
LCP amendment (LCP-6-CAR-21 -0087-3), as a result of the primary staff person assigned to the LCP leaving
the Commission, we are requesting that City staff withdraw and resubmit the amendment to allow us additional
time to provide you comments and coordinate with you prior to taking this item to a Commission hearing. Our
goal is to take the LCPA to the Commission at its next San Diego hearing in October 2023.
We know how important this effort is to the City, and we realize this project has been in review for a long time.
If this delay causes budget concerns due to the additional City staff time required to extend the time period, we
would be happy to discuss options that may be available to provide the City additional grant funding via the
Commission's Local Assistance Grant Program.
We'd appreciate if you could let us know whether you would be willing to withdraw and resubmit no later than
June 6.
Thank you again, and if you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please don't hesitate to
contact me.
Kaitlin Carney
Permits SupeNisor
California Coastal Commission
7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, 92108
kaitlin.carney@coastal.ca.gov
CALIFORNIA
COASTAL
COMMISSION
The Commission remains open for business. The best way to contact me is by email. In addition to the regular means of mailing
documents as required by the regulations or statute, please send a copy of all co rrespondence or other documents electronically via
email.
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 50 of 56
June 16, 2023
Diana Lilly, District Manager
California Coastal Commission
San Diego Coast District
7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103
San Diego, CA 92108
SUBJECT: Ca rlsbad LCP land Use Plan Update (LCP-6-CAR-21-0087-3)
Ms. Lilly,
Attachment B
{cityof
Carlsbad
In response to the Coastal Commission staff request described below, the City of Carlsbad hereby
withdraws its application to comprehensively update its Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (LCP-6-
CAR-21-0087-3). •
Background
• Dec. 23, 2021 -City staff submitted its LCP amendment application.
• April 22, 2022 -the city's application was deemed filed.
• Aug. 10, 2022 -the Coastal Commission waived the time limit for the commission to act on land
use plan amendments and extended the time limit to August 2023.
• Mar. 30, 2023 -the city received the commission staff's preliminary questions and comments on
three (out of eight) chapters of the city's updated land use plan.
Coastal Commission Staff Request
In an email dated May 30, 2023, commission staff requested that the city withdraw and resubmit its
application. As stated in the email, the withdrawal is necessary to allow commission staff additional
time to provide the city with comments and coordinate prior to a commission hearing.
In a meeting on June 1, 2023, commission staff stated they will prioritize providing comments on the
remaining land use plan chapters and estimated completion of the comments within a week or two
following the July Coastal Commission hearing.
Future Resubmittal
Once the city has received and evaluated all commission staff comments on the land use plan update,
the city will determine the appropriate time to resubmit the application.
Please contact Senior Planner, Jennifer Jesser, at jennifer.jesser@carlsbadca.gov if you have any
questions regarding this letter and to confirm withdrawal of the application.
Sincerely,
ERIC LARDY
City Planner
EL:mh
Community Development Department
Planning Division I 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 I 442-339-2600 www.carlsbadca.gov
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 51 of 56
Attachment: May 30, 2023 email from Coastal Commission Staff to the City
cc: Scott Chadwick, City of Carlsbad City Manager
Geoff Patnoe, City of Carlsbad Assistant City Manager
Gary Barberio, City of Carlsbad Deputy City Manager
Jeff Murphy, City of Carlsbad Community Development Director
Robert Efird, City of Carlsbad Principal Planner
Jennifer Jesser, City of Carlsbad Senior Planner
l<ate Huckelbridge, California Coastal Commission Executive Director
l<arl Schwing, California Coastal Commission District Director .
Diana Lilly, California Coastal Commission, District Manager
l<anani Leslie, California Coastal Commission, Coastal Program Manager
Kaitlin Carney, California Coastal Commission, District Supervisor
Toni Ross, California Coastal Commission, Coastal Resiliency Coordinator
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 52 of 56
Eric Lardy
From:
Sent:
To:
Carney, Kaitlin@Coastal <kaitlin.carney@coastal.ca.gov>
Tuesday, May 30, 2023 9:29 AM
Eric Lardy
Attachment A
Cc: Jennifer Jesser; Schwing, Karl@Coastal; Lilly, Diana@Coastal; Leslie, Kanani@Coastal; Ross,
Toni@Coastal
Subject: Request to withdraw Carlsbad LCPA LCP-6-CAR-21-0087-3
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Eric,
As we discussed last week, while Commission staff continues to work diligently on review of the LUP update
LCP amendment (LCP-6-CAR-21 -0087-3), as a result of the primary staff person assigned to the LCP leaving
the Commission, we are requesting that City staff withdraw and resubmit the amendment to allow us additional
time to provide you comments and coordinate with you prior to taking this item to a Commission hearing. Our
goal is to take the LCPA to the Commission at its next San Diego hearing in October 2023.
We know how important this effort is to the City, and we realize this project has been in review for a long time.
If this delay causes budget concerns due to the additional City staff time required to extend the time period, we
would be happy to discuss options that may be available to provide the City additional grant funding via the
Commission's Local Assistance Grant Program.
We'd appreciate if you could let us know whether you would be willing to withdraw and resubmit no later than
June 6.
Thank you again, and if you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please don't hesitate to
contact me.
Kaitlin Carney
Permits Supervisor
California Coastal Commission
7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, 92108
kaitlin.carney@coastal.ca.qov
CAL I FORN I A
COASTAL
COl'/IM I S S I ON
The Commission remains open for business. The best way to contact me is by email. In addition to the regular means of mailing
documents as required by the regulations or statute, please send a copy of all correspondence or other documents electronically via
email.
en attachments or click on links unless ou recognize /he sender and know the content is
Exhibit 4
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 53 of 56
If the matter requires immediate attention call local law enforcement or 911 .
Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR)
Help keep our community safe by reporting information regarding potential threats and
criminal activity.
Please use the appropriate buttons above for reporting suspicious activity.
National Fusion Centers Association -Video Series
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 54 of 56
sharing, regional preparedness, training and
investigative support/analysis for first responders
and other public and private partners in the region.
Training Those Who
Serve
SD-LECC provides intensive multi-disciplinary training
to Law Enforcement, Public Safety, Government and
Private Sector professionals, with exercises to
strengthen counter-terrorism readiness.
Partner Participation
If you are a state, local or federal law enforcement
agent or member of a supporting agency, SD-LECC
membership offers significant benefits. So we invite
all:
• Law Enforcement Agencies
• Public Safety Agencies
• Government Agencies
• Private Sector Partners
Privacy Policy
Ensuring the preservation of privacy, civil liberties,
and civil rights is of paramount importance for all SD-
LECC operations. In furtherance of this, the SD-LECC
follows the California State Threat Assessment
System {STAS Privacy Policy), which was developed
through consultation andcollaboration with all STAS
components.
Benefits of Membership
• Analytical Case Support
• Counter-terrorism and Public Safety Training
• Regularly published situational awareness
updates
• Participation in intelligence led policing
• Access to CIP support
• Access to advanced Cyber support
• Access to LES materials
• Access to TLO Library
• Access to training history and certificates
• Online SAR submission with auto complete
• Online training registration with auto complete
• Priority for training
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 55 of 56
Mission Statement
The SD-LECC's mission is to protect the people and infrastructure of San
Diego and Imperial Counties from criminal activity, terrorism, violent
extremism and potential hazards by effective information sharing and
timely/relevant analysis and dissemination of intelligence to local state,
tribal and federal partners.
Providing Essential Visibility and
Training
The SD-LECC provides a robust training and outreach program consisting
of courses, exercises, and intelligence briefings. The Threat Liaison Officer
(TLO) Program provides certified training to law enforcement and public
safety personnel in San Diego and Imperial Counties. A TLO is an
individual who serves as the point of contact for public safety in matters
related to violent extremism and threat information. In addition, the SD-
LECC's Infrastructure Liaison Officer (ILO) Program provides training to the
private sector and coordinates all outreach, training and exercises in
partnership with the San Diego lnfraGard Chapter.
Protecting Critical Infrastructure
The SD-LECC Critical Infrastructure Protection Program (CIP) coordinates
the identification and prioritization of infrastructure in San Diego and
Imperial counties and provides technical assistance to facilities to
minimize risk to violent extremism, terrorism, criminal acts and natural
hazards. The CIP program offers facility security surveys, develops key
infrastructure sector specific awareness products, and produces 360
degree visual Virtual Walkthroughs for public facilities designed to assist
first responders.
Improving Officer Safety Through
Deconfl iction
The SD-LECC Watch Center serves at the HIDTA deconfliction center for
San Diego and Imperial Counties. The Watch Center provides rapid
analysis to public safety personnel and investigators and performs case
coordination in order to ensure officer safety, facilitate information
sharing, and promote cooperation among law enforcement agencies. The
Watch Center serves over 100 Federal, State, and Local agencies in the
San Diego/Imperial HIDTA area of responsibility.
Supporting Investigations
The SD-LECC Investigative Support Unit (ISU) is a collaborative
effort between intelligence professionals from federal, state and
local entities that provides investigative case support for all
crimes, to any requesting law enforcement public safety agency.
The ISU is staffed by experienced analysts who can provide
assistance from initiation through adjudication of a case or
project. For additional information please contact us.
Cyber Support and Analysis
The SD-LECC provides advanced cyber support and analysis to
Local, State, Tribal and Territorial (SLTT) Law Enforcement as well
as various Critical Infrastructure partners throughout San Diego
and Imperial County. By assisting local law enforcement, the SD-
LECC is able to identify malicious activity in San Diego and
Imperial counties and provide the details of that behavior in a
timely and actionable manner.
Our Territory
The SDLECC area of responsibility includes both San Diego and
Imperial Counties. This includes the entire shared international
border between California and Mexico which is home to the
busiest international land border crossing at San Ysidro. The
region also stretches from the pacific coast, east to the Colorado
River and California's border with Arizona. The region spans 8,700
square miles and includes a population in excess of 3.3 million
citizens.
•
•
Dec. 10, 2024 Item #3 Page 56 of 56
Supporting Our National Fusion
Center Network
The SD-LECC is an integral component of The National Fusion Center
Enterprise, and is one of 80 OHS-designated centers in the United States.
Fusion centers serve as focal points within the state and local environment
for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-related
information between the federal government and state, local, tribal,
territorial (SLTT) and private sector partners.
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com >
Monday, December 9, 2024 2:50 PM
City Clerk
Melanie Burkholder; Teresa Acosta
All Receive -Agenda Item n.__3
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date tJh/ti CA ~ cc ~
no v ocno v-oc¥ rn --
Subject:
Attachments:
Public comment for Legislative Subcommittee 12/10/2024 Item #3
2024-11-19 2025 Legislative Bill Proposals -Linke.pdf
Carlsbad Legislative Subcommittee:
Please consider the following comments from the Equitable Land Use Alliance (ELUA) on your draft 2025
Legislative Platform.
Section 5 >Housing> (n): CEQA exemptions for affordable housing projects
We encourage the subcommittee to remove or modify this section, which currently reads: "Support
measures that would exempt affordable housing projects from complying with the California
Environmental Quality Act while continuing to mitigate residents' potential exposure to health and safety
hazards."
It is unclear whether the definition of "affordable housing project" means only those that are 100%
affordable, or any project that includes any number of affordable units. In either case, ELUA sees no
good reason for the city to eliminate the need to mitigate environmental impacts, which can be
substantial, just because some minimum number of affordable units are included in a project.
Recommended additions
ELUA also encourages the subcommittee to add the following to the platform, consistent with the
attached legislative bill idea proposals submitted to our state representatives (Sen. Blakespear and Asm.
Boerner):
• Prevent development projects that replace VMT-reducing retail with VMT-generating residential
from avoiding appropriate GHG mitigation
• Re-define "major transit stops" to exclude those with poor transit service
• Re-define the distance measurement method to transit stops to make them more realistic
• Allow local jurisdictions to require project design changes, as long as they do not affect feasibility
• Allow local jurisdictions to use incentives and/or require mitigation related to a project's effect on
food/pharmacy deserts
In particular, the state's definition of "major transit stop" should be modified to include only those stops
with frequent, local bus service that meaningfully allows people to commute and run errands, and to
measure the distance using actual walking distance/time--not simply based on the fact that a train stops
there and being within one-half mile of any part of the stop "as the crow flies." The current interpretation
creates greater than one-mile diameter circles around the Carlsbad Village and Poinsettia train stations,
within which developers are largely given free range to do anything, even though the actual transit quality
at those stations is very low.
1
Best regards,
Steve Linke
Equitable Land Use Alliance
Carlsbad, CA
2
BACKGROUND
2025 LEGISLATIVE BILL PROPOSALS
11/19/2024
Example development project that raises several CEQA and local land use control issues under
existing state law/guidance
A development project was recently approved in Carlsbad that will demolish a vehicle miles
traveled (VMT}-reducing local-serving retail mall (Carlsbad Village Plaza} that includes the only
affordable grocery store, hardware store, and pharmacy within several miles, as well as about
ten other stores. This will force current customers to travel farther on average to do their critical
shopping/services. Many will have to start driving rather than walking/biking. The project
replaces the Plaza with 218 apartments of new residents and a few small stores, plus a five-
story parking garage for their cars with all of the associated new VMT.
Despite this, the project was exempted from doing a California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA} transportation environmental impact study based, in part, on a claim that it will create a
net reduction in VMT. The net reduction was achieved by subtracting the VMT going to the
current stores and claiming that all of the substitute stores in the surrounding areas would
become responsible for the diverted VMT, even though there is no practical or legal way to
make the other stores accountable (and despite the fact that the existing stores are defined as
VMT reducers-not VMT-generating}.
In addition, a corner of the project site is within 0.5 miles of a corner of the parking lot of a train
station (Carlsbad Village Station} "as the crow flies," so a transit-based screen also was cited to
avoid the CEQA VMT study. However, actual walking distance from the residences to the
boarding area is at least 0. 7 miles, and overall transit service is poor at the station (it includes
only train service along the coast with 40-120 minute service intervals and a single, low-
utilization bus route with 30-60 minute service intervals and limited weekend service}.
Further, while the project is claiming to be "transit-oriented" for the purpose of avoiding CEQA,
it includes the aforementioned five-story parking garage with more than the minimum number
of parking spaces required by the city--likely because the units would be impossible to market
without substantial parking, given the low quality of the available transit.
Finally, the apartment buildings are five stories high, and the maximum height is 69 feet, far
exceeding the city's four-story/45-foot development standard limits, and the buildings also
exceed the city's building mass limit. State Density Bonus Laws require waivers of these local
development standards based on the inclusion of 12.5% affordable units. However, there is a
single-story portion of the project that, if developed more vertically, likely could keep the
1
buildings within the city's development standards. But there seems to be ambiguity in state law,
state guidance, and case law regarding a local jurisdiction's ability to require such design
changes, even if they do not physically or financially make the project infeasible or reduce unit
numbers.
ISSUES/SOLUTIONS
Issue #1: Development projects that replace VMT-reducing retail uses with VMT-generating
residential uses inappropriately avoid CEQA transportation studies and, consequently, avoid
greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation.
California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 15064.3 generally requires that local jurisdictions use
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to evaluate transportation impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to other state laws (e.g., § 21099), the Governor's
Office of Planning and Research (OPR)-now called the Office of Land Use and Climate
Innovation (LCl)-has prepared guidelines for VMT analyses. In order to be compliant with state
laws, those guidelines are generally adopted by local jurisdictions for evaluation of development
applications.
Solution #1: Loopholes that allow developers to avoid CEQA VMT studies need to be closed. If a
development project will eliminate local-serving retail, forcing diversion of VMT to other
local/regional stores, the development should not be able to subtract the diverted mileage from
its VMT calculation. VMT-related legislation and/or LCI guidance should close such loopholes,
and LCI could be empowered to provide guidance on analysis of individual projects, much like
HCD has been empowered to enforce housing laws on individual projects.
Issue #2: Under current state law, some limited-service transit stops are being considered
"major transit stops," which is exploited by developers to avoid CEQA VMT transportation
studies, while adding substantial vehicles/VMT and associated GHGs.
Various sections of state law restrict local development regulations (e.g., parking minimums)
and provide CEQA (e.g., VMT) screen-outs/exemptions for so-called "transit priority projects"
(or "transit-oriented projects," "infill opportunity zones," etc.)-i.e., projects "within one-half
mile" of a so-called "major transit stop" (or "high-quality transit corridor," etc.). For example,
see§ 15064.3, 21064.3, 21155, 65088.1, 65863.2, and 66005.1.
Most state laws seem to refer to § 20064.3 for the definition of "major transit stop," which
includes existing rail stations, bus rapid transit stations, or ferry terminals served by bus or rail;
or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15
minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. Other laws seem to
add transit stops that are "included in applicable regional transportation plans." Apparently, a
2
new law (AB 2553} is about to go into effect that will change§ 66005.1 (restricting CEQA VMT
study requirements) to include facilities to be constructed within one year and up to 20-minute
bus service intervals.
Solution #2: As described above, Carlsbad Village Station has a train route that makes it a
"major transit stop," but it is of very limited utility for most commuters, because it only includes
a few stops along the coast, and its single bus route with 30-60 minute service intervals does
not provide meaningful transit alternatives and is not well-utilized. The above-cited laws should
be changed to better define "major transit stop" to include only stops with transit service that is
actually usable by a majority of the future residents (e.g., multiple local routes with 20 minute
service intervals during peak commute times), independent of whether a train stops there, or
whether it is included in a regional plan.
Issue #3: Under current state laws and HCD guidance, the measurement of the distance from
a transit stop does not reflect reality or the actual likelihood of usage.
Regarding the method of determining whether a project is "within one-half mile" of transit, the
logical measurement would be walking distance from the residences to the boarding area (and
even a one-half mile walk is pushing the limits of usable transit). However, the Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD} has provided guidance that it should be measured
as "a straight, direct line from the nearest edge of the parcel containing the project site to any
point on the parcel(s) that make up the property upon which a major transit stop is located."
HCD's guidance cites some supporting evidence in other laws and case law for their
interpretation of the straight-line measurement from the nearest points of the sites, but they
ignore common sense and other laws with different interpretations of such measurements. For
example, § 21155 specifies:
A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-
quality transit corridor if all parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent of
their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor and if not more than 10
percent of the residential units or 100 units, whichever is less, in the project are farther
than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.
In the example development project, the residential buildings are set well back from the nearest
edge of the project site-in fact, there is a commercial lot between the residential portion and
the transit stop. And the nearest point at the transit stop is the parking lot. Further, people
cannot fly to the transit stop, they must navigate on the streets (and there may even be cases
where there is a barrier, such as a canyon). Using the definition in § 21155, the distance would
be about 0. 7 miles.
3
Solution #3: The laws should be changed to specify average walking distance to the boarding
area of the transit stop and use the definition of the residential site in § 21155, which would
account for potential physical barriers and the actual distance for residents-rather than the
over-simplistic one-half mile radius "as the crow flies" from the nearest points of the lots.
Issue #4: There seems to be ambiguity in state law, state guidance, and case law regarding a
local jurisdiction's ability to require design changes, even if they do not physically or financially
make the project infeasible or reduce unit numbers.
Solution #4: Make it clear in state law that cities can require such design changes to make
projects compliant with local rules/development standards, so that HCD guidance and the
courts will not create contrary rules.
Issue #5: The example project will demolish the only affordable grocery store and the only
hardware store and pharmacy within several miles, creating a food and pharmacy "desert"
without any consequences.
Solution #5: Allow local jurisdictions to require additional mitigation measures when proposed
projects will create food or pharmacy deserts and to reward projects that reduce deserts. Code
§ 66005.1 includes an opportunity for a special traffic impact fee carve-out when a project is in
proximity to " ... [c]onvenience retail uses, including a store that sells food ... " And there may be
other enacted or proposed food/pharmacy desert related laws that could set some sort of
precedent.
Note: None of the above solutions are intended to preclude project approval-just prevent
inappropriate avoidance of CEQA transportation-based mitigation and/or unintended creation
of food/pharmacy/retail deserts.
Steve Linke
splinke@gmail.com
Carlsbad, CA
4