Loading...
09-13-2021 CC Agenda Packet1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding the items on the consent calendar or items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. 4.A.MINUTES: 1) AMENDED REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 12, 2021 AND; NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 AGENDA Regular City Council Meeting CITY COUNCIL Monday, September 13, 2021 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 7:00 PM The meeting agenda is available on the City’s website. A live audio of the City Council meeting will be available on the City’s website. Both the agenda and the live audio can be found here: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php. Members of the public may submit written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published. Audio recordings to all the City Council meetings can be found here: https://cms5.revize.com/revize/rollinghillsca/government/agenda/index.php While on this page, locate the meeting date of interest then click on AUDIO. Another window will appear. In the new window, you can select the agenda item of interest and listen to the audio by hitting the play button. Written Action Minutes to the City Council meetings can be found in the AGENDA, typically under Item 4A Minutes. Please contact the City Clerk at 310 377-1521 or email at cityclerk@cityofrh.net for assistance. Next Resolution No. 1287 Next Ordinance No. 372 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1 2) REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 4.B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 4.C.CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (CALOES) DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED AGENTS. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 4.D.SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2021 RELIABILITY REPORT. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 4.E.REVISED SENATE BILL 9 (HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS). RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.OLD BUSINESS 8.NEW BUSINESS 8.A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH JIMENEZ CONSULTING SOLUTIONS TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT. RECOMMENDATION: Approve amended agreement. 8.B.CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA AMENDING ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 15.20.050 (VIOLATIONS), 1.04.010 (DEFINITIONS), AND 1.08.030 (VIOLATION—SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WHEN) TO MAKE VIOLATION OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST FIREWORKS WITHIN THE CITY SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION AND PENALTIES; AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT RECOMMENDATION: Consider and Approve. 8.C.REVIEW RESOLUTIONS TO BE PRESENTED AT THE CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 22 - 7.12.2021_CCMinutes.Amendment.docx 8.23.2021_CCMinutes.P.pdf Payment of Bills.pdf 2019-10-16 Ltr and forms accepting grant.pdf CalOES Authorize Agents Safety Element.pdf Rolling Hills2021.pdf RH Opposition SB 9_2021-08-25.pdf Amendment to Agreement with Jimenez - SIGNED by JCS 2021.09.10.pdf Resolution No Fee Schedule FY21-22 Council meeting.docx Fireworks Ordinance.DOCX 2 SEPTEMBER 24, 2021; AND PROVIDE DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY'S VOTING DELEGATE MAYOR BEA DIERINGER. R E COM M EN D ATIO N : Staff recommends that the City Council direct Mayor Dieringer to vote for Resolution No. 1 and Resolution No. 2 to best represent the City during the 2021 League of California Cities Annual Conference. 8.D.SCHEDULE THE THE ANNUAL HOLIDAY OPEN HOUSE ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2021 FROM 4PM TO 7PM; AND REVIEW AND APPROVE THE GUEST LIST FOR THE OPEN HOUSE. RECOMMENDATION: Consider and approve event. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 9.A.REPORT ON THE AUGUST 30, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING. (MIRSCH & BLACK) RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file a report from the Fire Fuel Committee. 9.B.CONSIDER SPECIAL STUDIES AS ALLOWED BY SB 330, HOUSING CRISIS ACT OF 2019 AND SB 9, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. (MAYOR DIERINGER) RECOMMENDATION: Presentation from Mayor Dieringer. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF 10.A.CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED WORKSHOP ON STORM WATER MEETING REMINDER AND DRAFTED AGENDA. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 11.CLOSED SESSION 12.ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Monday, September, 27, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274. League of CA Cities Resolution Packets 08162021.pdf League of CA Cities Resolution 1-1% Bradley Burns Tax & Concurrence Letters.pdf City of Rancho Cucamonga Letter for Support 08202021 for Reso 1.pdf League of CA Cities Resolution 2-Funding for CUPC & Concurrence Letters.pdf 2021_OpenHouseProposedInviteList_2021-08-24.xlsx Fire Fuel Committee Agenda Packet.pdf 345-Fire_Fuel_Hazard_Abatement_Dead_tree.pdf Senate Bills.docx Draft City Council and Planning Commission Stormwater Agenda.docx Notice: Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item. Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting 3 due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. 4 Agenda Item No.: 4.A Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:MINUTES: 1) AMENDED REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 12, 2021 AND; 2) REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2021. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: The July 12, 2021 Minutes were amended to further clarify Councilmember Pieper's motion to Item 10B. The changes are underlined below. ORIGINAL MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned that if all four Peninsula Cities address the housing bill, the City of Rolling Hills can address it as well, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. REVISED MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned that if all four Peninsula Cities are against a housing bill, City of Rolling Hills can also sign any opposing letter to such bill, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: NONE. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 7.12.2021_CCMinutes.Amendment.docx 8.23.2021_CCMinutes.P.pdf 5 Minutes 1 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, JULY 12, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person and via Zoom Teleconference on the above date at 7:05 p.m. Mayor Bea Dieringer presiding. 2. ROLL CALL Present:Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson Absent:None. Staff Present: Elaine Jeng, City Manager Meredith T. Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director Janely Sandoval, City Clerk Ashford Ball, Senior Management Analyst Stephanie Grant, Code Enforcement Officer Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Terry Shea, Finance Director Jennifer Misetich, Deputy City Attorney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY MAYOR DIERINGER. 3. OPEN AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME None. 4. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 4A REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 14, 2021 AND MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 2021. City Clerk Sandoval presented edits. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve minutes as corrected including Councilmember Mirsch’s correction, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. 6 Minutes 2 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR 5A PAYMENT OF BILLS. 5B SPONSOR THE LEAD BLOCK CAPTAINS TO ATTEND THE 2021 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXPO ON SEPTEMBER 22-24, 2021 AT THE SAFE CREDIT UNION CONVENTION CENTER IN SACRAMENTO. 5C APPROVE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY FOR PHASE 3 FUEL LOAD REDUCTION IN THE NATURE PRESERVE IN THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY BORDER. 5D LETTER OF COMMENDATION FOR TREVOR MOORE, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT DEPUTY FORESTER. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve as presented and Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 6. COMMISSION ITEMS None. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7A A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES OWED TO REPUBLIC SERVICES PURSUANT TO ITS SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE WITH THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ON THE FY 2021- 2022 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER’S OFFICE ANNUAL TAX ROLL. 7 Minutes 3 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 Finance Director Shea presented the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to put it on the tax roll, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. Councilmember Mirsch amended the motion to make a finding that there is no majority protest by property owners within the City of Rolling Hills, adopt the enclosed resolution in the attached report, and place the sanitation service charge on the annual County of L.A. Tax Roll, and Councilmember Pieper seconded the amended motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, and Mirsch. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Wilson. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8. OLD BUSINESS 8A ROLLING HILLS 5TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT CERTIFICATION BY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. Planning and Community Services Director Elguira presented the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8B REVIEW OVERALL PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AT 65% DESIGN PROGRESS FOR TWO LAYOUT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to move 8B to next Council meeting, and Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion. 8 Minutes 4 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9A SBCCOG COMMEMORATIVE SHOVEL TO CELEBRATE THE NOVEMBER “TURN-UP” OF THE SOUTH BAY FIBER NETWORK. City Manager Jeng presented the item. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9B RECEIVE AND FILE UPDATED ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS FOR CITY RESPONSE IN THE WORKPLACE TO COVID-19. Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item. Deputy City Attorney Misetich provided additional information regarding the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9C DEMONSTRATION OF RESIDENT PORTAL: EMERGENCY INFORMATION SYSTEM AND TRADING POST. Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item. 9 Minutes 5 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 Discussion was held. Resident Arlene Honbo explained that the Block Captains’ access to the EIS contains less residential details compared to the information accessible by staff. Resident Jim Aichele stated his concerns regarding who will have access to residents’ information and is afraid inappropriate items will be posted for sale in the Trading Post. Discussion continued. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9D REPORT ON JUNE 30, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING. Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item. Discussion was held. Resident Arlene Honbo explained that the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) had already explained their data gathering process. She also recommended that the City Council approve policies and use grant funds to begin clearing certain canyons. Lastly, she stated that she understood that clearing the canyons is a complicated process, but feels that a short-term solution addressing fire fuel modification can be beneficial for the City. Resident Gene Honbo stated that the City must decide on a short-term solution, but further explained that fires can start internally and not just externally so additional exit routes should be considered. He also stated that clearing the bottom of the canyons could be of assistance. Resident Jim Aichele is concerned that there is certain vegetation that burns quickly and should be cleared from the canyons. He also recommended considering clearing certain trails within the canyons for fire fuel protection. Resident Alfred Visco stated that following LACFD’s recommendations can be beneficial and a start. He also recommended that staff create a polygon establishing the 10 Minutes 6 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 area that should be tackled, thus creating a new methodology to be able to focus on short- term solutions. Discussion continued. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to push the item to the next meeting to include requested information in order to make a decision, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9E APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES FOR LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SERVICES. Planning and Community Services Director Elguira presented the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve the first amendment to the professional services agreement with Environmental Design Associates, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9F APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MV CHENG & ASSOCIATES FOR FINANCE SERVICES FOR A NOT-TO- EXCEED AMOUNT OF $68,960 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022. City Manager Jeng presented the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve the agreement as presented, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. 11 Minutes 7 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 10. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 10A ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION (RHCA) GATE ATTENDANT TRAVON THOMPSON’S SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. Mayor Dieringer presented the item. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to give a commendation certificate, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 10B AB 215 HOUSING ELEMENT: REGIONAL HOUSING NEED: RELATIVE PROGRESS DETERMINATION (DIERINGER). Mayor Dieringer presented the item. Discussion was held. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned that if all four Peninsula Cities are against a housing bill, City of Rolling Hills can also sign any opposing letter to such bill, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 10C DRONE POLICY (DIERINGER). 12 Minutes 8 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 Mayor Dieringer presented the item. Discussion was held. Resident Jim Aichele recommended drafting a drone ordinance allowing drones to be used only within the drone owner’s property, and that drone owners should receive written consent to fly over other residents’ properties. Resident Arlene Honbo restated and agreed with resident Aichele’s comments. Resident Alfred Visco restated and agreed with resident Aichele’s comments, and recommended that staff conduct further research regarding other cities’ ordinances on drones. 11. MATTERS FROM STAFF 11A FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT CASES QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2021 (APRIL 1 THROUGH JUNE 30). Code Enforcement Officer Grant presented the item. Discussion was held. 12. CLOSED SESSION None. 13. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, July 26, 2021 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Janely Sandoval City Clerk 13 Minutes 9 City Council Regular Meeting July 12, 2021 Approved, ________________________________ Bea Dieringer Mayor 14 Minutes 1 City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2021 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, AUGUST 23, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 7:01 p.m. Mayor Bea Dieringer presiding. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Black Staff Present: Elaine Jeng, City Manager Meredith T. Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director Janely Sandoval, City Clerk Ashford Ball, Senior Management Analyst Jane Abzug, City Attorney Kathleen McGowan, MS4 Permit Consultant PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY MAYOR DIERINGER. 3. OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME Resident Alfred Visco recommended that the City Council close the City’s gates during fire season, and that any outside contractors coming in to the City should be required to carry fire extinguishers. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR 4A REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 09, 2021. 4B PAYMENT OF BILLS. 4C REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR JULY 2021. 4D RECEIVE AND FILE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR CITY HALL LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE. 15 Minutes 2 City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2021 MOTION: Councilmember Wilson moved to approve consent calendar with amendment to 4A, and Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS 5A ZONING CASE 21-08: REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FOR ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND STRUCTURES IN THE FRONT YARD; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING LOCATED AT 3 OUTRIDER ROAD (HOYLER). MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 7. OLD BUSINESS 7A CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HQE SYSTEMS INC. FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $3,280 TO CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE BLOCK CAPTAINS PROGRAM COMMUNICATION PROJECT. Resident Alfred Visco recommended researching satellite phones and other vendors for a more reasonable price. Resident Gene Honbo recommended that the City have clear exit routes, for residents to harden their home, and the need for an alarm system as satellite phones might not be as effective for Block Captains. 16 Minutes 3 City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2021 MOTION: Councilmember Mirsch motioned we enter the Public Service Agreement with HQE Systems Inc. as amended, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 7B RECEIVE AND FILE THE CITY’S NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI) TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PENINSULA ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (EWMP), AND DISCUSS PARTICIPATION IN THE TORRANCE AIRPORT STORMWATER BASIN PROJECT. MOTION: Councilmember Mirsch motioned to receive and file the City’s Notice of Intent to join the Peninsula EWMP, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. MOTION: Councilmember Mirsch motioned to direct staff to continue with the procedure of moving forward with the Torrance Airport Project, and Councilmember Pieper seconded. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8. NEW BUSINESS 8A CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH GPA CONSULTING FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $199,214 TO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE CALOES/FEMA VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GRANT PROJECT. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve the Professional Services Agreement with GPA Consulting for a not-to-exceed $199,215.99 and change the title of the agreement to reflect the consulting firm’s official new name, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. 17 Minutes 4 City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2021 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8B CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE SECOND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT WITH NV5 FOR THE SEPULVEDA CANYON STORMWATER MONITORING TO INCLUDE A HYDROLOGY REPORT. MOTION: Councilmember Wilson moved to approve the PSA with NV5 for the Sepulveda Canyon Stormwater monitoring to include a hydrology report, and Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 9A CONSIDER RANCHO PALOS VERDES’ INITIATIVE TO INSTALL WILDFIRE MONITORING CAMERAS. (DIERINGER) Resident Alfred Visco believes that Southern California Edison should be pressured to use alert cameras in the City, and use residents’ light poles and Wi-Fi for electricity support, or use other forms of third party resources. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF The City Council was informed of the deployment and pick up dates of the communal bins. City Council was interrupted by a female stating that Mayor Bea Dieringer has been served, and placed a sealed envelope with the Mayor’s name on the dais. 11. CLOSED SESSION 11A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.9(d)(1) THE CITY FINDS, BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCLOSURE IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGATION. NAME OF CASE: DR. ELLIOT H. BRUNNER AND DR. 18 Minutes 5 City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2021 NOURIT G. KORZENNIK V. THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS; AND TOSHIKO AND TAKASHI NAKAMURA CASE NUMBER: 20TRCV00775. MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to add item to the agenda, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Councilmember Wilson recused himself from the closed session and left the City Council Chamber and City Hall at 9:01 pm. City Attorney Abzug stated there was no action to report. 12. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, September 13, 2021 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Janely Sandoval City Clerk Approved, ________________________________ Bea Dieringer Mayor 19 Agenda Item No.: 4.B Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:PAYMENT OF BILLS. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: NONE. DISCUSSION: NONE. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Payment of Bills.pdf 20 21 Agenda Item No.: 4.C Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (CALOES) DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED AGENTS. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: In 2018 and 2019 the City submitted six grant applications to the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) under the Hazard Mitigation Grants Program. In September 2019, the City was awarded $63,499 to update its Safety Element of the General Plan. The Safety Element is a required component of the General Plan and of the Hazard Mitigation Plan adopted by the City in January 2019. As part of the acceptance of the grant, the City was required to submit authorization forms and related documents; included in the forms is approval for the City's designated Authorized Agents to represent the City. DISCUSSION: CalOES requires names or titles of all Authorized Agents to be submitted to the Agency. The City's previous submittal is attached to this report. Although the previous designation form inlcudes the City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Services, the meeting discussion minutes did not specify that the Director of Planning and Community Services is also a designee. The revised designation form now includes the previous designees and Senior Management Analyst, who is also overseeing CalOES grants. Staff will also ensure that the minutes specifically mention the three designees. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 2019-10-16 Ltr and forms accepting grant.pdf CalOES Authorize Agents Safety Element.pdf 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Cal OES 130 DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OF THE (Governing Body) (Name of Applicant) THAT ,OR (Title of Authorized Agent) ,OR (Title of Authorized Agent) (Title of Authorized Agent) is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the , a public entity (Name of Applicant) established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act. THAT the ________________________________________________, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, (Name of Applicant) hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required. Please check the appropriate box below: This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and future disasters up to three (3) years following the date of approval below. This is a disaster specific resolution and is effective for only disaster number(s) ________________________ Passed and approved this day of , 20 (Name and Title of Governing Body Representative) CERTIFICATION I, , duly appointed and of (Name)(Title) , do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a (Name of Applicant) Resolution passed and approved by the of the (Governing Body)(Name of Applicant) on the day of , 20 . (Signature) (Title) Cal OES 130 (Rev.9/13) Page 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Cal OES ID No: ___ Acting Acting 31 Agenda Item No.: 4.D Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2021 RELIABILITY REPORT. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: The annual reliability report is comprised of statistics relating to how many power outages occurred in the previous year, the duration of the outage, and the causes of outages. Four circuits serve Rolling Hills; one of the circuits is a 4KV and the remainder are 16KV. SCE also reported capital work planned for the upcoming year including undergrounding work currently in the pipeline. Annually the information is shared with the Rolling Hills Community Association Manager. DISCUSSION: Reliability metrics can be found on page 18 and 19 of the report and the utility's planned capital improvement projects for 2021 for Rolling Hills can be found on page 16 of the report. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: Rolling Hills2021.pdf 32 Circuit Reliability Review Rolling Hills 2021 33 2 •Southern California Edison (SCE) is an Edison International company •One of the nation’s largest electric utilities •More than 130 years of history •Headquartered in Rosemead, California •Regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) •50,000 square miles of SCE service area across Central, Coastal, and Southern California •15 million residents through 5 million customer accounts •445 communities and 13 Native American tribes Who We Are 34 Our Grid To deliver safe, reliable, and affordable power, we monitor and maintain a vast electricity system 730,000 Transformers 119,000 Miles of Transmission and Distribution Lines 4,600 Circuits 1.4 Million Poles 50,000 Square Miles 335 Strengthening and Modernizing the Grid •Infrastructure reliability –updating underground cables, poles, switches, and transformers •Wildfire mitigation –hardening infrastructure, bolstering situational awareness capabilities, and enhancing operational practices •Transmission –connecting renewables, installing new substations, and updating lines •Grid readiness –updating the grid for impacts from new technologies •Long-term energy policy –supporting energy storage, electric vehicles, and renewables SCE plans to spend more than $5B each year to maintain, improve, and harden its infrastructure SCE’s investments support safe, reliable, affordable, and clean energy for our customers 2020 Capital Investments 235 miles of underground cable replaced 97 miles of overhead conductor replaced for public safety 11.1k distribution poles replaced 3.6k transmission poles replaced 79 underground structure replacements 436 Protecting Public Safety: Wildfire Mitigation Activities 2020 Year-End Progress Report –Data as of 12/31/20 537 Protecting Public Safety: Public Safety Power Shutoffs 6 •To reduce the threat of wildfires, SCE implements Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS) to temporarily shut off power to some customers in areas with a high risk for wildfires to prevent the electric system from becoming the source of ignition •PSPS is used as a measure of last resort to protect public safety under dangerous fire weather conditions, including high winds, low humidity, and dry vegetation •Multiple methods are used to notify people in affected areas before, during and after a PSPS event •SCE provides resources to support customers during PSPS and offers several programs and rebates to help customers be prepared and more resilient during emergencies •SCE is working to reduce the impact of PSPS and is continuing to strengthen the electric grid to become more resilient in the face of extreme weather events 38 Pathway 2045: Key steps California must take to reach carbon neutrality Creating a Clean Energy Future 7 100% of grid sales with carbon-free electricity 80 GW of utility-scale clean generation 30 GW of utility-scale energy storage 70% of all buildings will use efficient electric space and water heating 90% fewer GHG emissions from all-electric homes 26 million electric vehicles Over 1 million electrified medium and heavy duty vehicles 50% reduction in natural gas consumption 40% of the remaining natural gas is biomethane and hydrogen 39 Reliability Overview 840 What is Reliability? •In simplest terms: Having dependable electricity when you need it. •Outages: •Maintenance outages (aka planned outages) •Repair outages (aka unplanned outages) •Sustained Outage = An outage lasting > 5 minutes •Momentary Outage = An outage lasting ≤ 5 minutes •Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) 9 Major Event Day (MED) : A day in which the daily system SAIDI exceeds a threshold value. For the purposes of calculating daily system SAIDI, any interruption that spans multiple calendar days is accrued to the day on which the interruption began. Statistically, days having a daily system SAIDI greater than a threshold value are days on which the energy delivery system experienced stresses beyond that normally expected (such as severe weather). Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) : An operational protocol that SCE implements under extreme weather conditions in order to minimize the threat of wildfires and keep communities safe from potentially dangerous situations. These types of sustained outages are temporary and usually involve situations where high fire areas are experiencing adverse weather or public safety is at risk. 41 How Do We Measure Reliability? 1042 11Overview of Rolling Hills There are 4 circuits that serve Rolling Hills 1 Circuit Type Customers Circuit Type Customers Circuit Type Customers Circuit Type Customers FELDSPAR(16KV)1,465 --- SILICONE(16KV)1,999 --- STATLER(16KV)1,673 --- SURREY(4.16KV)90 --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Grand Total 5,227 Note: The number of customers listed represents the total number of customers on each circuit (not the local jurisdiction). 1143 BarChart SCE SYSTEMWIDE **Data is as of 03/16/2021, data can be slightly different due to outage data validation process Rolling Hills Reliability History of Circuits Serving Rolling Hills (No Exclusions) **“Exclusions” are days which utilities are allowed to remove from their metrics because the outages on those days were caused by acts of nature. 460.4 154.8 156.1 77.9 139.7 136.8 178.0 201.3 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 400.0 450.0 500.0 2017 2018 2019 2020 SAIDI(average minutes of sustainedinterruptions) 2.7 1.3 1.8 1.11.2 0.9 1.4 1.1 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 SAIFI(averagefrequency of sustainedinterruptions) 1.9 0.3 1.6 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 MAIFI(average frequency of momentary interruptions) 1244 SAIDIChart SAIDI = the cumulative amount of time the average customer is interrupted by “sustained” outages each year. Causes of Repair Outages in Rolling Hills 2020 Equipment Failure 20.8% Operation 25.5% Other 26.5% Vegetation /Animal 20.6% Weather /Fire /Earthquake6.6% Contributions to SAIDI by Outage CauseEquipment Failure e.g., in-service failure of transformer, switch, or conductors Vegetation/Animal e.g., tree branch, rodent, or bird causing a short circuit between conductors Other e.g., patrolled but no cause found Operations e.g., urgent maintenance w/o 3-day notice 3rd Party e.g., balloon, car hit pole, dig-in PSPS e.g., Public Safety Power Shutoff 1345 SAIFIChart SAIFI = the number of times the average customer is interrupted by “sustained” outages each year Causes of Repair Outages in Rolling Hills 2020 Equipment Failure 5.3% Operation 47.1% Other 14.6% Vegetation /Animal 15.7% Weather /Fire /Earthquake17.4% Contributions to SAIFI by Outage Cause Equipment Failure e.g., in-service failure of transformer, switch, or conductors Vegetation/Animal e.g., tree branch, rodent, or bird causing a short circuit between conductors Other e.g., patrolled but no cause found Operations e.g., urgent maintenance w/o 3-day notice 3rd Party e.g., balloon, car hit pole, dig-in PSPS e.g., Public Safety Power Shutoff 1446 1547 1648 Back-up Slides Reliability Histories of Circuits Serving Rolling Hills Updated through Dec 2020 1749 CitySummary SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI 460.4 2.7 1.9 154.8 1.3 0.3 156.1 1.8 1.6 16.9 0.4 -56.8 0.7 1.2 0.4 0.0 0.3 3.8 0.0 0.6 77.9 1.1 2.2 3rd Party ------10%31%53%--------------- Equipment Failure 32%41%26%62%56%91%79%56%26%69%84%-78%74%61%64%4%-8%28%48%73%75%48% Operation 14%8%-5%6%-2%0%-18%9%-1%1%----92%72%-9%4%- Other 21%32%27%0%0%-6%4%20%---4%1%27%36%96%100%--52%3%3%45% Vegetation/Animal 0%0%29%22%34%9%4%10%2%---2%2%-------1%1%- Weather/Fire/Earthquake 33%19%18%10%3%----13%7%-15%23%12%------14%17%7% PSPS ------------------------ SCE SYSTEMWIDE 139.7 1.2 1.8 136.8 0.9 1.4 178.0 1.4 1.4 17.1 0.2 0.3 17.2 0.2 0.4 17.4 0.3 0.4 95.5 0.4 0.4 201.3 1.1 1.4 Average Reliability of 4 Circuits Serving Rolling Hills 4th Qtr 2020 20202017201820191st Qtr 2020 2nd Qtr 2020 3rd Qtr 2020 4 Circuits Serving Rolling Hills -- Total Customers: 5,544 Notes: No outages are excluded from the metrics. Outage Causes: Other: e.g., patrolled but no cause could be found Operations: e.g., urgent maintenance w/o 3-day notice to customers 3rd Party: e.g., balloons, car hit pole, dig-in Vegetation/Animal: e.g., tree branch, rodent, or bird causing short circuit across conductors PSPS: e.g., Public Safety Power Shutoff SAIDI (minutes) = the cumulative amount of time the average customer is interrupted by “sustained” (longer than 5 minutes) outages. SAIFI (interruptions) = the number of times the average customer is interrupted by “sustained” outages. MAIFI (interruptions) = the number of times the average customer is interrupted by “momentary " (lasting 5 minutes or less) outages. 1850 CircuitHistory1 SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI SAIDI SAIFI MAIFI FELDSPAR(16KV) - Customers: 1,477 172.6 1.1 2.0 186.9 1.3 0.4 19.7 0.1 -45.1 1.1 -120.4 1.1 ----12.2 0.0 1.0 177.7 2.1 1.0 3rd Party ------------------------ Equipment Failure 25%3%-92%97%100%28%9%-95%97%-96%96%------100%89%96%100% Operation 4%1%-8%3%-3%3%----0%0%----100%100%-7%1%- Other ------54%29%---------------- Vegetation/Animal --50%---14%59%----3%4%-------2%2%- Weather/Fire/Earthquake 72%96%50%------5%3%----------1%1%- PSPS ------------------------ SILICONE(16KV) - Customers: 2,254 514.2 4.3 1.9 209.8 2.0 0.4 305.4 3.1 3.0 2.0 0.0 -33.4 0.6 1.9 ------35.4 0.6 1.9 3rd Party ------5%20%67%--------------- Equipment Failure 57%54%57%59%44%100%94%80%33%---100%100%100%------94%95%100% Operation 3%3%-3%6%-1%0%-100%100%----------6%5%- Other 40%43%43%0%0%------------------- Vegetation/Animal 0%0%-38%50%------------------- Weather/Fire/Earthquake ------------------------ PSPS ------------------------ STATLER(16KV) - Customers: 1,722 620.9 1.5 1.9 7.0 0.1 0.1 80.3 1.8 1.1 7.9 0.1 -35.5 0.5 1.6 1.3 0.1 1.1 1.8 0.0 1.0 46.4 0.7 3.6 3rd Party ------36%57%---------------- Equipment Failure 0%1%-13%6%-15%1%-12%5%----64%4%-52%50%-6%2%- Operation 32%36%-87%94%-4%1%-88%95%-1%2%----48%50%-18%11%- Other 0%1%24%---25%11%92%---20%3%69%36%96%100%--100%16%13%87% Vegetation/Animal --58%--100%20%30%8%--------------- Weather/Fire/Earthquake 67%63%18%---------79%96%31%------61%74%13% PSPS ------------------------ SURREY(4.16KV) - Customers: 91 91.1 1.0 2.0 917.9 3.0 1.0 ---104.4 2.0 -9.6 0.1 ------1.0 114.0 2.1 1.0 3rd Party ------------------------ Equipment Failure ---13%33%100%---6%50%---------100%5%48%100% Operation ------------100%100%-------8%4%- Other ------------------------ Vegetation/Animal --50%--------------------- Weather/Fire/Earthquake 100%100%50%87%67%----94%50%----------86%48%- PSPS ------------------------ Reliability Histories for Individual Circuits Serving Rolling Hills - 1 of 1 2017 2018 2019 1st Qtr 2020 2nd Qtr 2020 3rd Qtr 2020 4th Qtr 2020 2020 1951 Agenda Item No.: 4.E Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:REVISED SENATE BILL 9 (HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS). DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: On August 25, 2021, a letter opposing SB 9 (Atkins) Increased Density in Single-Family Zone was drafted by Mayor Dieringer and was sent to Assemblymember Anthony Rendon along with other representatives and the League of California Cities. The letter expressed the City's strong opposition to the proposed Bill, inclusive of the latest amendments. The proposed Bill poses grave danger to the City's residents during a wildfire and threatens properties. It also usurps the City's authority to make its own land use decisions. The Bill fails to address housing affordability and homelessness California cities are facing. DISCUSSION: The letter was sent on behalf of the City after the Mayor reached out to Councilmember Jeff Pieper and the City Manager. The action was taken based on a previous City Council motion that gave the Mayor permission to sign Peninsula Cities joint letters opposing housing bills if all four cities are in concurrence. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: RH Opposition SB 9_2021-08-25.pdf 52 53 54 55 56 Agenda Item No.: 8.A Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH JIMENEZ CONSULTING SOLUTIONS TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: In 2021, city staff worked with Jimenez Consulting to create a data base of residents' contact information for emergency related purposes (earthquakes, wildfires, etc.). The residents' database is also necessary for Block Captains to conduct outreach in their respective zones. The database provides information such as: emails, phone numbers, household/property information, special needs etc. This information helps the city to be informed of pertinent information for crises, disasters and other emergency related scenarios which could be vital for first responders. The operational management of the data base and records is exclusively provided by city staff and the Block Captains utilize the information only specific to their zone. Jimenez Consulting also has worked on the trading post allowing community members to advertise items for trade or giveaway mimicking an online "garage-sale" which is also exclusively for residents. A demonstration of the resident portal including the trading post was provided to the City Council on July 12, 2021. At the said meeting, Councilmembers provided feedback. Separately, staff has been working with a small group of Block Captains testing the resident portal to get feedback from users before the official launch. DISCUSSION: Jimenez Consulting exhausted the available budget to continue the development work on the database. To complete the remaining needs on the project and provide other IT related needs, staff is recommending that the City Council extend the term of the agreement and allocate additional budget to Jimenez Consulting. FISCAL IMPACT: 57 The amended agreement would extends the term to January 1, 2023 and increase the cost of service by $11,375 (65 hours at $175 per hour). If the amended agreement is approved, the total contract cost would be $32,375. In the FY 2021-2022 adopted budget, funds were allocated in account 01-917 for the service. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a third amendment with Jimenez Consulting to continue to provide technology support. ATTACHMENTS: Amendment to Agreement with Jimenez - SIGNED by JCS 2021.09.10.pdf 58 59 60 61 Agenda Item No.: 8.B Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA AMENDING ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 15.20.050 (VIOLATIONS), 1.04.010 (DEFINITIONS), AND 1.08.030 (VIOLATION—SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WHEN) TO MAKE VIOLATION OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST FIREWORKS WITHIN THE CITY SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION AND PENALTIES; AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: The State Fireworks Law contains a thorough guide for the state-wide administration and regulation of the manufacture, transportation, licensing, sale, and use of fireworks. (Health & Safety Code Section 12500, et seq.) California Health and Safety Code Section 11541 specifically authorizes a county or city to establish local fireworks prohibitions and regulations. The Los Angeles County Fire Code, which the City of Rolling Hills adopts by reference, prohibits safe and safe fireworks within the City since the City has no ordinance explicitly authorizing such use: The possession, manufacture, storage, sale, handling and use of fireworks are prohibited. Exceptions: (1) Storage and handling of fireworks as allowed in Section 5604. (2) Manufacture, assembly and testing of fireworks as allowed in Section 5605 and Health and Safety Code Division 11. (3) The use of fireworks for fireworks displays, pyrotechnics before a proximate audience and pyrotechnic special effects in motion pictures, television, theatrical or group entertainment productions as allowed in Title 19, Division 1, Chapter 6 Fireworks reprinted in Section 5608 and Health and Safety 62 Code Division 11. (4) The possession, storage, sale, handling and use of specific types of Division 1.4G fireworks, including safe and sane, where allowed by applicable laws, ordinances and regulations, provided such fireworks and facilities comply with NFPA 1124, CPSC 16 CFR Parts 1500 and 1507, and DOTn 49 CFR Parts 100—185, for consumer fireworks and [California] Health and Safety Code Division 11. (LA County Fire Code Section 5601.1.3; Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.20.010.) The other exceptions to the fireworks ban are inapplicable within the City of Rolling Hills because the City has no manufacturing or commercial zone and is made up of an almost entirely residential zone. DISCUSSION: Enforcement Difficulties Currently, a violation of the Fire Code, including the fireworks ban, is a misdemeanor unless such violation is declared to be an infraction. (See RHMC Section 15.20.050.) Any person convicted of a misdemeanor is punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of time not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (RHMC Section 1.08.020(A).) A person convicted of an infraction is punishable by a fine of $100 for the first violation, $250 for the second violation, and $500 for the third and additional violation within twelve months of the first violation. (RHMC Section 1.08.020(B).) Enforcement of the fireworks ban within the City is difficult due to the lack of opportunity to identify the actual user or possessor of fireworks within residential backyards and outside of an officer ’s presence. (See Penal Code Section 836 allowing arrest without a warrant when the officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense in the officer’s presence.) City staff is recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance making violations of the fireworks ban subject to administrative citation and penalty to assist with enforcement since (1) there is a lower burden of proof in establishing an administrative penalty as opposed to a misdemeanor conviction; (2) code enforcement officers do not need to witness a person in actual possession or discharging fireworks to issue an administrative citation as opposed to a warrantless misdemeanor arrest; and (3) code enforcement officers can cite the property owner where the violation occurs even if that person is not the person holding or discharging fireworks. The ordinance attached to this staff report does the following: RHMC Section 15.20.050 (Violations) The amendment makes violation of fireworks ban subject to administrative citation and penalty. RHMC Section 1.04.010 (Definitions) The amendment authorizes an “Enforcement Officer,” defined to mean “any Code Enforcement Officer or other City employee or agent of the City with the authority to enforce any provision of the Municipal Code” to issue an administrative citation to the “Responsible Party,” defined to mean the following: “Responsible Party” shall mean any person or persons in charge of the premises or location, or the person or persons responsible for the event or incident, and shall include any of the following: The person or persons who own the property where the violation exists; The person or persons in charge of the premises where the violation exists; The person or persons using or occupying the premises where the violation exists; and If any of those persons are minors, the parent or guardians of such minor(s) shall be the 63 Responsible Party. RHMC Section 1.08.030 (Violations – Subject to administrative citation when) The amendment makes a violation of the fireworks ban subject to administrative citation and penalty. The resolution attached to this staff report does the following: It establishes penalties associated with administrative citations for violation of the fireworks ban as follows: $500 for the first violation; $750 for the second violation of the same code section by the same person within a 12-month period of the first violation; and $1,000 for the third violation and each subsequent violation of the same code section by the same person within a 12-month period from the second or most recent violation. FISCAL IMPACT: Enactment of this Ordinance could require a modest level of staff resources for enforcement. Staff expects that enforcing the proposed Ordinance could be accommodated within existing staffing and budget authority. RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends the City Council consider and approve Ordinance No. 371, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills, California, Amending Rolling Hills Municipal Code Sections 15.20.050 (Violation—Penalty), 1.04.010 (Definitions), and 1.08.030 (Violation—Subject to Administrative Citation When) to Make Violation of the Prohibition Against Fireworks within the City Subject to Administrative Citation Penalties; and Finding the Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No Fee Schedule FY21-22 Council meeting.docx Fireworks Ordinance.DOCX 64 Resolution No.1 RESOLUTION NO. 1286 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE ROLLING HILLS FEE RESOLUTION AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1278. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The following fees are established and charged for applications for processing discretionary cases for Planning, Zoning and Subdivisions and shall be paid by the applicant prior to submission for public hearing, pursuant to Title 16 (Subdivision) and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: A.Site Plan Review $ 1,500 B.Conditional Use Permit $ 1,500 C.Variance $ 1,250 D.Variance, Minor $ 750 1.Minor deviation into required yard setback, not exceeding 5’ and attached to main residential structure E.Multiple discretionary reviews;Most expensive fee for the first review and 1/2 fee for second review. No cost for third or more reviews. F.Lighting Ordinance Modification $ 375 G.Outdoor Lighting Audit $ 150 (initiated by resident) H.Time extension $ 200 I.Zone Change $ 2,000 J.General Plan Amendment $ 2,000 K.Zoning/Subdivision Code Amendment $ 2,000 L Discretionary Approval Modification $ 2/3 of original application fee M.Appeal Fee $ 2/3 of original application fee N.City Council and Planning $ 375 Fee to be credited if Commission interpretation results in filing of a formal 65 Resolution No.2 and miscellaneous reviews application to City Council or Planning Commission O.Environmental Review fees for discretionary permits 1.Preparation and Staff Review $ 200 of Initial Study 2.Preparation of Negative $ 50 (plus fee charged by CA Declaration or Mitigated Department of Fish and Wildlife, Negative Declaration applicable, as adjusted annually) P.Environmental Impact Reports Consultant fee plus 10% Q.County Clerk Processing Fee County fee R.Lot Line Adjustment $ 1,500, plus County fee S.Tentative Parcel/Tract Map $ 1,500, plus County fee T.Final Parcel/Tract Map County fee U.Zoning violation and construction $ 1,500 penalty fee 1.Applications for illegal or “as built” grading or construction or non- compliance with approved plans for projects that require Planning Commission review. Fee is charged in addition to the discretionary application review fee. V.Stop work order $ 200 1.Fee charged for each additional “stop work order” that is issued beyond the original stop work order for illegal construction and grading activity. W.Service Request County fee, plus 20% (For services provided by L.A. County not included in the General Services Agreement) X.Appeal of Zone Clearance $ 375 Y.Stable Use Permit $ 375 (For stables under 800 sq ft considered by the Planning Commission) Z.Major Remodel Review $ 375 (For remodels of more than 50% demolition) 66 Resolution No.3 Section 2. The following fees are established and charged for applications for processing View Impairment, Traffic Commission, and Accessory Dwelling Unit cases: A.View Impairment 1.Review by Committee on Trees and Views Processing fee $ 2,000 2.Environmental Review Fees A.Preparation and Staff Review of Initial Study $ 200 B.Preparation of Negative Declaration or $ 50 Mitigated Negative Declaration (plus fee charged by CA Department of Fish and Wildlife, if applicable, as adjusted annually) B.Traffic Commission Review 1.New driveways or other traffic $ 300 related items C.Accessory Dwelling Unit 1.Accessory Dwelling Unit or $ 375 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Section 3.The following fees are established and charged for General Administration processing: A.General Plan $ 30 B.Zoning Code $ 25 C.Subdivision Code $ 25 D.Budget $ 30 E.Zoning Map $ 3 F.Xeroxed copies, each page $ 0.25 G.False Alarms 67 Resolution No.4 Fee for 1st and 2nd incident involving a false alarm is waived If paid within 30 days If paid after 30 days 3rd false alarm $ 50 $100 4th false alarm $ 100 $300 5th false alarm $ 150 $600 6th false alarm $ 200 $1,000 Section 4.The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit pursuant to Title 15, (Building and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: A.1.BUILDING PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Building Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. 2.PARKS AND RECREATION Each new residential dwelling shall pay 2% of the first $ 100,000 of construction valuation, plus 0.25% of such valuation over $ 100,000. B.PLUMBING PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Plumbing Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. C.MECHANICAL PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Mechanical Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. D.ELECTRICAL PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Electrical Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. E.GEOTECHNICAL REPORT,0.42% of the valuation of the proposed SITE AND PLAN REVIEW structures; however, minimum fee shall be $ 535.00 and the maximum fee shall be $ 3,588.00 F.SOLAR AND PHOTOVOLTAIC The amount set forth in the Los SYSTEMS AND APPURTENANT Angeles County Building and EQUIPMENT Electrical Codes for each fee, table and schedule therein, plus $ 60.11 City administrative fee. 68 Resolution No.5 Section 5.The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit pursuant to Title 15, (Building and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code for review conducted by the City’s contract building official, other than Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety: A.BUILDING PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 A.1 of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. B.PLUMBING PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 B. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. C.MECHANICAL PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 C. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. D.ELECTRICAL PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 D. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. E.GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, SITE AND PLAN REVIEW In addition to the provisions of Section 4 E. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fess shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. F.SOLAR AND PHOTOVOLTAIC In addition to the provision of Section SYSTEMS AND APPURTENANT 4 F. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge 69 Resolution No.6 EQUIPMENT on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees, plus $60.11 City administrative fee, shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. Section 6.The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit relating to construction and demolition waste: A.CONSTRUCTION AND $ 150 single project permit, plus DEMOLITION PERMIT $1,000 deposit refundable upon submittal of a Certificate of Compliance. Section 7. The following fines are established for issuance of administrative citations relating to a violation of Chapter 9.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: Administrative Penalty for $ 2,500 1st violation violation of Chapter 9.58 $ 5,000 2nd violation within one year of the 1st violation $ 7,500 Each additional violation within one year of the 1st violation Section 8. The following fines are established for issuance of administrative citations relating to a violation of Los Angeles County Fire Code Section 5601.1.3, which the Rolling Hills Municipal Code adopts by reference at Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.20.010: Administrative Penalty for $ 500 1st violation violation of Section 5601.1.3 $ 750 2nd violation within one year of the 1st violation $ 1,000 Each additional violation within one year of the 1st violation Section 9. The following fees are established and charged for processing landscaping submittals subject to the requirements of the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Review of landscape submittal $1,500 (portion refunded if not spent; package and verification of compliance additional funds may be collected, if needed to complete the review); plus $5,000 deposit refundable upon submittal of a Certificate of Compliance. 70 Resolution No.7 Section 10. The following fees are established and charged for processing utility pole removal reimbursement applications pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 1259. Review of utility pole removal reimbursement $100 application. Appeal of utility pole removal reimbursement $300 decision. Section 11.The following fee is established and charged for processing wireless telecommunication facility applications: Application fee:$1,000 Section 12.Should the City accept payment of any fee identified in this resolution by means of credit card, an additional 3% surcharge on such fee shall be charged as a convenience fee for processing the payment. When City accepts payment by means of credit card, it shall also accept payment by means of cash or check. Section 13.The fees set forth do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing such services. Section 13.The City Council Resolution No. 1278 is hereby repealed and superseded by this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ___ day of __________, 2021. _________________________________ BEA DEIRINGER MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________ CITY CLERK 71 Resolution No.8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1286 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE ROLLING HILLS FEE RESOLUTION AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1278. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13TH day of September 2021 by the following roll call vote: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. __________________________________ CITY CLERK 72 ORDINANCE NO. 371 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA AMENDING ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 15.20.050 (VIOLATIONS), 1.04.010 (DEFINITIONS), AND 1.08.030 (VIOLATION—SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION WHEN) TO MAKE VIOLATION OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST FIREWORKS WITHIN THE CITY SUBJECT TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION AND PENALTIES; AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT RECITALS A.Fireworks are prohibited within the City of Rolling Hills. (Los Angeles County Fire Code Title 32, Section 5601.1.3; Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.20.010.) B.Currently, a violation of the City’s Fire Code is a misdemeanor. (Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.20.050.) C.Enforcement of the fireworks prohibition is complex due to the difficulty in identifying the actual user or possessor of fireworks. D.Given the City’s designation as a very high fire hazard severity zone, as prescribed by the Director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, City staff desires to increase the enforcement tools available to police and fire personnel thereby further preventing violations of the prohibition against fireworks within the City. E.Administrative citations and fines are needed to curb the illegal practice and to prevent illegal fireworks from causing devastating harm to the entire community. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 15.20.050 (Violations) of Chapter 15.20 (Fire Code) of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) is amended to read as follows: 15.20.050 Violations A.Every person violating any provision of the Fire Code or of any permit or license granted hereunder, or any rule, regulation or policy promulgated pursuant hereto, is guilty of a misdemeanor unless such violation is declared to be an infraction. Each such violation is a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which such violation is committed, continued or permitted, and conviction of any such violation shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one 73 thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. B.In addition to any other remedy allowed by law, any person who violates Section 5601.1.3 of the Fire Code is subject to administrative penalties pursuant to Chapter 1.08. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1.08 and in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 12557, an administrative penalty assessed pursuant to Los Angeles County Fire Code Section 5601.1.3 for the possession or seizure of 25 pounds or less of dangerous fireworks, as the term is defined in Health and Safety Code Section 12505, shall provide for cost reimbursement to the Office of the State Fire Marshal and the collection of disposal costs pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 12557, and shall not be subject to Health and Safety Code Section 12706 (Disposition of Fines and Forfeitures). C.Violations of this Chapter are hereby declared to be a public nuisance. D.All remedies prescribed under this Chapter are cumulative and the election of one or more remedies does not bar the City from the pursuit of any other remedy to enforce this Chapter. Section 2. Section 1.04.010 (Definitions) in Chapter 1.04 (General Provisions) of Title 1 (General Provisions) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order: “Enforcement Officer” shall mean any Code Enforcement Officer or other City employee or agent of the City with authority to enforce any provision of the Municipal Code. “Responsible Party” shall mean any person or persons in charge of the premises or location, or the person or persons responsible for the event or incident, and shall include any of the following: 1) The person or persons who own the property where the violation exists; 2) The person or persons in charge of the premises where the violation exists; 3) The person or persons using or occupying the premises where the violation exists; and 4) If any of those persons are minors, the parent or guardians of such minor(s) shall be the Responsible Party. Section 3. Section 1.08.030 (Violations – Subject to administrative citation when) of Chapter 1.08 (General Penalty) of Title 1 (General Provisions) is hereby amended to read as follows: 1.08.030 Subject to administrative citation when. Any person violating any provision or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of Chapter 9.58 and Section 5601.1.3 of the Fire Code, shall be subject to the administrative penalty provisions of this chapter. 74 Section 4. Severability.If any provision of this ordinance is declared to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any remaining provision hereof. The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance despite any partial invalidity. Section 5. Environmental Review. This Ordinance is not a project within the meaning of Section 15378 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, directly or indirectly. The City Council further finds, under Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15061(b)(3), that this Ordinance is nonetheless exempt from the requirements of CEQA in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity exempt from CEQA. It also finds the ordinance is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15307 and 15308 as an action by a regulatory agency taken to protect the environment and natural resources. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code section 36937. Section 7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same, or the summary thereof, to be published or posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________ 2021. BEA DIERINGER, MAYOR ATTEST: ELAINE JENG, ACTING CITY CLERK 75 Agenda Item No.: 8.C Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:REVIEW RESOLUTIONS TO BE PRESENTED AT THE CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 22 - SEPTEMBER 24, 2021; AND PROVIDE DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY'S VOTING DELEGATE MAYOR BEA DIERINGER. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: Resolution 1: In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Wayfair v. South Dakota established that states could charge and collect taxes on online purchases outside of their state jurisdiction. For California, the collected tax from outside vendors is collected as a tax, not sales tax, in a countywide pool and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) analyzes the purchase from where the transaction was made, where the goods are located, and how the purchaser will receive their goods. Depending on the outcome of the CDTFA analyses, the tax is then determined to be a sales tax or to simply use tax and being allocated separately into the cities tax allocations. However, in early 2021, one of the largest online retailers shifted the structure of their company to be considered a retailer both in-state and out-of-state, producing in-state taxes that were once collected in the countywide pool, and distributed between surrounding cities, to now simply providing taxes to the city that hosts the fulfillment center. Therefore, there is a sales tax revenue decrease within cities that cannot and/or will not be building any fulfillment centers, as the countywide pool is not receiving the expected necessary funding. Resolution 2: The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) handles inspecting railroad lines to ensure that the equipment, bridges, and actual rail lines are operating safely. There is over 6,000 miles worth of coverage, but the CPUC only has 41 inspectors being able to travel and inspect the railroads within the State of California. Due to lack of support and funding, CPUC does not have the necessary budget to provide the resources to oversee whether rail operators are managing the railroads right-of- way areas adequately, and thus the railroads have witnessed an increase in illegal dumping, graffiti, and homeless encampments. There are certain cities, like City of South Gate, that have multiple rail lines within their city jurisdiction, but due to railroads being considered private property overseen by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and inspected by CPUC, the cities cannot simply go into these area to clear and clear nor do they always have the necessary funding. Furthermore, when cities such as South Gate do clean up the railroad lines, they do not receive direct revenue from the rail operators. 76 Funding is actually provided to CPUC to oversee any safety concerns, but also to ensure that the right- of-way rail operators are managing the rail adequately. Therefore, rail operators should be required to annual budget regular cleanups for railroad lines and areas throughout California Cities. DISCUSSION: Resolution 1: City of Rancho Cucamonga is presenting Resolution No. 1 in hopes that the Cal Cities calls on the State Legislature to pass policies and regulations that provide fair and equitable distribution of the Bradley Burns 1% local sales tax from in-state and out-of-state online purchases. The cities that do not and/or cannot have fulfillment centers recognize their disadvantage regarding the in-state tax, but also acknowledge the inequity and divide between such types of cities. Those cities that do not and/or cannot have fulfillment centers are advocating that their cities are still experiencing impacts from ecommerce and increased delivers, as their residents contribute to the revenue of consumption through their purchases. Therefore, the argument continues that although certain cities do not and/or cannot build fulfillment centers by having external impacts to their communities, they should receive some form of compensation in equitable shares of sales and use taxes, and have an equal form of funding distributed. Resolution 2: City of South Gate is representing Resolution No. 2 in hopes that the Cal Cities calls for the Governor and the Legislature to work alongside Cal Cities and other stakeholders to provide better regulatory policies and necessary funding so that the cities that lack the correct oversight of their railroads can be assisted. The cities will be assisted to deal with the railroads right-of-way areas and tackle the issues with illegal dumping, graffiti, and the homeless encampments that proliferate along the rail lines and are a public safety concern. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for Mayor Dieringer to vote during the Cal Cities 2021 Annual Conference. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council direct Mayor Dieringer to vote for Resolution No. 1 and Resolution No. 2 to best represent the City during the 2021 League of California Cities Annual Conference. ATTACHMENTS: League of CA Cities Resolution Packets 08162021.pdf League of CA Cities Resolution 1-1% Bradley Burns Tax & Concurrence Letters.pdf City of Rancho Cucamonga Letter for Support 08202021 for Reso 1.pdf League of CA Cities Resolution 2-Funding for CUPC & Concurrence Letters.pdf 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 Agenda Item No.: 8.D Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:SCHEDULE THE THE ANNUAL HOLIDAY OPEN HOUSE ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2021 FROM 4PM TO 7PM; AND REVIEW AND APPROVE THE GUEST LIST FOR THE OPEN HOUSE. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: The Annual Holiday Open House event, regularly held in December, is advertised in the citywide Newsletter and City's website inviting all residents to attend. The announcement is mailed the second week in November to each household in the City, to each Mayor on the Peninsula, President or lead individual of each local governmental agency (County, School District, Library District, Cities and State representatives), all elected officials, chiefs of staff and subordinate staff. In addition, vendors who provide a public service to residents are invited and one invitation is sent to the lead representative of the company (e.g., utilities, refuse contractor, Willdan, County Building Department, County Fire Department, County Sheriff ’s Department, County Animal Care & Control Department, etc.). Staff estimates that approximately 115 people attend the event yearly. T he event is traditionally held at City Hall on the second Monday in December, which falls on the 13th of December this year. Unfortunately, the 2020 Holiday Open House was cancelled due to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: The process to organize and schedule all tasks for the event is lengthy and time consuming. Among other things, it includes mailing out invitations, coordinating with a caterer, florist, bartender, ordering food, drinks and party supplies. The day of the event, staff sets up in the Council Chamber, moves around the tables and chairs, decorates tables and sets up for the caterer. The holiday tree is purchased more than a week before the event and decorated by staff. Staff shops for the best priced food and drinks and arranges for additional services needed for the event, including cleaning services before and after. FISCAL IMPACT: 216 The cost of the event in the past four years range between $6,100 and $6,600. The adopted FY 2021- 2022 budget, $10,000 is allocated for the event expenses. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that members of the City Council consider the date of Monday, December 13, 2021, 4-7 PM for the 35th Annual Holiday Open House and approve the guest list. ATTACHMENTS: 2021_OpenHouseProposedInviteList_2021-08-24.xlsx 217 2021 OPEN HOUSE PROPOSED LIST Name Company Address City 1 Honorable Al Muratsuchi Assemblymember Elect, 66th District 3424 W. Carson St., Suite 450 Torrance, CA 90503 2 Honorable Ben Allen State Senator, 26th District 2512 Artesia Blvd., #320 Redondo Beach, CA 90278-3279 3 Honorable Ted Lieu United States Congress, 33rd District 1645 Corinth Ave, Suite 101 Los Angeles, CA 90025 1600 Rosecrans Avenue, 4th Floor Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 4 Honorable Janice Hahn, Supervisor Fourth District, County of Los Angeles 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 5 Mr. Gerardo Pinedo, Chief of Staff Fourth District, County of Los Angeles 500 West Temple Street, Rm 358 Los Angeles, CA 90012 6 Ms. Erika Velazquez, Harbor Area Fourth District, County of Los Angeles 302 West 5th Street, #200 San Pedro, CA 90731 7 Ms. Kelly Cross, Staff Assistant Fourth District, County of Los Angeles 302 West 5th Street, #200 San Pedro, CA 90731 8 Mr. Matt Johnson, Special Assistant Fourth District, County of Los Angeles 302 West 5th Street, #200 San Pedro, CA 90731 9 Mr. Jeffrey Kiernan Regional Public Affairs Manager League of California Cities 8581 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 325 West Hollywood, CA 90069 10 Ms. Jennifer Quan, Executive Director Regional Public Affairs Manager League of California Cities 8581 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 325 West Hollywood, CA 90069 11 Ms. Kristine Guerrero, Legislative Director Regional Pubblic Affairs Manager League of California Cities 8581 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 325 West Hollywood, CA 90069 12 Mr. Allen Franz, President and Members of the Board of Directors P.V.P. Land Conservancy 916 Silver Spur Road, Suite 207 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 13 Ms. Adrienne Mohan, Executive Director and Susan Wilcox, Development Director P.V.P. Land Conservancy 916 Silver Spur Road, Suite 207 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 14 Mr. Kingston Wong, President Palos Verdes Library District 701 Silver Spur Road Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 15 Matthew Brach, President and Members PVPUSD Board of Education 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 16 Megan Crawford, V.P.PVPUSD Board of Education 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 17 Linda Reid, Clerk PVPUSD Board of Education 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 18 Richard Phillips, Member Ami Gandhi, Provisional Member PVPUSD Board of Education 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 1 9/9/2021 C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@540B45F0\@BCL@540B45F0.xlsx 218 2021 OPEN HOUSE PROPOSED LIST 19 Alex Cherniss, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools PVPUSD Malaga Cove Administrative Center 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 20 Ms. Jennifer Addington, Director Palos Verdes Library District 701 Silver Spur Drive Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 21 Mr. Rick Licciardello, Principal Rancho del Mar High School 375 Via Almar Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 22 Mr. Robert C. Ferrante, General Manager and staff County Sanitation District of L A County 1955 Workman Mill Rd.Whittier, CA 90601 23 Mrs. Jacki Bacharach, Executive Director and staff South Bay Cities Council of Governments 2355 Crenshaw Blvd., #125 Torrance, CA 90501 24 Sheriff Alex Villanueva L. A. County Sheriff's Headquarters 211 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 25 Captain James Powers and all LASD Lomita Personnel L. A. County Sheriff's Department 26123 Narbonne Avenue Lomita, CA 90717 26 Ms. Sandra Armenta President, Mayor Pro Tem for Rosemead and staff California Contract Cities Association 17315 Studebaker Road Suite 210 Cerritos, CA 90703 27 Mr. Marcel Rodarte Executive Director California Contract Cities Association 17315 Studebaker Road Suite 210 Cerritos, CA 90703 28 Ms. Eileen Hupp, President/CEO and staff Palos Verdes Peninsula Chamber of Commerce 4040 Palos Verdes Drive North, Suite 205 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 29 Mr. Daryl L. Osby, Fire Chief and staff, Division I Office - F. S. 158 Los Angeles County Fire Department 1650 West 162nd Street Gardena, CA 90247-3734 30 Mr. Scott Hale, Assistant Fire Chief Division 1, County of Los Angeles Fire Department 1650 W. 162nd Street Gardena, CA 90247-3734 31 Mr. J. Lopez, Assistant Chief County of Los Angeles Fire Department 5823 Rickenbacker Road Room 123 Commerce, CA 90040 32 All Fire Personnel at Fire Station 56 12 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 33 Mayor Eric Alegria Members of the City Council and Councilmembers Elect City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 34 Mr. Ara Mihranian, City Manager and staff City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 2 9/9/2021 C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@540B45F0\@BCL@540B45F0.xlsx 219 2021 OPEN HOUSE PROPOSED LIST 35 Mayor Steven Zuckerman, and Members of the City Council City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 36 Mr. Greg Grammer City Manager and staff City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 37 Mayor Michael Kemps and Members of the City Council City of Palos Verdes Estates 340 Palos Verdes Drive West Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 38 Ms. Laura Guglielmo, City Manager and staff City of Palos Verdes Estates 340 Palos Verdes Drive West Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 39 Mr. Mike Dorta, District Engineer and staff L. A. County Department of Public Works Building and Safety Division 24320 S. Narbonne Ave.Lomita, CA 90717 40 Mr. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney and staff BB&K LLP 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 41 Ms. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney BB&K LLP 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 42 Mr. Todd Leishman, Assistant City Attorney BB&K LLP 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 43 Mr. William Pagett, Sr. Vice President and staff Willdan Engineering 2401 East Katella Avenue, Suite 300 Anaheim, CA 92806 44 Ms. Vanessa Munoz, Traffic Engineer Willdan Engineering 13191 Crossroads Parkway North # 405 Industry, CA 91746-3497 45 Mr. Robert Saviskas Executive Director and staff L. A. County West Vector Control District 6750 Centinela Avenue Culver City, CA 90230 46 Ms. Marcia Mayeda, Director and staff L. A. County Animal Care & Control Administrative Headquarters 5898 Cherry Avenue Long Beach, CA 90805 47 Mr. Fernando Barrera Certified Applicator/State Licensed Trapper Pest Management Division County of L.A Department of Agricultural Commissioner/Weights and Measures 12300 Lower Azusa Road Arcadia, CA 91006 48 Mr. Tonya Griffin, General Manager and staff Republic Services Inc.14905 South San Pedro Street Gardena, CA 90248 49 Mr. Carlos Guzman, Operations Manager Republic Services Inc.14905 South San Pedro Street Gardena, CA 90247 3 9/9/2021 C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@540B45F0\@BCL@540B45F0.xlsx 220 2021 OPEN HOUSE PROPOSED LIST 50 Ms. Dawn Harris, Municipal Services Manager Republic Services Inc.14905 South San Pedro Street Gardena, CA 90247 51 Mr. Korey Bradbury, Operations Manager and staff California Water Service Company 2632 West 237th Street Torrance, CA 90505-5272 52 Ms. Kristen Raig RHCA Manager and staff 1 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 53 RHCA Board members 1 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 54 Ms. Susan Sifuentes-Trigueros District Manager and staff Southern California Gas Company 2922 - 182nd Street Redondo Beach, CA 90278-3922 55 Ms. Connie Turner, Region Manager and staff Southern California Edison 505 Maple Street Torrance, CA 90503 56 Mr. Jonathan R. Shull Executive Director and Staff California Joint Powers Insurance Authority 8081 Moody St.La Palma, CA 90623 57 Melaina Francis Regional Risk Manager California Joint Powers Insurance Authority 8081 Moody St.La Palma, CA 90623 58 Abraham Han Administrative Analyst California Joint Powers Insurance Authority 8081 Moody St.La Palma, CA 90623 60 Mr. Ray Cruz, City Manager Santa Fe Springs 11710 E. Telegraph Roa Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 61 Mr. Anton Dahlerbruch, Executive Recruiter Peckham & McKenney, Inc.300 Harding Boulevard, Suite 203-D Roseville, CA 95678 4 9/9/2021 C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@540B45F0\@BCL@540B45F0.xlsx 221 Agenda Item No.: 9.A Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:REPORT ON THE AUGUST 30, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING. (MIRSCH & BLACK) DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: The Fire Fuel Committee has held seven meetings since May 2021. At the August 30, 2021 meeting, the Committee discussed the definition of a fire hazard, potential amendments to the Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement and scheduled the next meeting. DISCUSSION: Council-member Mirsch provided a draft definition of fire hazard. Mayor Pro-Tem Black and the community provided feedback and suggestions as follows: 1. Provide definitions for native and non-native plants 2. Contact the fire department/ a retired person from the forestry department to get a better understanding about citing nuisances 3. Reference other cities' ordinances closely related to Rolling Hills' city environment 4. Adding a separate ordinance for Live vegetation Mayor Pro-Tem Black also wanted City Council to consider changing the slope specified in Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement a fifty percent slope to a steeper slope. The committee agreed to meet on Wednesday September 29, 2021 at City Hall at 6:30pm. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file a report from the Fire Fuel Committee. ATTACHMENTS: Fire Fuel Committee Agenda Packet.pdf 222 345-Fire_Fuel_Hazard_Abatement_Dead_tree.pdf 223 1.PARTICIPANTS 2.ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION 2.A.DEFINE FIRE HAZARD NUISANCE CONDITION (MIRSCH). RECOMMENDATION: None 2.B.DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TO THE DEAD VEGETATION ORDINANCE (MIRSCH). RECOMMENDATION: None. 2.C.SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING RECOMMENDATION: None. 3.COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN BY EMAIL IN REAL TIME - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 4.ADJOURNMENT 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 AGENDA Special Fire Fuel Management Committee Meeting FIRE FUEL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Monday, August 30, 2021 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 6:30 PM Executive Order All Committee members will participate in-person wearing masks per Los Angeles County Health Department's Health Officer Order effective Saturday, July 17, 2021. The meeting agenda and live stream will be available on the City’s website: https://www.rollinghills. org/government/agenda/index.php Members of the public may come in to City Hall wearing masks, per the new Health Officer's Order. Zoom teleconference will not be available for this meeting, but members of the public can submit written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published. 345-Fire Fuel Hazard Abatement Dead tree.pdf Municipal Code-ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE & FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT.docx Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agendas are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. 1224 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. 2225 Agenda Item No.: 2.A Mtg. Date: 08/30/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:DEFINE FIRE HAZARD NUISANCE CONDITION (MIRSCH). DATE:August 30, 2021 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: Develop definition of what constitutes a fire hazard nuisance condition, including criteria regarding type, density, and location of hazardous vegetation, as well as specific abatement standards. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Committee define what constitutes a fire hazard nuisance condition. ATTACHMENTS: 3226 Agenda Item No.: 2.B Mtg. Date: 08/30/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TO THE DEAD VEGETATION ORDINANCE (MIRSCH). DATE:August 30, 2021 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: Discuss possible amendments to the City's existing dead vegetation ordinance (chapter 830, no 345) to include live vegetation determined to be a hazard/nuisance, as identified above. Including justification for extending distance between the Fire Code of 200 feet from structure. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the committee to receive and file the discussed amendments to recommend to City Council at a later date. ATTACHMENTS: 345-Fire Fuel Hazard Abatement Dead tree.pdf Municipal Code-ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE & FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT.docx 4227 5228 6229 MUNICIPAL CODE: FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT & ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE 7230 8231 Agenda Item No.: 2.C Mtg. Date: 08/30/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING DATE:August 30, 2021 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: None. ATTACHMENTS: 9232 233 234 Agenda Item No.: 9.B Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER SPECIAL STUDIES AS ALLOWED BY SB 330, HOUSING CRISIS ACT OF 2019 AND SB 9, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. (MAYOR DIERINGER) DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: Senate Bill No. 9 states the following: (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny an urban lot split if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. Referenced above is the following section contained in SB 330: (d) A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development project, including farmworker housing as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project infeasible for development for the use of very low, low-, or moderate- income households, or an emergency shelter, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following: (2) The housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. 235 DISCUSSION: SB No. 9 cites SB 330 paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of 65589.5 which allows a local agency to disapprove a housing development if it makes written findings, based upon a preponderence of the evidence, that the proposed development would cause specific adverse impact to public health or safety and there is no way to feasibly mitigate it without rendering it financially infeasible. A “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Presentation from Mayor Dieringer. ATTACHMENTS: Senate Bills.docx 236 SENATE BILL NO. 9 Introduced by Senators Atkins, Caballero, Rubio, and Wiener (Coauthors: Senators Cortese, Gonzalez, and McGuire) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Robert Rivas and Wicks) December 07, 2020 An act to amend Section 66452.6 of, and to add Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to, the Government Code, relating to land use. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 9, Atkins. Housing development: approvals. The Planning and Zoning Law provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions. This bill, among other things, would require a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district. The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving the construction of 2 residential units, including, but not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to 2 units or physically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency’s processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps, and the modification of those maps. Under the Subdivision Map Act, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map expires 24 months after its approval or conditional approval or after any additional period of time as prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 12 months, except as provided. This bill, among other things, would require a local agency to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split that meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the urban lot split would not require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the parcel is located within a single-family residential zone, and that the parcel is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district. The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving an urban lot split, including, but not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding 237 the construction of 2 units, as defined, on either of the resulting parcels or physically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The bill would require an applicant to sign an affidavit stating that they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split, unless the applicant is a community land trust or a qualified nonprofit corporation, as specified. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing any additional owner occupancy standards on applicants. By requiring applicants to sign affidavits, thereby expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also extend the limit on the additional period that may be provided by ordinance, as described above, from 12 months to 24 months and would make other conforming or nonsubstantive changes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the ministerial review processes described above, would thereby exempt the approval of projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The California Coastal Act of 1976 provides for the planning and regulation of development, under a coastal development permit process, within the coastal zone, as defined, that shall be based on various coastal resources planning and management policies set forth in the act. This bill would exempt a local agency from being required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for housing developments and urban lot splits pursuant to the above provisions. By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, the bill would impose a state- mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons. Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES Bill Text THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 65852.21 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65852.21. 238 (a) A proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential zone shall be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or a hearing, if the proposed housing development meets all of the following requirements: (1) The parcel subject to the proposed housing development is located within a city, the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (2) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. (3) Notwithstanding any provision of this section or any local law, the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing: (A) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income. (B) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. (C) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (4) The parcel subject to the proposed housing development is not a parcel on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner’s rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application. (5) The proposed housing development does not allow the demolition of more than 25 percent of the existing exterior structural walls, unless the housing development meets at least one of the following conditions: (A) If a local ordinance so allows. (B) The site has not been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (6) The development is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any local law and except as provided in paragraph (2), a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that do not conflict with this section. (2) (A) The local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to two units or that would physically preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area. (B) (i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. (ii) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), in all other circumstances not described in clause (i), a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines. (c) In addition to any conditions established in accordance with subdivision (b), a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for two residential units as provided for in this section: (1) Off-street parking of up to one space per unit, except that a local agency shall not impose parking requirements in either of the following instances: 239 (A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code. (B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (2) For residential units connected to an onsite wastewater treatment system, a percolation test completed within the last 5 years, or, if the percolation test has been recertified, within the last 10 years. (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny a proposed housing development project if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. (e) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days. (f) Notwithstanding Section 65852.2 or 65852.22, a local agency shall not be required to permit an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit on parcels that use both the authority contained within this section and the authority contained in Section 66411.7. (g) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures provided that the structures meet building code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance. (h) Local agencies shall include units constructed pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400. (i) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply: (1) A housing development contains two residential units if the development proposes no more than two new units or if it proposes to add one new unit to one existing unit. (2) The terms “objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances. (3) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (j) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (k) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agency shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for a housing development pursuant to this section. SEC. 2. Section 66411.7 is added to the Government Code, to read: 66411.7. 240 (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division and any local law, a local agency shall ministerially approve, as set forth in this section, a parcel map for an urban lot split only if the local agency determines that the parcel map for the urban lot split meets all the following requirements: (1) The parcel map subdivides an existing parcel to create no more than two new parcels of approximately equal lot area provided that one parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision. (2) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), both newly created parcels are no smaller than 1,200 square feet. (B) A local agency may by ordinance adopt a smaller minimum lot size subject to ministerial approval under this subdivision. (3) The parcel being subdivided meets all the following requirements: (A) The parcel is located within a single-family residential zone. (B) The parcel subject to the proposed urban lot split is located within a city, the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (C) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. (D) The proposed urban lot split would not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing: (i) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income. (ii) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. (iii) A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner’s rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application. (iv) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (E) The parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance. (F) The parcel has not been established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this section. (G) Neither the owner of the parcel being subdivided nor any person acting in concert with the owner has previously subdivided an adjacent parcel using an urban lot split as provided for in this section. (b) An application for a parcel map for an urban lot split shall be approved in accordance with the following requirements: (1) A local agency shall approve or deny an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially without discretionary review. (2) A local agency shall approve an urban lot split only if it conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)), except as otherwise expressly provided in this section. 241 (3) Notwithstanding Section 66411.1, a local agency shall not impose regulations that require dedications of rights-of-way or the construction of offsite improvements for the parcels being created as a condition of issuing a parcel map for an urban lot split pursuant to this section. (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), notwithstanding any local law, a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards applicable to a parcel created by an urban lot split that do not conflict with this section. (2) A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of two units on either of the resulting parcels or that would result in a unit size of less than 800 square feet. (3) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. (B) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), in all other circumstances not described in subparagraph (A), a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines. (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny an urban lot split if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. (e) In addition to any conditions established in accordance with this section, a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split: (1) Easements required for the provision of public services and facilities. (2) A requirement that the parcels have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way. (3) Off-street parking of up to one space per unit, except that a local agency shall not impose parking requirements in either of the following instances: (A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code. (B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (f) A local agency shall require that the uses allowed on a lot created by this section be limited to residential uses. (g) (1) A local agency shall require an applicant for an urban lot split to sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split. (2) This subdivision shall not apply to an applicant that is a “community land trust,” as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or is a “qualified nonprofit corporation” as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (3) A local agency shall not impose additional owner occupancy standards, other than provided for in this subdivision, on an urban lot split pursuant to this section. (h) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days. (i) A local agency shall not require, as a condition for ministerial approval of a parcel map application for the creation of an urban lot split, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions. 242 (j) (1) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 65852.2, 65852.21, 65852.22, 65915, or this section, a local agency shall not be required to permit more than two units on a parcel created through the exercise of the authority contained within this section. (2) For the purposes of this section, “unit” means any dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21, a primary dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit as defined in Section 65852.2, or a junior accessory dwelling unit as defined in Section 65852.22. (k) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subdivision (c), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures provided that the structures meet building code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance. (l) Local agencies shall include the number of applications for parcel maps for urban lot splits pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400. (m) For purposes of this section, both of the following shall apply: (1) “Objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances. (2) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (n) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (o) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agency shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for urban lot splits pursuant to this section. SEC. 3. Section 66452.6 of the Government Code is amended to read: 66452.6. (a) (1) An approved or conditionally approved tentative map shall expire 24 months after its approval or conditional approval, or after any additional period of time as may be prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 24 months. However, if the subdivider is required to expend two hundred thirty-six thousand seven hundred ninety dollars ($236,790) or more to construct, improve, or finance the construction or improvement of public improvements outside the property boundaries of the tentative map, excluding improvements of public rights-of-way that abut the boundary of the property to be subdivided and that are reasonably related to the development of that property, each filing of a final map authorized by Section 66456.1 shall extend the expiration of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map by 48 months from the date of its expiration, as provided in this section, or the date of the previously filed final map, whichever is later. The extensions shall not extend the tentative map more than 10 years from its approval or conditional approval. However, a tentative map on property subject to a development agreement authorized by Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 65864) of Chapter 4 of Division 1 may be extended for the period of time provided for in the agreement, but not beyond the 243 duration of the agreement. The number of phased final maps that may be filed shall be determined by the advisory agency at the time of the approval or conditional approval of the tentative map. (2) Commencing January 1, 2012, and each calendar year thereafter, the amount of two hundred thirty-six thousand seven hundred ninety dollars ($236,790) shall be annually increased by operation of law according to the adjustment for inflation set forth in the statewide cost index for class B construction, as determined by the State Allocation Board at its January meeting. The effective date of each annual adjustment shall be March 1. The adjusted amount shall apply to tentative and vesting tentative maps whose applications were received after the effective date of the adjustment. (3) “Public improvements,” as used in this subdivision, include traffic controls, streets, roads, highways, freeways, bridges, overcrossings, street interchanges, flood control or storm drain facilities, sewer facilities, water facilities, and lighting facilities. (b) (1) The period of time specified in subdivision (a), including any extension thereof granted pursuant to subdivision (e), shall not include any period of time during which a development moratorium, imposed after approval of the tentative map, is in existence. However, the length of the moratorium shall not exceed five years. (2) The length of time specified in paragraph (1) shall be extended for up to three years, but in no event beyond January 1, 1992, during the pendency of any lawsuit in which the subdivider asserts, and the local agency that approved or conditionally approved the tentative map denies, the existence or application of a development moratorium to the tentative map. (3) Once a development moratorium is terminated, the map shall be valid for the same period of time as was left to run on the map at the time that the moratorium was imposed. However, if the remaining time is less than 120 days, the map shall be valid for 120 days following the termination of the moratorium. (c) The period of time specified in subdivision (a), including any extension thereof granted pursuant to subdivision (e), shall not include the period of time during which a lawsuit involving the approval or conditional approval of the tentative map is or was pending in a court of competent jurisdiction, if the stay of the time period is approved by the local agency pursuant to this section. After service of the initial petition or complaint in the lawsuit upon the local agency, the subdivider may apply to the local agency for a stay pursuant to the local agency’s adopted procedures. Within 40 days after receiving the application, the local agency shall either stay the time period for up to five years or deny the requested stay. The local agency may, by ordinance, establish procedures for reviewing the requests, including, but not limited to, notice and hearing requirements, appeal procedures, and other administrative requirements. (d) The expiration of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map shall terminate all proceedings and no final map or parcel map of all or any portion of the real property included within the tentative map shall be filed with the legislative body without first processing a new tentative map. Once a timely filing is made, subsequent actions of the local agency, including, but not limited to, processing, approving, and recording, may lawfully occur after the date of expiration of the tentative map. Delivery to the county surveyor or city engineer shall be deemed a timely filing for purposes of this section. (e) Upon application of the subdivider filed before the expiration of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map, the time at which the map expires pursuant to subdivision (a) may be extended by the legislative body or by an advisory agency authorized to approve or conditionally approve tentative maps for a period or periods not exceeding a total of six years. The period of extension specified in this subdivision shall be in addition to the period of time provided by subdivision (a). Before the expiration of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map, upon an application by the subdivider to extend that map, the map shall automatically be extended for 60 days or until the application for the extension is approved, conditionally approved, or denied, whichever occurs first. If the advisory agency denies a subdivider’s application for an extension, the subdivider may appeal to the legislative body within 15 days after the advisory agency has denied the extension. 244 (f) For purposes of this section, a development moratorium includes a water or sewer moratorium, or a water and sewer moratorium, as well as other actions of public agencies that regulate land use, development, or the provision of services to the land, including the public agency with the authority to approve or conditionally approve the tentative map, which thereafter prevents, prohibits, or delays the approval of a final or parcel map. A development moratorium shall also be deemed to exist for purposes of this section for any period of time during which a condition imposed by the city or county could not be satisfied because of either of the following: (1) The condition was one that, by its nature, necessitated action by the city or county, and the city or county either did not take the necessary action or by its own action or inaction was prevented or delayed in taking the necessary action before expiration of the tentative map. (2) The condition necessitates acquisition of real property or any interest in real property from a public agency, other than the city or county that approved or conditionally approved the tentative map, and that other public agency fails or refuses to convey the property interest necessary to satisfy the condition. However, nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to require any public agency to convey any interest in real property owned by it. A development moratorium specified in this paragraph shall be deemed to have been imposed either on the date of approval or conditional approval of the tentative map, if evidence was included in the public record that the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein may refuse to convey that property or interest, or on the date that the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein receives an offer by the subdivider to purchase that property or interest for fair market value, whichever is later. A development moratorium specified in this paragraph shall extend the tentative map up to the maximum period as set forth in subdivision (b), but not later than January 1, 1992, so long as the public agency that owns or controls the real property or any interest therein fails or refuses to convey the necessary property interest, regardless of the reason for the failure or refusal, except that the development moratorium shall be deemed to terminate 60 days after the public agency has officially made, and communicated to the subdivider, a written offer or commitment binding on the agency to convey the necessary property interest for a fair market value, paid in a reasonable time and manner. SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern and not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Sections 1 and 2 of this act adding Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to the Government Code and Section 3 of this act amending Section 66452.6 of the Government Code apply to all cities, including charter cities. SEC. 5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act or because costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. 245 Senate Bill No. 330 CHAPTER 654 An act to amend Section 65589.5 of, to amend, repeal, and add Sections 65940, 65943, and 65950 of, to add and repeal Sections 65905.5, 65913.10, and 65941.1 of, and to add and repeal Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 66300) of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. [ Approved by Governor October 09, 2019. Filed with Secretary of State October 09, 2019. ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 330, Skinner. Housing Crisis Act of 2019. (1) The Housing AccountabilityAct, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. The act specifies that one way to satisfy that requirement is to make findings that the housing development project or emergency shelter is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan as it existed on the date the application was deemed complete. The act requires a local agency that proposes to disapprove a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria that were in effect at the time the application was deemed to be complete, or to approve it on the condition that it be developed at a lower density, to base its decision upon written findings supported by substantial evidence on the record that specified conditions exist, and places the burden of proof on the local agency to that effect. The act requires a court to impose a fine on a local agency under certain circumstances and requires that the fine be at least $10,000 per housing unit in the housing development project on the date the application was deemed complete. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would specify that an application is deemed complete for these purposes if a preliminary application was submitted, as described below. Existing law authorizes the applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the development or emergency shelter, or a housing organization to bring an action to enforce the Housing Accountability Act. If, in that action, a court finds that a local agency failed to satisfy the requirement to make the specified findings described above, existing law requires the court to issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with the act within 60 days, as specified. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would additionally require a court to issue the order or judgment previously described if the local agency required or attempted to require certain housing development projects to comply with an ordinance, policy, or standard not adopted and in effect when a preliminary application was submitted. Existing law authorizes a local agency to require a housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need, as specified. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would, notwithstanding those provisions or any other law and with certain exceptions, require that a housing development project only be subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application is submitted, except as specified. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law, except as provided, requires that a public hearing be held on an application for a variance from the requirements of a zoning ordinance, an application for a conditional use permit or equivalent development permit, a proposed revocation or modification of a variance or use permit or equivalent 246 development permit, or an appeal from the action taken on any of those applications. That law requires that notice of a public hearing be provided in accordance with specified procedures. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would prohibit a cityor county from conducting more than 5 hearings, as defined, held pursuant to these provisions, or any other law, ordinance, or regulation requiring a public hearing, if a proposed housing development project complies with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards in effect at the time an application is deemed complete, as defined. The bill would require the city or county to consider and either approve or disapprove the housing development project at any of the 5 hearings consistent with the applicable timelines under the Permit Streamlining Act. (3) The Permit Streamlining Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each state agency and each local agency to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. That law requires the state or local agency to make copies of this information available to all applicants for development projects and to any persons who request the information. The bill, until January 1, 2025, for purposes of any state or local law, ordinance, or regulation that requires a city or countyto determine whether the site of a proposed housing development project is a historic site, would require the city or county to make that determination, which would remain valid for the pendency of the housing development, at the time the application is deemed complete, except as provided. The bill, until January 1, 2025, would also require that each local agency make copies of any above-described list with respect to information required from an applicant for a housing development project available both (A) in writing to those persons to whom the agency is required to make information available and (B) publicly available on the internet website of the local agency. The Permit Streamlining Act requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain timeframes, as specified. The act requires a public agency, upon its determination that an application for adevelopmentprojectisincomplete,toincludealistandathoroughdescription ofthespecificinformationneeded to complete the application. Existing law authorizes the applicant to submit the additional material to the public agency, requires the public agency to determine whether the submission of the application together with the submitted materials is complete within 30 days of receipt, and provides for an appeal process from the public agency’s determination. Existing law requires a final written determination by the agency on the appeal no later than 60 days after receipt of the applicant’s written appeal. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would provide that a housing development project, as defined, shall be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application upon providing specified information about the proposed project to the city or county from which approval for the project is being sought. The bill would require each local agency to compile a checklist and application form that applicants for housing development projects may use for that purpose and would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to adopt a standardized form for applicants seeking approval from a local agency that has not developed its own application form. After the submittal of a preliminary application, the bill would provide that a housing development project would not be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application under these provisions if the development proponent revises the project such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20% or more until the development proponent resubmits the information required by the bill so that it reflects the revisions. The bill would require a development proponent to submit an application for a development project that includes all information necessary for the agency to review the application under the Permit Streamlining Act within 180 days of submitting the preliminary application. The bill, until January 1, 2025, would require the lead agency, as defined, if the application is determined to be incomplete, to provide the applicant with an exhaustive list of items that were not complete, as specified. The Permit Streamlining Act generally requires that a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project approve or disapprove a project within 120 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of an environmental impact report prepared for certain development projects, but reduces this time period to 90 days from the certification of an environmental impact report for development projects meeting certain additional conditions relating to affordability. Existing law defines “development project” for these purposes to mean a use 247 consisting of either residential units only or mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses that satisfy certain other requirements. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would reduce the time period in which a lead agency under these provisions is required to approve or disapprove a project from 120 days to 90 days, for a development project generally described above, and from 90 days to 60 days, for a development project that meets the above-described affordability conditions. The bill would recast the definition of “development project” for these purposes to mean a housing development project, as defined in the Housing Accountability Act. (4) The Planning and Zoning Law, among other things, requires the legislative body of each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city and of any land outside its boundaries that relates to its planning. That law authorizes the legislative body, if it deems it to be in the public interest, to amend all or part of an adopted general plan, as provided. That law also authorizes the legislative body of any county or city, pursuant to specified procedures, to adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between industry, business, residences, open space, and other purposes. This bill, until January 1, 2025, with respect to land where housing is an allowable use, except as specified, would prohibit a county or city, including the electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, in which specified conditions exist, determined by the Department of Housing and Community Development as provided, fromenacting a development policy,standard, or condition, asdefined, that wouldhave the effectof (A) changing thelanduse designationor zoningof a parcel orparcels of property to alessintensive useor reducingtheintensity of land use within an existing zoning district below what was allowed under the general plan or specific plan land use designation and zoning ordinances of the county or city as in effect on January 1, 2018; (B) imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing development within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the county or city, except as provided; (C) imposing or enforcing new design standards established on or after January 1, 2020, that are not objective design standards, as defined; or (D) establishing or implementing certain limits on the number of permits issued by, or the population of, the county or city, unless the limit was approved prior to January 1, 2005, in a predominantly agricultural county, as defined. The bill would, notwithstanding these prohibitions, allowacityor countyto prohibit thecommercialuse ofland zoned for residential useconsistentwith the authority ofthecityor countyconferred byotherlaw. The bill wouldstatethattheseprohibitions wouldapplyto anyzoning ordinance adopted or amended on or after the effective date of these provisions, and that any development policy, standard, or condition on or after that date that does not comply would be deemed void. This bill would also require a project that requires the demolition of housing to comply with specified requirements, including the provision of relocation assistance and a right of first refusal in the new housing to displaced occupants, as provided. The bill would provide that these provisions do not supersede any provision of a locally adopted ordinance that places greater restrictions on the demolition of residential dwelling units or that requires greater relocation assistance to displaced households. The bill would require a county or city subject to these provisions to include information necessaryto determine compliance with these provisions in the list or lists that specify the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project under the Permit Streamlining Act. The bill would state that these prohibitions would prevail over any conflicting provision of the Planning and Zoning Law or other law regulating housing development in this state, except as specifically provided. The bill would also require that any exception to these provisions, including an exception for the health and safety of occupants of a housing development project, be construed narrowly. (5) This bill would include findings that the changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (6) By imposing various new requirements and duties on local planning officials with respect to housing development, and by changing the scope of a crime under the State Housing Law, this bill would impose a state- mandated local program. 248 The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. (7) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. DIGEST KEY Vote: majority Appropriation: no Fiscal Committee: yes Local Program: yes BILL TEXT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. This act shall be known, and may be cited, as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. SEC. 2. (a) The Legislature finds and declares the following: (1) California is experiencing a housing supply crisis, with housing demand far outstripping supply. In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita. (2) Consequently, existing housing in this state, especially in its largest cities, has become very expensive. Seven of the 10 most expensive real estate markets in the United States are in California. In San Francisco, the median home price is $1.6 million. (3) California is also experiencing rapid year-over-year rent growth with three cities in the state having had overall rent growth of 10 percent or more year-over-year, and of the 50 United States cities with the highest United States rents, 33 are cities in California. (4) California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over the next 7 years. (5) The housing crisis has particularly exacerbated the need for affordable homes at prices below market rates. (6) The housing crisis harms families across California and has resulted in all of the following: (A) Increased poverty and homelessness, especially first-time homelessness. (B) Forced lower income residents into crowded and unsafe housing in urban areas. (C) Forced families into lower cost new housing in greenfields at the urban-rural interface with longer commute times and a higher exposure to fire hazard. (D) Forced public employees, health care providers, teachers, and others, including critical safety personnel, into more affordable housing farther from the communities they serve, which will exacerbate future disaster response challenges in high-cost, high-congestion areas and increase risk to life. (E) Driven families out of the state or into communities away from good schools and services, making the ZIP Code where one grew up the largest determinate of later access to opportunities and social mobility, disrupting family life, and increasing health problems due to long commutes that may exceed three hours per day. 249 (7) The housing crisis has been exacerbated by the additional loss of units due to wildfires in 2017 and 2018, which impacts all regions of the state. The Carr Fire in 2017 alone burned over 1,000 homes, and over 50,000 people have been displaced by the Camp Fire and the Woolsey Fire in 2018. This temporary and permanent displacement has placed additional demand on the housing market and has resulted in fewer housing units available for rent by low-income individuals. (8) Individuals who lose their housing due to fire or the sale of the property cannot find affordable homes or rental units and are pushed into cars and tents. (9) Costs for construction of new housing continue to increase. According to the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at the University of California, Berkeley, the cost of building a 100-unit affordable housing project in the state was almost $425,000 per unit in 2016, up from $265,000 per unit in 2000. (10) Lengthy permitting processes and approval times, fees and costs for parking, and other requirements further exacerbate cost of residential construction. (11) The housing crisis is severely impacting the state’s economy as follows: (A) Employers face increasing difficulty in securing and retaining a workforce. (B) Schools, universities, nonprofits, and governments have difficulty attracting and retaining teachers, students, and employees, and our schools and critical services are suffering. (C) According to analysts at McKinsey and Company, the housing crisis is costing California $140 billion a year in lost economic output. (12) The housing crisis also harms the environment by doing both of the following: (A) Increasing pressure to develop the state’s farmlands, open space, and rural interface areas to build affordable housing, and increasing fire hazards that generate massive greenhouse gas emissions. (B) Increasing greenhouse gas emissions from longer commutes to affordable homes far from growing job centers. (13) Homes, lots, and structures near good jobs, schools, and transportation remain underutilized throughout the state and could be rapidly remodeled or developed to add affordable homes without subsidy where they are needed with state assistance. (14) Reusing existing infrastructure and developed properties, and building more smaller homes with good access to schools, parks, and services, will provide the most immediate help with the lowest greenhouse gas footprint to state residents. (b) In light of the foregoing, the Legislature hereby declares a statewide housing emergency, to be in effect until January 1, 2025. (c) It is the intent of the Legislature, in enacting the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, to do both of the following: (1) Suspend certain restrictions on the development of new housing during the period of the statewide emergency described in subdivisions (a) and (b). (2) Work with local governments to expedite the permitting of housing in regions suffering the worst housing shortages and highest rates of displacement. SEC. 3. Section 65589.5 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65589.5. (a) (1) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: 250 (A) The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California. (B) California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing. (C) Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration. (D) Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects. (2) In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares the following: (A) California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives. (B) While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable to Californians of all income levels is a key factor. (C) The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted unaffordability. (D) According to reports and data, California has accumulated an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with growth through 2025. (E) California’s overall homeownership rate is at its lowest level since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in homeownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. Only one-half of California’s households are able to afford the cost of housing in their local regions. (F) Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians. (G) The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more than 50 percent of their income toward rent. (H) When Californians have access to safe and affordable housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are less likely to become homeless and in need of government-subsidized services; their children do better in school; and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining employees. (I) An additional consequence of the state’s cumulative housing shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and middle-class households. California’s cumulative housing shortfall therefore has not only national but international environmental consequences. (J) California’s housing picture has reached a crisis of historic proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income levels, including this section. 251 (K) The Legislature’s intent in enacting this section in 1982 and in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled. (L) It is the policy of the state that this section be interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing. (3) It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently. (b) It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject or make infeasible housing development projects, including emergency shelters that contribute to meeting the need determined pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action and without complying with subdivision (d). (c) The Legislature also recognizes that premature and unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas. (d) A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development project, including farmworker housing as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project infeasible for development for the use of very low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency shelter, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following: (1) The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588, is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for the income category proposed for the housing development project, provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the housing development project includes a mix of income categories, and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need for one or more of those categories, then this paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve the housing development project. The share of the regional housing need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards. (2) The housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. 252 (3) The denial of the housing development project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. (4) The housing development project or emergency shelter is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project. (5) The housing development project or emergency shelter is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan as it existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in substantial compliance with this article. For purposes of this section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or condition approval of the housing development project or emergency shelter. (A) This paragraph cannot be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing development project if the housing development project is proposed on a site that is identified as suitable or available for very low, low- , or moderate-income households in the jurisdiction’s housing element, and consistent with the density specified in the housing element, even though it is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation. (B) If the local agency has failed to identify in the inventory of land in its housing element sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period and are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income levels pursuant to Section 65584, then this paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing development project proposed for a site designated in any element of the general plan for residential uses or designated in any element of the general plan for commercial uses if residential uses are permitted or conditionally permitted within commercial designations. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency to show that its housing element does identify adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate the local agency’s share of the regional housing need for the very low, low-, and moderate-income categories. (C) If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the congestion management program required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). (f) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring the housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies 253 shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density permitted on the site and proposed by the development. (2) Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring an emergency shelter project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that are consistent with paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction’s need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied by the local agency to facilitate and accommodate the development of the emergency shelter project. (3) Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from imposing fees and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the housing development project or emergency shelter. (4) For purposes of this section, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. (g) This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency shelter, is a critical statewide problem. (h) The following definitions apply for the purposes of this section: (1) “Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. (2) “Housing development project” means a use consisting of any of the following: (A) Residential units only. (B) Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use. (C) Transitional housing or supportive housing. (3) “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households” means that either (A) at least 20 percent of the total units shall be sold or rented to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or (B) 100 percent of the units shall be sold or rented to persons and families of moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, or persons and families of middle income, as defined in Section 65008 of this code. Housing units targeted for lower income households shall be made available at a monthly housing cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median income with adjustments for household size made in accordance with the adjustment factors on which the lower income eligibility limits are based. Housing units targeted for persons and families of moderate income shall be made available at a monthly housing cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 100 percent of area median income with adjustments for household size made in accordance with the adjustment factors on which the moderate-income eligibility limits are based. (4) “Area median income” means area median income as periodically established by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code. The developer shall provide sufficient legal commitments to ensure continued availability of units for very low or low-income households in accordance with the provisions of this subdivision for 30 years. (5) Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2025, “deemed complete” means that the applicant has submitted a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1. (6) “Disapprove the housing development project” includes any instance in which a local agency does either of the following: 254 (A) Votes on a proposed housing development project application and the application is disapproved, including any required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the issuance of a building permit. (B) Fails to comply with the time periods specified in subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph. (7) “Lower density” includes any conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing. (8) Until January 1, 2025, “objective” means involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official. (9) Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2025, “determined to be complete” means that the applicant has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943. (i) If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in force at the time the housing development project’s application is deemed complete, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability or affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, and the denial of the development or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as described in subdivision (d), and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, and with the requirements of subdivision (o). (j) (1) When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: (A) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. (B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. (2) (A) If the local agency considers a proposed housing development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity as follows: (i) Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains 150 or fewer housing units. (ii) Within 60 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains more than 150 units. 255 (B) If the local agency fails to provide the required documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision. (3) For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915 shall not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision. (4) For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project. (k) (1) (A) (i) The applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the development or emergency shelter, or a housing organization may bring an action to enforce this section. If, in any action brought to enforce this section, a court finds that any of the following are met, the court shall issue an order pursuant to clause (ii): (I) The local agency, in violation of subdivision (d), disapproved a housing development project or conditioned its approval in a manner rendering it infeasible for the development of an emergency shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, including farmworker housing, without making the findings required by this section or without making findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence. (II) The local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved a housing development project complying with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without making the findings required by this section or without making findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence. (III) (ia) Subject to sub-subclause (ib), the local agency, in violation of subdivision (o), required or attempted to require a housing development project to comply with an ordinance, policy, or standard not adopted and in effect when a preliminary application was submitted. (ib) This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2025. (ii) If the court finds that one of the conditions in clause (i) is met, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within 60 days, including, but not limited to, an order that the local agency take action on the housing development project or emergency shelter. The court may issue an order or judgment directing the local agency to approve the housing development project or emergency shelter if the court finds that the local agency acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this section. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out and shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or petitioner, except under extraordinary circumstances in which the court finds that awarding fees would not further the purposes of this section. (B) (i) Upon a determination that the local agency has failed to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within 60 days issued pursuant to subparagraph (A), the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building Homes and Jobs Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per 256 housing unit in the housing development project on the date the application was deemed complete pursuant to Section 65943. In determining the amount of fine to impose, the court shall consider the local agency’s progress in attaining its target allocation of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584 and any prior violations of this section. Fines shall not be paid out of funds already dedicated to affordable housing, including, but not limited to, Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing for very low, low-, and moderate-income households, and federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community Development Block Grant Program funds. The local agency shall commit and expend the money in the local housing trust fund within five years for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households. After five years, if the funds have not been expended, the money shall revert to the state and be deposited in the Building Homes and Jobs Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund, for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households. (ii) If any money derived from a fine imposed pursuant to this subparagraph is deposited in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund, then, notwithstanding Section 50661 of the Health and Safety Code, that money shall be available only upon appropriation by the Legislature. (C) If the court determines that its order or judgment has not been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing development project, in which case the application for the housing development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant consents to a different decision or action by the local agency. (2) For purposes of this subdivision, “housing organization” means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or advocating for increased access to housing for low-income households and have filed written or oral comments with the local agency prior to action on the housing development project. A housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in an action to enforce this section. (l) If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this section and (2) failed to carry out the court’s order or judgment within 60 days as described in subdivision (k), the court, in addition to any other remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) by a factor of five. For purposes of this section, “bad faith” includes, but is not limited to, an action that is frivolous or otherwise entirely without merit. (m) Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section. A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on, disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry of the trial court’s order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff is the project applicant. 257 (n) In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and, notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioner’s points and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondent’s points and authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs. (o) (1) Subject to paragraphs (2), (6), and (7), and subdivision (d) of Section 65941.1, a housing development project shall be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application including all of the information required by subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 was submitted. (2) Paragraph (1) shall not prohibit a housing development project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards adopted after the preliminary application was submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 in the following circumstances: (A) In the case of a fee, charge, or other monetary exaction, to an increase resulting from an automatic annual adjustment based on an independently published cost index that is referenced in the ordinance or resolution establishing the fee or other monetary exaction. (B) A preponderance of the evidence in the record establishes that subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, or standard beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to mitigate or avoid a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), and there is no feasible alternative method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. (C) Subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, standard, or any other measure, beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to avoid or substantially lessen an impact of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). (D) The housing development project has not commenced construction within two and one-half years following the date that the project received final approval. For purposes of this subparagraph, “final approval” means that the housing development project has received all necessary approvals to be eligible to apply for, and obtain, a building permit or permits and either of the following is met: (i) The expiration of all applicable appeal periods, petition periods, reconsideration periods, or statute of limitations for challenging that final approval without an appeal, petition, request for reconsideration, or legal challenge having been filed. (ii) If a challenge is filed, that challenge is fully resolved or settled in favor of the housing development project. (E) The housing development project is revised following submittal of a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision. For purposes of this subdivision, “square footage of construction” means the building area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations). (3) This subdivision does not prevent a local agency from subjecting the additional units or square footage of construction that result from project revisions occurring after a preliminary application is submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when the preliminary application was submitted. (4) For purposes of this subdivision, “ordinances, policies, and standards” includes general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and policies of a local agency, as defined in Section 66000, including those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions. 258 (5) This subdivision shall not be construed in a manner that would lessen the restrictions imposed on a local agency, or lessen the protections afforded to a housing development project, that are established by any other law, including any other part of this section. (6) This subdivision shall not restrict the authority of a public agency or local agency to require mitigation measures to lessen the impacts of a housing development project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). (7) With respect to completed residential units for which the project approval process is complete and a certificate of occupancy has been issued, nothing in this subdivision shall limit the application of later enacted ordinances, policies, and standards that regulate the use and occupancy of those residential units, such as ordinances relating to rental housing inspection, rent stabilization, restrictions on short-term renting, and business licensing requirements for owners of rental housing. (8) This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, 2025. (p) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Housing Accountability Act. SEC. 4. Section 65905.5 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65905.5. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, if a proposed housing development project complies with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards in effect at the time an application is deemed complete, after the application is deemed complete, a city, county, or city and county shall not conduct more than five hearings pursuant to Section 65905, or any other law, ordinance, or regulation requiring a public hearing in connection with the approval of that housing development project. If the city, county, or city and county continues a hearing subject to this section to another date, the continued hearing shall count as one of the five hearings allowed under this section. The city, county, or city and county shall consider and either approve or disapprove the application at any of the five hearings allowed under this section consistent with the applicable timelines under the Permit Streamlining Act (Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 65920)). (b) For purposes of this section: (1) “Deemed complete” means that the application has met all of the requirements specified in the relevant list compiled pursuant to Section 65940 that was available at the time when the application was submitted. (2) “Hearing” includes any public hearing, workshop, or similar meeting conducted by the city or county with respect to the housing development project, whether by the legislative body of the city or county, the planning agency established pursuant to Section 65100, or any other agency, department, board, commission, or any other designated hearing officer or body of the city or county, or any committee or subcommittee thereof. “Hearing” does not include a hearing to review a legislative approval required for a proposed housing development project, including, but not limited to, a general plan amendment, a specific plan adoption or amendment, or a zoning amendment, or any hearing arising from a timely appeal of the approval or disapproval of a legislative approval. (3) “Housing development project” has the same meaning as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5. (c) (1) For purposes of this section, a housing development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. (2) A proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria, but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency complies with the written documentation requirements of paragraph (2) of subdivision (j) of Section 65589.5, the 259 local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning that is consistent with the general plan; however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project. (d) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of, or the standards of review pursuant to, Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (e) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 5. Section 65913.10 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65913.10. (a) For purposes of any state or local law, ordinance, or regulation that requires the city or county to determine whether the site of a proposed housing development project is a historic site, the city or county shall make that determination at the time the application for the housing development project is deemed complete. A determination as to whether a parcel of property is a historic site shall remain valid during the pendency of the housing development project for which the application was made unless any archaeological, paleontological, or tribal cultural resources are encountered during any grading, site disturbance, or building alteration activities. (b) For purposes of this section: (1) “Deemed complete” means that the application has met all of the requirements specified in the relevant list compiled pursuant to Section 65940 that was available at the time when the application was submitted. (2) “Housing development project” has the same meaning as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5. (c) (1) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of, or the standards of review pursuant to, Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (2) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). (d) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 6. Section 65940 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65940. (a) (1) Each public agency shall compile one or more lists that shall specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. Each public agency shall revise the list of information required from an applicant to include a certification of compliance with Section 65962.5, and the statement of application required by Section 65943. Copies of the information, including the statement of application required by Section 65943, shall be made available to all applicants for development projects and to any person who requests the information. (2) An affected city or affected county, as defined in Section 66300, shall include the information necessary to determine compliance with the requirements of subdivision (d) of Section 66300 in the list compiled pursuant to paragraph (1). (b) The list of information required from any applicant shall include, where applicable, identification of whether the proposed project is located within 1,000 feet of a military installation, beneath a low-level flight path or within special use airspace as defined in Section 21098 of the Public Resources Code, and within an urbanized area as defined in Section 65944. 260 (c) (1) A public agency that is not beneath a low-level flight path or not within special use airspace and does not contain a military installation is not required to change its list of information required from applicants to comply with subdivision (b). (2) A public agency that is entirely urbanized, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 65944, with the exception of a jurisdiction that contains a military installation, is not required to change its list of information required from applicants to comply with subdivision (b). (d) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 7. Section 65940 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65940. (a) Each public agency shall compile one or more lists that shall specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. Each public agency shall revise the list of information required from an applicant to include a certification of compliance with Section 65962.5, and the statement of application required by Section 65943. Copies of the information, including the statement of application required by Section 65943, shall be made available to all applicants for development projects and to any person who requests the information. (b) The list of information required from any applicant shall include, where applicable, identification of whether the proposed project is located within 1,000 feet of a military installation, beneath a low-level flight path or within special use airspace as defined in Section 21098 of the Public Resources Code, and within an urbanized area as defined in Section 65944. (c) (1) A public agency that is not beneath a low-level flight path or not within special use airspace and does not contain a military installation is not required to change its list of information required from applicants to comply with subdivision (b). (2) A public agency that is entirely urbanized, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 65944, with the exception of a jurisdiction that contains a military installation, is not required to change its list of information required from applicants to comply with subdivision (b). (d) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2025. SEC. 8. Section 65941.1 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65941.1. (a) An applicant for a housing development project, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5, shall be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application upon providing all of the following information about the proposed project to the city, county, or city and county from which approval for the project is being sought and upon payment of the permit processing fee: (1) The specific location, including parcel numbers, a legal description, and site address, if applicable. (2) The existing uses on the project site and identification of major physical alterations to the property on which the project is to be located. (3) A site plan showing the location on the property, elevations showing design, color, and material, and the massing, height, and approximate square footage, of each building that is to be occupied. (4) The proposed land uses by number of units and square feet of residential and nonresidential development using the categories in the applicable zoning ordinance. (5) The proposed number of parking spaces. 261 (6) Any proposed point sources of air or water pollutants. (7) Any species of special concern known to occur on the property. (8) Whether a portion of the property is located within any of the following: (A) A very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 51178. (B) Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993). (C) A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section 65962.5 or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code. (D) A special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. (E) A delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local building department under Chapter 12.2 (commencing with Section 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2. (F) A stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code. (9) Any historic or cultural resources known to exist on the property. (10) The number of proposed below market rate units and their affordability levels. (11) The number of bonus units and any incentives, concessions, waivers, or parking reductions requested pursuant to Section 65915. (12) Whether any approvals under the Subdivision Map Act, including, but not limited to, a parcel map, a tentative map, or a condominium map, are being requested. (13) The applicant’s contact information and, if the applicant does not own the property, consent from the property owner to submit the application. (14) For a housing development project proposed to be located within the coastal zone, whether any portion of the property contains any of the following: (A) Wetlands, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 13577 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. (B) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas, as defined in Section 30240 of the Public Resources Code. (C) A tsunami run-up zone. (D) Use of the site for public access to or along the coast. (15) The number of existing residential units on the project site that will be demolished and whether each existing unit is occupied or unoccupied. (16) A site map showing a stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code and an aerial site photograph showing existing site conditions of environmental site features that would be subject to regulations by a public agency, including creeks and wetlands. (17) The location of any recorded public easement, such as easements for storm drains, water lines, and other public rights of way. 262 (b) (1) Each local agency shall compile a checklist and application form that applicants for housing development projects may use for the purpose of satisfying the requirements for submittal of a preliminary application. (2) The Department of Housing and Community Development shall adopt a standardized form that applicants for housing development projects may use for the purpose of satisfying the requirements for submittal of a preliminary application if a local agency has not developed its own application form pursuant to paragraph (1). Adoption of the standardized form shall not be subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. (3) A checklist or form shall not require or request any information beyond that expressly identified in subdivision (a). (c) After submittal of all of the information required by subdivision (a), if the development proponent revises the project such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, the housing development project shall not be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application that satisfies this section until the development proponent resubmits the information required by subdivision (a) so that it reflects the revisions. For purposes of this subdivision, “square footage of construction” means the building area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations). (d) (1) Within 180 calendar days after submitting a preliminary application with all of the information required by subdivision (a) to a city, county, or city and county, the development proponent shall submit an application for a development project that includes all of the information required to process the development application consistent with Sections 65940, 65941, and 65941.5. (2) If the public agency determines that the application for the development project is not complete pursuant to Section 65943, the development proponent shall submit the specific information needed to complete the application within 90 days of receiving the agency’s written identification of the necessary information. If the development proponent does not submit this information within the 90-day period, then the preliminary application shall expire and have no further force or effect. (3) This section shall not require an affirmative determination by a city, county, or city and county regarding the completeness of a preliminary application or a development application for purposes of compliance with this section. (e) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 9. Section 65943 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65943. (a) Not later than 30 calendar days after any public agency has received an application for a development project, the agency shall determine in writing whether the application is complete and shall immediately transmit the determination to the applicant for the development project. If the application is determined to be incomplete, the lead agency shall provide the applicant with an exhaustive list of items that were not complete. That list shall be limited to those items actually required on the lead agency’s submittal requirement checklist. In any subsequent review of the application determined to be incomplete, the local agency shall not request the applicant to provide any new information that was not stated in the initial list of items that were not complete. If the written determination is not made within 30 days after receipt of the application, and the application includes a statement that it is an application for a development permit, the application shall be deemed complete for purposes of this chapter. Upon receipt of any resubmittal of the application, a new 30-day period shall begin, during which the public agency shall determine the completeness of the application. If the application is determined not to be complete, the agency’s determination shall specify those parts of the application which are incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which they can be made complete, including a list and thorough description of the specific 263 information needed to complete the application. The applicant shall submit materials to the public agency in response to the list and description. (b) Not later than 30 calendar days after receipt of the submitted materials described in subdivision (a), the public agency shall determine in writing whether the application as supplemented or amended by the submitted materials is complete and shall immediately transmit that determination to the applicant. In making this determination, the public agency is limited to determining whether the application as supplemented or amended includes the information required by the list and a thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application required by subdivision (a). If the written determination is not made within that 30-day period, the application together with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for purposes of this chapter. (c) If the application together with the submitted materials are determined not to be complete pursuant to subdivision (b), the public agency shall provide a process for the applicant to appeal that decision in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of the agency, as provided by that agency. A city or county shall provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. There shall be a final written determination by the agency on the appeal not later than 60 calendar days after receipt of the applicant’s written appeal. The fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the 60-day period. Notwithstanding a decision pursuant to subdivision (b) that the application and submitted materials are not complete, if the final written determination on the appeal is not made within that 60-day period, the application with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for the purposes of this chapter. (d) Nothing in this section precludes an applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing to an extension of any time limit provided by this section. (e) A public agency may charge applicants a fee not to exceed the amount reasonably necessary to provide the service required by this section. If a fee is charged pursuant to this section, the fee shall be collected as part of the application fee charged for the development permit. (f) Each city and each county shall make copies of any list compiled pursuant to Section 65940 with respect to information required from an applicant for a housing development project, as that term is defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5, available both (1) in writing to those persons to whom the agency is required to make information available under subdivision (a) of that section, and (2) publicly available on the internet website of the city or county. (g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 10. Section 65943 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65943. (a) Not later than 30 calendar days after any public agency has received an application for a development project, the agency shall determine in writing whether the application is complete and shall immediately transmit the determination to the applicant for the development project. If the written determination is not made within 30 days after receipt of the application, and the application includes a statement that it is an application for a development permit, the application shall be deemed complete for purposes of this chapter. Upon receipt of any resubmittal of the application, a new 30-day period shall begin, during which the public agency shall determine the completeness of the application. If the application is determined not to be complete, the agency’s determination shall specify those parts of the application which are incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which they can be made complete, including a list and thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application. The applicant shall submit materials to the public agency in response to the list and description. 264 (b) Not later than 30 calendar days after receipt of the submitted materials, the public agency shall determine in writing whether they are complete and shall immediately transmit that determination to the applicant. If the written determination is not made within that 30-day period, the application together with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for purposes of this chapter. (c) If the application together with the submitted materials are determined not to be complete pursuant to subdivision (b), the public agency shall provide a process for the applicant to appeal that decision in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of the agency, as provided by that agency. A city or county shall provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. There shall be a final written determination by the agency on the appeal not later than 60 calendar days after receipt of the applicant’s written appeal. The fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the 60-day period. Notwithstanding a decision pursuant to subdivision (b) that the application and submitted materials are not complete, if the final written determination on the appeal is not made within that 60-day period, the application with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for the purposes of this chapter. (d) Nothing in this section precludes an applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing to an extension of any time limit provided by this section. (e) A public agency may charge applicants a fee not to exceed the amount reasonably necessary to provide the service required by this section. If a fee is charged pursuant to this section, the fee shall be collected as part of the application fee charged for the development permit. (f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2025. SEC. 11. Section 65950 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65950. (a) A public agency that is the lead agency for a development project shall approve or disapprove the project within whichever of the following periods is applicable: (1) One hundred eighty days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for the development project. (2) Ninety days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for a development project defined in subdivision (c). (3) Sixty days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for a development project defined in subdivision (c) and all of the following conditions are met: (A) At least 49 percent of the units in the development project are affordable to very low or low-income households, as defined by Sections 50105 and 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, respectively. Rents for the lower income units shall be set at an affordable rent, as that term is defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for at least 30 years. Owner-occupied units shall be available at an affordable housing cost, as that term is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (B) Prior to the application being deemed complete for the development project pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 65940), the lead agency received written notice from the project applicant that an application has been made or will be made for an allocation or commitment of financing, tax credits, bond authority, or other financial assistance from a public agency or federal agency, and the notice specifies the financial assistance that has been applied for or will be applied for and the deadline for application for that 265 assistance, the requirement that one of the approvals of the development project by the lead agency is a prerequisite to the application for or approval of the application for financial assistance, and that the financial assistance is necessary for the project to be affordable as required pursuant to subparagraph (A). (C) There is confirmation that the application has been made to the public agency or federal agency prior to certification of the environmental impact report. (4) Sixty days from the date of adoption by the lead agency of the negative declaration, if a negative declaration is completed and adopted for the development project. (5) Sixty days from the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), if the project is exempt from that act. (b) This section does not preclude a project applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing in writing to an extension of any time limit provided by this section pursuant to Section 65957. (c) For purposes of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) and Section 65952, “development project” means a housing development project, as that term is defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5. (d) For purposes of this section, “lead agency” and “negative declaration” have the same meaning as defined in Sections 21067 and 21064 of the Public Resources Code, respectively. (e) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 12. Section 65950 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65950. (a) A public agency that is the lead agency for a development project shall approve or disapprove the project within whichever of the following periods is applicable: (1) One hundred eighty days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for the development project. (2) One hundred twenty days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for a development project defined in subdivision (c). (3) Ninety days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the environmental impact report, if an environmental impact report is prepared pursuant to Section 21100 or 21151 of the Public Resources Code for a development project defined in subdivision (c) and all of the following conditions are met: (A) At least 49 percent of the units in the development project are affordable to very low or low-income households, as defined by Sections 50105 and 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, respectively. Rents for the lower income units shall be set at an affordable rent, as that term is defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for at least 30 years. Owner-occupied units shall be available at an affordable housing cost, as that term is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (B) Prior to the application being deemed complete for the development project pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 65940), the lead agency received written notice from the project applicant that an application has been made or will be made for an allocation or commitment of financing, tax credits, bond authority, or other financial assistance from a public agency or federal agency, and the notice specifies the financial assistance that has been applied for or will be applied for and the deadline for application for that assistance, the requirement that one of the approvals of the development project by the lead agency is a prerequisite to the application for or approval of the application for financial assistance, and that the financial assistance is necessary for the project to be affordable as required pursuant to subparagraph (A). 266 (C) There is confirmation that the application has been made to the public agency or federal agency prior to certification of the environmental impact report. (4) Sixty days from the date of adoption by the lead agency of the negative declaration, if a negative declaration is completed and adopted for the development project. (5) Sixty days from the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), if the project is exempt from that act. (b) This section does not preclude a project applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing in writing to an extension of any time limit provided by this section pursuant to Section 65957. (c) For purposes of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) and Section 65952, “development project” means a use consisting of either of the following: (1) Residential units only. (2) Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses in which the nonresidential uses are less than 50 percent of the total square footage of the development and are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of buildings that are two or more stories. As used in this paragraph, “neighborhood commercial” means small-scale general or specialty stores that furnish goods and services primarily to residents of the neighborhood. (d) For purposes of this section, “lead agency” and “negative declaration” have the same meaning as defined in Sections 21067 and 21064 of the Public Resources Code, respectively. (e) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2025. SEC. 13. Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 66300) is added to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, to read: CHAPTER 12. Housing Crisis Act of 2019 66300. (a) As used in this section: (1) (A) Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (B), “affected city” means a city, including a charter city, that the Department of Housing and Community Development determines, pursuant to subdivision (e), is in an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), “affected city” does not include any city that has a population of 5,000 or less and is not located within an urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (2) “Affected county” means a census designated place, based on the 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, that is wholly located within the boundaries of an urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (3) Notwithstanding any other law, “affected county” and “affected city” includes the electorate of an affected county or city exercising its local initiative or referendum power, whether that power is derived from the California Constitution, statute, or the charter or ordinances of the affected county or city. (4) “Department” means the Department of Housing and Community Development. (5) “Development policy, standard, or condition” means any of the following: (A) A provision of, or amendment to, a general plan. (B) A provision of, or amendment to, a specific plan. (C) A provision of, or amendment to, a zoning ordinance. 267 (D) A subdivision standard or criterion. (6) “Housing development project” has the same meaning as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 65589.5. (7) “Objective design standard” means a design standard that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and is uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal of an application. (b) (1) Notwithstanding any other law except as provided in subdivision (i), with respect to land where housing is an allowable use, an affected county or an affected city shall not enact a development policy, standard, or condition that would have any of the following effects: (A) Changing the general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district below what was allowed under the land use designation and zoning ordinances of the affected county or affected city, as applicable, as in effect on January 1, 2018, except as otherwise provided in clause (ii) of subparagraph (B). For purposes of this subparagraph, “less intensive use” includes, but is not limited to, reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, or new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations, or anything that would lessen the intensity of housing. (B) (i) Imposing a moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development, including mixed-use development, within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the affected county or city, other than to specifically protect against an imminent threat to the health and safety of persons residing in, or within the immediate vicinity of, the area subject to the moratorium or for projects specifically identified as existing restricted affordable housing. (ii) The affected county or affected city, as applicable, shall not enforce a zoning ordinance imposing a moratorium or other similar restriction on or limitation of housing development until it has submitted the ordinance to, and received approval from, the department. The department shall approve a zoning ordinance submitted to it pursuant to this subparagraph only if it determines that the zoning ordinance satisfies the requirements of this subparagraph. If the department denies approval of a zoning ordinance imposing a moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development as inconsistent with this subparagraph, that ordinance shall be deemed void. (C) Imposing or enforcing design standards established on or after January 1, 2020, that are not objective design standards. (D) Except as provided in subparagraph (E), establishing or implementing any provision that: (i) Limits the number of land use approvals or permits necessary for the approval and construction of housing that will be issued or allocated within all or a portion of the affected county or affected city, as applicable. (ii) Acts as a cap on the number of housing units that can be approved or constructed either annually or for some other time period. (iii) Limits the population of the affected county or affected city, as applicable. (E) Notwithstanding subparagraph (D), an affected county or affected city may enforce a limit on the number of approvals or permits or a cap on the number of housing units that can be approved or constructed if the provision of law imposing the limit was approved by voters prior to January 1, 2005, and the affected county or affected city is located in a predominantly agricultural county. For the purposes of this subparagraph, “predominantly agricultural county” means a county that meets both of the following, as determined by the most recent California Farmland Conversion Report produced by the Department of Conservation: 268 (i) Has more than 550,000 acres of agricultural land. (ii) At least one-half of the county area is agricultural land. (2) Any development policy, standard, or condition enacted on or after the effective date of this section that does not comply with this section shall be deemed void. (c) Notwithstanding subdivisions (b) and (f), an affected county or affected city may enact a development policy, standard, or condition to prohibit the commercial use of land that is designated for residential use, including, but not limited to, short-term occupancy of a residence, consistent with the authority conferred on the county or city by other law. (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, both of the following shall apply: (1) An affected city or an affected county shall not approve a housing development project that will require the demolition of residential dwelling units unless the project will create at least as many residential dwelling units as will be demolished. (2) An affected city or an affected county shall not approve a housing development project that will require the demolition of occupied or vacant protected units, unless all of the following apply: (A) (i) The project will replace all existing or demolished protected units. (ii) Any protected units replaced pursuant to this subparagraph shall be considered in determining whether the housing development project satisfies the requirements of Section 65915 or a locally adopted requirement that requires, as a condition of the development of residential rental units, that the project provide a certain percentage of residential rental units affordable to, and occupied by, households with incomes that do not exceed the limits for moderate-income, lower income, very low income, or extremely low income households, as specified in Sections 50079.5, 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code. (iii) Notwithstanding clause (i), in the case of a protected unit that is or was, within the five-year period preceding the application, subject to a form of rent or price control through a local government’s valid exercise of its police power, and that is or was occupied by persons or families above lower income, the affected city or affected county may do either of the following: (I) Require that the replacement units be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, low-income persons or families. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. (II) Require that the units be replaced in compliance with the jurisdiction’s rent or price control ordinance, provided that each unit is replaced. Unless otherwise required by the affected city or affected county’s rent or price control ordinance, these units shall not be subject to a recorded affordability restriction. (B) The housing development project will include at least as many residential dwelling units as the greatest number of residential dwelling units that existed on the project site within the last five years. (C) Any existing residents will be allowed to occupy their units until six months before the start of construction activities with proper notice, subject to Chapter 16 (commencing with Section 7260) of Division 7 of Title 1. (D) The developer agrees to provide both of the following to the occupants of any protected units: (i) Relocation benefits to the occupants of those affordable residential rental units, subject to Chapter 16 (commencing with Section 7260) of Division 7 of Title 1. (ii) A right of first refusal for a comparable unit available in the new housing development affordable to the household at an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable housing cost, as defined in 50052.5. (E) For purposes of this paragraph: 269 (i) “Equivalent size” means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced. (ii) “Protected units” means any of the following: (I) Residential dwelling units that are or were subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income within the past five years. (II) Residential dwelling units that are or were subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power within the past five years. (III) Residential dwelling units that are or were occupied by lower or very low income households within the past five years. (IV) Residential dwelling units that were withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 within the past 10 years. (iii) “Replace” shall have the same meaning as provided in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65915. (3) This subdivision shall not supersede any objective provision of a locally adopted ordinance that places restrictions on the demolition of residential dwelling units or the subdivision of residential rental units that are more protective of lower income households, requires the provision of a greater number of units affordable to lower income households, or that requires greater relocation assistance to displaced households. (4) This subdivision shall only apply to a housing development project that submits a complete application pursuant to Section 65943 on or after January 1, 2020. (e) The Department of Housing and Community Development shall determine those cities and counties in this state that are affected cities and affected counties, in accordance with subdivision (a) by June 30, 2020. The department may update the list of affected cities and affected counties once on or after January 1, 2021, to account for changes in urbanized areas or urban clusters due to new data obtained from the 2020 census. The department’s determination shall remain valid until January 1, 2025. (f) (1) Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4) and subdivisions (h) and (i), this section shall prevail over any conflicting provision of this title or other law regulating housing development in this state to the extent that this section more fully advances the intent specified in paragraph (2). (2) It is the intent of the Legislature that this section be broadly construed so as to maximize the development of housing within this state. Any exception to the requirements of this section, including an exception for the health and safety of occupants of a housing development project, shall be construed narrowly. (3) This section shall not be construed as prohibiting the adoption or amendment of a development policy, standard, or condition in a manner that: (A) Allows greater density. (B) Facilitates the development of housing. (C) Reduces the costs to a housing development project. (D) Imposes or implements mitigation measures as necessary to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). (4) This section shall not apply to a housing development project located within a very high fire hazard severity zone. For purposes of this paragraph, “very high fire hazard severity zone” has the same meaning as provided in Section 51177. 270 (g) This section shall not be construed to void a height limit, urban growth boundary, or urban limit established by the electorate of an affected county or an affected city, provided that the height limit, urban growth boundary, or urban limit complies with subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b). (h) (1) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of, or the standards of review pursuant to, Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (2) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). For a housing development project proposed within the coastal zone, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit an affected county or an affected city from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition necessary to implement or amend a certified local coastal program consistent with the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). (i) (1) This section does not prohibit an affected county or an affected city from changing a land use designation or zoning ordinance to a less intensive use if the city or county concurrently changes the development standards, policies, and conditions applicable to other parcels within the jurisdiction to ensure that there is no net loss in residential capacity. (2) This section does not prohibit an affected county or an affected city from changing a land use designation or zoning ordinance to a less intensive use on a site that is a mobilehome park, as defined in Section 18214 of the Health and Safety Code, as of the effective date of this section, and the no net loss requirement in paragraph (1) shall not apply. (j) Notwithstanding subdivisions (b) and (f), this section does not prohibit an affected city or an affected county from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that is intended to preserve or facilitate the production of housing for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or housing types that traditionally serve lower income households, including mobilehome parks, single-room occupancy units, or units subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. 66301. This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed. SEC. 14. The Legislature finds and declares that the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, is a matter of statewide concern and is not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, the provisions of this act apply to all cities, including charter cities. SEC. 15. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because, in that regard, this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution. However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code. SEC. 16. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. 271 272 Agenda Item No.: 10.A Mtg. Date: 09/13/2021 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED WORKSHOP ON STORM WATER MEETING REMINDER AND DRAFTED AGENDA. DATE:September 13, 2021 BACKGROUND: On July 26, 2021, the City Council agreed to hold a workshop with the Planning Commission to discuss establishing methods and policies that will help the City achieve its goal of limiting stormwater pollutants through on site retetion of stormwater runoff. Staff put together a draft agenda for the City Council's consideration, the draft agenda is attached. DISCUSSION: Staff will present the proposed agenda items and will request input and directions on which mitigations to pursue to help retain 85% of stormwater runoff within the City boundaries. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: Draft City Council and Planning Commission Stormwater Agenda.docx 273 Draft City Council and Planning Commission Stormwater Agenda Monday, September 27, 2021, 6 PM 1. Discuss latest Council decisions regarding stormwater compliance 2. Go over 85% and 24-hour stormwater compliance efforts 3. Discuss current LID and zoning requirements and triggers 4. Provide a list of current mitigations and potential costs 5. Discuss private improvements vs public improvements a. Pros and cons b. Cost c. Potential mitigations 6. Request Directions 274