10.19.21 Meeting Summary

Last night the Council did not have any action items or public hearings.  We did hear a presentation by the Contra Costa County District Attorney, Diana Becton, regarding the operations of the District Attorney's office.  I appreciated her taking the time to visit with us to share the work that she and her office does throughout the county. 

There were a number of questions asked of DA Becton regarding the treatment of and prosecution of crimes, and how the DA's office prioritizes its resources.  Myself and Councilmember Diaz expressed concerns about the treatment of lower level crimes, conveying that the lack of prosecution is frustrating to those in the community and especially to those that are victims of these crimes.

One key thing that was missing was data.  While we were presented with information regarding the number of felonies and misdemeanors that were filed, what was not available was the number of incidents referred to the DA's office that were not filed.  The system that tracks cases was not able to produce this type of data, or any aggregate level data that could give greater insight and transparency into the actions of the office.  DA Becton did state that a system to provide that type of data was in the works and she was hoping it would be available sometime in the future.

DA Becton did share information about programs she is seeking to implement, like neighborhood community courts for low level offenses that may help alleviate the burden that high volumes of cases places on our court system.  

Upcoming Council Meeting 10.19.21

At our next meeting there are not any action items or public hearings.  There will be however, a presentation by the Contra Costa County District Attorney, Diana Becton.  The presentation will cover an overview of the District Attorney's office, various programs that they operate, and information about their budget and personnel.

As with any agendized item, there is an opportunity for the public and the Council to ask questions of the presenters.  If you wanted to ask the DA any question, this is a good opportunity to do so.  

In addition to our meeting on 10.19.21, there is also going to be an online Community Workshop about the City's Housing Element.  The Housing Element is the document that determines how zoning should be to accommodate the required number of units that the state has mandated we provide for.  We are required to update our housing element every eight years and this outreach is one of the steps in the update process.  Information about the event can be found here:  https://claytonca.gov/fc/community-development/housing/housing-element/HEWorkshop102021flyer.pdf

10.5.21 Meeting Summary

Last night the Council met to discuss a couple significant items.  The matters were relatively straightforward and the meeting completed fairly quickly.

• We adopted a resolution to update Development and Wetland Mitigation Fees.  These are a set of fees and procedures by which developers pay a fee in an effort to provide a coordinated approach to permitting, conservation, and protection of sensitive species, their habitats, and other natural resources within eastern Contra Costa County.  These fees have an automatic riser each year in between audits.  Information from audits which are conducted every 3-5 years is used to adjust fees going forward until the next audit period.  After the audit the new fee rates need to be approved which is what we did last night.
  
  
• We adopted a resolution to allow for video and teleconference council meetings.  Under new law in CA, we need to make findings at least every 30 days regarding the necessity of virtual meetings.  Given the recommendations by the County Health Officer, we will continue meeting virtually until that recommendation changes.

Upcoming Council Meeting 10.5.21

There are a couple significant items that we will be discussing at tomorrow's meeting.  Was occupied this weekend so I wasn't able to get out the update until now.

• An increase for Development and Wetland Mitigation Fees.  These are fees levied against development projects to fund conservation efforts in Contra Costa County.
  
  
• Discussion regarding the continuation of allowing video and teleconference meetings.  The executive order that allowed this to proceed thus far has expired.  A new rule has been passed at the state to continue to allow these teleconference and video meetings to continue, with a few added requirements such as periodic certification of the necessity of such meetings.

If you have thoughts or questions about the above please let me know.

We Need to Zone for Approximately 570 Additional Housing Units

Last night, the city held a joint meeting with both the Council and the Planning Commission.  The purpose was to receive a presentation by Mig Inc. - our consultants that the city has engaged to assist with the housing element update process.  Ultimately the city is charged with updating our zoning to accommodate for an approximate 570 additional units, at varying levels of affordability.

In Contra Costa County, area median income (AMI) for 2021 is $125,600 based on a household size of four people

These figures come from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and while we as a city appealed this amount as unreasonable for a number of reasons, our appeal was denied along with the appeals of many other cities.  During the appeal hearing, it was made clear that ABAG does not consider environmental impacts, traffic, unsuitability of available land due to potential landslide, flood, or fire when they mandate these additional units to zone.

In addition to this area of the law being complicated, it's also been changed many times over the last several years making the legal requirements vary quite a bit over time.  There were many questions asked of Mig that focused on two main areas - how the process will work, and what the laws are regarding specific requirements.  Unfortunately, there were a number of inquiries that were unable to be addressed due to work not yet being done, or having to do further research.  When we engaged Mig back in May of this year, their experience and expertise were part of the reason they were selected.  Hopefully when we next meet they will be able to provide more information.

Here are the things that I asked for that are open items:

• Establishment of guiding principals for this process.  Guiding principals ensures that leadership is clear and aligned on the goals that are trying to be achieved.  This process will be long, and along the way there will be many decisions that need to be made.  The establishment of guiding principals facilitates that decision making because it allows staff at every level to test decisions that need to be made against those guiding principals.  This could be things like, should we have as a guiding principal that we want to maximize housing density?  Minimize housing density?  Concentrate impact in as small an area as possible, or disperse impact as much as possible?  Those types of guidelines will help clearly communicate direction to our consultants and to staff.  
  
  
• Detailed project plan and timelines with both internal and external touchpoints and deliverables.
  
  
• Identification of decision points that are matters of public policy.  There are some decisions that can be made even in a process that is as prescribed as this one.  We should identify those so those charged with enacting public policy can make deliberate choices.
  
  
• Detail behind the initial housing site assessment by ABAG that utilized property level data.  The initial assessment of potential housing sites was performed by ABAG and will be the starting point of our own assessment, however the underlying data was not readily available.
  
  
• Moderate income and overall income band calculation formulas and allowable methodologies to satisfy each.  We not only need to zone for an additional approximate 570 units, but they must be at the various income bands as listed above.  We were told that in a small city like Clayton, there is a presumption that any parcel that is zoned for density of at least 20 units/acre would qualify as Low or Very Low income units.  Above Moderate is considered market rate.  During the meeting however, it was unknown what would qualify as Moderate.  I stressed the importance of knowing these details so we can tailor our Housing Element with a focus on complying with the law.
  
  
• Rules regarding the number of ADUs that can be used to satisfy RHNA requirements at all income bands.  California HCD has issued guidance and adopted practices in this space but that information wasn't presented at the meeting.

Updating our Housing Element and the End of Single Family Zoning in CA

Earlier this month the Governor signed into law two impactful housing bills - SB 9 and SB 10.  These bills are complicated and have a number of varying provisions.  The most impactful thing that these bills do is that they eliminate single family zoning throughout the entire state of California.  We discussed SB 9 at our previous meeting in March of this year and at the time I raised the concern of ending single family zoning.

Suffice to say the passage of these laws is disappointing.  In looking at the votes, it appears that while our State Senator Glazer voted against SB 9, our representative in the Assembly, Tim Grayson voted in favor of ending single family zoning:

It would be easy to take issue with a single representative, but ultimately the vote totals for these bills were not close.  SB 9 passed 28-7 in the senate, and 45-19 in the Assembly.  SB 10 had larger margins.

Ultimately the goals of so much of the housing legislation in the state is to increase housing supply, and decrease housing costs, including decreasing the value of the homes that many Clayton residents own.  This is well beyond a city issue as much of the decision making that cities used to be able to engage in has been removed at the state level.  If we as a people want different outcomes at the state level, we're going to need to elect different people because what we're doing now is only moving the state in one direction.

This is the backdrop for next weeks joint meeting with the Council and the Planning Commission.  Next Tuesday, 9.28.21 at 6:30pm, there will be a meeting where both the Planning Commission and the City Council will gather (virtually) to hear from consultants we've hired about the process to update our Housing Element.  See here for more information about the process:  https://claytonca.gov/community-development/housing/housing-element/

This meeting will be mostly an informational session.  There will be additional community workshops that have yet to be scheduled.  More information on how to sign up is at the above link.

9.21.21 Meeting Summary

Last night there were several significant items discussed:

• We heard a great presentation by Con-Fire Chief Terence Carey about their efforts to address and mitigate fire risk, overall fire risk and activity in the state, and things that residents can do to help address overall fire risk.  The one thing that was stressed as an easy takeaway for everyone is to make sure that there are working smoke detectors in each residence, and that they are tested on a regular cadence.  Chief Carey also talked about a Preparedness & Evacuation reference guide that is on the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District website.  The guide can be found here:  https://www.cccfpd.org/ResidentsWildlandFireGuide
  
  
• The Council approved an appropriation of approximately $40K to upgrade equipment related to network connectivity, audio, and video as it relates to holding meetings in Hoyer Hall.  The funds used for these upgrades are from grants received to support public access to government and will not impact our general fund.  The work is scheduled to be complete towards the end of this year.  Included in the scope is equipment necessary to hold hybrid meetings whereby people will be able to participate both in person and remotely.
  
  We agreed that due to ongoing recommendations from the County Health Officer, Dr. Farnitano, there is continued elevated risk of meeting indoors and as such, the Council agreed that meetings will continue virtually until such time that the state and county emergency orders are lifted.
  
  
• The Council also agreed to appoint Management Partners as a consultant group to help develop and implement a program to use American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds.  Clayton is slated to receive approximately $2.9M and the Council is seeking to prioritize businesses in town that have been impacted by COVID-19.  There are a number of requirements associated with these funds including limits on how the funds can be used, procedures for their use, and reporting and audit requirements.  Management Partners will assist in all of these areas, though the execution and operationalizing of the plans that are prepared will fall on city staff.
  
  There may be opportunities for additional community support through volunteering to help support various aspects of the ARPA plan.  Those potential actives will be fleshed out further as Management Partners progresses with their work. 
  
  
• The Council also discussed the process for placing a tax measure on the ballot.  General tax increases can only be placed on the ballot on a General Election, with the next general election scheduled on November 8, 2022.  I have discussed previously the financial landscape the city is in, and some of the causes of our shortfalls and the impacts if we do nothing.  We do have structural problems that if they are not addressed, will begin to have significant impacts on city operations in the near term.  The good news is that as a small city, the gap we are trying to fill is not so large that we cannot address it.
  
  The Council agreed to direct staff to do the preliminary work towards a ballot measure for the November 2022 date.  This would include an outline of overall timing, the various steps necessary and when they would be due, etc.  Getting ballot language right and the various administrative requirements take a significant amount of time to work through.  On top of that, outreach, communicating the need, the cost, and the benefits, will take a coordinated effort.  After staff comes back with the overall outline, we will then discuss at a future meeting how to execute on that plan.