* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:03]
           RECORDING IN PROGRESS. 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. 
          WE'RE GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT SIX O'CLOCK ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27TH. 
          UH, WE DON'T HAVE A PACKED HOUSE TONIGHT, BUT WE KNOW IT'S MIGHTY IN SPIRIT. 
          AND WE'LL SAY HELLO TO ANY ALL TWO OF THE PEOPLE WHO I'M GUESSING ARE WATCHING ON YOUTUBE RIGHT NOW. 
          UM, WITH THAT, I'M GONNA ASK THAT THE CLERK CALL ROLL. 
          COMMISSIONER BAUER. 
          ABSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSES? HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER MCCARLEY? HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER KUSON. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER WIMAN HERE. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CATER THOMPSON. 
          ABSENT. 
          CHAIR HOOPER. 
          HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          AND WITH THAT, BEFORE I READ THE SEGMENT ON GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, I'M JUST GOING TO LOOK BASED ON THE HEAD NOD I JUST RECEIVED FROM THE FOLKS IN ATTENDANCE. 
          WE DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS, SO I'M JUST GOING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. 
          BUT QUICKLY, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK THE CLERK IF WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING WE RECEIVED. 
          NO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO 
          [PRESENTATIONS]
GET IN OUR FIRST PRESENTATION, WHICH IS ON THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OR CQA. 
          AND THE FOCUS OF THIS IS TO REALLY HELP SHARE WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HOW WE EVALUATE PROJECTS WITH CQA. 
          SOME OF US HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH POLICY, SOME DON'T. 
          AS PEOPLE KIND OF COME ON AND OFF THE COMMISSION AT DIFFERENT TIMES, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET THIS INFORMATION TO BE UPDATED ON IT PERIODICALLY. 
          ALSO, GIVEN WHAT WE'VE HAD IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, UH, I'M HOPING THAT SINCE THIS IS RECORDED, THIS WILL ALSO BE A GOOD TOOL FOR US TO SHARE FOR FOLKS WHO MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS OR BE A LITTLE IFFY ON WHERE A SQL POLICY IS TODAY. 
          SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO OUR ASSISTANT PLANNER, CRYSTAL, GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UH, I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE WITH YOU TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AS WELL AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY IN FULFILLING THEIR ROLE, UM, AS A REPRESENTATIVE BODY OF THE LEAD AGENCY. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW, UM, OF MYSELF, JUST SO YOU KIND OF KNOW MY CREDENTIALS. 
          UM, SO MY NAME IS CRYSTAL RIZZI AND I'M A PRINCIPAL PLANNER. 
          I'VE BEEN SERVING THE CITY OF PETALUMA SINCE 2017. 
          I RECEIVED MY BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE HERE LOCALLY AT SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY IN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND PLANNING. 
          AND THEN I ALSO RECEIVED MY MASTER'S DEGREE FROM SAN JOSE STATE IN URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING IN 2016. 
          MY EXPERIENCE WORKING HERE IN THE CITY OF PETALUMA RANGES FROM SERVICING THE PUBLIC COUNTER TO CONDUCTING ENTITLEMENT AS WELL AS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          AGAIN, I'M DELIGHTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE WITH YOU TONIGHT, AND I HOPE YOU WILL FIND THIS PRESENTATION BOTH INFORMATIVE AND ENGAGING. 
          SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. 
          SO THIS IS JUST AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT. 
          I'LL START BY GOING OVER THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS PRESENTATION, FOLLOWED BY A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF C Q'S HISTORY AND EVOLUTION TOPICS THAT ARE COVERED UNDER CQA AND WHAT CE QA IS AND IS NOT AS WELL, AS WELL AS WHEN CQA APPLIES. 
          NEXT, I'LL PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF C QA, INCLUDING THE ROLE OF THE VARIOUS AGENCIES AND STAKEHOLDERS, HOW WE DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES, AND HOW THE IMPACTS ARE ANALYZED AND ADDRESSED. 
          NEXT, I'LL GO OVER THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SERVING IN THE ROLE AS A REPRESENTATIVE BODY OF THE LEAD AGENCY, INCLUDING THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING BOTH THE PHYSICAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT WITHIN WHICH PROJECTS ARE EVALUATED, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CQA AND PLANNING REVIEW, HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND ADDRESS PUBLIC INPUT. 
          AND WE'LL CONCLUDE WITH TIPS FOR REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS. 
          AND THEN OF COURSE, AT THE END, THERE WILL BE, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS, UM, AND DISCUSSION IF NEEDED. 
          SO THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS PRESENTATION IS TO ESTABLISH A COMMON UNDERSTANDING AND AWARENESS OF CQA, UM, AS WELL AS TO ENHANCE COMMISSIONER'S SKILLS AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TOOLS NEEDED TO NAVIGATE THE SQA PROCESS. 
          AND ALSO, WE ARE LOOKING TO PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AND COLLABORATION AMONG ALL STAKEHOLDERS. 
          AS CHAIR HOOPER MENTIONED, THOUGH, THIS PRESENTATION IS ORIENTED TOWARD THE, TOWARDS THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          THE INFORMATION WE'RE PRESENTING TONIGHT IS, UH, BENEFICIAL TO ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF QA IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS. 
          SO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, OR CQA AS IT'S, UH, REFERRED TO MOST COMMONLY WAS ENACTED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE IN 1970, AND THAT WAS FOLLOWING ADOPTION OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OR NEPA FOR SHORT, WHICH APPLIES TO ACTIVITIES THAT ARE, UM, UNDERTAKEN BY FEDERAL AGENCIES. 
          CE QA IS A BODY OF LEGISLATION THAT'S CONTAINED WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE, AND IT INSTITUTES A STATEWIDE POLICY FOR 
          [00:05:01]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND COMPLIANCE. 
          EARLY ON IN CE A'S HISTORY, A LANDMARK CASE, UM, REFERRED TO AS FRIENDS OF MAMMOTH VERSUS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF MONO COUNTY, ESTABLISHED THAT CQA APPLIES TO LOCAL AGENCY DECISIONS ON PRIVATE ACTIVITIES AS WELL AS PUBLIC ACTIVITIES. 
          THIS RESULTED FROM THE COUNTY'S INTERPRETATION THAT A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WAS NOT SUBJECT TO CQA, WHICH AT THE TIME, UM, CQA DID NOT DEFINE WHAT A PROJECT WAS. 
          SO THEN FRIENDS OF MAMMOTH CHALLENGED THIS INTERPRETATION BY THE COUNTY, AND THEY PREVAILED WITH THE COURTS ISSUING A DECISION THAT PRIVATE ACTIVITIES ARE IN FACT CONSIDERED A PROJECT UNDER CQA AND THEREFORE MUST MEET THE SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW. 
          THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF CQA IS TO DISCLOSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES AND TO REDUCE AVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. 
          THE INTENT OF CE Q IS ACHIEVED BY PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT A PRO A PROPOSED ACTIVITY, ANALYZING PROJECT IMPACTS AGAINST ESTABLISHED THRESHOLDS, SUGGESTING WAYS TO MINIMIZE THESE IMPACTS AND PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC AND AGENCY PARTICIPATION. 
          CQA IS NOW OVER 50 YEARS OLD AND HAS EVOLVED OVER THE DECADES THROUGH BOTH DIRECT CHANGES TO THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL AS, UH, THROUGH INTERPRETATIONS ISSUED BY THE COURTS. 
          ONE EXAMPLE OF THIS EVOLUTION WAS THE ADOPTION OF SENATE BILL OF 7 43, WHICH CHANGED HOW TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ARE EVALUATED UNDER CQA. 
          I THINK WE'RE ALL FAIRLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS, UM, AT THIS POINT, BUT ESSENTIALLY SE UH, SB 7 43 REQUIRED LEAD AGENCIES TO SHIFT THEIR EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS, UM, FROM LEVEL OF SERVICE TO VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, UM, AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED FOCUSES ON BALANCING THE NEEDS OF CONGESTION MANAGEMENT WITH STATEWIDE GOALS, UM, RELATED TO INFILL DEVELOPMENT, WHICH PROMOTES, UH, PUBLIC HEALTH THROUGH INCREASED ACT, ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BY FACILITATING DEVELOPMENT THAT'S PROXIMATE TO, UM, ALTERNATIVE TRAVEL MODES AND ALSO REDUCES, UH, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, THE RELATED TO GREENHOUSE GAS, GAS EMISSIONS, THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DIS DISTRICT OR BAC MID FOR SHORT. 
          HOPEFULLY YOU'RE CATCHING ON THAT. 
          CE A USES A LOT OF ACRONYMS. UM, THEY RECENTLY ADOPT, UH, UPDATED THEIR THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE TO A QUALITATIVE APPROACH RATHER THAN A QUANTITATIVE METRIC. 
          AND THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE STATEWIDE GOALS FOR REDUCING CLIMATE IMPACTS OF GHGS ED'S UPDATED THRESHOLDS STATE AMONG, UM, SEVERAL OTHER CRITERIA THAT PROJECTS INCLUDING NATURAL GAS WOULD BE ABOVE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHEREAS PROJECTS EXCLUDING NATURAL GAS WOULD BE BELOW, UH, THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 
          SO AGAIN, MORE OF A, UM, QUALITATIVE RATHER THAN NUMERIC, UH, THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE RELATED TO HYDROLOGY. 
          THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS ADOPTED SEVERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT INCLUDE, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS THAT ADDRESS THE LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF A HEALTHY AND FUNCTIONING GROUNDWATER RESOURCE. 
          LEGISLATIVE CHANGES SUCH AS THIS ARE IMPORTANT IN IN CQA AS THEY PROVIDE THE NECESSARY INFORMATION TO ANALYZE IMPACTS TO HYDROLOGY IN A CHANGING CLIMATE, SUCH AS DURING PERIODS OF DROUGHT, WHICH AGAIN, WE'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH. 
          IN ADDITION TO THE SUBSTANTIVE UPDATES, CQA IS CONTINUALLY EVOLVING TO INCLUDE PROCEDURAL UPDATES AS WELL. 
          SO MOST RECENTLY, UM, AND THIS MAY NOT BE THAT RELEVANT, BUT IT'S KIND OF JUST TO DEMONSTRATE THAT PROCEDURAL CHANGES HAPPEN. 
          UM, PRETTY OFTEN IN CQA, LEAD AGENCIES ARE REQUIRED TO FILE NOTICES SUCH AS A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION WITH BOTH THE COUNTY CLERK AND THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, WHEREAS PREVIOUSLY THE NOTICES WERE ONLY POSTED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK. 
          SO PRETTY SEEMINGLY MINOR, BUT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT, UM, STAFF CONTINUES TO TRACK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, UH, COMPLYING WITH THOSE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO, SO UNDER CQA, A VARIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, FACTORS ARE REQUIRED TO BE ANALYZED. 
          ALL OF THOSE ARE LISTED HERE ON THIS SLIDE. 
          EACH ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR CONTAINS INDI INDIVIDUAL ISSUES TO BE ASSESSED RELATIVE TO A PROPOSED ACTIVITY. 
          ACTIVITIES ARE REVIEWED AGAINST THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHICH REFER TO IDENTIFIABLE, QUANTITATIVE, QUALITATIVE, OR PERFORMANCE LEVELS. 
          NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THRESHOLDS MEANS AN IMPACT OF A PROJECT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANCE, SORRY, WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT, WHEREAS COMPLIANCE WOULD MEAN THAT AN IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          WHERE IMPACTS ARE IDENTIFIED, UM, WE ARE REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES THAT CAN REDUCE OR OFFSET THOSE IMPACTS. 
          ON THIS SLIDE, UH, I'D LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE HIGHLIGHTED TOPICS YOU MAY RECALL, UM, IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENTS THAT YOU'VE SEEN IN THE PAST, UM, THAT INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS DO NOT TYPICALLY IDENTIFY IMPACTS. 
          UM, I RELATED TO THESE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS, AND THAT'S TYPICALLY BECAUSE, UM, IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH REC, RECREATION, UTILITIES, POPULATION, HOUSING, PUBLIC SERVICES. 
          THOSE ARE ADDRESSED AND ANALYZED IN THE GENERAL PLAN EIR. 
          SO IF A PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN EIR, IT MEANS THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN ANTICIPATED AND 
          [00:10:01]
IMPACTS ARE TYPICALLY LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE WOULD STILL OBVIOUSLY LOOK AT THOSE IMPACTS AND DISCLOSE THEM AND TALK ABOUT THEM, UM, BUT IN A MORE ABBREVIATED, UH, DISCUSSION. 
          SO IN UNDERSTANDING THE REQUIREMENTS OF CQA AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THEIR ROLE, IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT CQA IS AND WHAT CQA IS NOT. 
          SO, CQA IS A LAW THAT WAS ENACTED WITH THE GOAL OF PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE FROM HARM CAUSED BY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. 
          CE A IS ALSO AN INFORMATIONAL TOOL THAT IS USED TO IDENTIFY AND DISCLOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THOSE IMPACTS. 
          IT ALSO PROVIDES A FRAMEWORK FOR DECISION MAKING BODIES, SUCH AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO WEIGH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF A PROJECT WITH ITS BENEFITS BEFORE MAKING A DECISION TO APPROVE OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVE A PROJECT. 
          AND IT'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC AND AGENCY PARTICIPATION. 
          IN CONTRAST, CE QA IS NOT A STANDALONE APPROVAL PROCESS. 
          THIS MEANS THAT APPROVAL ADOPTION, OR CERTIFICATION OF A CA DOCUMENT DOES NOT HOLD THE POWER TO GUARANTEE APPROVAL OF ASSOCIATED PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS. 
          AND ALTHOUGH CQA MAY ADD TIME AND COMPLEXITY TO PROJECTS, IT'S NOT INTENDED TO UNNECESSARILY SLOW OR STOP DEVELOPMENT, NOR IS IT A WAY TO AUTOMATICALLY STOP PROJECTS FROM BEING APPROVED. 
          RATHER, CQA SEEKS TO ACHIEVE RESPONSIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT THROUGH INFORMED DECISION MAKING, IDENTIFICATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION WHILE CQA REQUIRES MITIGATION ME MEASURES THAT MINIMIZE OR REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO THE GREATEST DEGREE POSSIBLE. 
          IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT CQA IS NOT A GUARANTEE OF A PERFECT ENVIRONMENT. 
          AGAIN, SEQ A STRIKE SEEKS TO STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO GOING BACK TO OUR DISCUSSION OF THE LANDMARK COURT CASE THAT PROVIDED INTERPRETATION OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE LAW, CQA APPLIES TO ACTIVITIES THAT ARE DEFINED AS A PROJECT, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY AN ACTIVITY WHICH MAY CAUSE EITHER A DIRECT PHYSICAL CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT OR A REASONABLY FORESEEABLE INDIRECT PHYSICAL CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT. 
          SO UNDER CQA, A PROJECT CAN BE AN ACTIVITY THAT'S DIRECTLY UNDERTAKEN BY A PUBLIC AGENCY, SUCH AS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OR LEGISLATIVE CHANGES, SUCH AS THE ONGOING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. 
          IT CAN ALSO BE AN ACTIVITY THAT INVOLVES THE ISSUANCE OF A LEASE PERMIT, LICENSE CERTIFICATE, OR OTHER ENTITLEMENT BY THE CITY. 
          COMMON EXAMPLES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD SEE OF THIS, UM, WOULD INCLUDE PROJECTS SEEKING APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, OR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          LASTLY, A PROJECT CAN BE AN ACTIVITY THAT IS SUPPORTED BY GRANTS OR LOANS. 
          A LOCAL EXAMPLE OF THIS IS THE KENILWORTH PARK REVITALIZATION PROJECT, WHICH WAS FUNDED IN PART BY A STATE GRANT. 
          AND ANOTHER EXAMPLE WOULD BE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THAT RECEIVES A STATE, UM, FUND STATE FUNDING. 
          SO NOW THAT WE'VE, UH, DONE AN OVERVIEW OF CQA, I APOLOGIZE, IT WASN'T AS BRIEF AS I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS GONNA BE. 
          UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DIVE INTO SOME OF THE BASICS OF CQA, OR SORRY, LET'S DIVE INTO THE REQUIREMENTS OF CQA. 
          SO AGAIN, WE'LL TALK ABOUT, UM, AGENCY AND OTHER ROLES, HOW THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DETERMINED AND HOW IMPACTS ARE ANALYZED AND ADDRESSED. 
          SO YOU'VE HEARD ME USE THE TERM LEAD AGENCY SEVERAL TIMES AT THIS POINT, SO LET'S DISCUSS WHAT THAT IS. 
          THE LEAD AGENCY IS THE ENTITY THAT HOLDS PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT OR APPROVING A PROJECT, AND IS THEREFORE RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING THE ENTIRETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          THIS INCLUDES DETERMINING WHAT LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS QUI REQUIRED, COORDINATING WITH THE RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT MEETS ALL THE SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OF CE QA. 
          WHEN ENCOUNTERING ACTIVITIES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CE QA, THE CITY OF PETALUMA TYPICALLY SERVES AS THE LEAD AGENCY. 
          THOUGH IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE CITY OF PETALUMA CAN SERVE AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          ONE EXAMPLE, UM, OF THIS, WHICH IS EXTREMELY UNCOMMON, WAS WITH THE, UH, PG E PIPELINE REPLACEMENT THAT HAPPENED, UM, UNDER THE, UNDER THE PETALUMA RIVER. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF ANY OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT, BUT IN THAT CASE, THE STATE LANDS COMMISSION WAS THE LEAD AGENCY, SQL, OR SORRY, CITY OF PETALUMA WAS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          AND SO WE, UM, PREPARED A RESPONS TO COMMENT, OR SORRY, WE WERE PREPARED COMMENTS TO THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT, WHICH WAS IN OUR ROLE AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          UM, SO GOING BACK TO THE LEAD AGENCY, THE CITY OF PETALUMA, UM, AGAIN, SERVES AS THE LEAD AGENCY TYPICALLY, AND THAT'S INCLUSIVE OF CITY STAFF AND DECISION MAKERS, INCLUDING THE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          SO AGAIN, THIS COLLECTIVELY MAKES UP THE LEAD AGENCY AND THE ROLES OF THE LEAD AGENCY ARE FULFILLED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE. 
          SO CITY STAFF TYPICALLY DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRED, AND THIS IS INFORMED THROUGH INTERNAL COORDINATION WITH PLANNING STAFF, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS, UM, SUCH AS PUBLIC WORKS IF NECESSARY, AND IS IN PART DETERMINED THROUGH EARLY CONSULTATION WITH OTHER 
          [00:15:01]
AGENCIES AND TRIBAL ENTITIES. 
          WHILE STAFF PERFORMS THESE DUTIES ON BEHALF OF THE LEAD AGENCY, THE DECISION-MAKING BODY, SUCH AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, PERFORMS AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND ADOPT SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL FINDINGS. 
          THE LEAD AGENCY IDENTIFIES RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES EARLY IN THE PROCESS TO IDENTIFY AND ADDRESS POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN. 
          SO RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES ARE THOSE THAT HAVE SOME LEVEL OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY OVER A SPECIFIC PART OF A PROPOSED PROJECT, AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITY IS LIMITED TO THE COMPONENTS THAT ARE WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION. 
          A VERY COMMON EXAMPLE IS THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE. 
          SO IF YOU HAD A PROJECT THAT REQUIRED, UM, A LAKE AND STREAM BED ALTERATION AGREEMENT, FISH AND FISH AND WILDLIFE WOULD BE, UM, A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          TRUSTEE AGENCIES ARE THOSE THAT PROTECT AND MANAGE SPECIFIC NATURAL RESOURCES THAT ARE HELD IN THE TRUST FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE. 
          UM, SO AGAIN, SUCH AS STATE LANDS COMMISSION WHO PROTECT THE PUBLIC PUBLIC'S ACCESS TO NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS AND PRESERVE NATURAL HABITATS. 
          IF A PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT TRUST RESOURCES, TRUSTEE AGENCIES ARE IDENTIFIED BY THE LEAD AGENCY. 
          I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT TRUSTEE AGENCIES DON'T COME UP VERY OFTEN IN PETALUMA. 
          UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE ALWAYS TRACK IF A PROJECT IS GONNA AFFECT ANY TRUST RESOURCES, AND WE WOULD CONSULT WITH THOSE AGENCIES. 
          SO BOTH RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES PROVIDE COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON TOPICS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THEIR JURISDICTION. 
          AND LIKE THE LEAD AGENCY, THEY'RE CHARGED WITH FORMING THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT CONCLUSIONS ABOUT A PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ON THE RESOURCES WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION. 
          IN ADDITION TO RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES, THE LEAD AGENCY ALSO ENGAGES WITH TRIBAL ENTITIES, BOTH INFORMALLY AND THROUGH THE REQUIRED ASSEMBLY BILL 52 AND SENATE BILL 18 NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESSES, WHICH I'LL TOUCH ON A LITTLE BIT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT. 
          AS WITH RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES, TRIBAL ENTITIES PROVIDE COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION ON RECOMMENDATIONS ON POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MEASURES THAT CAN AVOID OR OFFSET IMPACTS TO TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. 
          AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SCREEN, WE HAVE PROJECT APPLICANTS ORGANIZATION AND, AND ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ALSO VERY IMPORTANT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. 
          SO APPLICANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE LEAD AGENCY WITH PROJECT DETAILS THAT ARE USED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT TO ANALYZE POTENTIAL IMPACTS, AND THEN FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF A PROJECT, APPLICANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING MATERIALS TO THE LEAD AGENCY THAT DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'VE COMPLIED WITH MITIGATION MEASURES, UM, THAT'S IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. 
          SO ESSENTIALLY, CITY STAFF WOULD TRACK THAT, UM, AND MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT'S PROVIDING WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THAT. 
          SO, FOR EXAMPLE, PROOF OF A PERMIT FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE. 
          SO ORGANIZATIONS, INDIVIDUALS, AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ARE, ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THEY BELIEVE MAY RESULT FROM A PROPOSED PROJECT. 
          STAKEHOLDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC EFFECTS OF CONCERNS EARLY ON, EXPLAIN WHY THEY THINK THE EFFECT WOULD OCCUR, AND WHY THE EFFECT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT WHEN PROVIDED. 
          UM, EARLY IN THE PROCESS. 
          DATA REFERENCES AND REASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS PROVIDED BY STAKEHOLDERS CAN BE EXTREMELY, UH, USEFUL AND EFFECTIVE IN ADDRESSING POTENTIAL ISSUES. 
          SO NEXT, UH, ONCE THE LEAD AGENCY IS IDENTIFIED AND AN ACTIVITY IS DETERMINED TO MEET THE SE QA DEFINITION OF A PROJECT, WE'RE THEN TASKED WITH REVIEWING THE PROJECT UNDER CE QA, WHICH STARTS WITH DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          SO THE STATE CQA GUIDELINES CHARGE AGENCIES WITH REDUCING DELAYS IN PAPERWORK AND AVOIDING PREPARATION OF REPETITIVE DISCUSSIONS OF THE SAME ISSUES. 
          TO THIS END, WHEN A PROJECT IS DETERMINED TO BE SUBJECT TO CQA, THE LEAD AGENCY STARTS BY DETERMINING OR IDENTIFYING IF THE PROJECT IS COVERED BY PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE SCOTT RANCH PROJECT IS RECEIVED, THE CITY WOULD DETERMINE IF THE PROJECT INFORMATION, OR SORRY, THE CITY WOULD REVIEW THE PROJECT INFORMATION TO THEN CONFIRM IF ALL ASPECTS WERE COVERED IN THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED EIR. 
          IF SO, THEN NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NEEDED. 
          IF NO PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW HAS BEEN CONDUCTED, THE LEAD AGENCY THEN REVIEWS THE PROJECT FOR, UM, EXEMPTION APPLICABILITY. 
          SO WHILE IT'S IMPORTANT TO ANALYZE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF A PROJECT, THE STATE HAS ESTABLISHED EXEMPTIONS FOR PROJECTS THAT MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA. 
          STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS ARE GRANTED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND APPLY REGARDLESS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT. 
          ONE RECENT EXAMPLE OF THIS WAS WITH THE SENIOR MOBILE HOME OVERLAY THAT WAS ADOPTED AMONG OTHER EXEMPTIONS THAT WERE APPLIED TO THE PROJECT. 
          THE PROJECT QUALIFIED FOR USE OF THE EMERGENCY PROJECT STATUTORY EXEMPTION AS IT SOUGHT TO PROTECT EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CONTEXT OF OUR CURRENT HOUSING CRISIS. 
          CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS ARE CLASSES OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY 
          [00:20:01]
AND ARE DETERMINED TO BE ACTIVITIES THAT DO NOT TYPICALLY HAVE SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT. 
          AN EXAMPLE OF THIS IS THE RECENTLY APPROVED AMY'S KITCHEN PROJECT IN DOWNTOWN PETALUMA, WHICH UTILIZED THE EXISTING FACILITIES EXEMPTION AND THE HISTORIC RESOURCE REHABILITATION EXEMPTION. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO EXEMPTIONS, STATUTORY AND CATEGORICAL IS THAT STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS ARE ABSOLUTE, WHEREAS CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS ARE SUBJECT TO EXCEPTIONS. 
          SO IF A PROJECT IS TRIGGERING ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTIONS, UM, IT MAY BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH FURTHER CQR REVIEW REGARDLESS OF THE APPLICABILITY OF THE EXEMPTION. 
          SO IN ADDITION TO STATUTORY AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS, THE GUIDELINES ALSO CONTAIN EXEMPTIONS FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF HOUSING PROJECTS, WHICH HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED IN RESPONSE TO THE STATE'S HOUSING CRISIS. 
          SO HOUSING PROJECTS QUALIFYING FOR EXEMPTIONS SUCH AS PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABILITY TO LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ARE REVIEWED AGAINST THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA. 
          AND IF ALL OF THOSE SPECIFIC CRITERIA ARE MET, THEN NO FURTHER SQR REVIEW IS REQUIRED. 
          AND LASTLY, UH, PROJECTS THAT ARE COVERED UNDER THE COMMON SENSE OR GENERAL RULE ARE PROJECTS THAT CLEARLY WILL NOT RESULT IN IMPACTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT ARE AND ARE THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM CQA. 
          A RECENT EXAMPLE OF THIS IS, UM, THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO IF AN EXEMPTION APPLIES, THEN NO FURTHER CQA REVIEW IS REQUIRED. 
          SO THEN IF A PROJECT DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR STREAMLINED REVIEW OR EXEMPTION FROM CQA, THE LEAD AGENCY CAN THEN PREPARE AN INITIAL STUDY. 
          UM, IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO PREPARE AN INITIAL STUDY, AND IN THE CASE THAT AN EIR IS CLEARLY GOING TO BE REQUIRED, LEAD AGENCY CAN BYPASS THE STEP AND, UM, ANALYZE ALL ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CONTAINED IN APPENDIX G OF THE SQA GUIDELINES. 
          INITIAL STUDIES WILL GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AS WELL. 
          AND, UM, THERE'S A VARIETY OF PATHS THAT CAN BE TAKEN AS A RESULT OF CONDUCTING AN INITIAL STUDY. 
          SO FIRST, THE INITIAL STUDY MAY CONCLUDE THAT AN ADDENDUM IS REQUIRED, UM, AND THIS WOULD BE REQUIRED, OR SORRY, COULD BE PREPARED IF THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN NEW OR MORE SEVERE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, SUCH AS WITH THE RECENTLY APPROVED, UH, SPIRIT LIVING PROJECTS, WHICH WAS COVERED BY THE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED, UH, RIVERFRONT, EIR. 
          IF THE INITIAL STUDY CONCLUDES THAT A PROJECT WILL RESULT IN NO IMPACTS, THEN A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS PREPARED, SUCH AS WITH THE CORONA ANNEXATION PROJECT. 
          AND IF A PROJECT MAY HAVE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS, BUT THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES, THOSE IMPACTS WILL FALL BELOW ESTABLISHED THRESHOLDS. 
          A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS PREPARED SUCH AS WITH THE OYSTER COVE PROJECT. 
          AND LAST, BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, IF THE INITIAL STUDY CONCLUDES THAT A PROJECT WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THEN AN EIR IS PREPARED. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, THE INITIAL STUDY THAT WAS PREPARED FOR THE SCOTT RANCH PROJECT IDENTIFIED POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND AS SUCH, AN EIR WAS PREPARED. 
          AND IT'S AGAIN, IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT AN EIR IS NOT INTENDED TO ADD UNNECESSARY PROCESS, BUT RATHER IS INTENDED TO FULLY ANALYZE AND DISCLOSE IMPACTS THAT HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN IDENTIFIED IN A PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. 
          SO ANOTHER TOPIC TO CONSIDER IN DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRED IS WHETHER TIERING FROM A PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT IS, IS APPROPRIATE. 
          TIERING ALLOWS THE LEAD AGENCY TO UTILIZE INFORMATION FROM A BROADER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT SUCH AS THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN EIR, WHEN PREPARING AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENT ON A SPECIFIC SITE. 
          THE TIERING PROCESS FOCUSES THE SCOPE OF THE REVIEW TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO A PROPOSED PROJECT AT A CERTAIN LOCATION. 
          ONE EXAMPLE OF THE CITY'S USE OF TIERING IS FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          SO WE'RE CALLING FROM OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS COVERED UNDER CQA. 
          THE CITY OFTEN TIERS FROM THE GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS TO DISCUSS IMPACTS TO TOPICS SUCH AS UTILITIES, UM, HOUSING POPULATION, GENERALLY, PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN WON'T RESULT IN IMPACTS TO UTILITIES AND THESE OTHER FACTORS BECAUSE THE INTENSITY AND DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED. 
          AND THE CITY'S UTILITY SYSTEM IN THIS CASE, UM, HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO BY FOCUSING ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, ISSUES THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT, THE CITY CAN BETTER FULFILL ITS ROLE AS LEAD AGENCY TO ENSURE IMPACTS ARE DISCUSSED IN A CLEAR AND CONCISE MANNER. 
          AND THEN, AS WE, UH, DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, TRIBAL NOTIFICATION AND EARLY CONSULTATION WITH RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES CAN HELP THE LEAD AGENCY, UM, TO DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IF THOSE, UM, AGENCIES AND ENTITIES IDENTIFY POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS. 
          SO IN ADDITION TO EARLY CONSULTATION, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, FORMAL NOTIFICATION TO TRADITIONALLY AND CULTURALLY AFFILIATED CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES IS REQUIRED BY AB 52 
          [00:25:01]
FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CQA. 
          AND SIMILARLY, NOTIFICATION UNDER SB 18 IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OR AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN OR SPECIFIC PLANS IF CONSULTATION IS REQUESTED BY THESE TRIBAL ENTITIES. 
          THE LEAD AGENCY COORDINATES WITH REPRESENTATIVES TO IDENTIFY AGREED UPON MITIGATION AVOIDANCE MEASURES, OR IN THE CASE OF GENERAL PLAN, UM, ALTERNATIVES. 
          AND AGAIN, THIS NOTIFICATION IS REQUIRED, BUT THROUGH THE EARLY CONSULTATION PROCESS, WE CAN IDENTIFY POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT WOULD THEN INFORM THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRED WHEN ANALYZING IMPACTS OF A PROJECT. 
          THE LEAD AGENCY RELIES ON DATA REFERENCES AND INFORMATION, UM, OFTENTIMES PREPARED BY TECHNICAL PROFESSIONALS SUCH AS BIOLOGICAL REPORTS, HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATIONS, AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS TO NAME JUST A FEW. 
          AND THIS HELPS TO DETERMINE WHETHER IMPACTS OF A PROJECT WILL BE ABOVE OR BELOW ESTABLISHED THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHICH AS A REMINDER ARE THE IDENTIFIABLE, QUANTITATIVE, QUALITATIVE OR PERFORMANCE LEVELS WHERE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ARE IDENTIFIED. 
          MITIGATION MEASURES MUST BE INCLUDED TO REDUCE OR OFFSET THE IMPACT. 
          IN THE CASE OF EIRS, IMPACTS MAY BE IDENTIFIED AS SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE DESPITE INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          AND I'LL DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          IN ADDITION TO ANALYZING IMPACTS RELATIVE TO ESTABLISHED THRESHOLD THRESHOLDS ANALYSIS OF PROJECT SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE EXISTING FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT IN NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS AND ANALYSIS OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS IS TYPICALLY PROVIDED IN THE MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANT SECTION, WHEREAS AN EIRS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ARE TYPICALLY DISCUSSED WITHIN EACH INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR. 
          SO SPECIFIC TO EIR AND ANALYSIS OF FE FEASIBLE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING A NO PRO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE IS ALSO REQUIRED. 
          THE PURPOSE OF ANALYZING THESE ALTERNATIVES IS TO COMPARE THE MERITS OF A PROJECT AGAINST PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND HELPS TO EXPLORE OTHER WAYS TO ACHIEVE PROJECT GOALS WHILE AVOIDING OR REDUCING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. 
          I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT, UM, THE REASON AN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS IS NOT REQUIRED FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS BECAUSE THESE DOCUMENTS ARE ONLY PREPARED FOR PROJECTS THAT, UM, HAVE IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED TO LEVELS BELOW SIGNIFICANCE. 
          SO THEREFORE, NO NEED TO DO AN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY ABLE TO REDUCE THE IMPACTS TO LEVELS BELOW SIGNIFICANCE. 
          SO, AS I SAID ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, IF THE ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT A PROJECT WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, ALL FEASIBLE OPTIONS FOR REDUCING THE IMPACT TO LEVELS BELOW ESTABLISHED THRESHOLDS MUST BE CONSIDERED. 
          THIS CAN OCCUR THROUGH MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROJECT IF AGREED TO BY THE APPLICANT, OR THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          SO GOING BACK TO THE ANALYSIS PREPARED FOR EIRS, ANALYZING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES PROVIDES THE INFORMATION ON THE DIFFERENCE OF IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT COMPARED TO FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES, AND AGAIN, CAN HELP TO INFORM THE PUBLIC AND DECISION MAKERS OF ALTERNATIVE SITE DESIGN OR PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAY BE ABLE TO REDUCE, UM, POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 
          IN THE EVENT THAT AN EIR IDENTIFIES SIGNIFICANT, UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS, DESPITE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, DESPITE MITIGATION MEASURES, ALL OF THAT, THEN THE LEAD AGENCY MUST ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, WHICH EXPLAINS THE SPECIFIC PUBLIC BENEFITS OF A PROJECT, AND THAT MUST BE DONE PRIOR TO, UM, APPROVING A PROJECT. 
          SO A NEARBY EXAMPLE OF THIS IS THE CARITAS VILLAGE PROJECT IN SANTA ROSA, WHICH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE FAMILY AND HOMELESS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITY, AS WELL AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROXIMATE TO THE CITY'S DOWNTOWN. 
          IN THE CASE OF THIS PROJECT, THE EIR IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS TO HISTORIC RESOURCES AS TWO HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE DEMOLISHED TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROJECT BECAUSE THE BUILDINGS WERE DEMOLISHED IMPACTS COULD NOT BE REDUCED TO LEVELS BELOW SIGNIFICANCE. 
          AND THE CITY ADOPTED A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN THAT STATEMENT. 
          THEY NOTED THAT THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT INCLUDED HOUSING ADDRESSING H THE HOMELESS AND EMERGENCY HOUSING CRISIS, PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOWNTOWN AND PROVIDING NEW EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES. 
          AND THEY SAID THAT THAT OUTWEIGHED THE IMPACTS OF, UM, THE LOSS OF THOSE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES. 
          AGAIN, THEY STILL REQUIRED IMPOSITION OF, UM, MITIGATION MEASURES, BUT IF YOU'RE DEMOLISHING A HISTORIC RESOURCE, IT'S IT'S GONE. 
          SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACT. 
          ALRIGHT, SO NOW THAT WE'VE GONE OVER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CE QL, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEIR ROLE AS A REPRESENTATIVE BODY OF THE LEAD AGENCY. 
          SO, UM, TO FULFILL THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DETERMINING WHETHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENTS MEET THE SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OF CQA, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COMMISSIONERS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE PHYSICAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT PLAY A ROLE IN ANALYZING IMPACTS WHAT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CQA AND PLANNING REVIEW IS. 
          HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND ADDRESS PUBLIC INPUT 
          [00:30:01]
AND TIPS FOR REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO UNDERSTANDING THE PHYSICAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW IS CRUCIAL IN EVALUATING AND ADDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF A SITE INFORMS LIKELY POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM A SPECIFIC LAND USE ACTIVITY. 
          AND THE EXAMPLE THAT WE HAVE SHOWN ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN, WE HAVE THE SITE AT 1 36 COURT STREET ON THE TOP OF, UM, ON THE TOP AND THE SITE OF THE CREEKWOOD PROJECT ON THE BOTTOM WITH THE SITE AT 1 36 COURT STREET. 
          ALTHOUGH THE SITE IS UNDEVELOPED, UM, REVIEW OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, INCLUDING THE SITE'S PROXIMITY TO DOWNTOWN, THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT AND THE MINIMAL VALUE FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INDICATED THE LEVEL OF REVIEW REQUIRED, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THIS PROJECT, WAS APPLICATION OF THE INFILL DEVELOPMENT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION. 
          AND AGAIN, WE DID REVIEW THAT PROJECT FOR EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTION. 
          AND THEN IN CONTRAST, THE SIDE OF THE CREEKWOOD PROJECT IS ADJACENT TO A CREEK, AND THE PROJECT PROPOSES CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE OVER THAT CREEK, WHICH AGAIN INFORMS THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, WHICH IN THE CASE OF THIS PROJECT IS AN EIR. 
          IN ADDITION TO THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT, UNDERSTANDING LAND USE ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF LOCAL REGULATIONS SUCH AS THE CITY'S, UH, THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, THE CENTRAL PETALUMA SPECIFIC PLAN IF IT APPLIES, AND OTHER PLAN AND POLICY DOCUMENTS HELPS TO INFORM THE LEVEL OF REVIEW AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM A PROJECT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLANS. 
          SO THIS INCLUDES IMPACTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CONDUCTED FOR THOSE PLAN LEVEL DOCUMENTS. 
          SO AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT UTILITIES, UM, HOUSING POPULATION, SO GENERALLY PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN THAT THEN INFORMS, UM, WHERE THE ANALYSIS SHOULD BE FOCUSED AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT MAY OCCUR. 
          SO ALSO UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CA AND THE PLANNING REVIEW PROCESS IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTANDING THE SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION'S DISCRETION FOR BOTH CQA AND PLANNING REVIEW PROJECTS ARE EVALUATED WITHIN A REGULATED DISCRETIONARY CONTEXT. 
          SO FOR CQA, THAT WOULD BE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND FOR PLANNING REVIEW, THAT WOULD BE COMPLIANCE WITH, UM, REVIEW CRITERIA SUCH AS FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. 
          FOR BOTH, THE CITY OF PETALUMA IS CHARGED WITH UPHOLDING PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS AND PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT. 
          AND LASTLY, BOTH SE AND PLANNING REVIEW ARE SUBJECT TO DECISION MAKING BY THE CITY, WHICH IS THEN DONE WITHIN THAT REGULATED CONTEXT. 
          AND THEN, AS I'VE DISCUSSED THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION, CE QA SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES AN ANALYSIS AND DISCLOSURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES TO REDUCE OFFSET THOSE IMPACTS. 
          WHEREAS ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE HAVE PLANNING REVIEW, WHICH REQUIRES AN ANALYSIS OF USE AND DESIGN COMPATIBILITY, AS WELL AS REVIEW FOR CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED CITYWIDE GOALS. 
          CE QA AND PLANNING REVIEW ARE VERY CLOSELY RELATED. 
          AND WHEN REVIEWING PROJECTS, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COMMISSIONERS TO UNDERSTAND THE ROLE OF EACH IN THE LAND USE PROCESS, INCLUDING WHERE THEY OVERLAP AND WHAT THEIR FRAMEWORK PROVIDES FOR IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS. 
          PUBLIC INPUT IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE SQR REVIEW PROCESS. 
          HOWEVER, UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF SPECIFIC COMMENTS WITHIN THE STATUTORY FRAMEWORK CAN SOMETIMES BE CHALLENGING TO UNDERSTAND PUBLIC COMMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF CQA. 
          COMMISSIONERS SHOULD UNDERSTAND WHETHER COMMENTS PROVIDED ARE SUBSTANTIVE. 
          A SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT PROVIDES SPECIFIC DETAILS ON THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THAT THE COMMENTER BELIEVES WILL OCCUR, WHY THEY WILL, WHY THEY BELIEVE IT WILL OCCUR, WHY IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT, AND THAT ASSERTION SHOULD BE SUPPORTED BY DATA REFERENCES AND REASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS. 
          AND I'LL DISCUSS MORE ABOUT SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS ON THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          AND THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, WHILE NON-SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS ARE IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND CONSTITUENT CONSTITUENT CONCERNS, THEY HAVE A LIMITED ROLE IN CQA. 
          NON-SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS ARE THOSE THAT PRESENT TOPICS THAT ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. 
          SO AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT THE STATUTORY FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH WE ARE OPERATING. 
          AND WHILE THEY MAY BE IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND CONCERNS, COMMENTS SUCH AS THESE SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS BEING RELATED TO CQA AS A LEAD AGENCY, LIKE I SAID, SHOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, STAYING WITHIN THAT LEGAL STATUTORY FRAMEWORK. 
          UH, GENERAL STATEMENTS ON THE PROJECT MERITS ARE ALSO CONSIDERED NON-SUBSTANTIVE, AS WELL AS COMMENTS THAT MAY BE RELATED TO TOPICS THAT ARE COVERED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT, BUT MAY HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THE COMMENTER. 
          SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE ASSERTS THAT THERE MIGHT BE A SIGNIFICANT VMT IMPACT, BUT THAT'S ALREADY IDENTIFIED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT, THAT'S CONSIDERED NON-SUBSTANTIVE BECAUSE THE INFORMATION IS ALREADY THERE. 
          SO GOING BACK TO SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS, THE LEAD AGENCY IS CHARGED WITH ASKING WHETHER THE COMMENTS PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. 
          A COMMENT DOES PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL E EVIDENCE IF FACTS, DATA REASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR EXPERT OPINIONS CAN SUPPORT A FAIR ARGUMENT EVEN THOUGH OTHER CONCLUSIONS MIGHT ALSO BE REACHED. 
          A COMMENT 
          [00:35:01]
DOES NOT PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IF IT SIMPLY PROVIDES ARGUMENTS, SPECULATION, UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION, INACCURATE INFORMATION, AND THE LIKE. 
          UM, SO COMMENTS THAT DO NOT PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AGAIN, ARE CONSIDERED NON-SUBSTANTIVE. 
          AND THE ROLE THEY PLAY IN CQA IS LIMITED. 
          SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN SUPPORT A FAIR ARGUMENT IF IT INDICATES THAT THE PROJECT MAY CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND MUST BE CONSIDERED IN LIGHT OF THE WHOLE RECORD. 
          THE FAIR ARGUMENT STANDARD IS USED BY COURTS IN REVIEWING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION VERSUS AN EIR AND HAVE HELD THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS INAPPROPRIATE. 
          IF IT CAN BE FAIRLY ARGUED THAT THE PROJECT MAY CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EIR, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN STILL SUPPORT A FAIR ARGUMENT AND MAY BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE EIR MEETS THE SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS OF CE QA, INCLUDING FULL ANALYSIS AND DISCLOSURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          SO WITH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE PROVIDED TONIGHT, I'LL CLOSE OUT WITH A FEW TIPS TO COMMISSIONERS FOR REVIEWING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS. 
          FIRST, WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU REVIEW THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT TO ENSURE THERE IS A BASE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPOSED PROJECTS PROJECT AND THE REGULATIONS THAT APPLY TO THAT PROJECT. 
          NEXT, WE RECOMMEND PRIORITIZING REVIEW OF SECTIONS THAT IDENTIFY POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, IF A PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH A GENERAL PLAN, COMMISSIONERS MAY CONSIDER DOING A CURSORY REVIEW OF CERTAIN SECTIONS, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO RECREATION, UTILITIES, POPULATION HOUSING, AND PUBLIC SERVICES, AS THESE TOPICS WOULD, UH, WOULD'VE BEEN ADDRESSED AND ANALYZED IN THE GENERAL PLAN EIR. 
          AND THEN THE COMMISSION CAN FOCUS THEIR REVIEW ON TOPICS FOR WHICH A PROJECT MAY HAVE SITE SPECIFIC IMPACTS THAT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD. 
          SO IF A PROJECT IS PROXIMATE TO A CREEK, YOU'D WANNA LOOK AT THE BIOLOGIC RESOURCES SECTION, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          ONCE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED, WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU REVIEW THE PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES, NOTING THAT MITIGATION MEASURES FOR TOPIC AREAS THAT ARE UNDER THE CONTROL OF OTHER AGENCIES SUCH AS MITIGATIONS ADDRESSING IMPACTS TO BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ARE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF OTHER AGENCIES. 
          OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THOSE AND WE CAN ALWAYS TALK ABOUT REVISIONS IF NEEDED. 
          BUT JUST KEEPING IN MIND THAT THOSE RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES ARE THE ONES THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING AND IMPLEMENTING THOSE MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          ONCE IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS ARE UNDERSTOOD, COMMISSIONERS SHOULD THEN REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AGAIN, FOCUS ON THOSE THAT ARE SUBSTANTIVE. 
          AS ALWAYS, WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THAT YOU ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS EARLY ON IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE, UM, NEEDING CLARIFICATION ON FOR, UH, METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES. 
          IF THERE'S MISSING INFORMATION, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TECHNICAL STUDIES OR ANY OTHER TOPICS, WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION. 
          AND I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, OUR, THE GOAL OF ALL OF US IS THE SAME. 
          WE WANNA, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND KEEP PETALUMA PETALUMA. 
          SO WITH THAT, THAT IS THE END OF MY SORT OF LONG PRESENTATION. 
          I'M SORRY FOR ALL THE TALKING. 
          UM, SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO REVISIT ANY OF THESE TOPICS, I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDES. 
          IF THERE'S QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ASK THEM. 
          UM, ALSO, IF YOU EVER HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU'RE ALWAYS WELCOME TO EMAIL ME. 
          UM, I KNOW CQA IS COMPLEX, THERE'S A LOT TO IT. 
          IT'S CONSTANTLY CHANGING, AND WE JUST WANNA BE HERE TO SUPPORT YOU AND TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND YEAH, I LOVE TALKING SEQA, SO ASK ME WHATEVER YOU WANT, . 
          THANK YOU. 
          WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT THOROUGH PRESENTATION AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING US THIS OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF ASK EVERY QUESTION WE'VE PROBABLY HAD OVER THE YEARS. 
          UH, I'M GONNA ASK FOLKS TO RAISE THEIR HANDS JUST AS A START FOR WHO WANTS TO KIND OF KICK THINGS OFF WITH ANY QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          UH, THAT WAS GREAT, THANK YOU. 
          AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE STAFF TO CLIP JUST THAT AND PUT IT ALONG WITH THE POWERPOINT LINKED IN ITS OWN YOUTUBE VIDEO THAT'S EASY TO FIND SO PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO DIG UP THE FEBRUARY 27TH PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, BUT THE QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK WAS AROUND THE, UM, DETERMINING LEVEL OF REVIEW, BECAUSE I THINK THAT HAS BEEN CONTENTIOUS IN SOME PROJECTS, AND I'M CURIOUS IF YOU COULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO WHO IS ACTUALLY IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND THEN SORT OF HOW LEVELS OF REVIEW MIGHT GET CHANGED IN CERTAIN INSTANCES. 
          YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO LIKE I MENTIONED, UM, UPON RECEIVING AN APPLICATION, EVEN IF APPLICATION IS NOT DEEMED COMPLETE, WE, WE START THE SQL REVIEW WHEN THE APPLICATION IS IS RECEIVED. 
          SO WE, UM, AS STAFF WILL REVIEW THE REGULATORY CONTEXT OR THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, SOME KIND OF TRIGGERS FOR HELPING DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS IF THEY'RE INCREASING DENSITY, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD START TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. 
          AND THEN WE ASK THE APPLICANT FOR DIFFERENT TECHNICAL STUDIES TO HELP SUPPORT THE ANALYSIS. 
          UM, AND THEN WE CONSULT WITH OTHER AGE AGENCY STAFF. 
          SO IF THERE'S, 
          [00:40:01]
UM, YOU KNOW, A DEVELOPMENT IN AN AREA THAT'S EXPERIENCED SANITARY SUPER OVERFLOWS IN THE PAST, THEN WE WOULD TALK WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ABOUT, OKAY, WHAT DOES THE PROJECT NEED TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN? UM, YOU KNOW, ONCE THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED, WE ALSO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, TALK THROUGH, UM, CQA PROCEDURES. 
          AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE QUA IS NOT BLACK AND WHITE. 
          IT'S VERY GRAY. 
          AND SO DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS A COOPERATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN ALL OF, UM, YOU KNOW, CITY STAFF. 
          AND WE DO TAKE THE CON THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          AND AGAIN, IF THE, YOU KNOW, IF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FLAG SOMETHING AND, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN HELP TO INFORM THE LEVEL OF REVIEW, BUT WE ARE, AS LEAD AGENCY, WE ARE REQUIRED TO APPLY EXEMPTIONS WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY'RE APPLICABLE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IN, IN TERMS OF STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS, THE, ONE OF THE ONES IN THERE THAT I'VE ALWAYS FOUND REALLY INTERESTING SINCE I WAS IN SCHOOL WAS OLYMPIC GAMES. 
          SO IF THEY EVER WANTED TO HOLD THE OLYMPIC GAMES IN PETALUMA, WE HAVE NO SAY. 
          IT'S JUST LIKE, OKAY, COOL, WE KNOW THAT IT'S GONNA HAVE IMPACTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT, BUT THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS JUST SAID, THAT'S FINE, WE DON'T CARE. 
          OR NOT THAT THEY DON'T CARE. 
          I DON'T MEAN TO BE SO FLIPPANT ABOUT IT, BUT THE POINT BEING THAT THERE'S NOT REALLY MORE THAT YOU CAN DO AND YOU'RE, YOU, YOU HAVE TO APPLY IT IF IT APPLIES, UM, WITH CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, EXCUSE ME, WITH CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS. 
          SIMILARLY, UM, WE DON'T WANNA PUT PEOPLE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF DOING AN EIR JUST BECAUSE THERE'S CONTROVERSY AROUND A PROJECT. 
          AGAIN, IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUENTS CONCERNS AND WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT ASPECT OF IT. 
          BUT IF A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLEARLY APPLIES TO A PROJECT, WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO APPLY IT. 
          AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WITH CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS, THERE'S A HANDFUL OF EXCEPTIONS TO THOSE EXEMPTIONS. 
          I DIDN'T GO INTO THEM IN DETAIL THOUGH, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PULL THEM UP WHILE WE'RE TALKING IF YOU'RE INTERESTED. 
          BUT ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTIONS IS IF THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGES TO HISTORICAL RESOURCE. 
          SO AT THAT POINT, UM, SO LIKE WITH AMY'S KITCHEN FOR EXAMPLE, WE ASKED THEM THEN FOR A HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION BECAUSE THEY WERE MAKING SOME EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS, AND THERE'S, UM, IF THEY COMPLY WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, THEN THEY FALL BELOW LEVELS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 
          SO THEN WE'RE ABLE TO SAY, OKAY, THE EXEMPTION APPLIES. 
          YOU'VE, YOU'VE PROVIDED THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION, WE NEED TO ANALYZE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTION, AND NOW WE'RE GOOD TO GO. 
          AND THEN WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXEMPTIONS, UM, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S VERY MUCH LIKE IF IT MEETS THOSE CRITERIA AND THERE'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF CRITERIA THAT ARE IN THERE, UM, BUT IF IT MEETS THOSE CRITERIA, WE HAVE TO APPLY THOSE EXEMPTIONS. 
          SO THEN IT GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE MUDDY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS IN EIRS. 
          AND I'M, I KNOW, I KNOW THAT YOU'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH, UM, WITH THAT, AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE SOME RECENT PROJECTS WHERE MND WAS PREPARED, AND THEN THERE WAS SOME, YOU KNOW, SOME INFORMATION THAT CAME UP. 
          AND SO NOW WE'RE PREPARING AN EIR AND WE REALLY WHAT OUR, OUR, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AS CITY STAFF IS TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY IS COMPLYING WITH CQA BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO TIE PROJECTS UP IN LEGAL BATTLES. 
          AND ALSO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE APPLYING THE RIGHT LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          SO IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC IMPACTS OF A PROJECT, THOSE ARE BEING FULLY ANALYZED, FULLY DISCLOSED, AND MITIGATED TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT REALLY HELPS. 
          I KNOW THAT'S LIKE SO MUCH, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHY WE WENT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DONE, THEN WE SAY, OKAY, IS THIS COVERED? ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT, I THINK I HEARD SOMEONE TALKING ABOUT THE TRESTLE BEFORE THE, BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED, THERE WAS AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT THAT WAS PREPARED FOR THAT PROJECT PREVIOUSLY. 
          SO WHEN, WHEN THAT PROJECT COMES OUT OF THE CONCEPT PHASE AND LIKE WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE PROJECT IS, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT THAT WAS PREPARED AND SAY, OKAY, IS THE WHOLE OF THE PROJECT COVERED BY THAT? IF SO, GREAT, WE CAN RELY ON THAT PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          IF NOT, THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT PATH WE NEED TO TAKE. 
          UM, YEAH, ANDREW, PLEASE. 
          SURE. 
          THANKS. 
          THANKS, CRYSTAL. 
          AND THIS IS, I KNOW IT'S A TON OF INFORMATION, SO FORTUNATELY WE DO HAVE THE YOUTUBE VIDEO. 
          UM, TO GO BACK, I ALSO WANT TO, SINCE YOU'VE INTRODUCED THE, THE CONCEPTS OF, UH, FAIR ARGUMENT VERSUS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, WHEN WE DO GET INTO THE USE OF EXEMPTIONS, STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS VERSUS CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS, A A STATUTORY EXEMPTION IS A STRONGER EXEMPTION BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE LEVEL OF CHALLENGE TO IT, WHEREAS A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION HAS A FAIR ARGUMENT LEVEL OF CHALLENGE. 
          SIMILARLY, UH, AN M AND D COMPARED TO A STATUTORY EXEMPTION OR TO AN EIR, THE M AND D WOULD HAVE A FAIR ARGUMENT LEVEL OF CHALLENGE WHILE THE STATUTORY EXEMPTION OR THE EIR WOULD HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, UM, CHALLENGE 
          [00:45:01]
ASSOCIATED WITH IT. 
          SO THERE, THERE ARE PART, PART OF THE ANALYSIS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT EXEMPTIONS, WILL ALSO LOOK AT THE LEVEL OF CHALLENGE ASSOCIATED WITH A PARTICULAR EXEMPTION OR WITH A DOCUMENT FOR THAT, UH, THE TYPE OF DOCUMENT FOR THAT MATTER. 
          MAYBE I CAN JUST DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TEST. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE, THE CITY, LIKE ANDREW SAID, IS APPLYING A STATUTORY EXEMPTION. 
          IF WE GET CHALLENGED ON THAT STATUTORY EXEMPTION, LIKE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATUTORY EXEMPTION, WE WOULD JUST NEED TO PROVE THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD FOR THE CITY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION THAT THE STATUTORY EXEMPTION WAS APPLIED. 
          UH, LIKE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ONE, IT'S PRETTY BLACK AND WHITE IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, NEEDS TO BE A CERTAIN SIZE, NOT ON A SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENT. 
          UM, WHAT ARE THE OTHER PARTS OF THAT CRYSTAL? THE, YEAH, THERE'S CERTAIN AFFORDABILITY LEVELS THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE. 
          I BELIEVE IT'S AT THE LOW INCOME, AFFORDABLE LEVEL. 
          THERE'S ALSO, UM, AN AGRICULTURAL HOUSING EXEMPTION. 
          THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL INFILL HOUSING EXEMPTION. 
          AND THOSE, LIKE I SAID IN THE PRESENTATION, THOSE EXEMPTIONS WERE ESTABLISHED, UM, IN RECOGNITION THAT WE'RE IN A HOUSING CRISIS. 
          AND YES, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER, BUT THERE'S ALSO THE SOCIAL IMPACTS AS WELL, AND WE NEED TO HOUSE PEOPLE. 
          SO, UM, SO YEAH, I THINK THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS ARE INTENDED SPECIFICALLY TO STREAMLINE. 
          UM, AND THE NICE THING TOO IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH A CITY LIKE PETALUMA, WE HAVE A LOT OF POLICIES THAT ARE ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          SO THEN WE'RE ABLE TO USE OUR GENERAL PLAN POLICIES TO, UM, YOU KNOW, ENSURE THAT THE, THAT THE PROJECTS COMPLY WITH THAT, THAT CAN GET A LITTLE HAIRY WITH, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE IF THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S MAYBE CERTAIN WAIVERS OR IF THEY'RE DOING DENSITY BONUS. 
          SO THERE'S A LOT OF REGULATORY CONTEXT THAT GOES INTO THAT. 
          BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, I THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE, AND THIS IS SUCH A GREAT OPPORTUNITY AS WELL, ESPECIALLY WITH THE ITEM THAT'S COMING UP AFTER THIS, AND WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE THAT'S GOING ON, UM, REALLY TALKING ABOUT POLICIES THAT CAN BE BAKED INTO OUR DOCUMENTS THAT HELP TO AVOID OR OFFSET THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          SO THEN WE CAN ALSO WORK TO CONTINUE STREAMLINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, UM, BECAUSE YES, EIR HAVE A PLACE IN, IN THE SQL REVIEW PROCESS, BUT A LOT OF WHAT WE SEE ARE, OR ARE SEEING AT THIS POINT IS A LOT OF INFILL EXEMPTION, UM, REUSE OF EXISTING SITES. 
          AND IN THAT SENSE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE BASELINE CONDITIONS ARE DISTURBED SITES IN A LOT OF CASES, AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF IMPACT CATEGORIES. 
          SO I, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S, WE CAN'T, IT'S NOT A SWEEPING COMMENT, BUT AGAIN, UNDERSTANDING THAT PHYSICAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE INTENT OF CE QA IS, IT'S NOT TO SLOW PROJECTS DOWN. 
          IT'S NOT TO WRITE 600 PAGE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENTS. 
          IT'S, YOU KNOW, REALLY TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD TOO, KIND OF INTERESTING, THE STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS BESIDES THE HOUSING POLICIES THAT WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY, THEY ALSO COME PRETTY FREQUENTLY DUE TO JUST DECISIONS, COURT CASES THAT THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T LIKE. 
          YOU SAW THIS RECENTLY WITH THE BERKELEY DORMS CASE WHERE OKAY, YES, THERE WAS AN IMPACT TO NOISE, BUT THE LEGISLATURE REALIZED COURT, YOU MIGHT'VE DECIDED THAT. 
          RIGHT? BUT WE LIKE TO HAVE DORMS AND HOUSING FOR THESE STUDENTS, SO WE'LL MAKE THIS A STATUTORY EXEMPTION FOR DORMS. RIGHT. 
          QUESTION, UH, YOU MENTIONED THE, UH, GENERAL PLAN EIR, SO THE, THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ARE ALL EVALUATED FROM A, FROM IMPACT STANDPOINT IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND TRAFFIC AND ALL THAT? CORRECT? YEAH. 
          SO WHEN WE, UM, DO A GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, SUCH AS THE ONE THAT'S ONGOING RIGHT NOW, AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REPORT WILL BE DONE TO ANALYZE, UM, IT ANALYZES BUILD OUT. 
          SO ESSENTIALLY IT ESTABLISHES, UM, WHAT WILL THE POPULATION BE, WHAT WILL THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE SPACE BE, AND THEN WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT? UM, AND THEN WITH ZONING, ZONING IMPLEMENTS THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          UM, SO TYPICALLY LIKE WITH THE PARKING, UM, MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE, THAT DOESN'T REALLY RESULT IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BECAUSE IT'S JUST A, A, A CHANGE IN THE, IN THE CODE. 
          AND THEN PROJECTS THAT COME UNDER THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH USING THE PARKING MODIFICATION, THEY MIGHT BE SUBJECT TO SQL, BUT THE PARKING MODIFICATIONS THEMSELVES ARE NOT REALLY CREATING ANY SORT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN THE, IN THE CASE OF LIKE OVERLAY ZONING WHERE THERE'S POTENTIALLY A 30 TO 40% INCREASE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE. 
          UM, THERE'S NO IMPACT, THERE'S NO EVALUATION OF THAT IMPACT, LIKE FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FOR THE GENERAL PLAN ITSELF. 
          BUT, BUT THIS IS LIKE AFTER THE GENERAL PLAN, IT'S RIGHT, IT'S AN OVERLAY ZONING. 
          OH, YOU'RE TALKING 
          [00:50:01]
ABOUT THE, THE EKN PROJECT SPECIFICALLY? YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, SO YOU'RE SAYING LIKE, ARE THE, I JUST QUESTION WHETHER THAT, WHETHER THAT 30 OR 40% DESERVES A EVALUATION OF WHETHER IT'S AN ISSUE OR NOT. 
          YEAH, IT'S HONESTLY A LITTLE HARD TO SPEAK ON THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF KIND OF MOVING PARTS WITH IT. 
          BUT IN, IN SOME TRAINS OF THOUGHT, IT'S THAT WE ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF THE CHANGE, WHICH THE CHANGE ISN'T ACTUALLY REALLY DOING ANYTHING, RIGHT? IT'S PERMITTING DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD HAPPEN UNDER THAT, AND THEN THOSE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE ANALYZED FOR THAT INCREASE IF THEY PROPOSE THAT INCREASE. 
          BUT THAT INCREASE IS SUBJECT TO CE QA BECAUSE IT'S A DISCRETIONARY ACTION. 
          SO, SO IT'S A PROJECT BY PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, NOT AN OVERALL JUSTIFICATION. 
          RIGHT. 
          IN THE CASE OF THAT PROJECT, WHEN WE DID THE MND, THAT WAS THE CONCLUSION WE CAME TO. 
          AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'RE PREPARING AN EIR FOR THAT PROJECT. 
          SO, UM, AND I, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THAT ANALYSIS IS GONNA LOOK LIKE BECAUSE I HAVEN'T, I HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN TOO INVOLVED. 
          ANDREW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT. 
          I WANNA ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M SPEAKING CORRECTLY ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          THE, THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IS ASSUMING YOU, IF YOU DO AN EIR FOR A GENERAL PLAN LEVEL, YOU'VE GOT A TRAFFIC MODEL. 
          IF YOU KNOW YOU GOT THE WHOLE CITY IN THAT TRAFFIC STUDY, WHICH WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THAT WAS A TRAFFIC MODEL THAT THEN COULD BE USED BY PROJECTS, RIGHT? BECAUSE FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN IS EVERY, EVERY PROJECT HAS TO DO ITS OWN TRAFFIC STUDY AND IT DOESN'T PLUG INTO ANY OVERALL SYSTEM, RIGHT? IS THAT NOT, IS THAT PART OF THE CITY GOAL TO HAVE A TRAFFIC MODEL OR NOT THAT I'M NOT SURE. 
          BUT WHEN, AGAIN, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC IMPACTS, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT LEVEL OF SERVICE UNLESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF ADOPTED POLICIES FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE. 
          UM, BUT I THINK MAYBE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WHETHER OR NOT THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN WILL INCLUDE VMT MODELING, SO THEN EACH INDIVIDUAL PROJECT WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL VMT ANALYSIS. 
          UM, WE HAVE THE ADOPTED VMT GUIDELINES AND THAT ESTABLISHES SOME LEVELS OF SCREENING CRITERIA. 
          SO IF YOU'RE WITHIN HALF MILE OF TRANSIT, BUT THEN FOR PROJECTS THAT FALL OUTSIDE OF THAT, THEN IT'S EXACTLY LIKE YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL PROJECT THEN HAS TO ANALYZE THE IMPACTS OF THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL VMT IMPACTS, WHERE THAT COULD BE AND PROBABLY WILL BE ANALYZED BY THE GENERAL PLAN EIR. 
          AGAIN, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK TO ABSOLUTELY ABOUT WHAT IT WILL AND WON'T DO BECAUSE I, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, IS ACCURATE THAT YES, YOU CAN DO A PLAN LEVEL REVIEW AND THEN IF THE PROJECT FALLS WITHIN WHAT'S ANTICIPATED BY THE, THE PLAN, SO LET'S SAY IT'S IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL, UM, ZONING DISTRICT, AND THAT ALLOWS WHATEVER PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVERAGE AND THE PROJECT IS COMPLYING WITH THAT, WE CAN THEN ESSENTIALLY CONCLUDE THAT THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL THAT WAS ANALYZED IN THE GENERAL PLAN, WHICH INCLUDED A VMT MODEL. 
          AND SO THEN WE CAN SAY WHAT THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE. 
          AGAIN, DEPENDING ON THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECT, WE MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, BUT IT'S AT LEAST A GOOD BASELINE TO START FROM SO THAT WE CAN, WE CAN KIND OF ORIENT OURSELVES AND NOT HAVE TO START AT SQUARE ONE EVERY SINGLE TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM, , DARREN, UH, THANK YOU. 
          AND THANK YOU CRYSTAL FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION. 
          I'LL PROBABLY NEED TO WATCH IT AGAIN JUST TO PICK UP EVERYTHING YOU WERE PUTTING DOWN THERE. 
          UM, TO KICK IT OFF, LEAD AGENCY, A QUESTION ABOUT LEAD AGENCY RELATIONSHIP, ESPECIALLY WITH TRUSTEE AGENCIES. 
          UH, AND I KNOW THAT IN OUR TENURE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THERE'S A, A DESIRE AS THE LEAD AGENCY TO SAY, WELL, UH, I, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY HOW DO YOU AVOID STEPPING ON THE TOES OF THE TRUSTEE AGENCIES REACHING TO THEIR AREA OF SUBJECT MATTER? IS THAT THE INTENT OR IS THAT ONE OF THE POTENTIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LEAD AGENCY TO VERIFY KIND OF STATEMENTS OR REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY A TRUSTEE AGENCY? AND I'M THINKING, UH, YOU KNOW, IN THE CONTEXT OF LIKE THE SCOTTS RANCH DEVELOPMENT, WHEN WE SAW THAT ONE, THERE WAS SOME DETERMINATION BY LIKE CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE. 
          WE HAD FOLKS WHO MIGHT HAVE DISAGREED WITH THAT AS THE LEAD AGENCY. 
          CAN WE DISAGREE WITH LIKE A SUB, UH, SUPPOSITION OR AN ASSUMPTION MADE BY THAT TRUSTEE AGENCY OR THAT EXPERT THAT, UM, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          UM, I WOULD SAY WE CAN QUESTION THEM AND WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. 
          CERTAINLY. 
          UM, TYPICALLY THAT HAP THAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN THE EARLY CONSULTATION PROCESS. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS GROUP WOULD NOT TYPICALLY BE INVOLVED IN THAT, BUT IF THERE WERE POTENTIAL CONCERNS, UM, OF A PROJECT RELATIVE TO PURVIEW THAT'S UNDER AN AGENCY THAT'S NOT THE CITY OF PETALUMA, THEN IF YOU WANTED TO FLAG THOSE ISSUES TO STAFF EARLY ON, THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK TO THE RESPONSIBLE 
          [00:55:01]
AGENCIES AND SAY, HEY, OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IMPACT THAT YOU MIGHT THINK IS NOT SIGNIFICANT, IS ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANT. 
          WE CAN, WE TALK ABOUT IT AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A BACK AND FORTH. 
          UM, WHERE WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT IS THAT, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGES AND INTERPRETATIONS THAT ALSO HAPPEN AT THE COURT WITH THE COURTS AND IN CASE LAW THAT THEN AFFECTS WHAT THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES EVEN HAVE JURISDICTION OVER. 
          SO ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT IS WITH, UM, THE DEFINITION OF WETLANDS AND WATERS OF THE US AND WATERS OF THE STATE, IT IS AN ABSOLUTE MESS AND IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND IT'S SO HARD TO KEEP TRACK OF. 
          UM, WE HAVE A FAIRLY GOOD HANDLE ON IT. 
          UM, BUT EV AGAIN, LIKE WE DON'T HA WE CAN'T SAY, WELL, YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S A WETLAND, BUT WE DO. 
          SO WE DON'T CARE. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE KEEPING IT, THERE'S A POTENTIAL TO ADDRESS THAT THROUGH THE POLICY DOCUMENTS. 
          SO THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, MAYBE WE COULD DO, I MEAN, I'M NOT TRYING TO PROPOSE POLICY TO YOU PLEASE, JUST AS A DISCLAIMER, BUT IF THE CITY OF PETALUMA WANTED TO SAY, OKAY, WHERE, WHERE WETLANDS, WHERE WE DEFINE WETLANDS, WE DEFINE THEM MORE BROADLY. 
          AND SO YOU HAVE TO AVOID, AVOID DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE WETLANDS. 
          AGAIN, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE, THERE'S A NEXUS FOR THAT AND THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, ENGAGING IN A TAKING FROM, FROM THAT, UM, DEVELOPER APPLICANT. 
          BUT DEFINITELY I THINK THERE'S A, THERE'S, UH, AN AVENUE FOR DISCUSSION WITH THOSE RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE A JURISDICTION THAT WE REALLY, WE REALLY CARE ABOUT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND MAYBE BEYOND THE, UM, PURVIEW THAT YOU AS, AS THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY HAVE. 
          'CAUSE THEIR HANDS ARE TIED A LITTLE BIT TOO, RIGHT? LIKE THEY HAVE TO WORK WITHIN THEIR FRAMEWORK. 
          UM, BUT I THINK THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT WE COULD DO THAT THROUGH POLICIES AND, AND THROUGH THE EARLY CONSULTATION PROCESS. 
          THAT'S REALLY INTERESTING. 
          AND DYLAN, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE, UH, THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, FINDINGS FOR A DECISION, RIGHT? AS A COMMISSIONER TO SAY, WELL, I DISAGREE WITH THE FINDING OF THAT RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          IS THERE ANY LEG TO STAND ON THERE OR IS THAT GENERALLY, AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT, I KNOW I USED AN EXAMPLE, BUT NOT SUPER SITE SPECIFIC. 
          YEAH. 
          CAVEAT IN LIKE GENERALLY IN YOUR EXPERIENCE. 
          YOU KNOW, I HAVE NOT SEEN A LEAD AGENCY DISAGREE WITH THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S IN PART BECAUSE A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY HAS DISCRETIONARY SOME DISCRETIONARY ACTION OVER THE PROJECT LATER ON. 
          SO IF IT'S LIKE FISH AND WILDLIFE, UH, THE STATE LANDS COMMISSION, YOU NEED PERMITS FROM THEM. 
          MAYBE YOU DON'T WANNA, YOU KNOW, UPSET THEM AND TRY TO WORK WITH THEM LIKE CRYSTAL SAID. 
          UH, SO THAT EVENTUALLY LATER PERMIT COMES PRETTY EASILY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT, THAT STRATEGY THOUGH, AS A COMMISSIONER, YOU CAN REACH OUT TO THAT AGENCY EARLY ON AND TRY TO HAVE SOME OF THAT DISCUSSION POTENTIALLY IF YOU, IF YOU DO HAVE A DISAGREEMENT. 
          YEAH, IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE MAYBE TO REACH OUT TO CRYSTAL OR OLIVIA, UH, FIRST, BUT YEAH, I, 'CAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE YOU GUYS HAVE THE RELATIONSHIP WITH, YOU KNOW, THE TRUSTEE AGENCIES, RIGHT? AND THAT THE EARLY CONSULTATION IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO ANYWAY. 
          UM, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE WERE DOING THE HOTEL, UM, MND, WE REACHED OUT TO THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD BEFORE THE PROJECT WAS EVER EVEN DEEMED COMPLETE BECAUSE IT WAS ON A CLEANUP SITE AND THEY WERE EXCAVATING, OR THEY WERE PROPOSING EXCAVATION OF SUCH A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF SOIL THAT WE WERE LIKE, HEY, REGIONAL BOARD, WE'RE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THIS. 
          WHAT DO YOU THINK? UM, AND IN THAT CASE, IT'S, IT CAN BE A LITTLE BIT HARD WITH SUCH TECHNICAL INFORMATION THAT, I MEAN, OUR KNOWLEDGE ONLY GOES SO FAR. 
          UM, AND SO IT, AND, AND AGAIN, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SAY, LIKE, IF THEY'RE GONNA SAY IT'S OKAY THAT THEY CAN DO THAT AND IT FALLS BELOW THE RESIDENTIAL SCREENING LEVELS, OR THE COMMERCIAL SCREENING LEVELS, OR WHATEVER IT IS FOR THE, UM, HAZARDS OF CONCERN, THEN WE KIND OF HAVE TO RELY ON THEM AS THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS. 
          BUT I THINK THAT THAT IS, CAN VARY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF, UM, TOPICS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          SO WITH BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT WITH THEIR, WITH THE CONSULT WITH THE AGENCIES EARLY ON. 
          ONE ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THIS WHERE CDFW KIND OF REACHES ON THEIR, UM, ON THEIR JURISDICTION IS RELATED TO BUMBLEBEES. 
          UM, AND CQA PROVIDES SOME ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS TO SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES. 
          LIKE IT HAS KIND OF A BROADER DEFINITION OF SPECIES THAN WHAT CDFW, UM, LIKE FISH AND GAME CODE, UH, ESTABLISHES. 
          AND SO IN THAT CASE, WE'RE ABLE TO ES TO, UM, IF THEY'RE GONNA, UM, YOU KNOW, TAKE AWAY HABITAT FOR BUMBLEBEES, THEN WE CAN SAY PLANT LANDSCAPING THAT ATTRACTS BUMBLEBEES, AND THEN CDFW CAN COMMENT ON THAT. 
          SO WE CAN ALSO DO THAT. 
          SO WE CAN LOOK AT IMPACTS THAT MAYBE WE THINK ARE IMPACTS, BUT THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY DOESN'T, AND THEN WE CAN DRAFT MITIGATIONS AND AS LIKE, THROUGH THE PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS, THEY CAN REVIEW THOSE AND SAY, NO, NO, NO, YOUR MITIGATIONS ARE STEPPING OUT OF LINE. 
          YOU CAN'T DO THAT AND HERE'S WHY. 
          AND THEN THAT CAN START TO DEVELOP MAYBE, UM, THE FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH WE CAN, WE CAN WORK. 
          BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANNA BE REALLY CAREFUL THAT WE'RE, THERE'S NEXUS 
          [01:00:01]
TO IN INCLUDE THOSE MITIGATIONS AND THAT SORT OF THING. 
          BUT I CERTAINLY HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I THINK IT'S, I MEAN, I THINK YOU DON'T KNOW IF YOU DON'T ASK, RIGHT. 
          SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE, IF THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT COME UP THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, I, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S REACHING OUT TO ANDREW AND THEN ANDREW REACHING OUT TO ME, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY RESEARCH STUFF LIKE THAT FOR YOU AND GET IN TOUCH WITH THOSE AGENCIES AND ASK, ASK THE QUESTIONS. 
          THEY'RE NORMALLY REALLY RESPONSIVE AND I MEAN, THEY HAVE THE SAME GOAL AS WE DO, RIGHT? THEY WOULDN'T WORK FOR THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE IF THEY DIDN'T. 
          SO, AND I'LL JUST ADD REAL QUICK ON TOP OF THAT, UH, THERE IS A THING IN THE SUPREME COURT'S TRYING TO GET RID OF IT, BUT CALLED CHEVRON DEFERENCE, WHERE AGENCIES, THEY'RE THE ONES THAT INTERPRET THEIR RULES. 
          THEY'RE THE ONES THAT BEST KNOW WHAT THEIR RULES ARE. 
          SO IF WE AS A CITY ARE SAYING CDFW STATE, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR OWN RULES, UH, IT'S NOT LIKELY THAT WE WOULD GO TOO FAR IN A COURT CASE. 
          UH, A JUDGE WOULD PROBABLY SIDE WITH, UH, THE STATE AGENCY THAT'S INTERPRETING THEIR OWN RULES. 
          GOT IT. 
          NO, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE AS WITH MOST THINGS, COORDINATING WITH STAFF EARLY AND OFTEN WITH QUESTIONS TO TRY TO SUS SOME OF THAT OUT IS ONE OF THE BEST ROUTES. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UM, AND I THINK THIS BUILDS OFF. 
          COMMISSIONER MC LING'S COMMENT, UH, JUST IN TIERING, AGAIN, THIS IS WITH THE CAVEAT KIND OF GENERALLY IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, WHAT IS THAT THRESHOLD? UM, OR IS THERE A THRESHOLD INDIFFERENCE FROM THE PROJECT BEING PROPOSED VERSUS WHAT BUILD OUT WAS ANALYZED ON THE DOCUMENT YOU'RE TIERING FROM? IS THERE KIND OF A DEFINED LEVEL? LIKE IS IT SQUARE FOOTAGE, IS IT INTENSITY OF USE, JUST LAND USE TYPE THAT YOU SAY, OKAY, THIS NOW DIVERGES ENOUGH WHERE WE CAN'T TIER OR REQUIRES A CERTAIN LEVEL OF ANALYSIS. 
          UM, JUST ANY INSIGHTS THERE ON THAT ABILITY TO TIER AND WHAT KIND OF LEVEL OF DIFFERENCE STARTS TRIGGERING MAYBE A MORE ROBUST ANALYSIS OR PREVENTS TIERING AT ALL? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. 
          YEAH, NO, THAT'S, THAT'S TOTALLY FAIR. 
          IT'S A LITTLE HARD BECAUSE IT IS VERY PROJECT SPECIFIC. 
          UM, TYPICALLY PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE DESIGNATION, SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IT'S HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THEY'RE PROPOSING HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THEN IM, IT'S IMPACTS RELATED TO CERTAIN CRITERIA, RIGHT? SO LIKE IN TERMS OF UTILITIES, WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT THE CITY'S UTILITY SYSTEM CAN HANDLE, UM, ADDITIONAL WASTEWATER FOR UP TO 60,000, A POPULATION OF 60,000. 
          SO WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IN, IN THAT CONTEXT AS WELL IS THAT THE PROJECTIONS IN THE GENERAL PLAN ARE NOT ALWAYS OBVIOUSLY REFLECTIVE OF, OF REAL LIFE. 
          AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW IS THAT THE POPULATION IN PETALUMA AT BUILD OUT, WHICH IS 2025, SO NEXT YEAR, UM, IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN, THAN WHAT WAS ANTICIPATED. 
          AND SO IN SOME CASES, UM, THAT KIND OF COMES INTO PLAY, BUT IT'S VERY SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT. 
          UM, SO IT'S KIND OF, WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE REGULATORY CONTEXT AND WE SAY, OKAY, HERE'S THE PROJECT AND HERE ARE THE REGULATIONS, WHERE ARE THERE HOLES? AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS GONNA TRY TO PROVIDE A METAPHOR FOR TIERING, BUT IT WAS REALLY HARD TO KIND OF CAPTURE THE ESSENCE OF IT. 
          BUT YOU CAN KIND OF THINK OF IT AS LIKE A CAKE OR LIKE A COMPLEX TAPESTRY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          AND YOU HAVE THIS BIG PICTURE OF WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN AND THEN YOU HONE IN ON THE REALLY SMALL DETAILS, THE REALLY NOT SMALL DETAILS, THE, THE, UM, I'M NOT, I'M BLANKING ON THE WORD, THE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THE PROJECT, RIGHT? SO THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT LIKE, BECAUSE IT, THE INTENT OF TIERING IS TO ELIMINATE THE REPETITIVE DISCUSSIONS. 
          SO WE WOULD STILL DISCUSS UTILITIES, BUT IT WOULD BE IN A MORE ABBREVIATED DISCUSSION. 
          UM, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S, I MEAN CQA IS, IT'S COMPLEX AS IT IS AND THERE'S 21 TOPICS THAT HAVE TO BE ANALYZED. 
          SO IF WE WERE DOING EACH ONE OF THEM TO ITS ABSOLUTE, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM, AND, AND THEN BASICALLY JUST REITERATING WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE UTILITY SECTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN, EIR, THEN IT KIND OF DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          BUT I KNOW THAT DOESN'T PROBABLY REALLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT IT IS REALLY HARD WHEN, LIKE, FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT, UM, YEAH. 
          'CAUSE YOU KINDA LOOK AT THEM SIDE BY SIDE. 
          N NO, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND I THINK THEY'RE, IN READING A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS, THEY KIND OF GET TO THE HEART OF THIS THINGS THAT ARE MORE ART THAN SCIENCE, AND WHERE DO THOSE THRESHOLDS COME INTO PLAY. 
          UH, AND SO TO AVOID KIND OF GOING THROUGH THAT MORE, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I WOULD ASSUME, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO A SOLUTION AS A COMMISSIONER, WHEN WE LOOK AT DETERMINATIONS LIKE THAT, AND WHAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN HERE WERE LIKE SIGNIFICANT THRESHOLDS, SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS WHEN IT COMES TO IMPACTS, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO SUFFICIENCY OF MITIGATION MEASURES, THOSE ARE OBVIOUSLY BEING INFORMED BY TRUSTEE AGENCIES, RIGHT? THOSE ARE BEING INFORMED BY STAFF. 
          IF WE HAVE ANY DISAGREEMENTS QUESTIONS AROUND THAT, AGAIN, I WOULD ASSUME THIS IS THE THING WE BRING TO STAFF EARLY AND OFTEN AND KIND OF HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS THAT WAY, UM, TO KIND OF SUSS OUT THOSE ISSUES AND SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING TO BE TALKED ABOUT OR CONSIDERED THERE. 
          YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND THAT'S ALSO WHY GOING BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND PUBLIC INPUT, THAT'S WHY IT'S SO VALUABLE TO US AS WELL IS BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE HAVE A VERY COMPREHENSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF 
          [01:05:01]
CQA. 
          UM, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, GETTING DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES IS VERY HELPFUL IN SEEING IT FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU ONLY KNOW WHAT YOU KNOW, AND YOU ONLY SEE IT HOW YOU SEE IT. 
          SO WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE INTRODUCES LIKE, WELL, WHAT ABOUT THIS? THEN YOU'RE ABLE TO SAY, OKAY, YEAH, MAYBE WE NEED TO DO AN EXPANDED DISCUSSION OF UTILITIES AND HERE'S WHY. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S, AND, AND WITH COMMISSIONERS TOO, IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT A PROJECT WITH, IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EARLY ON, 'CAUSE I THINK THAT YOU'RE ALL APPRISED OF PROJECTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE, RIGHT? UM, SO THEN IT'S NOT LIKE, SURPRISE, HERE'S THIS PROJECT AND THESE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          THAT'S NEVER WHAT, THAT'S NEVER OUR INTENT TO DO THAT TO YOU. 
          SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SUPPORTING YOU IN THAT ROLE BECAUSE AGAIN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE LEAD AGENCY, THE CITY OF PETALUMA AS A WHOLE, OUR GOALS ARE THE SAME, RIGHT? IT'S JUST THAT WE ALL PLAY DIFFERENT ROLES. 
          UM, AND SO IF YOU HAVE THOSE CONCERNS OR THE CONSI, IF YOUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE THOSE CONCERNS, BRING THEM TO US EARLY SO THAT THEN WE CAN, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEM AND WE CAN, WE CAN ADDRESS 'EM. 
          WELL, AND THIS GETS TO A PROCESS QUESTION. 
          IF THIS IS VERY BASIC, MY APOLOGIES. 
          BUT WHEN A DOCUMENT IS BROUGHT FORWARD, MND OR CQA, MAYBE WE HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND THERE'S A DEBATE ABOUT A MITIGATION MEASURE. 
          CAN THAT DOCUMENT BE CHANGED ONCE IT'S BEEN INTRODUCED? YES. 
          IF WE MEET BEFORE 10 DAYS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING, OR, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S A TIME THING, LIKE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME BEFOREHAND, WE CAN MAKE UPDATES. 
          BUT IF YOU FIND SOME ISSUE AND WE SAY, LOOK, THIS IS REALLY THE ONLY WEAKNESS I SEE. 
          IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS IT? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS EVEN ABLE TO BE CHANGED AT THAT STAGE? NOT DURING THE PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S OUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AGENCIES. 
          THAT'S 30 DAYS AGENCIES, THAT'S, IT'S 30 DAYS FOR MENDS AND 45 FOR EIR. 
          UM, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO, SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CHANGE? SO FIRST OF ALL, YOU DON'T WANNA CHANGE A DOCUMENT THAT'S STILL OUT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW BECAUSE IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT KNOW THAT THOSE UPDATES ARE HAPPENING. 
          UM, BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO IS YOU CAN FLAG THOSE ISSUES TO US, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 10 DAYS OF, IF THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS STILL 10 DAYS AND WE'RE DOING A HEARING AND YOU'RE LIKE, HEY, THERE'S THIS LITTLE PIECE THAT I'M NOT SUPER COMFORTABLE WITH, THEN WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF THAT INFORMATION THAT COULD BE ADDED CAN JUST BE DONE THROUGH THE FINAL MND OR THE FINAL EIR OR IF IT WOULD REQUIRE RECIRCULATION. 
          SO THERE'S A COUPLE TRIGGERS THAT REQUIRE RECIRCULATION, BUT IF IT'S JUST THIS MINOR, LIKE, HEY, YOU FORGOT TO ADD THIS SPECIFIC CONTEXT, UM, IF IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE, THE LEVEL OF THE IMPACT, OR IF IT'S NOT LIKE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CHANGING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IF IT'S NOT A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE, UM, THEN WE CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES IN THE FINAL MND. 
          SO THEN WHEN YOU, IF YOU WERE TO EITHER ADOPT THE MND OR RECOMMEND ADOPTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, YOU COULD, UM, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO A PROJECT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THE FINAL MND INCLUDES THIS, THIS AND THAT, UM, WHICH CAN INCLUDE REVISIONS TO MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          I KNOW ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT WAS WITH, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE CASA GRANDE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT OR THE BAYWOOD PROJECT, AND THERE WAS A MINOR CHANGE MADE TO THE NOISE MITIGATION MEASURE TO EXPAND THE NOTIFICATION RADIUS FROM 50 TO A HUNDRED FEET. 
          SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS, CAN HOPEFULLY EASILY IDENTIFY CONSTITUENT CONCERNS. 
          AND THEN IS IS NOT SUBSTANTIVE IN TERMS OF CE QA 'CAUSE IT'S LITERALLY JUST EXPANDING A BOUNDARY. 
          NO, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER. 
          MY LAST QUESTION, JUST AS REGARDS TO, UM, PUBLIC OUTCRY, IT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO ME A COUPLE TIMES THAT IF THERE IS ENOUGH PUBLIC OUTCRY ABOUT A PROJECT THAT BECOMES AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REFERENCE IN AN MND OR CE QA. 
          UM, BUT AGAIN, I HAVEN'T REALLY FOUND DEFINITIVE GUIDANCE ON THAT. 
          SO ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT? YEAH, IT'S CHALLENGING BECAUSE THE CONCERNS OF PEOPLE ARE REAL. 
          UM, AND I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TO, TO THE COMMISSION AND TO THE PUBLIC THAT MIGHT BE LISTENING CONCERNS ARE REAL, I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          BUT WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT WE'RE OPERATING WITHIN A REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND CONTENTION, OPPOSITION RESISTANCE TO CHANGE. 
          THOSE ARE NOT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. 
          UM, POTENTIALLY THE, UM, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SQUA AND THE PLANNING REVIEW PROCESS. 
          THAT'S WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF ASK YOURSELVES AS COMMISSIONERS, CAN THIS ISSUE, IS THIS ISSUE ACTUALLY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT? AND CAN I ADDRESS IT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF CQA? OR IS THIS A LAND USE ISSUE THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UH, FOR THE PROJECT? AND THEN THERE'S OTHER CONCERNS WHERE PEOPLE JUST DON'T WANT DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND THAT'S FINE. 
          IT'S ACCEPTABLE THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT THINGS TO CHANGE. 
          THEY DON'T WANT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING TO BE DEVELOPED NEAR THEM. 
          I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT, BUT IT'S, I MEAN, IT'S A BALANCE, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S A BALANCE BETWEEN THE NEED FOR HOUSING, IT'S A BALANCE FOR THE NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, IT'S A BALANCE FOR THE NEED FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, PROTECTING YOUR EXISTING CONSTITUENTS, ALL OF THAT. 
          SO IT'S, IT IT'S CHALLENGING TO NAVIGATE FOR SURE, IS WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          YEAH. 
          AND SO THERE'S NO VOLUME OF OPPOSITION THAT SUDDENLY PRESENTS A NEW ISSUE THAT KIND OF SUPERSEDES WHETHER EACH INDIVIDUAL ARGUMENT IS SUBSTANTIVE. 
          [01:10:01]
IT'S, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY EXIST, OR YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THAT? NO, NO. 
          IT'S THE SUBSTANCE OF THE COMMENTS THAT ARE PROVIDED. 
          UM, AND THAT I KNOW THAT IT'S, IT CAN GET CHALLENGING WHEN THERE'S A LOT OF THEM BECAUSE THAT THEN BECOMES A LITTLE BIT UNCOMFORTABLE THAT PEOPLE REALLY DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. 
          UM, BUT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF SE A, YOU'VE GOTTA KEEP, IT'S LIKE BOWLING, YOU GOTTA KEEP THOSE BUMPERS UP, RIGHT? YOU DON'T WANNA GO INTO THE GUTTER WITH IT. 
          UM, AND THEN JUST SEE WHERE, SEE IF YOU CAN ADDRESS IT IN ANOTHER WAY, SEE IF IT CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH, EVEN THROUGH A POLICY CHANGE, RIGHT? SO IF WE'RE HEARING THAT THERE'S A LOT OF OUTCRY ABOUT SPECIFIC TYPES OF PROJECTS, UM, POTENTIALLY THAT'S POLICY ADOPTION. 
          AGAIN, UNDERSTANDING THAT HOUSING IS IMPORTANT, WE NEED HOUSING, ALL OF THAT STUFF. 
          AND, AND STILL WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE ADOPTED CITYWIDE GOALS AND POLICIES AND IN LINE WITH WHAT IT IS THAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO DO. 
          UM, SO IT'S KIND OF, TRIAGING IS MAYBE A GOOD WORD TO USE FOR THE COMMENTS THAT YOU RECEIVE. 
          AND SO WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF SQL, WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUBSTANTIVE AND NON-SUBSTANTIVE, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE COMMENTS AND PUT THE NONS SUBSTANTIVE ONES ASIDE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF CQA, BUT OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE COMMENTS ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOUR CONSTITUENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT. 
          BUT JUST KIND OF LIKE, PUT IT ON THIS SIDE AND PUT IT ON THAT SIDE AND PUT IT IN FRONT AND PUT IT IN BACK, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S KIND OF KIND OF WHAT YOU GOTTA DO. 
          EACH, EACH COMMENT IS ON ITS OWN MERIT. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM. 
          THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD TO THAT TOO. 
          I THINK YOU SEE A LOT OF, DURING OUR PREVIOUS EKNM AND D, JUST A LOT OF COMMENTS WE NEED IN EIR WITHOUT GIVING IT A FAIR ARGUMENT FOR WHY WE NEED AN EIR. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT IN OF OF ITSELF IS A FAIR ARGUMENT, AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN KIND OF IGNORE. 
          UM, JESSICA, IS THIS A FOLLOW UP TO THIS? OKAY, THEN? YES. 
          UM, WOULD IT BE FAIR IN THE CONTEXT OF THESE QUESTIONS AROUND THE SORT OF OPPOSITION AND WHAT HAVE YOU, IT, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO SORT OF LOOK AT APPENDIX G AND THAT IF THERE'S LIKE A REASONABLE DATA BACKED PUSHBACK AGAINST SOMETHING IN APPENDIX G, IS THAT SORT OF WHAT WOULD MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT A LITTLE BIT MORE SUBSTANTIVE? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S FAIR. 
          SO IF YOU HAD SOMEONE THAT WAS ARGUING THAT THERE WOULD BE AN IMPACT TO AIR QUALITY, UM, YOU CAN PROBABLY SKIP APPENDIC APPENDIX G BECAUSE IT'S GONNA BE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR YOU. 
          SURE. 
          UM, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, UNDER AIR QUALITY, THERE'S HOWEVER MANY ISSUE AREAS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. 
          THERE'S ONE ABOUT CRITERIA POLLUTANTS. 
          THERE'S ONE ABOUT CONFLICT WITH ADOPTED PLANS. 
          SO THEN YOU TRY TO UNDERSTAND, AND THAT'S WHY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, UM, THE PUBLIC PROVIDING COMMENTS, THEY NEED TO IDENTIFY THE SPECIFIC IMPACT THAT THEY THINK IS GOING TO OCCUR. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , WHY IT'S GONNA OCCUR AND WHY IT'S GONNA BE SIGNIFICANT. 
          AND WE, AND I THINK MAYBE, YOU KNOW, ON THE SIDE OF PLANNING STAFF, THAT CAN BE SOMETHING THAT WE TRY TO, UM, MAYBE MESSAGE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GIVE MORE TARGETED FEEDBACK. 
          BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE PROVIDE VERY GOOD INFORMATION AND HAVE VERY THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS THAT THEY PROVIDE. 
          UM, IT'S JUST KIND OF GETTING IT TO THE LEVEL THAT IS SUBSTANTIVE. 
          AND AGAIN, LIKE THAT IS HELPFUL TO US, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S DONE EARLY ON. 
          'CAUSE THEN WE CAN SAY, YEAH, THANKS FOR POINTING THAT OUT. 
          WE'LL CONSIDER THAT AND WE'LL INCLUDE IT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, SO YEAH, UNDERSTANDING THE COMMENTS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE APPENDIX G CHECKLIST. 
          SO IF THERE'S A COMMENT ABOUT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT EXAMPLE I COULD PROVIDE, BUT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BY CQA, EVEN IF IT MIGHT BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, IT'S NOT WITHIN THAT STATUTORY FRAMEWORK. 
          AND SO WE CAN'T MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT UNDER CQA. 
          RIGHT. 
          WELL, THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , I THINK CHAIR, I'D ALSO LIKE TO, I WANNA NOTE THAT THIS, THIS QUESTION ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT IS FAIR ARGUMENT AS WELL AS I THINK THE QUESTIONS ABOUT PROJECT SPECIFIC VERSUS COLLECTIVE IMPACTS. 
          I, I'VE GOT NOTES TO FOLLOW UP ON THOSE. 
          I'M NOT SURE HOW WE'LL FOLLOW UP EXACTLY WHETHER IT WILL BE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND AS, AS THE GENERAL PLAN EIR STARTS TO, TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          OR IF WE MIGHT FIND A TIME TO DO IT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, PLANNING MANAGER COMMENTS AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          BUT I'D LIKE TO GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH THAT WE CAN COME BACK WITH A MORE SORT OF COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE. 
          I, I WOULD DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THAT IN PART BECAUSE HAVING, HAVING THIS EXPLAINED FULLY FOR BOTH US, BUT ALSO FOR THE PUBLIC WHO WILL HOPEFULLY WATCH THIS LATER. 
          UH, I, I CAN ALREADY HEAR RIGHT NOW FOLKS GOING, WELL, I PROVIDED MY PHOTOS. 
          WELL, I PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, I TOOK A SAMPLES MYSELF. 
          SO BEING ABLE TO STATE QUITE CLEARLY WHAT THAT SUBSTANTIVE THRESHOLD IS, WHICH BY THE WAY, YOU HAVE BEEN QUITE CLEAR IN TERMS OF REACHING THAT THRESHOLD. 
          BUT BEING ABLE TO PUT IT IN KIND OF THAT CHART FORM FOR FOLKS SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND, WE'RE NOT SAYING YOUR COMMENT DOESN'T MATTER. 
          WE'RE SAYING THAT UNDER THIS LEGAL FRAMEWORK WE'RE THAT WE'RE HAVING TO FOLLOW, UH, WE CAN'T APPLY 
          [01:15:01]
IT. 
          AND ALSO, AND, AND THEN I WILL MOVE ON TO RICK. 
          I, I PROMISE, UM, I WOULD ALSO ASK IN WHATEVER YOU PUT TOGETHER, CLARIFYING THE LEGAL A THE LEGAL RISK, SHOULD WE IGNORE? 'CAUSE THAT'S ONE THING FOLLOWING, UH, FOLLOWING THE OVERLAY, WHICH IS THE MOST RECENT EXAMPLE. 
          THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH WITH FOLKS PRETTY REPEATEDLY ABOUT WHY AS COMMISSIONERS, WE CAN'T JUST GO, WELL, TO ME IT'S SIGNIFICANT, THE END AND WHAT THOSE RISKS ARE FOR THE CITY. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          SURE. 
          THANK YOU RICK. 
          GREAT. 
          THANKS CHAIR. 
          AND THANKS A LOT CRYSTAL, REALLY COMPREHENSIVE PRESENTATION. 
          AND, AND ANGIE, THANKS FOR PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA. 
          I THINK IT'S GREAT TO GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE AND GIVE EVERYBODY THE INFORMATION AND, AND GET A COMMON UNDERSTANDING. 
          UM, JUST A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS. 
          UM, MITIGATION, ARE THOSE ALWAYS, UM, EMPLOYED ON SITE OR ARE THERE ANY BANKING OPTIONS OR IN LIEU TYPES OF, OF OPTIONS FOR MITIGATIONS? YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO MITIGATION MEASURES AVOID OR OFFSET. 
          UM, AND SO A VERY COMMON MITIGATION IS IF WETLANDS ARE BEING REMOVED ON A SITE, THEN THEY'RE REPLACED AT A CERTAIN RATIO SPECIFIED BY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AT A MITIGATION BANK, UM, OR SOMETHING SIMILAR SOMETIMES TOO. 
          THEY CAN BE, YOU KNOW, REESTABLISHED ON SITE IF THERE'S LIKE AN AREA THAT'S, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED FOR JUST PRESERVATION, AND THEN THEY CAN DO THAT. 
          THERE AGAIN, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN CONSULTATION WITH CDFW. 
          BUT YEAH, THAT'S EITHER AVOIDING OR OFFSETTING. 
          SO YOU CAN MITIGATE IN BOTH WAYS. 
          AND THAT, CAN THAT BE THROUGH THE, UM, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROCESS? OR IS THAT DONE DURING AN EIR OR, OR WHERE CAN YOU CONSIDER THAT? YEAH, IT CAN BE DONE THROUGH THE M AND D PROCESS. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO AS LONG AS THE, THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN M AND D AND EIR IS THAT AN M AND D CAN MITIGATE ALL IMPACTS TO LEVELS BELOW SIGNIFICANCE, WHEREAS SOMETIMES, NOT ALWAYS WITH EIR, BUT MOST OF THE TIME WITH AN EIR, UM, CERTAIN IMPACTS CAN'T BE MITIGATED TO LEVELS BELOW SIGNIFICANCE DESPITE IM IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          SO YOU CAN DO THAT O OFFSET OR, OR OFFSITE MITIGATION UNDER BOTH AN M AND D OR AN EIR. 
          GOT IT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, OH, SORRY, RICK, I JUST, CRYSTAL, I ALWAYS LEARN THAT IT'S, FIRST THERE'S KIND OF TEARS IS, HEY, AVOID THE IMPACT AT ALL. 
          YEAH. 
          IF YOU DO HAVE THE IMPACT, THEN REPLANT THOSE TREES, REPLANT THE WETLANDS ON SITE, AND THEN IF YOU CAN'T DO ONE OR TWO, THEN YOU CAN DO THE OFFSITE OR THE BANKING SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          IS THAT, YEAH, NO, I THINK THAT'S COMPLETELY ACCURATE. 
          I THINK THERE'S A HIERARCHY AND, AND KIND OF WHAT'S PREFERRED, UM, FOR THE APPROACH. 
          BUT YEAH, SOMETIMES IT'S, YOU KNOW, AVOIDING IS NOT, IS NOT FEASIBLE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT YES, I, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. 
          GOT IT. 
          GOT IT. 
          WELL, YOU, UH, BROUGHT UP A TERM THAT'S BEEN USED. 
          GOOD, GOOD SEGUE, UM, SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , IS THAT ALWAYS SUBJECTIVE? I'VE HEARD, I HEARD THE TERM SUBJECTIVE YOU USED EARLIER AND GOING FROM OBJECTIVE TO SUBJECTIVE, BUT WHEN WE'RE GIVEN, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, A DECISION OR CONCLUSION BY STAFF OR WHATEVER, IS IT, IS IT SUBJECTIVE OR IS IT, WELL BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC IMPACT WAS GREATER THAN 15% OF SOME? OR IS THERE SOME OBJECTIVE THRESHOLD? YEAH, SO THE QUANTITATIVE VERSUS QUALITATIVE, I THINK IS WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          SO IN SOME, I THINK A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THIS IS AESTHETICS, RIGHT? LIKE MM-HMM. 
          , THE ESTABLISHING A QUANTITATIVE THRESHOLD FOR AESTHETICS WOULD BE REALLY CHALLENGING. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, AND SO THE THRESHOLD IS WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. 
          SO THAT IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. 
          TYPICALLY THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH A CITY'S DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS BECAUSE WIS WIS BAR, WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, HARMONY WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS AND GOOD QUALITY MATERIALS AND THAT KIND OF THING. 
          AND I THINK, I MEAN, THOSE ARE STILL KIND OF SUBJECTIVE, BUT THAT'S MORE, THERE'S REGULATIONS AND FINDINGS SPECIFICALLY THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE. 
          WHEREAS WITH TRAFFIC, THE CITY'S ADOPTED VMT THRESHOLDS, UM, ESTABLISHED THAT IT HAS TO BE A CERTAIN PERCENT BELOW, UM, AN AVERAGE. 
          SO THAT'S A VERY SPECIFIC QUANTITATIVE THRESHOLD. 
          SIMILARLY, LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH GHG IMPACTS, THOSE USED TO BE QUANTITATIVE. 
          UM, IT WAS I THINK 4.6 METRIC TONS OF CO2 EQUIVALENT PER CAPITA WAS THE THRESHOLD. 
          SO THEN YOU WOULD RUN A MODEL, AN EMISSIONS MODEL, AND THEN YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD, THERE WAS A BUNCH OF INPUTS. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY KIND OF A FUN MODEL TO RUN IF YOU'RE EVER INTERESTED IN CHECKING IT OUT. 
          CALI MODEL IS WHAT IT'S CALLED, . 
          UM, BUT ANYWAY, YOU WOULD PLUG IN THE PROJECT SPECIFICS AND THEN THE MODEL WOULD SPIT OUT, UM, THIS IS WHAT THE ANTICIPATED EMISSIONS ARE GONNA BE, WHICH IS BASED ON A BUNCH OF, UM, DATA AND EMPIRICAL DATA AND ALL OF THAT. 
          AND THEN IF IT'S BELOW, THEN COOL, YOU'RE BELOW THE QUANTITATIVE THRESHOLD, YOU'RE GOOD. 
          BUT NOW BACK MID HAS SWITCHED TO A, A QUALITATIVE THRESHOLD, WHICH IS, YOU DON'T INCLUDE NATURAL GAS, YOU DON'T UNNECESSARILY, UM, 
          [01:20:01]
USE ENERGY RESOURCES. 
          YOU INCLUDE, UM, EV CHARGING ON SITE, YOU COMPLY WITH OTHER BUILDING CODE REGULATIONS, THAT TYPE OF THING. 
          AND SO IT DEPENDS ON WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          ANOTHER, UM, QUALITATIVE THRESHOLD IS IN THE LAND USE, UH, SECTION, IT TALKS ABOUT PHYSICAL DIVISION OF A COMMUNITY. 
          SO THEN IT'S LIKE YOU HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT A PHYSICAL DIVISION OF A COMMUNITY IS AND THEN DETERMINE IF THERE'S AN IMPACT. 
          SO IT KIND OF GOES BACK AND FORTH. 
          AND SO UNDERSTANDING WHICH ARE QUANTITATIVE, WHICH ARE QUALITATIVE, AND THEN THE MORE SUBJECTIVE ONES CAN BE REALLY CHALLENGING TO DETERMINE, UM, IF THERE'S IMPACTS. 
          IT'S JUST LAYING OUT YOUR METHODOLOGY AND YOUR APPROACH IS WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT SO THAT THE LOGIC CAN BE FOLLOWED BY SOMEBODY. 
          AND THEN IF THEY HAVE AN ARGUMENT AS TO WHY, LIKE IF THEY PRESENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OR SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS THAT ARE LIKE, WELL, HERE'S WHY I CAN ARGUE, LIKE THEY CAN ARGUE A SAME, UH, A POINT AS WELL. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND THEN IF THAT COMES UP, THEN WE CAN SAY, OKAY, YEAH, THEN MAYBE THERE IS AN IMPACT. 
          LET'S LOOK AT IT. 
          SO, MM-HMM. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          SO EVEN IF IT'S NOT QUALITATIVE, YOU'LL GIVE US, YOU KNOW, A QUANTITATIVE STANDARD ON WHICH YOUR FINDINGS WERE BASED. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND SO IT'S NOT JUST ARBITRARIES. 
          CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S INFORMED BY THE APPENDIX G CHECKLIST, WHICH AGAIN, WE ALWAYS INCLUDE IN THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS DIRECTLY. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, UM, LAST THING. 
          SO, UM, WHAT IS THE FORUM OR IS THERE A FORUM FOR, UM, APPEALS OF CONCLUSIONS? EITHER, EITHER IN FAVOR OF A PROJECT OR A POST IMPOSING A PROJECT? SO IF MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC OR IF THE APPLICANT, UM, YOU KNOW, WANTS TO CONTEST THE FINDING OF THE LEAD AGENCY MM-HMM. 
          , WHERE DOES ONE GO? IS IT STRAIGHT TO THE COURTS OR IS THERE IS GONNA GO TO A HIGHER LEVEL A HJ OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I THINK TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE APPEALED INTERNALLY. 
          SO IF IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION, IT WOULD BE APPEALED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          IF IT'S A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, IT'D BE APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          AND THEN IF IT, IF THE, IF FURTHER LITIGATION IS HAPPENING AFTER THAT, THEN I THINK IT WOULD GO TO THE COURTS. 
          BUT MAYBE DYLAN CAN CLARIFY. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          IT WOULD GO TO THE COURTS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THERE'S NO OTHER, THERE'S NO OTHER JURISDICTION. 
          IT GOES RIGHT INTO THE JUDICIAL PROCESS, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          CITY COUNCIL IS PROBABLY KNOCKING AWAY WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL OR SIGNIFICANT OR BELOW THE THRESHOLD FOR, UM, I GUESS A PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL THEN WOULD AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. 
          YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T APPEAL A RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION, SO THEN PROBABLY JUST GOES FROM CITY COUNCIL DECISION STRAIGHT TO COURT AND THERE WOULDN'T BE AN INTERNAL APPEAL, JUST THINKING ABOUT IT NOW. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S IT FOR ME, CHAIR. 
          THANKS THAT, THANK YOU. 
          UH, UNDERSTANDING FULL WELL THAT WE HAVE A SECOND LARGE PART TO TONIGHT'S MEETING. 
          I WILL KEEP MY QUESTIONS BRIEF. 
          UH, I DO WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR MAKING THIS THOROUGH AND CLEAR, UH, IN PART BECAUSE I THINK I'VE GOTTEN SOME OF THESE ANSWERS THE HARDEST WAY POSSIBLE, WHICH HAS BEEN IN VARIOUS, UH, MND AND EIR MEETINGS AND LEARNING THE HARD WAY, UH, TO, TO SOME OF DARREN'S POINTS WHAT EXACTLY WE COULD QUESTION, WHAT WE COULDN'T QUESTION, WHEN WE COULD QUESTION IT, AND WHY. 
          UM, AND ONE NOTE I DID WANT TO FLAG, UH, FOR YOU DARREN, UH, ONE EXAMPLE OF KIND OF HOW THEY RESPOND WHEN YOU KIND OF REACH OUT EARLY ENOUGH. 
          THIS WAS, I DON'T MEAN FOR THIS TO BE ANOTHER SCOTT'S RANCH EXAMPLE, BUT SCOTT'S RANCH WENT ON FOR SO LONG THAT IT JUST HAS A HISTORY. 
          I THINK ONE OF MY FIRST M OR DRAFT MDS WAS SCOTT'S RANCH. 
          AND I REMEMBER HAVING CONCERNS ABOUT ONE OF THE WILDFIRE COMPONENTS THAT THEY'D PUT IN FOR MITIGATION. 
          UH, STAFF WEREN'T QUITE CERTAIN, WEREN'T QUITE CERTAIN ABOUT THE POINT I HAD BROUGHT UP. 
          SO THEY FLAGGED IT FOR ALL OF US IN THE MEETING THAT THAT WAS AN ITEM OF CONCERN. 
          IT DIDN'T CHANGE THE DOCUMENT 'CAUSE IT WAS OUT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW, BUT IT WAS FLAGGED FOR ALL OF US. 
          SO WE KNEW IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GONNA COME BACK. 
          IT TURNED OUT NOT TO BE AN ISSUE AFTER ALL, BUT IT'S JUST ONE THING TO POINT OF THE EARLIER WE CAN GET TO OUR QUESTIONS AND EVEN IF IT CAN'T BE AMENDED AHEAD OF THE PUBLIC CONSIDERATION, YOU'LL STILL SEE IT IN THE DOCUMENTS WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          UM, I HAD SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT SUBSTANTIVE THRESHOLD IN PUBLIC COMMENTS, BUT WE'RE GONNA SAVE THAT FOR WHEN STAFF GET BACK. 
          UH, I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT BY PROJECT JUSTIFICATION VERSUS OVERALL JUSTIFICATION, UM, THAT REALLY CAME OUT AS A STICKING ISSUE FOR A LOT OF FOLKS DURING THE OVERLAY DISCUSSION AND KIND OF EXPLAINING THAT POINT PROVED TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE. 
          'CAUSE FOR SOME FOLKS IT'S, WELL, IF IT'S AN OVERALL EIR FOR THE SITE, WHY DOESN'T IT, 
          [01:25:01]
HOW DO YOU THEN GO PROJECT BY PROJECT AFTERWARDS THAT, THAT FEELS LIKE KIND OF A WAY AROUND, AROUND THE PROCESS IN A LESS THAN IDEAL WAY. 
          UM, THAT MADE, IT ENDED UP MAKING PERFECT SENSE TO ME AT THE TIME, GIVEN THE POLICY DISCUSSION. 
          BUT I WANTED TO ASK YOU IF YOU COULD JUST EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT HOW THAT'S KIND OF EVOLVED IN CQA AND HOW COMMON THAT ENDS UP BEING TO, TO CONFIRM, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW COMMON IT IS TO REVIEW BOTH A LAND USE CHANGE AND A SPECIFIC PROJECT IN ONE DOCUMENT. 
          WELL, SO THERE'S THAT, BUT THAT, THAT'S WASN'T MY QUESTION, BUT THAT OH, OKAY. 
          SORRY. 
          THAT COULD BE FUN, BUT NO, THAT, THAT WASN'T MY QUESTION . 
          UM, I, I UNDERSTOOD WHY THAT CAME ABOUT. 
          UH, IT'S MORE OF HOW COMMON IT IS TO HAVE THE EI EIR FOR THE KIND OF ALLOWANCE THAT YOU'RE GIVING TO THE SITE. 
          AND THEN PROJECT PER BY PROJECT, UH, PROJECT BY PROJECT, ESSENTIALLY DISCRETION OVER WHETHER OR NOT IT COMES FORWARD FOR ANOTHER EIR BASED ON THAT ALLOWANCE BECAUSE OF THE CONDITIONAL USE YOU'RE PROVIDING. 
          OKAY. 
          I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          WHAT'S CHALLENGING ABOUT THAT PROJECT IS THAT CQA CHARGES US WITH REVIEWING THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO YOU CAN'T DISENTANGLE THE HOTEL AND THE ZONE AND THE ZONING IN GENERAL PLAN CHANGES. 
          IT'S NOT, I DON'T THINK SUPER COMMON, UM, BECAUSE I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHY, BECAUSE I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK TO IT. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S WHY WE TOOK THE APPROACH THAT WE DID WITH THAT. 
          UM, AND REGARDLESS OF IF IT'S THE M AND D OR THE EIR, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T REALLY SEPARATE BOTH PROJECTS, UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE ONE PROJECT AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE, THE LAND USE CHANGES WERE INITIATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH I THINK IS FAIRLY UNCOMMON. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE AS MUCH EXPERIENCE AS ANDREW. 
          MAYBE HE'S SEEN THAT BEFORE. 
          I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT BEFORE. 
          AND I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING EVEN FOR US TO WRAP OUR HEADS AROUND HOW DO WE ANALYZE THIS, WHERE WE'RE, YEAH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SITE SPECIFIC, BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT REASONABLY FORESEEABLE PROJECTS THAT CAN COME IN. 
          BUT I THINK WHERE THAT CONVERSATION IN MY MIND IS REALLY CLEAR IS THAT THE, THE OVERLAY IS ALLOWING PROJECTS TO EXCEED CERTAIN HEIGHT AND LOT COVERAGE AND FAR LIMITATIONS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. 
          AND IT'S REALLY HARD AND IT'S ACTUALLY SPECULATIVE, WHICH YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO INSA TO SAY WHERE THE CHASE BANK IS. 
          THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A 70 FOOT BUILDING THAT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT LOCK COVERAGE. 
          'CAUSE YOU CAN'T SAY THAT WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN. 
          WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT OWNER WOULD EVER SELL THAT SITE. 
          WE DON'T KNOW. 
          MM-HMM. 
          THAT COULD BE A BANK FOR THE NEXT A HUNDRED YEARS. 
          SO IT'S, THAT'S WHERE CQA KIND OF LIKE STOPS AND STARTS IS THAT WITH THE HOTEL, WE HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC PROPOSAL MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO WE KNOW WHAT THE, WHAT THE IMPACTS COULD BE AND WE CAN ANALYZE THOSE. 
          WHEREAS WITH AN OVERLAY, IT'S A LOT MORE CHALLENGING TO SAY ON THIS SITE, THESE WOULD BE THE IMPACTS AND ON THIS SITE THESE WOULD BE THE IMPACTS. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. 
          THAT DOES. 
          AND I, I PARTIALLY WANTED IT IN THE HOPES THAT THE SEGMENT ENDS UP GETTING CLIP CLIPPED FOR FOLKS WHO ARE REVIEWING. 
          'CAUSE THAT IDEA, GOING BACK TO SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT WHERE WE KIND OF HAVE TO HAVE THE GUARDRAILS UP. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , I THINK THAT IDEA WAS HARD FOR PEOPLE TO WRAP THEIR HEADS AROUND, WHICH IS ON ONE HAND, C EQUA IS TELLING US THIS IS ALL ONE PROJECT. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS ONE PROJECT. 
          ON THE OTHER HAND, C EQUA IS ALSO TELLING US DO NOT SPECULATE ABOUT FUTURE PROJECTS. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO IT'S ONE CONSIDERATION HERE, ANOTHER CONSIDERATION THERE. 
          AND WE'RE, REGARDLESS OF HOW ANYONE MIGHT FEEL ABOUT THE CONSIDERATION, WE STILL HAVE TO APPLY IT. 
          CORRECT. 
          AND I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT TOO IS THAT CQA, THE CA DEFINITION OF A PROJECT AND THE CITY'S DEFINITION OF A PROJECT ARE NOT THE SAME. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, AND SO CQA SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT A PROJECT IS NOT INDICATIVE OF THE DIFFERENT ENTITLEMENT, UM, THE DIFFERENT ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED. 
          SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE OVERLAY COULD BE APPROVED AND THE HOTEL COULD BE DENIED. 
          THAT COULD HAPPEN. 
          BUT THE SQUA DOCUMENT STILL HAS TO ANALYZE BOTH. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, SO THAT, THAT MIGHT ALSO HELP CLEAR IT UP TOO, IS THAT YES, IT'S BEING REVIEWED IN THE CONTEXT OF ONE DOCUMENT BECAUSE IT'S TECHNICALLY ONE PROJECT. 
          IT'S THE WHOLE OF THE ACTION. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARY. 
          LIKE, AND AGAIN, GOING BACK TO CQA IS NOT AN APPROVAL PROCESS OF THE PROJECT, RIGHT. 
          LIKE IT'S JUST MEETING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO THE CITY COULD CERTIFY AN EIR FOR THE PROJECT AND THEN DENY THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT COULD COMPLETELY HAPPEN AS WELL. 
          SO, UM, I MEAN THAT I DON'T, SQUA IS NOT ACTUALLY REALLY REQUIRED FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING DENIED 'CAUSE IT'S NOT A DISCRETIONARY ACTION OR ANYWAY THAT'S, THERE'S A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS OF SEQA. 
          I DON'T WANNA MUDDY IT UP TOO MUCH. 
          BUT ANYWAY, I'M JUST SAYING THAT CERTIFYING AN EIR DOES NOT EQUATE TO PROJECT APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE, THE FRESH EXPLANATION I WAS LOOKING FOR. 
          YEAH. 
          JUST TO LAY THAT OUT. 
          UM, MOVING 
          [01:30:01]
ON TO A SEPARATE THING. 
          WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT VMT LEVELS FOR THE LAST, WELL IT FEELS LIKE THE LAST FOREVER, BUT PROBABLY THE LAST THREE, THREE-ISH YEARS AS IT'S BEEN EVOLVING. 
          I KNOW A LOT OF CITIES SET THEIR OWN THRESHOLD, UH, CLARIFICATION. 
          I NEEDED, I KNOW WE PIVOTED AWAY FROM, FROM TRANSIT CAPACITY TO, TO VMT STANDARD. 
          UH, CE A IS HAVING A, IS ESSENTIALLY HAVING US FOLLOW WHAT OUR LOCAL STANDARDS ARE OR LOCAL STANDARDS HAVING TO FOLLOW POLICY SET BY CE A. 
          THAT WAS ONE AREA WHERE I WAS NEVER QUITE CLEAR. 
          YEAH. 
          SO SQL REQUIRED THAT WE SHIFTED ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS FROM THE LEVEL OF SERVICE BECAUSE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS JUST VEHICLE DELAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO IT'S PRIORITIZING VEHICLES OVER ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION TO VMT BECAUSE THAT HAS MORE IMPLICATIONS FOR GHG AND THE LIKE. 
          UM, WITH THAT, WITH THE THRESHOLDS THAT WE'VE ADOPTED LOCALLY, UM, OPR SUBMIT OR, UH, ISSUED THEIR TECHNICAL ADVISORY ON EVALUATING THE IMPACTS OF VMT. 
          AND THAT WAS WHAT THE CITY FOLLOWED FOR A LONG TIME. 
          BUT THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE IN BECAUSE THAT VMT DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHES THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR PETALUMA SPECIFICALLY. 
          SO OURS ARE GREATER THAN WHAT IS IN THE OPR TECHNICAL ADVISORY. 
          WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO THAT. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          YOU COULD TECHNICALLY DO THAT WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AS WELL WITH A BUNCH OF CAVEATS. 
          UM, SO THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE CAN BE ADOPTED BY LOCAL AGENCIES AND IT'S JUST THE THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE SPECIFIC IMPACT WITHIN CQA. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          'CAUSE THAT WAS ALWAYS, THAT WAS ALWAYS KIND OF A ROUGH SPOT FOR ME JUST CONSIDERING HOW MANY OTHER STANDARDS HAVE THE EXCE, THE EXCEPTIONS THAT THEY DO AND THE CONSIDERATIONS THEY DO. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , WHY IT WAS LIKE CITY BY CITY. 
          EVERYBODY WAS KIND OF HAVING FUN WITH THE POLICY THEY WERE ADOPTING IN THAT DISCUSSION. 
          THAT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          IF IT'S MORE OR LESS SPECIFIC TO THIS CHANGE. 
          UM, AND THEN GOING TO, UH, ANOTHER AREA, I'VE ONLY BEEN A PART OF A FEW STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION. 
          HOW, FRANKLY, HOW COMMON DO THEY END UP BEING FOR HOUSING PROJECTS, UM, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE AT LEAST. 
          AND THEN WHAT ARE THE LIMITS LIMITS TO THEM? BECAUSE WE'VE, WE'VE HAD A FEW, BUT THEY'VE NEVER BEEN TO ANY KIND OF EXTREME. 
          AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW FAR A CITY CAN GO, NOT THAT I WOULD EVER ADVOCATE FOR THAT, BUT HOW FAR A CITY CAN END UP GOING BASED ON THE JUSTIFICATION THEY PROVIDED. 
          YEAH. 
          I MEAN, CITIES CAN ADOPT SIGNIFICANT OR STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          IF EVERY SINGLE IMPACT WAS SIGNIFICANT, UNAVOIDABLE, THAT'S EXTREMELY UNCOMMON. 
          IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAPPEN. 
          UM, BUT THERE ARE SOME AGENCIES THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEIR GENERAL PLAN EIRS IDENTIFY FIVE OR SIX SIGNIFICANT, UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS AND THEN THEY ADOPT THE, UM, THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION THAT WEIGHS THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT AGAINST THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES. 
          IT'S VERY MUCH ON A JURISDICTION BY JURISDICTION BASIS. 
          AND SO THE, THE, THE DECISION MAKING BODY IS THE ONE THAT'S, UM, THAT'S ALLOWED TO SAY, HERE ARE WHAT WE SEE AS THE BENEFITS. 
          AND THOSE CAN BE ECONOMIC, THOSE CAN BE SOCIAL, THOSE CAN BE TECHNOLOGICAL, THEY CAN BE A VARIETY OF THINGS. 
          SO IT'S FAIRLY BROAD. 
          AND SO I THINK UNLESS THERE'S THERE, AND THERE MAY BE CASE LAW OUT THERE, I'M SURE THAT THERE IS 'CAUSE THERE'S CASE LAW FOR EVERYTHING. 
          BUT I THINK DEFERENCE IS TYPICALLY GIVEN TO THE AGENCY THAT'S ADOPTING THAT STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          UM, BUT I DO THINK YOU NEED TO GO FAR ENOUGH TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE ARE BENEFITS. 
          YOU CAN'T JUST SAY IT'S A COOL PROJECT AND WE LIKE IT AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DON'T MATTER. 
          NOT THAT, I MEAN, AGAIN, I'M KIND OF RIGHT. 
          NO, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          VERY RUDIMENTARY. 
          BUT YEAH, I THINK YOU DO HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY PROVIDE ENOUGH JUSTIFICATION, BUT IT'S, I THINK UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE AGENCY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I'LL JUST ADD CRYSTAL'S. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          RIGHT. 
          BESIDES THE SOCIAL LEGAL, TECHNOLOGICAL, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL, THERE'S ALSO A PRETTY BIG CAVEAT OF JUST OR OTHER BENEFITS. 
          SO AS LONG AS THEY'RE SUBSTANTIAL IN THE EV UH, EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT BENEFIT, THEN OF COURT'S NOT GONNA OVERTURN AND SECOND GUESS THE LEGISLATURE THERE FOR MAKING IT. 
          SO THIS REALLY GOES BACK TO WHAT CRYSTAL WAS SAYING ABOUT THIS BEING A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS IN TERMS OF NOT ONLY ESTABLISHING THE THRESHOLDS, BUT THEN LATER AGREEING TO WHAT IS CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT, WHAT ISN'T CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT, HOW THESE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THE PROCESS COME TOGETHER IN AGREEMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I WOULD IMAGINE THAT IF WE WERE TO ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR A HOUSING PROJECT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKELY REFER TO IN TERMS OF BENEFITS WOULD BE CITYWIDE POLICIES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , OTHER ADOPTED REGULATORY, UM, DOCUMENTS. 
          SO KIND OF SHOWING HOW THE BENEFITS OF A PROJECT ARE IN LINE WITH THE CITY'S OVERALL GOALS. 
          UM, AND THEN ACKNOWLEDGING THAT YEAH, THERE, THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF IN THIS ONE, YOU KNOW, FACTOR, BUT THERE'S, 
          [01:35:01]
THERE'S THESE OTHER BENEFITS THAT OUTWEIGH THE SCALE. 
          UM, SO, AND THAT WOULD, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THE, THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WOULD BE PREPARED BY STAFF AND PRESENTED ABSOLUTELY. 
          TO, TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER, CITY COUNCIL. 
          UM, BUT I THINK THAT WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY USE THE ANALYSIS THAT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THAT'S IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND ALL THE SURROUNDING REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO DEVELOP A STATEMENT THAT IS, IS KIND IN LINE WITH, WITH THE CITY'S OVERALL GOALS. 
          I MEAN, IF I RECALL, SCOTT RANCH I THINK WAS IN EIR WITH OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          IS THAT RIGHT, HEATHER? YEAH. 
          AND IT WAS PART OF THAT, YOU KNOW, BESIDES THE HOUSING, YOU HAD THE WHATEVER, 80 ACRES TO YEAH. 
          THE EXTENSION TO HELEN PUTNAM. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          SO OBVIOUSLY A COURT, IF WE WERE CHALLENGED THERE IS NOT GONNA SAY, OH, 80 ACRES OR HOWEVER MANY IS NOT A OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION. 
          THAT'S DEFINITELY A SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION THAT MADE THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AND WE WOULD, UH, I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT IF WE WERE CHALLENGED, WE WOULD SUCCEED THERE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I MEAN, THIS REALLY DRIVES HOME THE POINT YOU WERE MAKING EARLIER ABOUT HOW A LOT OF CITY POLICY LIKE OR GENERAL PLAN LIKER ZONING ORDINANCE, HOW THESE ALL CIRCLE BACK INTO KIND OF THE LOCAL ASPECT OF SQL POLICY AND HOW THE KIND OF SHADES OF GRAY THAT END UP COMING THROUGH WHEN IT COMES TO ACTUALLY DEALING WITH A PROJECT AND THE NITTY GRITTY OF WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN AN IDEAL SENSE AND WHAT YOUR CITY POLICY MIGHT BE. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR GOING WITH ME ON THAT JOURNEY FOR OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 
          UM, ONE LAST QUESTION THAT I HAD, AND PART OF IT IS BECAUSE HONESTLY THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING I'VE HAD A HARD TIME KEEPING TRACK OF JUST BECAUSE, UH, HOUSING POLICY IN THE LAST THREE YEARS HAS EXPLODED. 
          AND I KNOW I DO A FAIR BIT OF TRACKING AT WORK, BUT ALL OF US WHO TRACK IT AT WORK HAVE VERY DIFFERENT LISTS FROM EACH OTHER. 
          UH, HOW EXTENSIVE HAVE THE KIND OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXEMPTIONS GOTTEN? UM, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          I THINK THAT THEY, I I DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE ARE A TON OF EXEMPTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK IT REALLY FOCUSES ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          LIKE I SAID, IT INCLUDES AGRICULTURAL HOUSING. 
          AND I THINK BECAUSE THAT'S, UH, THAT'S A VERY SPECIFIC TYPE OF HOUSING. 
          AND I THINK IT, WHAT IT'S DOING IS, UM, RECOGNIZING THAT AGRICULTURAL IS A BENEFIT AND THAT FINDING HOUSING FOR AGRICULTURAL WORKERS CAN BE CHALLENGING. 
          AND SO IT'S KIND OF TRYING TO SET THAT ASIDE TO, TO STREAMLINE IT SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND SUPPORT THE PEOPLE THAT DO THAT WORK. 
          AND THEN SIMILAR WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, RIGHT? IT'S, IT'S GOTTEN SO DIFFICULT FOR DEVELOPERS TO MAKE THOSE PROJECTS PENCIL OUT THAT IT DOESN'T INCENTIVIZE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          BUT THEN WHEN YOU HAVE AN AGENCY THAT IS, OR A NONPROFIT OR WHATEVER THE DEVELOPER MIGHT BE, THAT'S A, UM, DEVELOPING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU WANNA, THE STATE I THINK WANTS TO REMOVE AS MANY MM-HMM. 
           OBSTACLES TO THEM AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE ALSO EERS ARE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE AND THEY'RE VERY TIME SENSITIVE TO, OR THE, SORRY, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE, IF THEY'RE GETTING STATE FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAN BE VERY TIME SENSITIVE. 
          AND SO I THINK THE LEGISLATURE IS UNDERSTANDING THAT IF THEY DIDN'T CARVE OUT THOSE EXEMPTIONS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING WOULD NEVER GET CONSTRUCTED. 
          AND EVEN WITH THOSE EXEMPTIONS, IT STILL IS REALLY CHALLENGING. 
          AS, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT COME UP. 
          SO I WOULDN'T SAY THAT THERE'S, THERE'S THAT MANY OF THEM. 
          UM, I THINK THEY'RE VERY SPECIFIC AND VERY TARGETED. 
          AND AGAIN, THEY'RE VERY SPECIFIC ON THE CRITERIA THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN AFFORDABILITY LEVELS, CERTAIN SIZE OF THE PROJECT, THERE'S POPULATION DENSITY REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT. 
          UM, SO WE GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE WHEN WE'RE APPLYING THOSE EXEMPTIONS WHEN THEY DO COME UP, WHICH IS NOT VERY OFTEN, AND WE SAY, YES, IT MEETS THIS, YES, IT MEETS THIS, YES, IT MEETS THIS. 
          AND IF IT DOESN'T MEET SOME OF THOSE CRITERIA, THEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT A DIFFERENT PATH FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. 
          RIGHT. 
          I WOULD JUST ADD TOO, RATHER THAN SPECIFIC NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXEMPTIONS, THEY'RE MORE, THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TOWARDS THE STREAMLINE WHERE IT'S MINISTERIAL LIKE SB 35, WHERE CQA AGAIN ONLY APPLIES TO THE DISCRETIONARY. 
          AND BECAUSE THE STATE, THROUGH THEIR INFINITE WISDOM IS SAYING THAT CERTAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS THAT MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA ARE MINISTERIAL SQUA IS NOT INVOLVED. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE, UH, UH, EIRS AND THE LITIGATIONS AND THE COSTS AND GOING THROUGH ALL OF, UH, GOING IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THE STATE IS RIGHT NOW. 
          OH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          WE JUST PASSED LAST YEAR, UH, STREAMLINING BILL THAT NEGATES SE A FOR ANYTHING THAT'S A MOTEL CONVERSION FOR, UM, HOUSING FOR THE SHELTERLESS ESSENTIALLY. 
          AND YEAH, AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS A GREAT POINT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, UM, AS CRYSTAL POINTED OUT, THERE'S PROBABLY RELATIVELY FEW LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS THAT ACTUALLY REDUCED, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT CREATED 
          [01:40:01]
STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS LIKE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, STATUTORY EXEMPTION. 
          AND THEN AS DYLAN POINTED OUT, SB 35 HAD THE EFFECT OF ELIMINATING DISCRETIONARY REQUIREMENT, WHICH THEN MADE A, MAKES AN SB 35 PROJECT, NOT SUBJECT TO CE QA. 
          SO THEY'RE HITTING IT FROM A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ANGLES. 
          BUT THE OTHER THING TOO THAT'S INTERESTING IS IF, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT HOUSING PROJECTS, AND THERE'S ALWAYS A REQUIREMENT THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE, THE OBJECTIVE DENSITY STANDARD. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN THAT DENSITY STANDARD WAS ESTABLISHED, THAT SQL WAS DONE ON THAT DENSITY STANDARD. 
          SO IT REALLY DOES GET TO THE ESSENTIALS OF THE INTENSITY OF THE LAND USE. 
          NOW, IT MAY, MAY CIRCUMVENT AESTHETICS OR REDUCE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POTENTIAL FOR A LOCAL JURISDICTION TO, UM, SUBJECTIVE PROJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW. 
          BUT THEN AS, AS CRYSTAL POINTED OUT EARLIER, THE AESTHETICS AS A-A-S-Q-A ELEMENT IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. 
          AND SO I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE STREAMLINING THAT'S HAPPENED, WE DO HAVE TO, TO OBSERVE THAT CQA HAS BEEN CONDUCTED AT SOME LEVEL, IN PARTICULAR, IF WE LOOK AT, AT LAND USE RELATED FACTORS, INTENSITY OF USE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WELL, THAT FULLY CLARIFIES MY QUESTIONS. 
          DO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON FROM THIS ITEM? WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CRYSTAL. 
          THAT WAS A PHENOMENAL PRESENTATION. 
          YEAH, THANK YOU ALL. 
          AND IF YOU EVER HAVE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS, PLEASE SEND THEM ALONG TO ANDREW AND I'M HAPPY TO, I'M ALWAYS HAPPY TO TALK QUA. 
          SO THANKS AGAIN FOR HAVING ME. 
          THIS HAS BEEN REALLY GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, WITH THAT, I'M JUST GOING TO LOOK AT OUR, IS THERE, DO YOU HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ONE? ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, WE WILL, AND TO ANYBODY WHO'S WATCHING ON YOUTUBE, WE HAVE ONE PER, WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IN THE AUDIENCE. 
          SO I THOUGHT I WOULD JUST ASK IF THERE WAS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM. 
          UH, I WILL OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          THE PUBLIC IS, IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. 
          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE. 
          YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU CAN MAKE YOUR FULL PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON HERE TODAY. 
          UH, I'M JUST GONNA ASK THE CLERK IF THEY'VE RECEIVED COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. 
          WE RECEIVED. 
          NO PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          AND AGAIN, FOR ANYBODY WATCHING ON YOUTUBE, IF YOU SHOW UP TO THIS MEETING AND THERE'S NO ONE ELSE HERE, YOU MIGHT GET TO HAVE THAT LONG PUBLIC COMMENT YOU'VE WANTED TO HAVE. 
          SO WITH THAT, UH, WE'LL OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT AND INVITE THE FIRST AND ONLY COMMENTER, WHICH IS NICOLA. 
          I ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE, I'M JUST GONNA ASK IT ANYWAY AND THEN I KNOW ANDREW WILL GET BACK TO ME WITH THE ANSWER LATER. 
          IT'S, IT'S ON, I THINK. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE COMMITTEES AND THE COMMISSIONS IN THE CQA PROCESS. 
          UM, ARE WE TECHNICAL EXPERTS? ARE WE PUBLIC INPUT? ARE WE POTENTIAL BENEFITS? I MEAN, HOW DO WE, AS THE OTHER COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONERS AND THE BOARDS OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA GET INVOLVED IN THESE THINGS? AND I KNOW ANDREW WILL GET BACK TO ME WITH THE ANSWER, SO THAT'S FINE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT WAS A GREAT QUESTION. 
          AND, UH, I'M JUST GONNA ASK BEFORE WE GET TO THE NEXT ITEM, DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK OR ARE THEY GOOD? OKAY, EXCELLENT. 
          WITH THAT, UH, 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WE WILL MOVE TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, AND THESE WOULD BE MINUTES FROM OUR FEBRUARY 13TH MEETING. 
          UH, DOES ANYBODY HERE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR EDITS FOR THE MINUTES? GREAT. 
          UH, WITH THAT I WILL. 
          OKAY. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          TYPICALLY I ASK FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          WE DON'T HAVE ANY, ANY COMMENTS OR AMENDMENTS. 
          I ALWAYS FEEL RIDICULOUS ASKING FOR A ROLL CALL. 
          VOTE FOR THAT. 
          CAN WE JUST DO VOTE BY ACCLIMATION AND OKAY. 
          I'M JUST GONNA DO A VOTE BY ACCLIMATION TO CALL THESE APPROVED. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          UH, AND WITH 
          [PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION]
THAT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING. 
          AND WITH THAT, WE ARE DOING A STUDY SESSION SPECIFICALLY ON, UH, THE CITY OF PETALUMA'S DRAFT BLUEPRINT FOR CARBON NEUTRALITY. 
          AND FOR THAT, WE'D LIKE TO INVITE OUR SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER, HEATHER HINES, TO GIVE PRESENTATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND IF YOU CAN JUST BEAR WITH ME FOR A SECOND WHILE I GET MY PRESENTATION UP, 
          [01:45:33]
I'M ALWAYS AMAZED WHEN I MAKE IT WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO ASK A FRIEND . 
          OKAY. 
          AND ONE THING I WANNA FIGURE OUT IS HOW TO ADVANCE IT. 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, HEATHER HEINZ, SPECIAL PROJECT MANAGER. 
          UM, NICE TO BE HERE THIS EVENING, UM, TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE BLUEPRINT FOR CARBON NEUTRALITY. 
          I DO WANNA PREFACE THIS, THAT, UH, THE BLUEPRINT WAS PREPARED BY OUR CONSULTANTS, REMY, UM, WHO ARE REALLY THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS IN PREPARING THIS. 
          SO I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          UM, AND IF I NEED TO FOLLOW UP ON SOMETHING, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT. 
          UM, I WANTED TO START, UM, JUST BY TAKING A MINUTE TO TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS. 
          UM, THIS IS ONE PIECE OF A MUCH LARGER, UM, DISCUSSION AND A LARGER EVENT THAT IS HAPPENING, UM, IN OUR COMMUNITY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS. 
          AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF GET A SENSE OF WHERE ALL THESE THINGS COME TOGETHER, UM, WHAT YOU, YOU ARE GOING TO BE SEEING IN THE NEAR FUTURE. 
          UM, SO THINGS ARE GETTING VERY REAL WITH THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS. 
          SO YOU ARE ABOUT TO START SEEING THINGS ON A PRETTY REGULAR BASIS, UM, PROBABLY EVEN MONTHLY COMING UP. 
          UM, WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HITTING YOU WITH ALL THE PIECES, UM, BEFORE WE'VE GOT A DRAFT PLAN IN FRONT OF YOU AND, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO DIGEST IT. 
          SO, UM, THIS IS KIND OF A, A FIRST, A FIRST PIECE OF THIS IS THE BLUEPRINT. 
          UM, NEXT MONTH WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE FLOOD AND SEA LEVEL RISE MODELING. 
          THAT HAS BEEN A REALLY IMPORTANT KEY PART OF THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROCESS THUS FAR BECAUSE IT WILL, UM, SHAPE OUR ADAPTATION APPROACH AND OUR LAND USE, UM, ALTERNATIVES AS WELL AS FRAMEWORK. 
          SO, UM, SO NEXT, NEXT MONTH, I BELIEVE THAT'S GONNA BE A, A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION AS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IN MARCH. 
          UH, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          ON MARCH 12TH. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, SO TO, UM, KIND OF RUN THROUGH SOME OF SOME OF THAT INFORMATION, BECAUSE THEN IN APRIL WE'RE GONNA BE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU AGAIN, UM, TO DO KIND OF A GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW, START TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE LAND USE ALTERNATIVES, WHAT ARE POLICY FRAMEWORKS, UM, THEN BACK AGAIN IN MAY TO REALLY TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE POLICY FRAMEWORKS THAT WILL BE BEING RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC, THAT SPECIFICALLY, UM, TOUCH ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PURVIEW AND, AND, UM, HOW IT IMPACTS YOUR, YOUR REVIEW, UM, TO GET YOUR INPUT. 
          AND THEN, UM, FINALLY IN THE SUMMER AND FALL, UM, TALKING ABOUT THE LAND USE ALTERNATIVES. 
          AND THAT IS A REAL KEY PIECE BEFORE THINGS LIKE THE, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PROCESS STARTS, UM, AS WE START LOOKING AT, UM, ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN ITSELF IN, UM, SUMMER FALL OF 2025. 
          SO, UM, WANTED TO KIND OF SET THAT, THAT CONTEXT. 
          UM, BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE BLUEPRINT, ANDREW. 
          SURE. 
          HEATHER, I JUST WANTED TO, TO POINT OUT AND MAKE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE, THE, UM, THE GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS AND, AND THEN THE FRAMEWORK. 
          SO WHEN HEATHER USES THE TERM FRAMEWORK, SHE'S TALKING ABOUT AN A REQUIRED ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN OR AN OPTIONAL ELEMENT THAT WE'VE DECIDED TO INCLUDE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, UM, THERE COULD BE SOME MODIFICATIONS ABOUT HOW WE EXACTLY NAME THEM, BUT THIS IS GONNA BE A LAND USE POLICY FRAMEWORK. 
          IT'S GONNA BE A MOBILITY, UM, IT'S GONNA BE HISTORIC, IT'S GONNA BE A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT YOU TYPICALLY SEE AS ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          YES. 
          UM, AND POLICY FRAMEWORKS THAT ARE WILL IN THEN IN 
          [01:50:01]
TURN BECOME THOSE DRAFT ELEMENTS INTO THE PLAN. 
          THANK YOU, ANDREW. 
          UM, SO WHAT, WHAT IS THE BLUEPRINT? SO THIS IS GONNA KIND OF BE OUR FOCUS FOR TONIGHT. 
          UH, THE BLUEPRINT IS, UM, IT'S REALLY REFINING OUR VISION FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION IN PETALUMA. 
          UH, IT BUILDS ON PRIORITIES THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ALREADY ESTABLISHED THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION HAS WORKED ON, SUCH AS THE CLIMATE ACT, UH, CLIMATE EMERGENCY FRAMEWORK. 
          SO THIS, AND, AND OVERALL IT'S OUR COMMITMENT TO CARBON NEUTRALITY BY 2030, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY, UM, MA THE COMMITMENT TO WORK TOWARDS WHEN THEY, UM, ADOPTED THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY FRAMEWORK. 
          SO IT IS BUILDING ON, UM, THOSE, THOSE THINGS THAT ARE THE POLICY ALREADY OF OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, IT'S INCORPORATING NEW AND INNOVATIVE PRACTICES TO HELP US GET TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE. 
          UM, IT'S A SHORT RANGE PLAN BECAUSE AGAIN, IT IS FOCUSED ON OUR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND BY SAYING WE WANNA BE CARBON NEUTRAL BY 2030. 
          THAT IS KIND OF A SHORT TERM, UM, TO MAKE THAT, MAKE THOSE CHANGES. 
          SO, UM, THE DRAFT OF THE BLUEPRINT WAS, UM, COMPLETED IN OCTOBER AND RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. 
          UM, AND WE HAVE BEEN DOING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, UM, SINCE THAT TIME. 
          SO BOTH WITH THE PUBLIC AND WITH OUR CCBS AND WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION, GIVEN THEIR PURVIEW, UM, ON, ON THIS TOPIC. 
          SO WHEN WE STARTED OUT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, UNDERTAKING THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, WE HAD PLANNED TO DO A CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN AND TO HAVE IT RUN CONCURRENTLY FOR ADOPTION WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          THERE WERE A COUPLE THINGS THAT MADE US SEPARATE THOSE TWO. 
          ONE WAS THE CARBON NEUTRAL BY 2030 GOAL, WHICH TIME WAS TIME WAS PASSING. 
          AND SO WE FELT LIKE IT WAS IMPORTANT TO REALLY DIVE INTO THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 
          UM, SO WE COULD REALLY, YOU KNOW, BRING FORWARD IDEAS AND, UM, AN ACTION PLAN WITH THAT. 
          UM, ANOTHER THING WAS THAT FOR THE CLIMATE ADAPTATION, WE WERE DOING A LOT OF MODELING, UH, FLOOD MODELING AND SEA LEVEL RISE MODELING. 
          AND THAT ENDED UP TAKING A LOT LONGER THAN WE HAD THOUGHT. 
          SO WE ENDED UP SPENDING ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF WITH SOME OF THAT MODELING. 
          UM, SO BECAUSE OF THAT, SOME OF THE GENERAL PLAN TIMELINE SLOWED DOWN. 
          AND SO THAT WAS ANOTHER REASON WHY WE THOUGHT PULLING THEM APART. 
          UM, SO IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE NOT DOING ADAPTATION, IT'S JUST THAT'S GONNA BE REALLY MORE IN THE GENERAL PLAN ITSELF. 
          AND THE BLUEPRINT IS SPECIFIC ON GREENHOUSE GAS MITIGATION. 
          UM, AND A A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE, UM, DISCUSSION, AND THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT AT YOUR NEXT MEETING. 
          UM, OR MAYBE NOT YOUR NEXT MEETING, BUT TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW NEXT MONTH, UM, MARCH 12TH, UM, THE CITY DID DO NEW FLOOD AND SEA LEVEL RISE MAPPING. 
          UH, THOSE WERE RELEASED IN SEPTEMBER. 
          UM, SO WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT THERE HAS ALSO BEEN SOME NEW GUIDANCE THAT HAS COME OUT FROM THE STATE SINCE WE RELEASED THAT 18 MONTH MODELING EFFORT. 
          UM, SO WE HAVE BEEN EVALUATING WHAT IS THE NEW GUIDANCE? DOES IT CHANGE ANYTHING FOR PETALUMA? DO WE NEED TO MODIFY ANYTHING? UM, SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH OUR CONSULTANTS ON THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN THE, THE INFORMATION FROM THAT MODELING REALLY IS AT THE CRUX OF PREPARING THE ADAPTATION POLICY FRAMEWORK AS WELL. 
          UM, ALSO THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT, UM, AND, UM, THE LAND USE DISCUSSION. 
          SO YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE, UM, ASPECTS OF THE ADAPTATION KIND OF TRICKLE A THREAD OF IT THROUGH A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS. 
          UM, SO I TOUCHED ON THIS BLUEPRINT PROCESS. 
          IT'S REALLY, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS, UH, SINCE THE COMMUNITY AND MUNICIPAL INVENTORIES WERE DONE IN 2021. 
          UM, UM, DEVELOPING ACTION PLANS, AS I MENTIONED, THERE WAS, UH, THE DRAFT WAS RELEASED IN OCTOBER, AND THERE WAS A COMMUNITY, UM, OPEN HOUSE THAT CELEBRATE THE RELEASE OF THAT AND, AND GET SOME OF THE INFORMATION OUT. 
          WE HAVE BEEN, WE HAVE RECEIVED, I BELIEVE IT MIGHT BE CLOSE TO A THOUSAND COMMENTS, 
          [01:55:01]
UM, DURING THIS PUBLIC RELEASE, UM, OF THE DRAFT. 
          WE HAVE BEEN TO THE DIFFERENT CCBS TO GET INPUT, UM, ON THE, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS OR INPUT ON HOW WHAT IS IN THE BLUEPRINT AFFECTS THE DIFFERENT BODIES IN TERMS OF WHAT THEIR PURVIEW IS. 
          UM, AND WITH TONIGHT'S MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU ARE THE FINAL, UM, CCB TO PROVIDE YOUR INPUT. 
          UM, WE WILL THEN, UH, BE LOOKING TO REVISE THE BLUEPRINT, UM, AND THE FINAL DRAFT, THEN GO BACK TO THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION AND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BEFORE GOING TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION. 
          SO TOUCHING FIRST ON PETALUMA'S CONTRIBUTION TO EMISSIONS. 
          SO, UM, THIS PIE CHART REPRESENTS THE COMMUNITY-WIDE, UM, EMISSIONS. 
          UM, SO BOTH IN TERMS OF METRIC, TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE, BUT ALSO IN THE DIFFERENT SECTORS. 
          UM, AND THE REASON THIS GRAPH IS SO IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT REALLY ARE THE BIGGEST, UM, EMISSION, UM, IMPACT IN PETALUMA, AND THAT'S TRANSPORTATION, AND THAT IS ENERGY USAGE OR IN OUR, IN OUR BUILDINGS. 
          SO THE RESULTS OF THIS EMISSIONS PROFILE REALLY TOLD US THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON. 
          THIS IS WHERE WE NEED TO LOOK FOR THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK, BECAUSE IF WE CAN'T REDUCE THOSE TWO THINGS, WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE AN ADEQUATE DENT IN OUR EMISSIONS. 
          UM, SO JUST TOUCHING ON, THERE'S BEEN SOME TRENDS IN OUR GHG EMISSIONS. 
          UM, SO FOR INSTANCE, THE TRANSPORTATION HAS GONE UP. 
          UM, OUR EMISSIONS RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION HAS BEEN INCREASED FROM, THIS IS DATA IS 2010 TO 2018. 
          SO THE MOST RECENT DATA WE HAD TO WORK WITH WAS 2018. 
          UM, OUR, UM, SONOMA CLEAN POWER HAD A BIG IMPACT ON HELPING REDUCE SOME EMISSIONS, BOTH WITH, UH, ENERGY AS WELL AS WATER. 
          UM, AND THEN THERE, BUT THERE HAS BEEN A BIG INCREASE ALSO IN, UM, LANDFILL WASTE EMISSIONS. 
          UM, AND SO THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE, THE TRENDS THAT, UH, RAMI IDENTIFIED FOR WHY, UM, WHY THOSE CHANGES WERE HAPPENING AND WHY WE WERE SEEING INCREASES OR DECREASES IN SPECIFIC SECTORS. 
          UH, THIS, UH, CHART LOOKS SPECIFICALLY AT THE MUNICIPAL EMISSIONS. 
          UM, SO THE, THE CITY OF PETALUMA'S, UM, MUNICIPAL EMISSIONS IS A PRETTY SMALL PIECE OF THAT LARGER PIE FROM THE COMMUNITY WIDE. 
          UM, BUT THIS IS BREAKING DOWN WHERE, UM, THE CITIES, THE CITY ITSELF, THE MUNICIPAL EMISSIONS ARE COMING FROM. 
          AND AGAIN, MUCH OF IT IS TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN THE TRANSPORTATION, THE TRANSIT FLEET, VEHICLE FLEET, EMPLOYEE COMMUTES, YOU KNOW, ALL RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION. 
          AND THEN THE BUILDING AND FACILITY ENERGY BEING 19%. 
          SO, UM, SIMILAR MIRRORING OF, OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY WIDE EMISSIONS ARE. 
          SO THE, THE BLUEPRINT ITSELF, UH, IS BROKEN INTO SEVEN SECTORS, UM, THAT ARE OUTLINED HERE. 
          UM, AND IT LOOKS AT A SERIES OF SCENARIOS. 
          SO YOU WILL HAVE SEEN, THERE'S FOUR SCENARIOS THAT WERE LOOKED AT IN THE, IN THE BLUEPRINT. 
          ONE WAS REALLY A BUSINESS AS USUAL. 
          IF, UM, NO ACTION REALLY WAS TAKEN TO REDUCE EMISSIONS BY THE STATE OR AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, BY PETALUMA, THAT'S SHOWED US WHERE WE WOULD END UP. 
          THERE WAS AN ADJUSTED BUSINESS AS USUAL, WHICH REALLY WAS LETTING THE STATE SET THE PACE. 
          UM, SO THIS IS IF WE, UM, IF WE WERE CONSISTENT, UM, WITH ADOPTED STATE POLICIES, BUT WE DIDN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. 
          UM, AND THEN THE AMBITIOUS CLIMATE ACTION. 
          THIS IS REALLY WHERE THIS LOCAL AMBITIOUS ACTION TO MAKE CHANGES TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND, UH, STATE AND FEDERAL POLICY TO REALLY USE ALL, EVERYTHING AT OUR DISPOSAL, UM, TO, TO REDUCE OUR EMISSIONS. 
          UM, THIS DIDN'T GET US WHERE WE ARE COMMITTED TO GETTING, UM, WHICH IS CARBON NEUTRALITY. 
          SO EVEN THIS VERY AMBITIOUS AND 
          [02:00:01]
AGGRESSIVE APPROACH, UM, UNDER THIS SCENARIO DIDN'T GET US TO ZERO. 
          UM, SO THERE WAS ALSO A SCENARIO, UM, TO JUST LOOK AT WHAT, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE? AND IT IS, IT IS EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVE. 
          UM, AND, AND NOT, AND NOT, UM, SO MUCH OF IT IS BASED ON BEHAVIOR CHANGES, UM, UM, AT THE COMMUNITY LEVEL. 
          UM, SO THIS ONE FELT, UM, BEYOND WHAT THE CITY COULD, COULD ACTUALLY AFFECT CHANGE TO, TO MAKE. 
          UM, SO IN EACH OF THESE SCENARIOS, THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT, UH, THIS IS LOOKING AT WHAT WE GET WITH EACH OF THOSE SCENARIOS. 
          SO YOU'LL SEE THAT ADJUSTED BUSINESS AS USUAL. 
          WE DO SEE A DECREASE, BUT JUST REALLY NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO ENOUGH. 
          THE AMBITIOUS GETS US DOWN. 
          AND THEN THAT GAP, UM, BETWEEN THE, UH, WHAT DOES IT TAKE AND AMBITIOUS CLIMATE ACTION SCENARIOS. 
          AND THIS REALLY SHOWS, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S A BIG JUMP EVEN BETWEEN THOSE SCENARIOS. 
          SO THE AMBITIOUS CLIMATE ACTION SCENARIO, WHICH IS REALLY WHAT IS, IS, UM, OUTLINED IN THE BLUEPRINT ITSELF, UM, VERSUS THE, WHAT DOES IT TAKE? IT'S, YOU KNOW, GETTING, GOING FROM 40% DECARBONIZING 40% OF EXISTING BUILDINGS TO 85%, UH, BY 2030, IT, THAT'S A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING. 
          UM, THE MODE SHIFT, UM, OR MODE SHARE IS ANOTHER ONE THAT EVEN, EVEN 50%, UM, MODE SHARE, UH, IN THE AMBITIOUS CLIMATE ACTION IS A, IS A BIG UNDERTAKING. 
          UH, IT WOULD JUMP TO 75% IN UNDER THE, WHAT DOES IT TAKE SCENARIO. 
          SO JUST, JUST TO KIND OF GIVE SOME, UH, CONTEXT TO HOW SIGNIFICANT OF CHANGES, UH, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH, WITH THIS PLAN. 
          SO THE BLUEPRINT UNDER EACH OF THOSE SEVEN, UM, I'M FORGETTING WHAT WE CALL 'EM, UH, THE STRATEGIES, THE, UM, SECTORS THANK YOU SECTORS. 
          UM, THERE ARE THEN ACTION PLANS UNDER EACH OF THOSE. 
          UM, SO THIS KIND OF GIVES YOU AN INDICATION OF UNDER TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE AND, UM, MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS THAT HAVE KIND OF THE MOST, UM, ACTION PLANS UNDER, UNDER THOSE. 
          UM, AND THEN WE, WE WENT BEYOND THAT TO, UM, OH, I'M JUMPING AHEAD, BUT THIS IS LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF ACTION PLANS, THE NUMBER OF CITY ACTIONS IN THOSE ACTION PLANS, THE NUMBER OF PARTNERSHIP ACTIONS. 
          WE RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO ALONE BY ANY MEANS. 
          WE, IT IS GONNA REQUIRE PARTNERSHIP. 
          IT IS GONNA REQUIRE COMMUNITY ACTION AS WELL. 
          AND THEN ALSO, UM, UH, THE NUMBER OF CORNERSTONE ACTIONS UNDER EACH OF THESE SECTORS. 
          AND I'LL GO INTO DISCUSSION OF THE CORNERSTONE ACTIONS, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          WE ALSO, WE WANTED TO LOOK AT WHAT IS THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK. 
          UM, SO THESE, THESE ARE UNDER THESE DIFFERENT, UM, UH, ELEMENTS. 
          IT'S LOOKING AT THE ACTION PLANS THAT HAVE THE HIGHEST GHG REDUCTION POTENTIAL. 
          SO THE DARKER THE GREEN, THE BIGGER, UM, REDUCTION IN, UM, GHG. 
          AND THEN SIMILARLY THE COST. 
          SO THE DARKER, THE ORANGE, UM, THE MORE EXPENSIVE, UM, THE ESTIMATE OF THESE ARE. 
          SO REALLY TRYING TO LOOK FOR THINGS THAT, ARE THERE THINGS THAT HAVE A BIG REDUCTION AT A LOWER COST THAT WE SHOULD FOCUS ON? OR ARE THERE THINGS THAT HAVE THE BIGGER REDUCTION, UM, ALL AT A, AT A HIGHER COST. 
          ALL THINGS WE'RE, WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO CONSIDER, UM, AS WE, AS WE LOOK AT, UM, IMPLEMENTING THE ACTIONS. 
          SO, UH, FINALLY I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE CORNERSTONE ACTIONS. 
          SO THESE WERE 22 PRIORITY ACTIONS, UM, THAT RAMI IDENTIFIED AS REALLY BEING FOUNDATIONAL ACTIONS. 
          UM, SO THEY WERE ABOUT DEEP PRODUCTIONS AND ALSO ABOUT EDUCATION. 
          'CAUSE AGAIN, WE NEED TO EDUCATE THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. 
          IT'S GONNA TAKE EVERYONE TAKING ACTION. 
          UM, SO SOME OF, SOME OF THESE, UM, ARE REALLY ABOUT SETTING THAT STANDARD, SETTING THAT FOUNDATION SO THAT WE CAN, UM, SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH FROM THAT. 
          MANY OF THEM ALIGN WITH THINGS WE'RE 
          [02:05:01]
ALREADY WORKING ON, OR, UM, CURRENT CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES. 
          SO IN SOME OF THESE, MAYBE WE'RE A LITTLE AHEAD OF OUR, OF THE GAME, UM, AND WE'LL HAVE THEM AHEAD OF THE DATES THAT ARE ON THERE. 
          SO, UM, CORNERSTONE ACTIONS RELATED TO BUILDINGS. 
          'CAUSE AGAIN, REMEMBERING THAT THAT IS SUCH A BIG, UM, PART OF OUR EMISSIONS. 
          UM, ESTABLISHING A ONE STOP SHOP, UM, WITH THE CITY FOR INCENTIVES, EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR ELECTRIFICATION, UM, OPTIONS. 
          AND THEN, UM, ALSO LOOKING AT FUNDING MECHANISMS, UM, FINANCING MECHANISMS. 'CAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, OBVIOUSLY SEEING THE ELECTRIFICATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT WE NEED TO SEE COST MONEY. 
          AND WE HAVE TO FIND WAYS TO BRING THOSE COSTS DOWN TO SUPPLEMENT, UM, WHAT PEOPLE, UM, HAVE TO, UM, CONTRIBUTE TO THOSE RETROFITS. 
          AND THAT ELECTRIFICATION EFFORTS. 
          ALSO WITH BUILDINGS, UM, UH, TALKING ABOUT A PHASE IN EXISTING BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION STRATEGY. 
          SO THINGS LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, BURNOUT, ORDINANCES OR OTHER, UM, WHERE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO, IF YOU'RE GOING TO REPLACE A FURNACE OR A WATER HEATER THAT YOU HAVE TO REPLACE IT WITH ELECTRIFYING. 
          SO, UM, LOOKING AT WAYS TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. 
          AND, UM, AND ALSO LOOKING FOR, UH, REQUIREMENTS AROUND TO ADOPT REQUIREMENTS AROUND LOW EMBODIED CARBON MATERIALS AS PART OF CONSTRUCTION OR, UM, RETROFITS, UH, MOVING TO TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE. 
          UM, LOOKING AT ADOPTION OF A TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE AND A VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IMPACT FEE, UM, AS KEY CHANGES, UM, TO ADDRESS THE TRANSPORTATION. 
          UM, COMPLETING OUR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, OUR LOCAL SAFETY PLAN. 
          UM, AND THAT, UH, INTEGRATION, UH, WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. 
          AND THEN ALSO AN ELECTRICAL VEHICLE, CHAR CHARGING REACH CODE, UM, TO INCREASE, UH, THE AMOUNT OF, UM, CHARGING WE ARE, ARE GETTING WITH, UM, DEVELOPMENT, CONTINUING ON WITH TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE, UM, ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTING OUR GENERAL PLAN. 
          OUR GENERAL PLAN IS GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THINGS, YOU KNOW, IN IT WITH LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION THAT ARE WORKING TOWARDS REDUCING OUR, UM, OUR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 
          UM, ONE OF WHICH PARKING PRICING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS. UM, SO, UM, IMPLEMENTING THOSE AS WELL. 
          AND WE HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, ALSO CONTINUING TO INCREASE OUR CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THERE WHEN PEOPLE NEED IT SO THAT PEOPLE, UM, CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS ABOUT, UM, ELECTRICAL VEHICLES AND THAT AND THAT SWITCH. 
          UM, ALSO THE REVISED ZONING CODE, WHICH WE ARE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY KICKING OFF THIS YEAR SO THAT IT IS RUNNING IN PARALLEL WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, UM, AND IS ABLE TO BE ADOPTED AND CONCURRENTLY OR ON THE HEELS OF ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN NEXT YEAR. 
          UM, AND, UM, ALSO LOOKING AT, UM, IMPROVEMENTS TO PERMITTING AND APPROVAL PROCESSES, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE, WHEN THEY DO COME IN AND THEY WANNA DO THOSE ELECTRIFICATION CHANGES, UM, OR A DU, UM, CONSTRUCTION OR ANY OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ALIGNED WITH, UM, WHERE WE NEED TO TO BE, UM, THAT WE'RE MAKING THOSE EASIER AND QUICKER, UH, AROUND RESOURCE CONSUMPTION. 
          UM, UH, DEVELOPING, UM, ENCLOSURE STANDARDS FOR, UH, NEW RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. 
          UH, TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE GONNA DO, UM, A COMMUNITY SURVEY AROUND, UM, CONSUMPTION EMISSIONS TO REALLY START GETTING AN IDEA HOW MUCH ARE WE ALL, UM, UH, HOW MUCH DOES OUR INDIVIDUAL CONSUMPTION IMPACT THE COMMUNITY'S EMISSIONS? UM, AND THEN CONTINUING TO PARTNER WITH RECOLOGY AND ZERO WASTE TO, UH, CONTINUE TO DO WASTE AUDITS, UM, THE EDIBLE FOOD RECOVERY PROGRAM AND EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT WASTE DIVERSION. 
          UM, AROUND SEQUESTRATION THE CORNERSTONE ACTIONS ARE, UM, UPDATING OUR TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, WHICH IS ALSO IN PROCESS, UM, ADOPTING AN URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN, WHICH WAS 
          [02:10:01]
KICKED OFF, UM, LAST YEAR. 
          AND THEN, UM, LOOKING AT COMPREHENSIVE LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES, UH, FOR CITY PROPERTIES IN TERMS OF MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS, CORNERSTONE ACTIONS ELECTRIFYING OUR TRANSIT FLEET, UM, DOING FACILITY ENERGY AUDITS SO THAT WE CAN, UH, FULLY ELECTRIFY THE MUNICIPAL FACILITIES AND ALIGNING OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND PLAN WITH OUR CARBON NEUTRALITY GOAL, WHICH WE'RE ALREADY TAKING STEPS TO DO. 
          UM, AND FINALLY, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES TO THE CORP YARD AND WITH OUR PETALUMA TRANSIT SO WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE SO WE CAN MOVE TO ELECTRIFYING OUR FLEET. 
          UM, AND A ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE PLAN, UM, FOR CITY, UM, THE CITY'S FLEET. 
          SO WITH THAT, UM, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. 
          I KNOW THAT THIS IS A HEFTY DOCUMENT. 
          THERE'S A LOT IN IT. 
          IT'S AN INCREDIBLY AMBITIOUS, UM, PLAN. 
          UM, AND, UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF, IF I CAN ANSWER THEM. 
          UM, I'M HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ALSO, IF THERE'S THINGS THAT I'M NOT ABLE TO ANSWER 'CAUSE THEY GET A LITTLE MORE TECHNICAL. 
          UM, AND REALLY THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN HERE THAT YOU'RE PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN BECAUSE OF WHERE IT ALIGNS WITH YOUR PURVIEW, UM, OR, UM, INPUT ON SOMETHING THAT WASN'T IN HERE OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, TIMELINES. 
          UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DEFINITELY AT THE STAFF LEVEL RECOGNIZE IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STAY AGILE AND FLEXIBLE WITH SOME OF THE TIMELINES, UM, BASED ON FUNDING. 
          UM, AND BASED ON OPPORTUNITY, THERE MAY BE THINGS THAT ARE MORE, YOU KNOW, IN THE BLUEPRINT, SAY AREN'T UNTIL 2028, BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN A FUNDING OPPORTUNITY COMES UP FOR US TO LOOK AT DOING IT NOW. 
          AND WE'RE GONNA NEED TO STAY AGILE AND BE READY TO PIVOT, UM, TO DO AS MUCH OF THIS AS WE POSSIBLY CAN IN THE NEXT SIX YEARS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          AND ONE THING I JUST WANTED TO FLAG, AND I'LL START LOOKING FOR FOLKS WITH QUESTIONS. 
          UH, THIS PLAN HAS GONE THROUGH A PAINFUL AMOUNT OF REVIEW ALREADY ACROSS, YOU KNOW, P BACK AND TREE, BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY CLIMATE COMMISSION. 
          AND I THINK I'VE BEEN TO HALF A DOZEN OTHER MEETINGS WHERE THIS HAS SHOWN UP. 
          SO WHILE COMMISSIONERS ARE ABSOLUTELY FREE AND SHOULD FOCUS ON THOSE AREAS THAT THEY'RE MOST PASSIONATE ABOUT AND, AND SEE HOLES IN, THE ONE THING I WOULD ASK US TO DO IS ALSO REMEMBER THAT WE'RE HERE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION LOOKING AT WHERE THERE'S KIND OF THAT LAND USE INTERSECTION AND HOW THIS PLAN WILL IMPACT US AS A COMMISSION. 
          HOW WE'RE WE GO ABOUT OUR BUSINESS GOING FORWARD UNDER THIS PLAN, AND WHAT ELEMENTS OF THAT MIGHT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF COMMENTS FOR THE PLAN. 
          UH, WITH THAT, WHO HAS QUESTIONS, DARREN, THEN RICK? OKAY. 
          UM, I'M GONNA ASK JUST A COUPLE FRAMING QUESTIONS. 
          I THINK THE FIRST ONE MIGHT BE FOR HEATHER, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE CLIMATE ADAPTATION FRAMEWORK, UH, AND THEN WE HAVE THE CARBON OR CLIMATE NEUTRALITY BLUEPRINT, AND THEN WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY OUR GENERAL PLAN, AND THEN OUR IZO, THESE PLANS ALL TALK TO EACH OTHER. 
          CAN YOU JUST TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, 10,000 FOOT VIEW ON THEIR RELATIONSHIP? IS THERE A HIERARCHY HERE AS ONE PLAN INFORMS ANOTHER? IS IT JUST CHRONOLOGICALLY WE NEED ONE BEFORE THE OTHER, JUST THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WORKING OUT. 
          BUT JUST THAT KIND OF VIEW ON HOW THESE PLANS FIT TOGETHER. 
          SURE. 
          UM, THERE IS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT, THIS CAME UP AT THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION ON WHETHER, UH, ONCE THE GENERAL PLAN IS ADOPTED, SHOULD ACTUALLY THE ADAPTATION BE ROLLED INTO THIS. 
          SO IT ACTUALLY IS A CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, JUST SO THEY'RE ALL IN ONE PLACE VERSUS SOME IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND SOME HERE INSTEAD OF TWO, YOU KNOW? SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, WE ARE DOING THIS AND YOU WILL SEE MUCH OF THIS REFLECTED IN THE GENERAL PLAN IN TERMS OF POLICIES. 
          UM, AND SO THERE WILL BE SOME OVERLAP, WHICH I THINK IS GOOD. 
          UM, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE, THE IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE OR WHATEVER WE CALL IT WHEN WE HAVE A NEW ONE, WHICH WE'LL ALL BE HAPPY TO HAVE A NEW ONE, UM, THAT IS GONNA BE IMPLEMENTING WHAT'S IN THE GENERAL PLAN, RIGHT? SO THE BLUEPRINT SAYS THINGS LIKE UPDATE THE PARKING ORDINANCE, RIGHT, THE, YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY GET DOWN 
          [02:15:01]
INTO HOW, YOU KNOW, TO EXACTLY SAYING MM-HMM,  WHAT EXACTLY THAT IS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , RIGHT? SO THE GENERAL PLAN IS PROBABLY LIKELY, AND THE HOUSING ELEMENT HAD SOMETHING SIMILAR IN IT TOO. 
          AND THEN IT'S GONNA BE THE, THE IZO OR WHATEVER THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT GETS INTO WHAT THAT ACTUALLY, THAT VERY SPECIFIC REGULATION IS. 
          UM, SO THEY, THEY WILL ALL BE WORKING TOGETHER. 
          UM, BUT I, I ALWAYS THINK OF THEM ALSO AS KIND OF LIKE, BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, IT'S THE VERY SPECIFIC REGULATION. 
          SO THE GENERAL PLAN MIGHT SAY SOMETHING LIKE, YOU KNOW, UPDATE THE PARKING REGULATIONS TO REDUCE REQUIRED PARKING, ESTABLISH MAXIMUMS AND UNBUNDLE PARKING OR SOMETHING KIND OF GENERAL. 
          AND THEN THE ZONING ORDINANCE WILL TAKE IT TO THE VERY, VERY SPECIFIC, LIKE, IS IT BY AREA OF THE CITY OR IS IT BY LAND USE OR WHATEVER. 
          IT'S OKAY. 
          THAT WAS, DID THAT HELP? THAT WAS PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU FOR, FOR LAYING THAT OUT. 
          I DID EVERYONE HEAR THAT ? YOU KNOW, WHEN I ASK IT, I USE A PRETTY STRONG WORD WITH PERFECT. 
          NO, AND THIS ALWAYS COMES UP WHENEVER WE HAVE SOME OF THESE PLANS. 
          I LIKE, WE LIKE THAT WORD. 
          YEAH, THAT TALK, YOU CAN USE IT ANYTIME. 
          THE TALK TO THE GENERAL PLAN, THIS COMES UP. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR THAT BREAKDOWN. 
          UH, AND THEN ANDREW, YOU WERE TALKING JUST BEFORE THE MEETING WHEN I WAS KIND OF THROWING SOME QUESTIONS AT YOU. 
          CAN YOU JUST TALK ABOUT THE ROLE OF THIS BLUEPRINT ON A PER PROJECT BASIS AND AS A MITIGATION TOOL IN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS? 'CAUSE I THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY INTERESTING AND IT WASN'T SOMETHING I WAS THINKING ABOUT, UM, WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THE DOCUMENT. 
          WELL, WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT THE BLUEPRINT WOULD BE A POLICY DOCUMENT THAT WOULD DRIVE OTHER REGULATORY TOOLS TO, UM, TO, TO CREATE THOSE, THOSE REGULATIONS THAT WOULD AFFECT CHANGE OR, OR THAT COULD CREATE, UM, MITIGATION MEASURES. 
          SO HEATHER, WHAT WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IS LIKE THE, THE CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN COULD INCLUDE MITIGATIONS THAT COULD BE APPLIED. 
          SO IF YOU HAVE A PROJECT THAT EXCEEDS VM TS, THEY, THEY COULD MITIGATE THAT, THOSE V MTS THROUGH, UM, OTHER MEANS, SUCH AS, UM, PAYING INTO A FUND THAT WOULD PROVIDE ELECTRIC VEHICLES FOR THE CITY'S, UM, FLEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. 
          BUT THE BLUEPRINT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY DO THAT, RIGHT? THE BLUEPRINT MIGHT ESTABLISH POLICY POLICY, RIGHT? THAT WOULD DIRECT THOSE MITIGATIONS TO BE CREATED. 
          SO FOR INSTANCE, TO KIND OF CONTINUE WITH THAT LINE, UM, THE VMT THINKING, THE BLUEPRINT CALLS FOR ESTABLISHING A-A-V-M-T, UH, IMPACT FEE, RIGHT? SO THEN THAT'S, THEN WE WOULD DO THAT ACTION TO CREATE IT. 
          UM, AND THEN THAT WOULD THEN BE APPLIED AT A PROJECT BY PROJECT LEVEL THEORETICALLY. 
          UM, BUT THE BLUEPRINT ITSELF ISN'T ESTABLISHING THAT, THAT FEE. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT BUILDS OFF THE EXPLANATION YOU GAVE. 
          I JUST REALLY LIKED ANDREW'S EXAMPLE. 
          SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR, FOR, UH, EXPANDING ON THAT. 
          AND THEN THE CORNERSTONE ACTIONS WE SAW THERE, I DON'T KNOW WHY I HADN'T SEEN THOSE BEFORE. 
          DID THOSE REPRESENT SOME FORM OF PRIORITIZATION IN THE OVERALL BLUEPRINT DOCUMENT? AND IS THERE, I DON'T RECALL THIS BEING IN THE DOCUMENT. 
          IS THERE A SENSE OF PRIORITIZATION IN THE BLUEPRINT ITSELF, JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY PROJECTS REPRESENTED, IS THIS KIND OF GETTING US TO A PLACE WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO PRIORITIZE JUST IN THIS SHORT TIMEFRAME? SO THE CORNERSTONES WERE WHAT, UM, IAN ASSOCIATES IDENTIFIED AS FEELING LIKE, WE REALLY NEED TO WORK ON THESE IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH, LIKE, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T GO WORK ON THAT UNTIL WE'VE DONE THIS FOUNDATIONAL ACTION. 
          SO THEY, THEY, UM, PUT THOSE OUT THERE. 
          THE, JUST FOR TRANSPARENCY, THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CHANGE THE CORNERSTONE ACTIONS. 
          SO, UM, SO THE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NOW HAVE THOSE COMMENTS AND WE WORKED WITH THEM TO TRY TO ALSO, UM, TO TRY TO KIND OF MATCH THEM UP. 
          UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ATTACHED TO YOUR PACKET. 
          YEAH, IT WAS WHERE IT WAS LIKE THE ORIGINAL AND THE, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THE, UM, SO SOME OF THE THINGS, AND THERE WAS A, A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCOURSE THERE BECAUSE IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS SOME THINGS THAT KIND OF GOT DROPPED THAT THE CLIMATE ACTION DIDN'T PRIORITIZE ON 'EM. 
          AND WE HAD MEETINGS WITH THEM WHERE IT WAS LIKE, WE REALLY THINK THIS IS A KEY THING TO KEEP ON AS A, AS A, UM, AS A CORNERSTONE ACTION BECAUSE IT'S SO FOUNDATIONAL IN 
          [02:20:01]
MOVING FORWARD. 
          BUT YOU'LL SEE, UM, WE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME WITH THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION ABOUT, UM, SOME OF THE CULTURE AND EDUCATION. 
          AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN, IN THOSE KIND OF REVIS, THE RECOMMENDED, UM, ABOUT, UM, MAKING SURE THERE'S STAFF, MAKING SURE THERE'S BUDGET, MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S A CULTURE THAT IS PRIORITIZING THE, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF, OF THE BLUEPRINT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND ONE EXAMPLE FROM THAT, UH, I JUST HAD A QUESTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND THE PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES, I NOTICED THEY WEREN'T IN THE FIRST COLUMN FROM CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , BUT THEN THEY WERE PUT IN. 
          CAN YOU JUST TALK ABOUT THE GENESIS OF THOSE A LITTLE BIT AND, YOU KNOW, WAS THAT SOMETHING RAMEY KNOWS IS BEST PRACTICE? IS THAT SOMETHING OUR STAFF KNEW WAS BEST PRACTICE AND NECESSARY? UM, YEAH, SO THAT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT, UM, MY RECOLLECTION WAS, IS THAT THEY ARE IN THE CORNERSTONES THAT WERE IN THE BLUEPRINT, CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION HAD, WHEN THEY KIND OF DEVELOPED, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBER WAS, THEIR ACTIONS. 
          UM, IT WAS FELT, BECAUSE SO MUCH OF THE EMISSIONS COME FROM TRANSPORTATION, UM, THAT REALLY, IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT TO START SETTING SOME OF THOSE, UH, TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND, AND PAR PARKING. 
          'CAUSE THEY DRIVE SO MUCH OF, OF THAT, THOSE STEPS TOWARDS REDUCING, UM, THE TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS. 
          SO IT WAS STRONGLY, THERE WAS SOME MEMBERS OF THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION TOO THAT FELT REALLY STRONGLY THAT THOSE NOT FALL OFF. 
          UM, THERE WAS AN AD HOC THAT DEVELOPED THE, THE FIRST RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CHANGES TO THE CORNERSTONES. 
          THERE WERE A, UM, A, A FEW, I CAN'T REMEMBER THAT EXACT NUMBERS ON THAT BOARD. 
          THAT FELT ALSO THAT, UM, THE TDM WAS REALLY CRUCIAL. 
          UH, RAMEY FELT LIKE IT WAS REALLY CRUCIAL, UH, THAT IN PARKING 'CAUSE IT DROVE SO MUCH OF THE CONVERSATION. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          AND THEN WHEN WE THINK ABOUT LAND USE, AND I KNOW THIS IS, YOU KNOW, A PRETTY, UH, BIG SECTION IN THERE ABOUT LAND USE, ABOUT DENSIFICATION. 
          THIS IS ALL BEING TALKED ABOUT IN THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          YEP. 
          UM, IN THE MOST RECENT MEETING THEY HAD, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT FIT INTO THAT FRAMEWORK OF CALCULATING GH HG EMISSION SOURCES? I NOTICED, UM, YOU KNOW, ON THE LIST YOU WERE SHOWING THERE WAS THAT TABLE WHERE YOU HAD YOUR SEVEN SECTORS WITH DROPDOWNS OF LIKE HOW EFFECTIVE THEY WERE. 
          AND THEN ANOTHER SLIDE ON HOW COST EFFICIENT THEY WERE. 
          I NOTICED THERE WAS LIKE, NEW BUILDING AND UPGRADING EXISTING BUILDINGS, BUT THIS IDEA OF DENSIFICATION AND PRIORITIZING THAT AS A STRATEGY, DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH IMPACT THAT HAS WHEN IT COMES TO LIKE THAT ACTUAL REDUCTION CALCULATION COMPARED TO SOME OF THESE OTHER CATEGORIES? 'CAUSE I CAN'T GET OUTTA MY HEAD LIKE THAT 67% PIECE CHUNK MM-HMM. 
           THEN THAT ENERGY CHUNK. 
          BUT HOW DOES THAT DENSIFICATION FIT INTO THAT? BECAUSE I THINK YEAH, JUST THAT'S THE QUESTION. 
          WELL, UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT EE UM, NOTED WAS THAT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, SO I'M, I'M GONNA HIT THIS FROM TWO DIFFERENT, UM, POINTS. 
          ONE THING I THINK IS IMPORTANT IS NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          WE'VE DONE SO MUCH TO, UM, ADOPT STRICT REGULATIONS ABOUT OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION, SO OUR ALL ELECTRIC, UH, BEING ONE OF THEM. 
          UM, SO WE ARE, WHEN A NEW BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE DOING GOOD, LIKE, IN TERMS OF JUST MAKING SURE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, UM, A LOW, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T USE NATURAL GAS. 
          SO WE'RE NOT FURTHERING THAT IN TERMS OF DENSIFICATION. 
          UM, I THINK IT PLAYS INTO THINGS LIKE HOPEFULLY IT'S CENTRALLY LOCATED. 
          SO YOU'RE CLOSE TO SERVICES. 
          SO IF YOU'RE CLOSER TO SERVICES, YOU'RE, HOPEFULLY YOU'VE GOT A GROCERY STORE OR YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, YOUR COFFEE SHOP OR YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR BANK. 
          AND SO YOU'RE JUST BY BEING IN AN AREA WHERE THERE'S MORE DENSITY AND YOU'VE GOT SERVICES IN CLOSER PROXIMITY, HOPEFULLY YOU ARE NOT DRIVING TO THEM. 
          SO YOU ARE REDUCING YOUR DEPENDENCY ON THE AUTOMOBILE. 
          SAME WITH TRANSIT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT NORTH STATION COMING ONLINE, THAT WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT WHAT GETS DEVELOPED AROUND IT IS SUPPORTING IT AND IT'S SUPPORTING THAT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO MAKE SURE THAT, HEY, IF WE'VE GOT THIS STATION AND PEOPLE CAN GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B NOT IN THEIR CAR, LET'S MAKE SURE PEOPLE CAN LIVE NEAR THAT STATION SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE THEIR CAR TO THE STATION. 
          UM, IT ALSO PLAYS INTO, YOU KNOW, FOCUSING 
          [02:25:01]
OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          IF WE'RE FOCUSING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND THOSE HIGHER DENSITY AREAS, WHETHER THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BIKE LANES, UM, STREET TREES, YOU KNOW, ALL THE THINGS THAT MAKE IT PLEASANT AND SO THAT PEOPLE ARE ENCOURAGED TO NOT GET IN THEIR CAR. 
          SO THAT'S THEN REALLY HELPING WITH THAT, THAT MODE, MODE SHIFT. 
          IF, IF YOU LOOK AROUND, MAKING SURE THE INFRASTRUCTURE'S THERE, IF YOU ARE GONNA HAVE A CAR YOU PLUG IN, BUT MAYBE THERE'S A CAR SHARE BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A HIGHER DENSITY THAT CAN SUPPORT A CAR SHARE. 
          AND NOT EVERY SINGLE PERSON NEEDS THEIR OWN CAR. 
          SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS. 
          YEAH, THAT MAKES, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UH, AND THEN ALONG WITH THIS, I KNOW SEQUESTRATION FACTORS IN HERE, IN THE CALCULATIONS YOU SHOWED, AGAIN, REFERENCING THE SECTORS WITH KIND OF THEIR DROPDOWN IMPACTS. 
          DO YOU KNOW, AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU CAN GET BACK TO ME LATER, MAYBE I CAN BE PUT IN CONTACT WITH THEM HOW SEQUESTRATION FITS INTO THAT CALCULATION, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THE GHD AMOUNT AND WHAT THOSE REDUCTIONS ARE, AND THIS IS MY OWN ESSENCE IN THIS PROCESS, AND I'VE NOT RUN THESE CALCULATIONS, KIND OF HOW SEQUESTRATION BUILDS INTO THAT MODEL. 
          UM, I WOULD JUST BE VERY CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. 
          YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP. 
          THAT WOULD BE RAM. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT I CAN CIRCLE BACK. 
          OKAY, PERFECT. 
          AND I THINK THAT HITS ON A LOT OF MY BIG ONES. 
          OH, UM, I SAID HERE, FLEXIBILITY, FEEDBACK AND UPDATES. 
          I GUESS FROM A BROAD SENSE, WHEN YOU HAVE A POLICY LIKE THIS, AND I KNOW WHAT A LOT OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING THIS, THERE'S BEST PRACTICES EMERGING. 
          UH, HOW DO WE TELL THAT IT'S WORKING? HOW DO WE UPDATE BASED ON EMERGING BEST PRACTICES IN ARRIVING AT THE OUTCOMES WE WANT? BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS A NEW SPACE. 
          THERE'S NEW TECHNOLOGIES, NEW THINGS CHANGING. 
          MM-HMM MM-HMM. 
          , YOU KNOW, HOW FLEXIBLE IS THE PLAN? IS THERE LIKE A PLANNED PERIODIC UPDATE REVIEW BY CLIMATE ACTION? MAYBE THAT'S ALL ASSUMED, BUT YEAH, I MEAN, A COUPLE THINGS. 
          ONE, I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO IS ON A REGULAR BASIS, LOOK AT, OKAY, WHAT CAN WE DO THIS YEAR? RIGHT? I MEAN, LIKE, WE CAN'T SAY, OKAY, YOU SAW THE PLAN, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A LOT. 
          WE CAN'T JUST BE LIKE, OKAY, READY SET, LET'S GO. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS PART OF OUR PRIORITIES. 
          WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW IT OVERLAPS WITH EVERYTHING THE CITY'S DOING. 
          SO IF THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A, A STREET PROJECT, MAKING SURE THAT IT'S BEING DONE IN A WAY THAT IMPLEMENTS ALL THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, STREET TREES AND BIKE LANES AND, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THOSE CONNECTIONS, UM, IT'S GONNA NEED TO BE BUDGETED. 
          UM, SO IT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE TALKED, THE, WHATEVER WE'RE TAKING ON FOR THAT YEAR, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHERE, HOW DOES IT FIT WITHIN THE CITY'S BUDGET PROCESS AND WHERE THE FUNDS COMING FROM AND THE STAFF RESOURCES AND THE PARTNERSHIP. 
          AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT TOO, WITH THAT FLEXIBILITY, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, MONEY COMES, GRANT FUNDS COME UP AND WE DON'T WANNA BE LIKE, OH NO, WE SAID WE WEREN'T GONNA DO THAT THING UNTIL 2028, SO WE'RE NOT GONNA GO AFTER THAT GRANT. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO NEED TO REMAIN FLEXIBLE, UM, TO, TO DO IT. 
          UM, SO RECOGNIZING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE THINGS ARE CHANGING SO FAST. 
          SO THE FLEXIBILITY AND FEEDBACK IS BUILT INTO THAT ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS. 
          UH, AND THEN THE FINAL QUESTION, I THINK WE CONFIRMED THIS AT THE, UH, LAST MEETING WITH TREE COMMITTEE AND THE IZO, UH, WAS LISTED AS LIKE 2028, AND YOU SAID, NO, NO, NO. 
          THAT'S, IT'S GONNA BE SOONER. 
          NO, NO, IT'S GONNA BE SOONER. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AND, UH, I WILL SAVE MY COMMENTS FOR THE NEXT ROUND. 
          RICK, YOU WERE NEXT. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO WE'RE IN, WE'RE IN QUESTION CATEGORY RIGHT NOW, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, TO BE FRANK, YOU CAN, AT THIS POINT, QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS CAN MERGE TOGETHER. 
          I WASN'T BEING TOO RESTRICTIVE ON THIS ONE BECAUSE IT'S LITERALLY A STUDY SESSION. 
          THERE'S NO VOTE TO BE HAD, BUT WE CAN CIRCLE BACK LATER. 
          SOUNDS GOOD. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANKS, CHAIR. 
          UM, SO THE, THE NUMBERS, THE, THE PIE CHARTS, THE, THE STATISTICS YOU PUT UP, THOSE ARE FOR MUNICIPAL USE, RIGHT? NOT, NOT THE BROADER GENERAL PUBLIC OF PETALUMA, THE PIE CHARTS. 
          YEAH, THERE WAS, THE FIRST ONE WAS PETALUMA OVERALL. 
          OKAY. 
          THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. 
          I SEE. 
          OKAY. 
          THE, AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO THE MUNICIPAL. 
          GOT IT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          AND FOR MUNICIPAL, THAT WAS SCOPE ONE AND SCOPE TWO MISSIONS, BOTH USE OF BUILDINGS LIKE THIS BUILDING ITSELF AS WELL AS THE PURCHASE OF ENERGY. 
          UH, YEAH, THE CITY, I BELIEVE THE CITY ALL DOES EVERGREEN. 
          DO WE, DOES ANYONE, I'M, I'M SAYING THIS, BUT I'M FEELING LIKE I NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK, BUT I THINK WE HAVE SWITCHED TO EVERYTHING. 
          EVERGREEN, JASON AMONG CLEAN POWER. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, ON THAT 
          [02:30:01]
GRAPHIC WHERE YOU SHOWED, UM, SIMILAR WHAT, WHAT DARREN JUST REFERRED TO, UH, THE IMPACTS AS WELL AS THE COST MM-HMM. 
          , UM, THOSE COSTS ARE EVALUATED. 
          DO YOU KNOW HOW RAINY DID THAT IN TERMS OF COST TO WHOM, UM, IN OTHER WORDS, WERE THOSE ALL CAPITAL COSTS THAT THE CITY WOULD BEAR IN ORDER TO HIT THOSE GHG TARGETS? OR WAS IS BECAUSE I, I NOTICED A NUMBER OF THIS WORK GETS INTO THE, THE STATEMENT PART. 
          THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CATEGORIES WHERE THINGS LIKE EVS, WELL, YOU CAN LEASE AN EV UH, FLEET THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN UPFRONT CAPITAL COST. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND, AND THEREFORE JUST REPLACES YOUR COST OF, YOU KNOW, OPERATIONS OR YOUR RIGHT. 
          UM, THOSE EXPENSES, I THINK IT WAS BEYOND MUNICIPAL BECAUSE THERE WAS A RECOGNITION THAT, FOR INSTANCE, TO, UM, ELECTRIFY, UM, EXISTING BUILDINGS MM-HMM. 
          , THE CITY'S NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO PAY FOR EVERYBODY TO ELECTRIFY THEIR HOUSES. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO THERE'S GONNA BE SOME COST FOR THE CITY TO, YOU KNOW, CREATE, CREATE THE PROCESS AND THE REGULATIONS AND THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT THEN THE, IT'S GONNA BE AN EXPENSIVE, AT A COMMUNITY LEVEL TO GET THAT PERCENT. 
          SO I THINK THAT WAS BAKED INTO THERE. 
          I SEE, OKAY. 
          SO THAT, THAT, THAT WAS NOT JUST A REFERENCE TO MUNICIPAL, RIGHT? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          GOT IT. 
          UM, YEAH, BECAUSE THINGS LIKE, UH, FOR, FOR MUNICIPAL EVS, EV CHARGING EQUIPMENT, THOSE COULD ALL BE LEASED OR SOMEWHERE ACQUIRED THROUGH A THIRD PARTY WHERE IT DOESN'T REQUIRE CAPITAL OUTLAY FROM THE CITY. 
          RIGHT. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND I THINK, AND I BELIEVE I'M NOT INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH OUR FLEET MANAGEMENT MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BUT I BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE CONSISTENTLY LOOKING AT ALL THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND WHAT'S THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE TO MAKE THE CHANGES THAT WE NEED TO MAKE. 
          GOOD, GOOD. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, YOU MENTIONED SONOMA CLEAN POWER IS AS THE ENERGY PROVIDER. 
          UM, HOW MUCH ENGAGEMENT DO IS THE CITY HAVING RIGHT NOW WITH, WITH PG E AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE LEVEL? UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. 
          I DON'T KNOW, DYLAN, IF YOU YEAH, I, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME SORT OF CONTRACT WITH PG E THEY'RE PROVIDING SOLAR HERE RIGHT? AT CITY HALL, AND WE'RE GIVING THEM EASEMENTS. 
          SO, MM-HMM. 
          I MEAN, I, I KNOW WE MUST BE AT, AT SOME LEVEL, BE GIVEN THE, THE CHA THE PROJECTS WE ARE UNDERTAKING, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT, I DON'T, OKAY. 
          I DON'T THINK I CAN QUANTIFY IT GOING FROM, FROM, UM, KIND OF QUESTION TO STATEMENT AND STATEWIDE, THERE, THERE'S LITERALLY A CRISIS AT THIS POINT FOR ELECTRICAL PROVISION AT EVERY LEVEL AT RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL. 
          SO THAT INFRASTRUCTURE RIGHT NOW IS A HUGE CRITICAL PATH TO MOVING ANYTHING FORWARD. 
          IT, IT'S, I WOULD SAY IT'S SIMILAR, BUT A LITTLE BIT BELOW THE RADAR OF WHAT HOUSING WAS, YOU KNOW, 10 YEARS AGO. 
          UM, AND, AND I FORESEE US TAKING THE SAME KIND OF EXTREME MEASURES WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT AROUND, UH, YOU KNOW, IN THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF HOUSING TO THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF ANYTHING TO, TO EXPEDITE ELECTRICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          UM, IT'S, IT'S THE HUGE ACHILLES HEEL RIGHT NOW TO DECARBONIZATION IN CALIFORNIA. 
          FULL STOP. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, AND GOING TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS THE NEXUS WITH, WITH WHAT WE DO, UM, THINGS LIKE, AND I'M, I'M PERSONALLY EXPERIENCING THIS RIGHT NOW WHERE I'M TRYING TO UPGRADE MY, MY HOME SERVICE, RESIDENTIAL SERVICE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN AGES WITH PG E JUST TRYING TO GET THEM. 
          AND NOW THEY INFORM ME THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE NEW TRANSFORMER, UM, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THERE'S LONG LEAD TIMES FOR THAT EQUIPMENT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SO ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO AS A CITY TO, UM, YOU KNOW, BROADEN THAT MESSAGE TO PG E UM, BECAUSE, AND I SAY PG E BECAUSE THEY ARE THE, OBVIOUSLY THE, THE MONOPOLY, THE SINGULAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEMONSTRATE, YOU KNOW, BROADER VOLUME OF I IMPACT AND, AND, AND, UH, DEDICATION TO THE CITY. 
          NOT JUST THE CITY OF UTILITIES, BUT THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S SQUEAKY WILL GETS GREASED, VOLUME GETS, GETS THE MOST ATTENTION. 
          SO ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO KIND OF MUNICIPALIZE THAT, EVEN WITH, IF THAT'S WITH A LOWERCASE M UM, AND THEN THERE ARE ALSO CERTAIN REALLY SIMPLE THINGS LIKE THERE ARE STREAMLINED, UM, UH, PERMITTING PROVISIONS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UM, SOLAR APP IS ONE OF 'EM THAT WAS PROMOTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY. 
          UM, SO THE CITY COULD IMPLEMENT THAT AND MAKE IT MUCH EASIER FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS, RESIDENCES, UM, AND, AND SMALL COMMERCIAL TO STREAMLINE THE, THE, UM, PERMITTING 
          [02:35:01]
PROCESS AND BOTH LOWERS COSTS AND JUST SPEED THINGS UP. 
          'CAUSE, 'CAUSE AS YOU MENTIONED THIS, WE'RE ON A TIMELINE HERE, WHICH IS GONNA BE A VERY DIFFICULT TIMELINE TO MEET. 
          UM, THERE ARE CODES FOR THINGS LIKE SMART PANELS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT THEN OBVIATE THE NEED FOR, UH, SERVICE UPGRADES AND UTILITIES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO ANY AREAS LIKE THAT, THEY SEEM MINUTE, BUT THEY, THEY MANIFEST THEMSELVES PRETTY BROADLY ACROSS, YOU KNOW, 60,000, UM, RESIDENCES. 
          UM, AND, AND THEREFORE GET OUR, YOU KNOW, STRATEGIC GOALS UP VERY QUICKLY. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, BOTH PROBING FOR WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING WORK IN THAT AREA AS WELL AS KIND OF ADVISING, THERE'S A COUPLE OF REALLY PRACTICAL AREAS WHERE WE CAN MAKE AN IMPACT, YOU KNOW, AT THIS LEVEL AND WITHIN OUR PURVIEW. 
          YEP. 
          UM, AND THEN THE LAST ONE I'LL MENTION IS, UM, THE COUNTY HAS A RENEWABLE COMBINING ZONE FOR, UH, ACTUAL SOLAR DEVELOPMENT, UM, ON, UM, PROPERTY WITHIN THE COUNTY. 
          AND IT'S ALSO A MEASURED, A STREAMLINED DEVELOPMENT OF LARGER SOLAR SYSTEMS, BOTH FOR ACCESSORY USE AND, AND COMMERCIAL USE. 
          AND SO I, I WOULD ASK, YOU KNOW, IF THE CITY HAS SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT WHERE IT PROVIDES A MORE, YOU KNOW, EXPEDITIOUS PATH TO SOLAR DEVELOPMENT. 
          'CAUSE AGAIN, UM, IT'S A HUGE TIME ISSUE AND HUGE COST ISSUE TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, EXPEDITE THAT, UM, DEVELOPMENT TIME, UM, TIMELINE. 
          AND THE COUNTY'S ALREADY DONE REALLY EXCELLENT WORK IN THIS AREA FOR, YOU KNOW, A DECADE OR SO. 
          UM, SO WE COULD ADOPT THAT WITHOUT REINVENTING THE WHEEL OURSELVES. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I'LL GET OFF MY SOAPBOX. 
          THANKS CHAIR. 
          JESSICA, YOU'RE, YOU'RE DEPRESSING ME. 
          UM, GO AHEAD. 
          WHAT? EXCUSE ME. 
          WHAT DID YOU POINT TO HER? TO ME, I, I POINTED TO JESSICA, BUT SHE APPEARS TO HAVE SEATED TO YOU. 
          SIR, GO AHEAD. 
          NO, GO AHEAD, . 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THIS, THIS IS A VERY DAUNTING, UH, UH, PROGRAM WE'RE ON. 
          ARE THERE FEDERAL OR STATE, UH, CONSEQUENCES? IS THERE FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES TO, TO NOT REACHING IT OR TO NOT TO, TO WHATEVER DEGREE WE CAN ACCOMPLISH IT? OR IS THERE A FINANCIAL ISSUE? NO. 
          'CAUSE WE HAVE SET A MORE AGGRESSIVE, UM, PATH, UM, FOR OURSELVES. 
          SO THERE WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, I MEAN, THERE, THERE ARE THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE IN THIS CYCLE, THERE WILL BE NEW STATE BUILDING CODE, YOU KNOW, THAT WILL OKAY. 
          NEED TO ADOPT AND SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS. 
          BUT NOT LIKE YOU ONLY HIT, BUT IT IS NOT LIKE THE HOUSING REQUIREMENT. 
          NO, NO. 
          UM, WELL, I, I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I'VE, I'VE ASKED, I WASN'T AT THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUT I ASKED THAT QUESTION. 
          YOU KNOW, 67, 70% OF THE CARBON IS COMING FROM THE ROAD SYSTEM. 
          DO WE KNOW, HAVE WE ANY, HAVE ANYBODY ASKED THE QUESTION OR CAN WE ANSWER THE QUESTION? WHAT IF WE PLANTED ALL THE ROADS WITH HEAVY TREE CANOPY? WHAT WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT BE COST EFFECTIVE? WOULD THAT COST BENEFIT? DO WE KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT? 'CAUSE I, I'M NOT SAYING IT WORKS, I'M JUST QUESTIONING SEEMS THAT'S THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM. 
          MAYBE WE COULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM CLOSER TO THE SOURCE, OR AT LEAST IMPACT THE PROBLEM. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THEY'VE RUN LIKE A, A MEASUREMENT OF THAT. 
          LIKE IF YOU TOOK EVERY STREET IN PETALUMA AND ADDED TREES EVERY, WHATEVER FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T, THEY DON'T HAVE THAT IN HERE. 
          NO. 
          BUT, BUT CITIES HAVE, CITIES HAVE STATISTICS OF WHAT THE TREE BENEFITS ARE. 
          MM-HMM. 
           CHICO IS A GOOD ONE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , THEY GET SOMETHING LIKE A, A VALUE OF $4 MILLION FOR THE TREE. 
          OH, FOR THE CARBON, OKAY. 
          GOT SEQUESTERED. 
          GOT IT. 
          SO THAT'S A SOURCE. 
          I WOULD, I WOULD EVEN CALL THEM 'CAUSE THEY MAY KNOW MORE THAN THEY'VE PRINTED, BUT I, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE, UH, WE'RE LIKE AT 14% COVERAGE. 
          IS THAT WHAT OUR CANOPY COVERAGE IS? IS NOW, I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM CINDY. 
          IF WE, IF WE GOT TO 20% OR 25%, WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD THAT MAKE? UH, WOULD IT, WOULD IT HELP OR, OR NOT? UH, RELIEF HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN OPEN SPACE AND PARKS AND STUFF, BUT I, I JUST WONDER IF IT'S WORTH THE CITY'S INVESTMENT IN TERMS OF GETTING MORE CANOPY MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND DOES IT PAY OFF TO US? SO THAT'S, AND THAT PROBABLY COMES WITH A FOREST MANAGEMENT PHASE A COUPLE YEARS FROM NOW. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND, AND I WOULD ALSO ADD, THERE'S, THERE'S 
          [02:40:01]
A, LIKE AN ADJACENT BENEFIT TO IT ALSO BECAUSE WHEN YOU DO HAVE MORE STREET TREES, YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, IT MAKES IT MORE PLEASANT AND PEOPLE THEN, YOU KNOW, THEORETICALLY WOULD WALK MORE OR FEEL SAFER OR, AND THEN THEY'RE NOT IN THEIR CARS SO MUCH. 
          SO THERE'S A, OH, THERE'S, THERE'S SO MANY THERE, YOU KNOW, INDIRECT, IT'S PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, IT'S CARBON FRIENDLY, IT'S, IT'S GREEN CHANGE WATER, IT PROVIDES TEMPERATURE CONTROL. 
          IT'S ALL KINDS OF BENEFITS IF IT'S DONE CORRECTLY. 
          UH, IT ALSO IMPROVES PROPERTY VALUE. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, I WAS JUST MENTIONING TO THE, UH, COMMISSION BEFORE WE STARTED THAT IN THE RE IN, UH, CHICO, THEY SAID IF IT'S, IF YOU HAVE BELOW A 10% CANOPY COVERAGE, THERE'S A LARGER ISSUE OF DEPRESSION. 
          MM-HMM. 
          SO IT HAS SOME MENTAL ILLNESS, UH, BENEFITS. 
          THE OTHER QUESTION, UM, I I, IS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO CONSIDER, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA START, WE'RE REQUIRING COMMERCIAL STORES, GROCERY STORES TO PROVIDE DELIVERY SERVICE SO THAT THERE'S ONE CAR SERVING 200 HOMES VERSUS 200 CARS SERVING ONE, ONE STORE. 
          SO WE TURN A POLICY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE ENCOURAGED TO DELIVERY TO THE HOMES, GROCERY DELIVERIES, REDUCE THE TRA THE TRANSPORTATION, THE DAILY TWO OR THREE DAILY TRIPS TO THE MARKET. 
          AND, AND JUST BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING, I THINK IN TERMS OF, UM, IF YOU CAN, UH, IF YOU CAN SOLVE THE PROBLEM BY REVERSING THE FLOW OF CARS, THAT MIGHT BE ONE WAY OF DEALING, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST ASKING. 
          I'M NOT SURE. 
          I KNOW THAT IT DOES WORK, BUT, UH, THERE'S A LOT MORE DELIVERY COMPANIES, UH, IN BUSINESS AND IT MIGHT, MIGHT BE A WAY TO SOLVE IT. 
          SO THOSE, OTHERWISE, I THINK IT'S THE GREAT PURPOSE AND A GREAT, UH, BEGINNING. 
          SO GOOD LUCK, . 
          THANK YOU, ROGER. 
          JESSICA, UM, I, I, I SHARE SOME OF ROGER'S DEPRESSION, I PROMISE , THE SIMMERING EXISTENTIAL DREAD , UM, WAS STRONG WHILE READING. 
          UM, BUT I APPRECIATED YOUR, UM, CALL OUTS A COUPLE TIMES ABOUT BANG FOR OUR BUCK. 
          IT'S SOMETHING I'VE THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, CITY PROJECTS. 
          AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO HOW THE BLUEPRINT THINKS ABOUT AND HOPEFULLY INCORPORATES, UM, ADDRESSING CORPORATE AND PRIVATE SECTOR IMPACTS TO EMISSIONS. 
          I AM TRYING TO THINK OF, I'M NOT SURE IF I'M GONNA BE ABLE TO PULL OUT A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, TDM COULD BE ONE THING. 
          'CAUSE OFTENTIMES YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BASED ON NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES OR YOU KNOW, THAT THING, THAT TYPE OF METRIC, UM, TO, UM, REQUIRE WHETHER IT'S, IF WE'RE GOING TO FAIR FREE, YOU DON'T NEED PASSES, BUT, YOU KNOW, TO OFFER THINGS TO INCENTIVIZE THEIR EMPLOYEES TO NOT DRIVE THEIR CARS. 
          SO THAT WAS THE ONE THING WE HAVE WORKED IN THERE. 
          I'M, I'M GONNA HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU. 
          I CAN'T THINK OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD WHAT WE HAVE IN HERE THAT'S SPECIFIC FOR, UH, LARGER CORPORATIONS. 
          DOES THE COMMUNITY-WIDE EMISSIONS DATA INCORPORATE CORPORATE AND PRIVATE SECTOR EMISSIONS? UM, I BELIEVE IT IS EVERYTHING IN OUR COMMUNITY IT IS, IS IN THAT COMMUNITY PROFILE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, INTERESTING. 
          YEAH, I, I GUESS SORT OF WHAT I'VE DANCING AROUND IS THE COMMON REFRAIN OF INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND I DON'T WANT TO SQUEEZE PETALUMA AND GUILT THEM INTO, YOU KNOW, CHANGING THEIR BEHAVIORS AND, AND COMPLETELY UPROOTING THEIR ROUTINES, WHICH IS REQUIRED. 
          AND I'M, YOU KNOW, RIDING MY BIKE TO THE OFFICE AND ENJOY IT A LOT ACTUALLY. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UM, WHEN THE, THE BIGGEST CULPRITS ARE NOT INDIVIDUALS, BUT RATHER, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, IN MANY CASES, CORPORATIONS AND SYSTEMS THAT ARE NOT DOING THEIR FAIR SHARE OF CLEANUP WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, THESE MAJOR CLIMATE ISSUES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          NOTED. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T, I'M, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          I JUST, IT'S NOT ONE I HAVE ON THE BACK OF MY HEAD TO KIND OF LIKE QUOTE YOU SURE. 
          FOUR OR FIVE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WOULD IMPACT THAT. 
          BUT, UM, BUT NOTED 
          [02:45:01]
AND I CAN FOLLOW UP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND DARREN, I KNOW YOU WANTED TO FINISH UP. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN I'M REALLY SEPARATING MY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, IT'S NOT NEEDED. 
          AND THEN I STRUGGLE TO, ANYWAY, WE'RE FIGURING IT OUT. 
          UM, SO JUST TO KIND OF LINE UP WITH MY QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO FRAMING HOW THESE PLANS WORK TOGETHER, UH, THE REASON I ASKED THAT QUESTION, UH, I WANTED, WHEN I READ THROUGH THE LAND USE POLICY SECTION, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS CARBON NEUTRALITY BLUEPRINT, AND MAYBE THIS IS THE INTENT OR HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO FUNCTION, BUT I DIDN'T WANT IT TO SEEM LIKE IT WAS PREEMPTING THE GENERAL PLAN IN IZO OR MAKING THOSE PROCESSES A FOREGONE CONCLUSION, THOUGH. 
          ONE EXAMPLE THAT KEPT STICKING OUT TO ME WAS, YOU KNOW, IT SAID IN THERE WE WILL PASS AN SB 10 ORDINANCE AND, AND LIKE SB 10 IS A PRETTY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE RIGHT NOW. 
          AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A HUGE TOPIC OF DEBATE IN BOTH THE GENERAL PLAN AND THEN EVENTUALLY HOW YOU WOULD, WHAT THAT ORDINANCE WOULD LOOK LIKE IN A ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          UM, SO YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, AND MAYBE IT'S JUST SOFTENING SOME OF THE LANGUAGE, WHICH I KNOW FOLKS ON CLIMATE ACTION PROBABLY HAVE GOTTEN THE FEEDBACK, LOOK, MAKE THIS THING AS ROBUST AS POSSIBLE AND AS DEFINITIVE AS POSSIBLE. 
          BUT I THINK ON SOME OF THE LAND USE PIECES WHERE YOU'RE GONNA RELY ON THESE OTHER PLANS TO INFORM WHAT THAT POLICY'S GONNA LOOK LIKE, I THINK SOFTENING THE LANGUAGE TO LIKE EXPLORE AND ADOPT OR EXPLORE AND IMPLEMENT RATHER THAN JUST HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO, I THINK WOULD BE A WELCOME CHANGE FOR ME. 
          UM, OR I THINK WOULD BE A WELCOME CHANGE AND A PRUDENT CHANGE AGAIN. 
          SO WE KIND OF DON'T HAVE THE APPEARANCE THAT THOSE PROCESSES DON'T HAVE THE KIND OF DILIGENCE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE AND THAT THEY ARE A FOREGONE CONCLUSION. 
          WE DON'T WANT IT TO APPEAR THAT WAY. 
          UM, CORNERSTONE ITEM ON THE LIST OF CORNERSTONE ITEMS, THE ORIGINAL ITEM 17, I'M SURE YOU WOULD GUESS I WAS IN LOVE WITH. 
          IT DID GET CHANGED. 
          AND THIS IS ABOUT CREATING AN URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT OR, OR URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT UNDER PUBLIC WORKS. 
          AND I SAW THAT THAT OBVIOUSLY GOT CHANGED. 
          UM, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US MOVE MORE IN THAT DIRECTION AND UPGRADE THAT, UH, ALIGNMENT, UH, YEAH, STRATEGY ALIGNMENT TO A MORE ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE AND STAFFING STRATEGY. 
          UM, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY A LOT THERE. 
          WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FLOWING RIGHT INTO MY NEXT COMMENT ABOUT SEQUESTRATION, GETTING MORE VISIBILITY ON THAT SIDE OF THESE EQUATIONS. 
          TO ROGER'S POINT, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T HAVE ROBUST CALCULATIONS ABOUT OUR CARBON CYCLING, OUR CARBON SEQUESTRATION CAPACITY, IT'S HARD TO KNOW HOW AGGRESSIVE WE HAVE TO BE. 
          AND MAYBE SOME OF THESE TARGETS THAT SEEM LIKE, OH, THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO REDUCE OUR CONSUMPTION THAT MUCH. 
          IF WE UNDERSTAND OUR SEQUESTRATION TARGETS AND HOW THOSE IMPACT IT. 
          MAYBE THIS STARTS TO LOOK A LOT MORE ACHIEVABLE AND KIND OF MAKE THIS SEEM MORE REALISTIC AND, AND MAYBE NOT TURN PEOPLE OFF BY SEEMING LIKE IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN'T ACHIEVE, I GUESS. 
          UH, SO, UH, THAT WAS URBAN FORESTRY. 
          AND THEN, YEAH, THE LAST PIECE I ASKED ABOUT HOW DENSITY FACTORS INTO THESE EQUATIONS. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING FROM THE LAST GENERAL PLAN MEETING WE HAD. 
          THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT 15 MINUTE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          ALL OF THAT IS PART AND PARCEL WITH THIS, NOT TO RETREAD THAT ENTIRE, UH, ELEMENT, BUT JUST FROM WHAT YOU WERE SAYING ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON GHG EMISSIONS WHEN IT COMES TO DENSITY AND THAT DISCUSSION AT GENERAL PLAN WHERE, YOU KNOW, FROM GENERAL PLAN COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THERE WERE DEFINITELY, IT SEEMED LIKE A LOT OF MEMBERS WHO DIDN'T WANT THE FOCUS OF 15 MINUTE NEIGHBORHOODS TO BE TOTALLY GETTING RID OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR FOCUS ON TRANSFORMING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IN PETALUMA. 
          AND FROM WHAT YOU WERE SAYING ABOUT ACTUAL GHG IMPACTS, IT'S LIKE A FOCUS ON TARGETED DENSITY, WHICH IT DOES SAY IN HERE. 
          AND WE TALK ABOUT ENABLING TRANSIT CENTERS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          I THINK IF THERE IS A PRIORITIZATION HERE, AND THIS MAY BE OBVIOUS, WE WANT TO PRIORITIZE THAT TARGETED DENSITY AND NOT FOCUS AS MUCH. 
          IT MAY BE SB 10 WOULD BE PART OF THAT, BUT NOT FOCUS AS MUCH ON HAVING TO TRANSFORM THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE NOT CENTERED AROUND TRANSIT CURRENTLY OR THAT ARE NOT IN THESE KIND OF SERVICE CENTERS. 
          BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THE BANG FOR THE BUCK IS THERE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND IT'S A POTENTIAL HUGE ROADBLOCK IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SUPPORT AND PUBLIC WILLINGNESS. 
          SO I WOULD JUST KIND OF LOWER THAT PRIORITY AND FOCUS ON KIND OF THE SCENARIO THAT YOU OUTLINED. 
          AND THEN ALSO SOMETHING, UH, I THINK THAT CAME UP WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          WHEN WE THINK ABOUT 15 MINUTE NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRUCTURING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AROUND SERVICES AND ECONOMIC CENTERS, UH, IT WOULD JUST BE GREAT TO HAVE THAT RETAIL OR ECONOMIC VIABILITY PIECE. 
          I BROUGHT UP AT THAT MEETING DURING THE S STAT PROGRAM WHERE THIS CONCEPT WAS REALLY ROLLED OUT. 
          THE EXPERT FROM THE, UH, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ARCHITECTS ON RETAIL VIABILITY WASN'T THERE. 
          AND THE, THE GENERAL PLAN MEETING, WE DIDN'T QUITE HAVE THAT PIECE. 
          SO I WOULD JUST LOVE TO KNOW THAT PIECE. 
          'CAUSE SO MUCH OF ENABLING THAT VISION IS UNDERSTANDING HOW WE DON'T CANNIBALIZE FROM EXISTING CENTERS, UH, AND HOW WE CAN KIND OF EFFECTIVELY CREATE THESE NODES OF SERVICE 
          [02:50:01]
AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY THAT I THINK THE 15 MINUTE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT AS WE HAVE CONSTRUCTED REALLY CENTERS AROUND. 
          UH, AND I THINK THAT REALLY SUMS UP A LOT OF MY COMMENTS. 
          AND THEN I MENTIONED THIS AT PBAC, BUT TRANSPORTATION, DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES, I THINK THOSE, OH, WHAT AM I GONNA SAY? THOSE ARE DEFINITELY FEEL LIKE MORE STICK THAN CARROT. 
          THEY'RE, THEY'RE, I THINK SOMETHING THAT WILL REQUIRE A LOT OF MESSAGING AND POSITIONING APPROPRIATELY FOR PEOPLE TO GET BEHIND. 
          UM, SO IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S DEEMED AS LIKE, THIS IS THE LOW HANGING FRUIT AND MOST COST EFFECTIVE THING WE CAN DO, THEN I TOTALLY GET THAT. 
          MY COMMENTS WERE, LOOK, IF THERE ARE OTHER MORE EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES THAT WON'T ENCOUNTER AS MUCH RESISTANCE, I WOULD FOCUS THERE FIRST. 
          BECAUSE IN READING THROUGH WHAT THAT IS IN THE CARBON BLUEPRINT, I CAN TELL IT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE UNPOPULAR. 
          I MEAN, I READ IT AND I WAS LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD BE A FAN OF THIS. 
          I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE GOAL IS AND WHY IT'S THERE. 
          UM, BUT JUST SOMETHING TO EXAMINE. 
          AND LIKE I SAID, IF THAT'S THE LOW HANGING FRUIT AND THE BEST PATH, UH, I UNDERSTAND. 
          BUT THOSE, THOSE TWO STOOD OUT TO ME. 
          UH, SO YEAH, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          NOW I'LL GET TO MY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. 
          UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE HOW THE PLAN TAKES A KIND OF LENGTHY LOOK AT EQUITY AND THE IMPLEMENTATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN TALKING ABOUT HOW WE RESOLVE, UH, THE ISSUE OF RETROFITS AND THE COST. 
          'CAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE LAND RICH, BUT CASH POOR. 
          UM, I SAW, AND I, I'M FORGETTING THE CORNERSTONE NUMBER, BUT I, I SAW THE FOCUS ON HAVING KIND OF BUYOUT PROGRAMS FOR FOLKS WHO ARE MOVING FROM GAS, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER COMPONENTS TO FULL ELECTRIFICATION WILL 'CAUSE I AGREE WITH, I AGREE WITH DARREN THAT CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THIS DEFINITELY CAN BE SOFTENED IN TERMS OF ALLOWING FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS KIND OF FOUNDATIONAL LEADING INTO THE GENERAL PLAN, LEADING INTO THE IZO LEADING INTO ET CETERA. 
          BUT MY QUESTION SLASH ASK, UM, IS THAT THE EQUITY COMPONENTS OF THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO IMPLEMENTATION, HOW FIRM ARE THEY GONNA BE AT THAT, THAT TOP LINE POLICY LEVEL? 'CAUSE THEY GET INCREDIBLY NERVOUS ABOUT FOLKS IN A, IN A UNDERSTANDABLE DESIRE TO RUSH TO US GETTING TO THAT, YOU KNOW, NET ZERO COMPLETELY STEAMROLLING OVER THE FOLKS WHO CAN'T, CAN'T AFFORD IT THE MOST. 
          SO JUST WONDERING HOW THAT ENDS UP PLAYING OUT. 
          IT, IT IS A TOP CONSIDERATION AND PRIORITY. 
          UM, IT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE REASONS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE DON'T HAVE SOME OF THE MORE STRINGENT REGULATIONS ALREADY LIKE TEED UP BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FULLY FIGURE OUT YEAH. 
          HOW DO WE FUND THIS? HOW DO WE HELP PEOPLE? HOW, HOW DO WE NOT HAVE A REGULATION THAT IS UNACHIEVABLE FOR PEOPLE? IT'S, YOU KNOW, YEAH. 
          SO WE HAVE BEEN REALLY FOCUSING ON, UH, YOU KNOW, OTHER THINGS LIKE THE ELECTRIFICATION EXPO WE DID IN CONCERT WITH COOL PETALUMA AND WE HAD A CONTRACTOR, UM, LISTENING SESSION TO HEAR FROM THEM LIKE, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS WITH, YOU KNOW, YOUR WORK AND TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, SO WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO FOCUS ON A LOT OF THINGS WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME OF THE FUNDING MECHANISMS BECAUSE THEY'RE HARD. 
          UM, AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT AND WE'RE NOT GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING, UH, THAT DOESN'T HAVE, DOESN'T HAVE RIGHT. 
          IN, IN CONCERT SOME EQUITY PIECE ALONG WITH IT. 
          I'M ASSUMING LIKE, AND I KNOW THIS IS NOT AT THE PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, BUT I'M ASSUMING AT THIS STAGE THE HOPE IS THAT THERE'LL BE EITHER OUTSIDE OF JUST GENERAL FUND, UH, ACCESS, THAT THERE'LL BE SOME KIND OF COLLECTION OF FEDERAL OR STATE GRANTS TO BE ABLE TO FUND SOME KIND OF BUYOUT PROGRAM. 
          YEAH. 
          IT'S ALL, ALL SORTS OF IT. 
          WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BUYING IN BULK. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, UM, TRYING TO DO SOME, UH, PROACTIVE, UM, WITH PG AND E ESPECIALLY IN ARE THERE SPECIFIC AREAS OF TOWN, UM, WHERE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, MORE CHALLENGES WITH, UM, WITH ELECTRIC SERVICE. 
          UM, AND ARE, DO THOSE OVERLAP WITH, YOU KNOW, ANY OF OUR DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DESIGNATIONS OR OTHER THINGS THAT, AND MAYBE THAT'S WHERE THE CITY NEEDS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO STEP IN AND PROACTIVELY. 
          SO WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE, IT'S NOT AN EASY THING TO YEAH. 
          TO FIGURE OUT. 
          BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT CONSISTENTLY, UM, AND ONGOING AND HAND IN HAND WITH THINKING ABOUT THE REGULATION PART OF IT AND 
          [02:55:01]
FOLLOWING, UH, RICK'S COMMENTS BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS INCREDIBLY APT TO BRING UP THE MM-HMM. 
           ISSUES PG E AND OTHER UTILITIES ARE HAVING WITH KIND OF GETTING THE GRID UP AND RUNNING. 
          AND I KNOW CERTAINLY AT THE STATE LEVEL IT IS LIKE PULLING TEETH, TRYING TO GET INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE. 
          UH, BUT SNOW CLEANING POWER REALLY HAS DONE A LOT IN THAT AREA. 
          HAVE THERE BEEN EARLY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM ABOUT HOW THERE CAN BE MORE PARTNERSHIP ON THAT END? SHOULD SOME OF THIS MOVE ALONG? UM, YOU KNOW, SOME, WE'VE BEEN MORE FOCUSED. 
          I HAVE TO ADMIT RIGHT NOW, I, YOU KNOW, IN THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE BEEN A PART OF, IT'S BEEN FOCUSED ON HOW TO FIGURE OUT THE, THE INFRASTRUCTURE PIECE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND EVEN LIKE UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS, UM, IS, IS A MAJOR HURDLE. 
          THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT LIKE A MAP WE CAN PULL OUT AND SAY, OH, YOU'RE IN THAT AREA WHERE THERE'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, IT'S NOT INTEL. 
          YOU KIND OF HAVE IT AT A HOMEOWNER LEVEL AND YOU HAVE A, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO MAKE AN UPGRADE AND YOU CAN'T BECAUSE YOU NEED A NEW TRANSFORMER. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, SO WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TALK ABOUT IT, UM, AND, AND TALK WITH PG E IN THAT WAY. 
          UM, AND IT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT READILY AVAILABLE. 
          NO, FAIR ENOUGH. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UM, AND THEN I'M TRYING TO DO MY BEST TO DO QUESTIONS FIRST BEFORE I GO INTO COMMENTS, BECAUSE I DO FEEL BAD THAT THIS IS THE ONE TIME, UM, OH, IN TERMS OF THE FOCUS ON, ON PUBLIC TRANSIT, WHICH NO ONE HERE WILL BE SURPRISED. 
          I WAS THRILLED BY THAT ENTIRE SECTION OF, OF THE BLUEPRINT, UH, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE IT REALLY BROUGHT HOME WHAT I THINK SHOULD HAVE FRANKLY BEEN PERFECTLY OBVIOUS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME HERE. 
          UM, BUT ONE THING I DIDN'T SEE THERE, AND I MIGHT HAVE MISSED IT. 
          THE, WAS THERE A DISCUSSION OF, UH, MICRO TRANSIT AND MORE SHUTTLE BASED SERVICE AS PART OF LIKE THE OUTLAY OR POTENTIAL PUSH AT THE POLICY LEVEL? UM, WE ARE WORKING ON THAT RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO THAT'S ALREADY IN, IN, IN ACTION I THINK, I THINK MAYBE A PILOT PROGRAM ROLLING OUT IN JUNE, JULY. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          JUNE. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'LL BE FROM THE FAIRGROUNDS TO THE SMART STATION TO DOWNTOWN ALL FREE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          BEAUTIFUL. 
          THAT IS JUST, THIS IS THE KIND OF NEWS. 
          OKAY. 
          . 
          UH, AND THEN, UH, FOR, I THINK THIS WAS ITEM 24, TALKING ABOUT CAR CARBON GARDENING. 
          UH, I ASSUME PART OF THAT PROFILE IS LIKE THINGS LIKE ROBUST COMMUNITY GARDEN PROGRAMS, THAT SORT OF THING THROUGHOUT THE CITY. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I THINK CAME FROM THE, THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSIONS, UM, AD HOC. 
          SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SUGGESTED. 
          UM, AND IT WAS ALSO REALLY TO BRING IT TO A THINGS THAT PEOPLE CAN DO NOW. 
          MM-HMM. 
           THINGS THAT PEOPLE CAN DO WITHOUT A SIGNIFICANT, UH, FINANCIAL OUTLAY NECESSARILY. 
          UM, AND REALLY, SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF OPEN TO, UM, FLESH OUT AND DEVELOP. 
          BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S WHERE THAT WAS COMING FROM. 
          OH, GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN FOR, UH, THE VMT MITIGATION FEE, UH, HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT? AND I, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT THE PROG PROGRAMMATIC LEVEL, BUT DISCUSSION OF THAT, CONNECTING BACK TO HOW WE EXPAND PUBLIC TRANSIT? UM, YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT UPDATING OUR FEES AFTER THE GENERAL PLAN, ALL OF OUR IMPACT FEES. 
          UM, ONE OF THE, I THINK IT WAS WITH THE, UM, SCOTT RANCH PROJECT. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , WE, WE DIDN'T, WE DON'T HAVE A FEE. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND WE THAT, YEAH, WE REALLY TRIED TO, AND IT WAS LIKE, IT, WE JUST COULDN'T DO IT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY SYSTEMS SET UP. 
          SO MM-HMM. 
          , WE COULDN'T SAY LIKE, THIS MUCH MONEY TOWARDS THIS BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT SET UP. 
          SO THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN THAT, AND WE BATTED AROUND A LOT OF DIFFERENT IDEAS. 
          AND ULTIMATELY WHERE WE CAME TO WAS ALL GREAT IDEAS. 
          WE NEED TO ESTABLISH THE PROGRAM AND THE SYSTEM SO WE CAN PUT THIS INTO PLACE. 
          SO SOME OF IT WAS AROUND TRANSIT, UM, DEFINITELY. 
          UM, AND DOES EVERYBODY, IS, IS EVERYONE AWARE OF THE FAIR, FAIR FREE PILOT PROGRAM? MM-HMM? . 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          YES, BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S PHENOMENAL NEWS. 
          YEAH. 
          NEWS TOO. 
          AND IT KIND OF, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT KEPT COMING UP WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT VMT MM-HMM. 
           WAS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU BUY BUS PASSES FOR, YOU KNOW, AND NOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE 
          [03:00:01]
THAT'S ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF. 
          SO THAT'S GREAT. 
          AND IT MAKES SENSE THAT THAT WOULD COME THAT MUCH LATER. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, AND THEN, AND THIS IS GOING TO, THIS IS GONNA LEAD INTO MY COMMENTS, BUT I JUST WANT TO GET CLARITY. 
          UH, HOW IS, HOW IS THE BLUEPRINT AT THIS POINT DEFINING DENSIFICATION? HOW IS THE BLUEPRINT DEFINING DIFFERENT? YEAH. 
          BECAUSE I HAVE FOUND IN A LOT OF THESE MEETINGS, WHETHER IT'S US OR COUNCIL OR ELSEWHERE, EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT IDEA OF WHAT DENSITY MEANS. 
          SO I, ONE THING I'D JUST LIKE TO ESTABLISH FOR US IS JUST KIND OF WHAT THE, WHERE THE BLUEPRINT IS TARGETED WHEN IT'S TALKING ABOUT INCREASING DENSIFICATION OF THE CITY. 
          WELL, I THINK WE'RE GONNA REALLY BE SEEING THAT WHERE THAT'S REALLY GONNA BE IMPLEMENTED IS THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          MM-HMM. 
          SO IT'S CALLING FOR DENSIFICATION. 
          UH, AND THEN WHEN WE GET INTO OUR LAND USE ALTERNATIVES AND OUR LAND USE FRAMEWORK BE FULLY FLESHED OUT, WE'RE REALLY GONNA BE TOUCHING ON THAT. 
          WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, IN OUR GENERAL PLAN, HOW WE HAVE, UM, UH, RANGES FOR EACH OF OUR LAND USE DESIGNATION. 
          ANOTHER THING WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS WE HAVE AREAS, UH, WHERE, AND THIS WAS TALKED ABOUT AT THE GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAST MEETING, ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWING OUR HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR PROJECTS TO COME IN AT THE LOWER END EDGE. 
          MM-HMM. 
           OF THAT DENSITY RANGE E EVEN BECAUSE MM-HMM. 
          , WE'RE LOSING PRIME OPPORTUNITY, PRIME OPPORTUNITY FOR, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY A LOWER AT THE VERY LOWEST MM-HMM. 
           OF THAT RANGE TO COME IN. 
          AND MAYBE IT'S SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AT THAT VERY LOWEST RANGE. 
          AND THAT'S OUR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND IT REALLY SHOULD BE RESERVED. 
          SO WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE POLICIES TO SAY THINGS LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, A PROJECT HAS TO COME IN AT THE MIDPOINT OR HIGHER OR THOSE KIND OF THINGS, OR CHANGE THE ZONING CODE TO NOT ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY IN OUR MULTIFAMILY HIGH DENSITY AREAS THAT IT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE. 
          YOU HAVE TO DO MULTIFAMILY. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO, UM, SO I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THE SPECIFICS OF DENSITY ARE REALLY GONNA PLAY OUT MORE IN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LAND USE AND THE, AND THE POLICIES AND THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          NO, THAT MAKES, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND I'M GLAD YOU PHRASED IT THAT WAY, BECAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE, AND NOW I'M JUST GOING TO PIVOT TO COMMENTS. 
          UM, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE SOME PEOPLE MIGHT READ DENSITY AND GET AFRAID. 
          THAT'S CERTAINLY BEEN AN ONGOING BACK AND FORTH FOR QUITE A FEW DIFFERENT DISCUSSIONS THAT THE CITY LATELY. 
          UH, BUT I'M GLAD YOU HIGHLIGHTED EXACTLY THE POINT I WANTED TO BRING UP, WHICH IS DENSITY IS DIFFERENT THINGS IN DIFFERENT PLACES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO HAVING THAT IDEA IN MIND AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, UH, LATELY I'VE NOTICED THERE'S BEEN A TENOR CHANGE WHERE PEOPLE WHO I USED TO VIEW AS MENTORS WHO USED TO TALK A GREAT DEAL ABOUT TRANSIT-ORIENTED GROWTH AND DENSITY, AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, HAVE NOW TURNED AROUND AND BACKTRACKED FROM THAT. 
          AND ONE THING I'D, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY, WITH A PLAN LIKE THIS, UH, THEY'RE, I MEAN, WE'VE DONE ALL THE LOW HANGING FRUIT YOU CAN DO IN THIS CITY. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE PAST THAT POINT. 
          I, I WAS INCREDIBLY GLAD TO SEE THIS AND GO THROUGH THIS. 
          I KNOW THERE WAS THAT ELEMENT OF BEING DEPRESSED, BUT I WAS THRILLED BECAUSE I WOULD RATHER KNOW WHAT THE ABSURD LEVEL WE HAVE TO REACH IS TO ACTUALLY GET TO WHERE WE'RE GOING RATHER THAN JUST THINKING THAT, OKAY, IT'S ENOUGH TO RECYCLE AND WE DO THINGS HERE AND THERE AND WE'VE REDUCED SOME POWER. 
          LIKE TO KNOW HOW HARD THIS IS GONNA BE IS ACTUALLY INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. 
          THE FACT THAT WE CAN DO THAT IS EVEN BETTER. 
          UH, AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING IN AHEAD OF OUR GENERAL PLAN TO GIVE US THAT GUIDE GUIDING POINT IN ALL THE WORK THE CLIMATE COMMISSION AND STAFF AND THE CONSULTANT HAVE DONE TO PUT THIS TOGETHER. 
          I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING TO BE CELEBRATED. 
          UH, GOING BACK TO LIKE WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS, WE'VE BEEN INVESTING IN PUBLIC TRANSIT AND THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE LAST, WHAT, 20, 30 YEARS. 
          IT'S BEEN GETTING PROGRESSIVELY BETTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. 
          NOW WE'RE AT FREE SERVICE. 
          IT'S, IT'S GONE FROM BEING NON-EXISTENT TO FULLY FUNCTIONAL, ONE OF THE BEST LIKE COMPLETE CIRCLE SYSTEMS, INNO COUNTY FOR A CITY THAT IS IN SANTA ROSA AT THIS POINT. 
          AND IT ONLY TAKES A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A NUDGE TO MAKE IT ADOPTED FOR A LARGER PORTION OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          I BRING THIS UP BECAUSE DENSITY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE, WE'RE ADDING SHUTTLE BUS SERVICE ON A REGULAR BASIS, MAKING IT SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE A CAR OR AN ELECTRIC BIKE, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN'T NECESSARILY AFFORD AND OR SAFELY RIDE AN ELECTRIC BIKE. 
          AND THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SAFELY OR PHYSICALLY 
          [03:05:01]
RIDE AN ACTUAL BIKE. 
          SO HAVING, HAVING REGULAR SHUTTLE SERVICE THAT ADDS A LEVEL OF DENSITY TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT CHANGING ANYTHING, THEN THERE'S THE ASPECT OF, OKAY, YOU'RE ALLOWING SOME DUPLEXES. 
          VERY FEW PEOPLE WOULD MIND SEEING A HOME SPLIT. 
          OR BECAUSE OF RECENT STATE LAW, CITIES CAN NOW TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, UH, CREATING A DU SPACE. 
          PETALUMA HASN'T, AS FAR AS I KNOW, HASN'T ADOPTED THIS POLICY, BUT IF IT DID, YOU CAN SEG SEGMENT OUT YOUR A DU AS AN OWNED PARCEL. 
          MM-HMM . 
          AND FOR NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THE ONE I LIVE IN, WHERE IT'S WHOLE FAMILIES, THEIR KIDS AND THEIR PARENTS, BECAUSE NO ONE CAN AFFORD HOUSING HERE, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG DEAL. 
          'CAUSE THAT CREATES DENSITY WITHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD EVEN REALIZING IT HAS IT. 
          SO I, I'M GLAD THE PLAN CALLS IT OUT, AND I'M GLAD THE PLAN ALLOWS, ALLOWS FOR THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS TO KIND OF STRENGTHEN IT. 
          I JUST ALSO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, I ALWAYS HEAR A LOT OF FEAR AROUND DENSITY. 
          AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY AS, AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE'S SCALES TO DENSITY. 
          AND IF WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT HITTING CARBON NEUTRALITY BY, OR BEING CARBON NEUTRAL BY 2030, UH, YEAH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TALK ABOUT DENSITY IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          I MEAN, THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THERE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE THIS MANY SINGLE FAMILY ZONED HOMES, BUT WE KIND OF GOT STUCK IN A MODE FOR A GOOD 20 YEARS BEFORE YOU CHANGE THE POLICY. 
          UH, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE SUDDENLY GOING TO HAVE 10 STORY APARTMENTS RIGHT NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT VMT MITIGATION FEE, UH, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT. 
          UH, WE'RE NOT, I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE WON'T LOVE IT. 
          MANY CITIES HAVE ADOPTED IT. 
          PEOPLE HAVE LEARNED TO ADJUST THAT IN COMBINATION WITH PARKING PRICING. 
          AND IF WE START LOOKING AT OUR PARKING MINIMUMS, UH, MY FAVORITE EXAMPLE TO BRING UP IS THE BOWLING ALLEY EXAMPLE. 
          THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PER BOWLING LANE. 
          IT JUST, IT REALLY CRYSTALLIZES, WE MADE THOSE STANDARDS UP BASED ON KIND OF BACK OF THE NAPKIN LOGIC. 
          UH, BEING ABLE TO UP UPDATE THOSE STANDARDS IN CONCERT, I THINK WILL BE CRITICAL FOR DOING THE OTHER PART OF THIS THAT I KNOW IS FRUSTRATING FOR PEOPLE, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE DRIVING LESS, LESS ATTRACTIVE. 
          WE, THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A STICK. 
          IT CAN'T ALL BE LOOK AT THE LOVELY BIKE LANE. 
          THERE ALSO HAS TO BE A DIFFICULTY WHEN IT COMES TO TAKING A TRIP YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE. 
          AND IF WE'RE COMBINING THAT WITH EXPANDED TRANSIT SERVICE, THERE'S THAT MANY MORE OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE. 
          UM, I DID WANT TO ACTUALLY, AND I'VE CIRCLED BACK, I DID HAVE A QUESTION. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE IF THIS GOES THROUGH AS PROPOSED. 
          AND I RECOGNIZE THAT YOU SHARED A LOT OF THE, THE MAXIMUM WE'D HAVE TO GO TO REACH OUR GOAL. 
          AND I CERTAINLY HOPE WE GET THERE IF THIS GOES THROUGH AND WE GET THROUGH GENERAL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE IN OUR CLIMATE MITIGATION PLAN AND IT'S FULLY IMPLEMENTED, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION PER PROJECT THAN WE'VE EVER HAD BEFORE ON CARBON EMISSIONS, ON USE MATERIALS, ON, UH, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN THE AREA, ET CETERA. 
          SO ONE QUESTION I HAD, HOW IS THIS GOING TO IMPACT KIND OF OUR DESIGN REVIEW GOING FORWARD? I MEAN, WILL THERE BE KIND OF ANOTHER STANDARD OR CHECKLIST OF REVIEW THAT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT? OR WILL THIS BE SO FULLY BAKED INTO THE DESIGN OR INTO OUR BUILDING STANDARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, WON'T REALLY POP UP JUST THE SAME WAY, YOU KNOW, THE CHOICE OF WOOD YOU MIGHT PICK DOESN'T REALLY POP UP IN OUR MATERIAL IN OUR MEETINGS. 
          I THINK THAT IS, IS YET TO BE DETERMINED BY HOW WE ADOPT THIS INTO REGULATIONS AND, AND GUIDELINES. 
          SO THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BLUEPRINT THAT I, YOU KNOW, THAT IT WOULD BE LIKE, IS THIS PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDING CONSISTENT WITH OUR BLUEPRINT, YOU KNOW, POLICY 22, 24, 20, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. 
          UM, BUT THE IDEA IS WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THE DIRECTION IN HERE AND START CREATING, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REGULATIONS. 
          AND SO IF WE ADOPT A LOW CARBON CONCRETE MM-HMM. 
           REQUIREMENT, THEN AT A PROJECT LEVEL YOU'RE GONNA SAY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A CONDITION. 
          RIGHT? OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT SAYS PRIOR ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT, YOU'LL DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S LOW CARBON CONCRETE. 
          SO YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT THE BLUEPRINT ITSELF DOESN'T HAVE THAT LIKE, UH, DEVELOPER, YOU KNOW, CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST. 
          UM, SO I THINK IT'LL, IT'LL BE AS, BUT BY THE TIME WE ADOPT, THAT'S HOW WE GET THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, THE GENERAL PLAN AND WE ADOPT THE REGULATION AND, UM, I THINK THE ADAPTATION FRAMEWORK IS GONNA HAVE STUFF, UM, ABOUT LIKE, IF THIS, IF YOU'RE IN THIS AREA BASED ON OUR MODELING, THEN YOU 
          [03:10:01]
HAVE TO DO X, Y, AND Z. 
          OR IF YOU ARE LOCATED IN THIS AREA AND YOU'RE THIS KIND OF LAND USE, THEN YOU HAVE TO DO EVEN ADDITIONAL A, B AND C, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT KIND OF STUFF. 
          UM, SO THAT ONE I THINK WILL HAVE A MORE IMMEDIATE IMPACT ON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROJECTS IN THOSE FLOOD AND S LR PRONE AREAS. 
          GOT IT. 
          ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU. 
          UH, THAT KIND OF CON CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. 
          I WENT OFF A LITTLE BIT THERE. 
          UM, DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DARREN? UH, JUST AS A QUICK WRAP UP, I REALLY APPRECIATE CHAIR HOOPER KIND OF REALLY BROADENING THAT CONVERSATION. 
          AND I TOTALLY AGREE. 
          I THINK DIFFERENT AREAS, DENSITY LOOKS DIFFERENTLY, YOU KNOW, BUT MY COMMENTS WHEN I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS GHG GOAL AND THINKING ABOUT IT ALMOST AS A PROJECT MANAGER IS WHERE ARE WE GONNA HIT THE MO THE MOST ROADBLOCKS, WHERE'S THAT BANG FOR OUR BUCK? I JUST WANTED TO, AND AND THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY PRIORITIZE IN THE BLUEPRINT BY ANY MEANS, LIKE WE NEED TO TRANSFORM ALL THE SMALL COTTAGE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS IN PETALUMA. 
          UM, BUT THE IDEA THAT THOSE ARE GONNA HAVE LESS OF AN IMPACT THAN LIKE, HEY, WE'VE ONLY GOT A FEW YEARS. 
          LET'S MAKE SURE WE ACTUALLY BUILD THOSE SUPER HIGH DENSITY ONES NEAR TRANSIT. 
          'CAUSE THAT STILL HASN'T HAPPENED AFTER FIVE YEARS. 
          SO IT'S JUST KIND OF SHIFTING THAT FOCUS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE REALLY HITTING THE BIG ITEMS AND THIS KIND OF DISPARATE TRANSFORMING AREAS THAT MIGHT ENCOUNTER RESISTANCE IS JUST, AND MAYBE THAT PRIORITIZATION COMES THROUGH IN THE GENERAL PLAN. 
          UH, BUT YEAH, THAT, THAT WAS MY POINT ON THAT, BUT I TOTALLY APPRECIATE CHAIR HOOPER'S COMMENTS ABOUT THAT AND KIND OF BROADENING THAT CONVERSATION OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. 
          I THINK THAT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION TO HAVE ABOUT WHAT DOES DENSITY LOOK LIKE IN DIFFERENT ZONING AREAS? WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS? IT'S NOT JUST AN APARTMENT BUILDING. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S VALID. 
          BUT YEAH, JUST IN TERMS OF REALLY HITTING OUR GOALS AND FOCUSING ON THOSE BIG TARGET AREAS FIRST TO REALLY ACHIEVE IT, THAT THAT WAS REALLY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO COMMUNICATE. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          AND SO I DO THINK THAT THERE MAY BE SOME, UM, SOME OF THE OUTREACH WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, MAYBE SOME LIKE, UM, UH, VISUAL PREFERENCE AROUND DIFFERENT DENS, WHAT DIFFERENT DENSITIES LOOK LIKE ONE. 
          UM, AND TWO, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO, THE MARKET IS A BIG PIECE OF THIS DISCUSSION BECAUSE THE CITY DOESN'T NECESSARILY GO AND BUILD THAT, YOU KNOW, HIGH DENSITY ON A PIECE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
          SO WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I, I THINK THE, THE, UM, FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY, DID THAT COME TO THIS GROUP ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT'S, UH, NOT DIRECTLY, NO. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THE GENERAL PLAN IS LOOKED AT WAS, UM, SOME RESIDENTIAL FEASIBILITY ALSO. 
          AND IT'S TOUGH BECAUSE WE ARE IN AN AREA THAT, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T HAVE, DOESN'T, UM, YOU DON'T CHARGE THE RENTS OF SAN FRANCISCO, BUT THE COSTS OF BUILDING ARE THE SAME AS SAN FRANCISCO OR THEREABOUT. 
          SO WE HAVE THIS KIND OF LIKE, IT'S, IT'S A CATCH UP TO FOR THE MARKET TOO. 
          SO IT'S JUST LIKE, I KNOW THAT'S, THAT THERE IS OFTEN A KIND OF LIKE, WELL, WE SAY WHAT WE WANT AND IT'LL IT, BUT THE MARKET IS ANOTHER PIECE OF THAT CONVERSATION. 
          SO WE THINK NEED TO THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE FACILITATE OBVIOUSLY GOOD DEVELOPMENT, THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREAS WE WANT, BUT ALSO WE HAVE TO BE AWARE THAT THE MARKET IS GONNA BE A HUGE PLAYER IN, IN SEEING THE, THOSE PROJECTS. 
          AND, AND BY THE WAY, I SHOULD JUST CLARIFY, UH, COMMISSIONER KUSON, I COULDN'T AGREE MORE THAT WE SHOULD DEFINITELY HIT OUR BIGGEST BANG FOR A BUCK. 
          THAT'S WHY I WAS SO THRILLED TO SEE PUBLIC TRANSIT HIT EXACTLY IN THE MIDDLE, WHICH GAVE ME A GREAT DEAL OF JOY. 
          UM, AND I WASN'T AT ALL TRYING TO FRAME YOUR COMMENTS IN THIS LIKE, FEAR TOWARDS DENSITY. 
          IT'S MORE OF A, THAT HAS COME UP IN OTHER MEETINGS WITH THAT. 
          WE'VE ALL HAD TO WATCH THAT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF PUT THAT OUT THERE AND ALSO HIT BACK HOME. 
          ON YOUR POINT IN RELATIONSHIP TO, I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WAS THE, THE, THE MARKET ASSESSMENT. 
          BUT LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IN LIKE A PERFECT WORLD, THAT SMART PROPERTY, WE WOULD'VE DONE THAT BY NOW. 
          IT'D BE DONE, WE'D BE GREAT. 
          WE WOULD'VE ADDED TO OUR NUMBERS. 
          I COULD, AND MAYBE I'M ENTIRELY WRONG BASED ON THE MARKET ANALYSIS, BUT I COULD SEE A WORLD WHERE IT'S LIKE, WELL, THAT'S GONNA TAKE ANOTHER FIVE YEARS, BUT IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS WE COULD BUILD A LOT OF DUPLEXES IN RANDOM PARTS OF TOWN. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF THING. 
          SO JUST I THINK WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS, GOES BACK A LOT TO YOUR ORIGINAL POINT, WHICH IS AS LONG AS WE'RE ABLE TO KEEP THE FLEXIBILITY, 
          [03:15:01]
KEEP THE FLEXIBILITY OF WHAT, WHAT IS THE BIGGEST BANG FOR A BUCK BASED ON THOSE CONDITIONS. 
          SO YEAH. 
          AND WITH THAT, I THINK THIS ITEM IS CLOSED AND I VERY MUCH, WE MIGHT NEED PUBLIC COMMENT CHAIR. 
          OH, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          I AM SO SORRY. 
          DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS SIDE? NO. 
          'CAUSE I ALREADY HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS WITH MY COMMITTEE, SO I'M DONE WITH THIS. 
          YOU HAD TO GO THROUGH IT. 
          YEAH, YEAH. 
          EXCEPT THAT WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T GET HEIDI TO COME VISIT US. 
          I HAD CREATE DOCUMENTS TO SHOW THEM WHAT THIS ALL MEANT. 
          DID DID WE GET ANY PUBLIC COMMENT OR VIRTUAL? WE RECEIVED ONE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS MEETING ITEM. 
          IT HAS BEEN POSTED ONLINE AND IT'S ALSO AVAILABLE IN THE BACK FOR VIEWING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          AND I REALLY WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND THANK YOU FOR BEARING WITH US THROUGH BOTH QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. 
          AGAIN, HAPPY TO BE HERE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THIS IS FROM CHICO FOR YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WITH THAT, 
          [COMMITTEE COMMENT]
UH, WE, WE'LL MOVE FROM THE STUDY SESSION AND WE WILL GO INTO, I BELIEVE WE'RE AT, UH, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AT THIS POINT. 
          SO WITH THAT, UH, I'LL START DOWN THE ROAD. 
          RICK. 
          YEAH, I, I, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION THAT WE JUST HAD AROUND, UM, CARROTS AND STICKS AND FINDING WAYS OF PAYING FOR THIS ALL. 
          AND ONE THING THAT I'D LIKE TO ENCOURAGE IS, UM, UH, CAL CITIES HAS, HAS PRODUCED SOME, SOME GOOD WORK ABOUT, UM, UH, CHANNELING, UH, IRA MONEY AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE FUND MONEY TO CITIES. 
          UM, SO IF, IF, UM, WE HAVE STAFF THAT CAN KIND OF RESEARCH THAT, UM, THAT COULD BE JUST A, A REALLY GOOD CONDUIT FOR SOME OF THIS FUNDING TO MAKE THESE THINGS HAPPEN, ESPECIALLY FOR DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND, AND ANYTHING TO ACHIEVE EQUITY IN THE, UH, ELECTRIFICATION TRANS, UH, TRANSITION. 
          SO, UH, DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE, UH, STAFF TO LOOK INTO THAT. 
          I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. 
          THANK YOU, DARREN. 
          YEAH, I, WE HAVE NOT HAD A PBAC MEETING SINCE OUR LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND I'LL LET ROGER HIT THE BIG ITEMS FOR TREE COMMITTEE. 
          UH, I WILL SAY THAT THERE WILL BE AN ARBOR DAY CELEBRATION FROM THE TREE COMMITTEE ON APRIL 28TH. 
          IT'S GONNA BE KIND OF THE BIGGEST CELEBRATIONS, THE CITY THE CITY'S HAD LED BY MEMBERS OF THE TREE COMMITTEE AD HOC. 
          SO YOU'RE GONNA HEAR ME PROMOTING THAT PRETTY OFTEN AS WE APPROACH THE DATE. 
          UH, SO AN ARBOR DAY COMMITTEE, IT'S GONNA BE AT PRINCE PARK. 
          WE'RE CHOOSING A LOCATION, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE TO CELEBRATE OUR URBAN FOREST. 
          THAT'S AMAZING. 
          UH, A GOOD ARBOR DAY. 
          A GOOD ARBOR DAY EVENT IS HONESTLY SOMETHING I HAVEN'T SEEN IN A WHILE. 
          YEAH, SORRY. 
          WE DO IT. 
          YEAH, I HOPE WE DO IT. 
          UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ROGER. 
          UH, JUST, UH, ON THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WE HAVE, UH, WE'RE CLOSE TO A STREET TREE LIST. 
          VERY CLOSE. 
          IT'S DOWN TO THE FINAL FEW TREES. 
          UM, SO IT'S COMING. 
          GREAT NEWS, JESSICA. 
          UM, N NOT A SPONSORED POST, BUT SOMETHING I FOUND INTERESTING THAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY IS URBAN CHAT SLASH KNOW BEFORE YOU GROW HAS A COUPLE INTERESTING SPEAKER EVENTS COMING UP TOMORROW. 
          THERE'S A BIGGIE, UM, ABOUT TRANSIT. 
          AND THEN ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13TH IS A EVENT ACTUALLY AT THE MYSTIC, UM, WITH, UH, SOME ARCHITECTS TALKING ABOUT, UH, MAKING HOUSING MORE FOR PEOPLE . 
          UH, SO YEAH, SOME GOOD STUFF IF YOU GO TO URBAN CHAT.ORG. 
          AWESOME. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          AND WITH 
          [STAFF COMMENT]
THAT, WE'RE NOW ONTO OUR PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT. 
          GREAT. 
          THANKS CHAIR. 
          I'LL BE, UH, VERY BRIEF THIS EVENING. 
          UM, AS, AS HEATHER INDICATED, YOU ARE GOING TO BE RECEIVING SOME OF THE, UH, GENERAL PLAN, UM, ONGOING WORK THAT WILL BE COMING UP AS WE DID WITH, UM, WITH BLUEPRINT. 
          WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO GET THOSE LINKS TO MATERIALS OUT TO YOU WELL IN ADVANCE AND, UM, AND TRY TO KEEP YOU APPRAISED WITH THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. 
          'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF CONTENT AND IT'S A LOT TO THINK ABOUT. 
          UM, WE ARE ALSO, UH, AS PART OF THAT, SO, SO MARCH 12TH, UM, WE WILL BE HOSTING A JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION MEETING TO LOOK AT THE FLOOD AND SEE LEVEL RISE MAPPING. 
          SO, SO THAT WILL BE A PRETTY BIG MEETING IN TERMS OF PARTICIPANTS. 
          UM, AND THEN WE GO INTO, UH, WE'VE GOT SEVERAL, UM, DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEWS LINED UP, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UM, 
          [03:20:01]
FOR HILLSIDE CONDITION AND SUCH, AS WELL AS, UH, SEEKING AND WORKING TO BRING SOME ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU RELATED TO HOUSING. 
          BUT, UH, ALSO AS PART OF THAT, WE'RE WORKING WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE TEAM TO, TO SORT OF LOOK BROADLY AT THE GENERAL PLAN AND WHAT'S COMING FORWARD. 
          I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER KUSON POINTED OUT THIS EVENING, SOMETIMES WHEN YOU APPLY THAT, THAT LAND USE LENS TO A PARTICULAR FRAMEWORK, IT, IT TAKES ON A DIFFERENT, UM, YOU HAVE DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS FROM IT AND YOU WANT TO SEE DIFFERENT THINGS IN IT. 
          IN THE CASE THIS EVENING, IT WAS LOOKING FOR MORE FLEXIBILITY, YOU KNOW, AT, AT CERTAIN POINTS IN THE BLUEPRINT. 
          AND SO WE'RE GONNA DO SOME WORK WITH THAT TO HELP THE COMMISSION UNDERSTAND HOW TO RECEIVE SOME OF THESE FRAMEWORKS AND HOW TO THINK ABOUT THEM WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF, UM, THE, THE COMMISSION'S, UM, DUTIES AS A, UH, REVIEW AUTHORITY. 
          SO JUST KNOW THAT THAT, THAT WHILE WE'RE, WE ARE BRINGING SOME ITEMS FORWARD YOU EARLY, WE'RE NOT FORGETTING THAT WE ALSO HAVE A LONG ROAD AHEAD OF US AND THAT WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT YOU'RE WELL PREPARED, UM, TO EXERCISE YOUR DUTIES AND, UH, TO SUPPORT YOU IN THAT REGARD. 
          THAT'S GREAT NEWS. 
          AND YOU'VE ACTUALLY TAKEN AN ITEM OFF MY LIST THAT I WAS GONNA ASK YOU ABOUT AFTER THIS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, WELL, WITH THAT, WE HAVE COME TO THE END OF OUR EVENING AND WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE, 10 O'CLOCK. 
          UH, SO I WANNA COMMEND US ALL, UH, I'M GOING TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. 
          THANK YOU EVERYONE.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.