The ordinance, presented by Julian Perez, the Community Development and Planning Director, outlined a comprehensive strategy to regulate residential development in industrial, commercial, and mixed-use areas. The ordinance highlighted the need for specific standards pertaining to permitted and prohibited uses, density, setbacks, landscaping, open space requirements, and the process for application submission and consistency review. The goal was to craft an ordinance that would both comply with state mandates and protect the city’s interests.

A notable concern during the discussion of the ordinance was the open space requirement for developers and the potential impact of Senate Bill 102 on residential communities. There was a debate over potential setbacks and amendments to the bill, with particular attention to maintaining the quality of life for future residents. After deliberation, the ordinance was approved on first reading, subject to a clerical amendment to its language. Additionally, a reminder was issued regarding the second reading of the item scheduled for March 13.

Complementing the discussion on land use, the council addressed the vetting of the ordinance that would allow agenda items to be placed within seven days prior to a meeting, without the need for an affirmative majority of the city council. This amendment aimed to better align the council’s procedures with the city charter. The council approved this amendment, which was notably supported by the vice mayor, and was seconded by another council member.

Financial management also took center stage with the introduction of the Capital Asset Reserve Fund Policy. This policy is designed to establish a minimum annual contribution and fund balance within the infrastructure replacement fund of the city’s budget. The Finance director emphasized that the policy aligns with the Government Finance Officers Association best practices. It was noted that the policy would require the city to allocate a small percentage of funds annually for future asset repairs. Questions were raised regarding the voting requirements for policy changes, specifically the shift from a majority to a four-fifths vote. The council addressed these concerns, emphasizing that the four-fifths vote requirement would reduce the influence of politics in decision-making. The policy was motioned for approval.

Further discussions included several ordinances that had reached their second reading. Ordinance Number 20241 dealt with year-round landscape irrigation restrictions, where public comments highlighted the importance of repairing broken pipes to prevent water wastage. The City Manager’s Office confirmed no changes between the first and second readings of the ordinance. The council touched upon the enforcement of the ordinance and the necessity of community education prior to implementing any penalties.

Additionally, Ordinance Number 20242 addressed the retail sales of dogs and cats, and the Code Compliance department confirmed that this ordinance had seen no changes between readings. Ordinances Number 20243 and 20244 were also finalized in line with the County’s regulations, having no alterations from their first readings. Lastly, Ordinance Number 202405, which focused on the ethics code of conduct, was clarified by the City Attorney based on recommendations from the Mate Commission on ethics to clearly delineate their jurisdiction over ethics matters. All mentioned ordinances were approved on second reading.

The meeting commenced with a public comment from Mr. Pier Christ, urging the council to restore harmony in the city. However, no other public comments were made for the remainder of the session.