[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6205902,"mediaKeyId","3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e","parentId",3768094,"title","Arts community urges council to remove ‘Site 23’ from housing element to protect Sanchez Art Center","audioSeconds",1591,"startMs",1182000,"endMs",2773000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e&start=1182&end=2773","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e/thumbnail_1182000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6205902/Pacifica/San-Mateo-County/California/Arts-community-urges-council-to-remove-Site-23-from-housing-element-to-protect-Sanchez-Art-Center","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6205902-611dac6bc343f49b4569e146cebc6590/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167952&Signature=XoZvOmrroYGAe8QgBnClnNgHyYAJ0kId~Phm7~Yhusazzy~qW5n2yrmkHrZdS~63W3ew-Vssw7yZGjbKPi~gBKe-gOnbH4-KTGGAYWAtZxprnVT-NlxNOiNtyMJqfQiAcsiVHE1CLTL8qlognAHBb5HtmmX0nsgUFwzjHXo8W2T~VPI0qcso9m10Vi6oAb0pmF8AXpvoFtN7dWpO875fqG~-nFTZps70g9cwpAh7wxDJW8knU8NibKIClsoN5mgUkAcF3KnjrDS3q2Qznj9xgk4gtGxOnEwVqRnyi24XoD15ciT3A5E7U3OSeBaHjxTMfgf-FERK1uAt7rtX2sih0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Pacifica CA","date","2025-06-11T16:24:57.38Z","article","Artists, nonprofit leaders and community members urged the City Council on Monday to remove a campus identified as “Site 23” from Pacifica’s housing element, saying the site — home to Sanchez Art Center and related arts activities — serves a broad social and cultural role that housing development would damage.

Speakers described the Sanchez Art Center as a regional draw that provides classes, exhibitions and community programs that reduce social isolation and support seniors. Sanchez Art Center Executive Director Cindy Abbott and a local artist who identified herself as Larissa Wasserman said losing Site 23 would remove a rare gathering space for older adults, artists and visitors and damage the city’s cultural economy.

Why it matters: The housing element must identify potential sites to meet state RHNA requirements, but residents argued that Site 23’s community uses and economic contributions make it unsuitable for residential redevelopment without alternatives.

Larissa Wasserman, who said she is not a Pacifica resident but has strong ties to the art center, told the council the site supports vulnerable people who benefit from community art programs. \"Removing Site 23, which is Sanchez Art Center, is a very thoughtless and ill considered proposition,\" she said.

Cindy Abbott outlined recent activity at the art center — gallery exhibitions by known regional artists, summer camps, concerts and an asphalt art pilot project — and asked the council to \"do the right thing for the community\" by directing staff to prepare an amendment removing Site 23 from the housing element.

Speakers also linked arts preservation to economic and social benefits: they said FogFest and other events bring visitors and revenue to downtown businesses and that the Sanchez campus draws people from across the Bay Area. FogFest organizers spoke separately during public comment to announce the September festival dates and call for volunteers; later in the budget presentation staff noted a $25,000 funding request from FogFest received after packet publication that was not included in the proposed budget.

City response and next steps: Several speakers asked staff to prepare a formal amendment removing Site 23 from the housing element; staff did not commit to a specific action on the dais during the public‑comment portion but the request became part of public record. The council did not take immediate action to amend the housing element; staff indicated the housing element will return to the Planning Commission in July and that the earliest council review could be in August, depending on the commission schedule.

Ending: Arts advocates asked the council to prioritize the cultural and social benefits of Sanchez Art Center when finalizing the housing element; the council will consider housing‑element timing and related staff recommendations at future meetings.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","PCC 6/9/25 Part 1 - Pacifica City Council Meeting - June 9, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Sanchez Art Center supporters and other residents told the City Council that designating the art center campus (Site 23) for housing would harm community arts programming and senior social connections; speakers asked staff to draft an amendment removing Site 23 from the housing element.","taxTitle","Pacifica, San Mateo County, California","taxId",54263,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6205907,"Residents urge Pacifica to act on RVs near Oceana and Paloma Avenue, citing safety and sanitation",2109,1536000,3645000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e&start=1536&end=3645","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e/thumbnail_1536000.jpg","/articles/6205907/Pacifica/San-Mateo-County/California/Residents-urge-Pacifica-to-act-on-RVs-near-Oceana-and-Paloma-Avenue-citing-safety-and-sanitation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6205907-28c3c8359b398e8f4e66488b5e9127f6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167952&Signature=UovHZg~2SkH8Ahp~ZM1Ng1JLmyPyckIiWTszhqSlODhXwKS~nAcupw91KbFaK3x5zMcAY3A76hnj1gAyRU3Zazy0EMKBQqcfvqlh8FbiT8WjBwfWiPUcPIp86av1mhuF9AbL6IStTbtWgdjNKtdAfuHioRLk8zoREZ12xJjoB~mwsQdIed1zWYTR6quTzSwxhkrgXW~3MA5fe8daGHeRa-b-mYj67Bmu0Fl-o809g6oFypEoUq6YFbOW932Dt9lrJp6MGRplklh9iSO7pEyv6if-EaovMGxJs2-02HCc5VJT9Zaa1FVnmlHeRKJwttWa6rPl~-oWkwsfPRzQmbHimg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of residents from the Sharp Park neighborhood told the Pacifica City Council on Monday that long‑term RV parking along Paloma Avenue—near Oceana High School and nearby preschools—has created visibility problems, sanitation hazards and safety concerns.

Speakers described RVs repeatedly occupying curbside space for prolonged periods, obstructing sightlines for drivers and pedestrians and, in some cases, leaving trash and human waste. Several said the same owner was renting or otherwise placing multiple RVs on the block, generating business‑like activity on a residential street.

Why it matters: Commenters said the RVs reduce parking for residents during school events, present a potential hazard for children walking or biking to school, and create public‑health worries where sanitation appears to be inadequate.

Liana Wren, a 20‑plus‑year local high school teacher and Sharp Park resident, told the council the situation undermines residential zoning and “is not only a threat to public safety, but also a direct disruption to community standards, livability, and fairness.” Joyce Toomey, who said her family has lived on Paloma for decades, described feces and dumped garbage near homes and said residents were becoming ill from stress caused by ongoing incidents.

“My wife and others who live in my neighborhood have been taken to the hospital already because of this related anxiety and stress,” resident Albert Romero said, describing repeated 72‑hour parking moves that nonetheless keep RVs effectively in the same location.

Former city public‑works employee Paul Laverini urged neighbors to document incidents and urged calmer engagement with police, saying enforcement of the 72‑hour rule has been insufficient and that some RV occupants are openly dismissive of enforcement.

Residents asked the council for several possible remedies: stricter enforcement of existing 72‑hour parking limits, designation of non‑residential streets for RV parking, re‑evaluation of weight or length limits on residential streets, and targeted cleanup and storm‑drain protections to prevent sewage or other waste running into the storm system.

Several speakers asked the city to consider local regulatory changes. Helena Pacaluk, a neighbor active in East Sharp Park, asked whether the council could consider an anti‑camping ordinance or designate areas such as Lundy Way near the highway as allowable parking zones that would keep temporary living vehicles away from residential blocks.

City response and next steps: City officials acknowledged receipt of the complaints and said staff and police would continue their work on enforcement and outreach. During council communications the mayor said staff and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation department were discussing increased public messaging about illegal beach fires and that the council was “actively working with staff” on neighborhood complaints. No immediate ordinance change or new enforcement policy was adopted at the June 9 meeting; residents were told staff would return with additional analysis and options.

Ending: Neighbors asked the council for clearer enforcement and faster remedies; council members asked staff to refine the options and report back, including whether additional resources or ordinance changes are needed.","Multiple Sharp Park and East Sharp Park residents told the City Council that long‑term RV parking near schools is creating safety, sanitation and quality‑of‑life problems and called for stronger enforcement and ordinance changes.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6205912,"Pacifica council reviews ‘bare‑bones’ FY2025‑26 budget and flags housing‑fund spending",2874,4753000,7627000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e&start=4753&end=7627","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3768094-d060df3e16d233c17d3a0a334ac0f06e/thumbnail_4753000.jpg","/articles/6205912/Pacifica/San-Mateo-County/California/Pacifica-council-reviews-barebones-FY202526-budget-and-flags-housingfund-spending","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6205912-fbd4e6633ffa085d1f3ce9c04409aa73/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167952&Signature=L67qEoYhzG0rzuHkEo5dEosqvw2XjitiqmiRsypaMcZU5gpMA3zocrHElqgHC7XmTWu2v5wD99O~5K4FT0jcNy0DE4F5iHfHlShrUMBqK5du4c8WXttTKvnQHenxH2PtIukNcW57w6Z61Qo7zs0GQcSsf7kUDx0EDzO~TasDkoWajM6Lw88aZHR470ilXqOTtXW2KSmycv3oozQ5jfto-2z~SUzFGclvaxRfEz7xecRbJZVT-8IHlb8Mv2m4lJqpjm80q9SOFPvuzl4Q1sW2ddrjvfXbqj9~kT58M3efxo7KvysF-Er0QQkGrK3F1fmD-MuA-iWebnqNBfQ5EEpu5w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Pacifica city staff on Monday presented a recommended fiscal year 2025‑26 budget the city manager called “one of the most challenging years,” asking the City Council for policy direction on roughly $820,700 in general‑fund program options and about $1.6 million in additional unfunded requests.

The budget presentation, led by City Manager Kevin Woodhouse and Assistant City Manager Yulia Carter with input from Administrative Services/Finance staff, framed the proposed plan as structurally balanced only after one‑time moves and by relying on revenue assumptions that remain uncertain, including vehicle license fee (VLF) “backfill” payments from the state. The staff recommended reductions or deferrals for several items and offered alternatives to fund some priorities if council chooses to do so.

Why it matters: The recommended budget preserves core services while postponing or trimming other work the council and staff have prioritized, including capital and equipment replacement. Several items—particularly actions tied to the Housing Action Fund and to state funding guarantees—could affect the city’s ability to meet housing goals and its long‑term fiscal stability.

City staff said the proposed budget includes an operating surplus of $57,109 after the recommended program changes and one‑time transfers. The proposal increases the city’s unassigned general‑fund balance to about $10.1 million (roughly 9.1% of operating expenditures), above the Government Finance Officers Association’s two‑month recommended minimum but short of a three‑month target staff referenced as ideal.

Major recommended program options in the general fund include a $150,000 one‑time Shoreline Adaptation Program allocation, a $100,000 one‑time development impact and cost‑recovery study, a $75,000 ongoing short‑term‑rental (STR) administration allocation, a $200,000 ongoing replenishment of the vehicle replacement (motor pool) fund and a $85,000 one‑time Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Plan (CARP) implementation request. Staff recommended postponing the city’s scheduled contribution to the PARS pension trust for the coming year (about $214,700) to help balance the budget and retained an OPEB trust contribution of roughly $283,000.

\"I will say that, in reflecting back, I do feel like this year is one of the most challenging years,\" City Manager Kevin Woodhouse told the council, adding the recommendation tries to preserve services while shifting some work to later years.

Council members pressed staff for clearer accounting of Housing Action Fund uses after public commenters raised concerns that in‑fund payments were being used in place of producing affordable units. Assistant City Manager Yulia Carter and finance staff outlined requested Housing Action Fund items: a limited‑term economic/housing staffing package (roughly $246,000 for the first year as presented), $150,000 for a master planning of city sites to support housing, and $100,000 for on‑call technical services to implement the housing element. Staff also noted the fund carries current‑year contractual commitments, including payments to community programs such as a temporary safe‑parking arrangement administered by a nonprofit partner.

During public comment, a constituent who identified herself as Dinah Verby urged the council not to allow a developer of the 801 Fastler townhomes to substitute an in‑lieu fee for required below‑market units, saying, \"I'm strongly opposed to that.\" Staff confirmed the city had issued a notice of violation to that developer and said details would be brought forward for council consideration.

Staff identified roughly $1.3 million in overdue vehicle and equipment replacement requests that are unfunded; the recommended budget proposes a $200,000 annual replenishment to the motor‑pool fund to begin rebuilding that reserve. The budget also lists $1.6 million in total unfunded general‑fund requests, including public‑works compliance training, an HR performance management system, streetlight maintenance and two additional staff requests the city manager did not recommend for the coming year.

The recommended budget treats a request from FogFest organizers for $25,000 as a community funding ask not included in the base budget; staff said the council could decide whether to fund the festival. Staff also described a three‑year, regional funding request from the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (one Shoreline) for $120,000 and recommended—if the council were inclined—to fund only the first year while the city evaluates benefits to Pacifica.

Staff stressed that several revenue assumptions carry risk: the city is relying on $3.7 million in excess ERAF (Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund) transfers and on uncertain state VLF backfill payments (staff cited a prior year’s backfill of about $2.3 million). The recommendation includes a $600,000 one‑time transfer from the debt service fund to add short‑term relief.

What council asked next: Council members requested clearer, consolidated schedules showing Housing Action Fund commitments and asked staff to confirm current contractual obligations and the timing of one‑time versus ongoing costs. Several council members signaled hesitancy to make long‑term commitments from one‑time reserves and asked staff to return on June 23 with any changes for final adoption.

A public step: The council held this study session for direction; final adoption of the FY2025‑26 operating and capital budget and the citywide fee schedule is scheduled for the June 23 meeting.

Ending: Staff indicated they may revisit several items midyear if revenue conditions change and will provide refined cost estimates. The council did not take a final vote on the budget at the June 9 study session; members requested follow‑up information on Housing Action Fund line items, the status of the 801 Fastler enforcement action, and the potential fiscal impact of any funding requests for community organizations.","City staff presented a structurally balanced but constrained fiscal 2025‑26 budget that relies on uncertain state backfill and one‑time transfers; council members and public pressed for clarity on Housing Action Fund uses, in‑lieu fees and community event requests.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Arts community urges council to remove ‘Site 23’ from housing element to protect Sanchez Art Center

Residents urge Pacifica to act on RVs near Oceana and Paloma Avenue, citing safety and sanitation

Pacifica council reviews ‘bare‑bones’ FY2025‑26 budget and flags housing‑fund spending