Oct 27, 2026 Cultural Heritage Commission

[00:05:15]

THIS

[00:05:15]

WE WILL BE STARTING SHORTLY.

WE ARE WAITING FOR ONE MORE COMMISSIONER SO WE CAN REACH QUORUM I.

[00:18:39]

[00:18:39]

[00:21:58]

UM, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL

[CALL TO ORDER]

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL FOR

[ROLL CALL]

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER PIZO.

PRESENT, VICE CHAIR GFE PRESENT AND CHAIR MCG GUAN PRESENT.

WE HAVE QUORUM.

THANK YOU FOR THE RECORD.

COMMISSIONER PADILLA PEREZ AND COMMISSIONER PRYOR ARE EXCUSED FROM THE MEETING.

ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? IF NONE, PLEASE STAND

[PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

I GOTCHA.

READY, BEGIN.

I PLEDGE ALL ALLEGIANCE, ALLEGIANCE TO TO THE FLAG OF OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR SFI FOR THAT.

SINCE WE'LL, WE'RE NOT HAVING ANY HEARINGS, WE WILL SKIP THE SWEARING OF WITNESSES.

UH, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE FIRST ITEM.

ITEM NUMBER ONE

[1. 26-56528 Recommendation to receive and file Director’s Report.       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

MAY I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND ON THIS? CAN I HAVE A SECOND, PLEASE? I'LL TAKE A VERBAL IF THERE'S ANY, UH, VICE CHAIR GFI.

I SECOND.

THANK YOU.

THE MOTION HAS BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BODAK AND SECOND BY VICE CHAIR GFI.

I'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO STAFF FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.

THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

GOOD EVENING.

UH, JUST A COUPLE UPDATES FROM THE STAFF TABLE.

UM, AT THE LAST MEETING OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION, WE HAD ANNOUNCED THAT WE WOULD BE IZING ELECTIONS.

HOWEVER, SINCE WE DO HAVE A SMALLER, UH, NUMBER OF FOLKS HERE THIS EVENING, WE WILL RESERVE THAT FOR THE NEXT, UH, NEXT MEETING OF THE COMMISSION.

UM, AND AS WE LOOK TOWARDS YEAR END, I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT WE ANTICIPATE, UH, LIKELY CANCELING THE NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER MEETINGS, GIVEN THEY FALL ON THE HOLIDAY WEEKS.

UM, AND DUE TO LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS, UM, NEEDING TO BE BROUGHT, BROUGHT FORWARD AT THIS TIME.

SO WE'RE EXPECTING THAT OUR NEXT MEETING WILL LIKELY BE, UM, THE LAST WEEK OF JANUARY.

I WANTED TO THANK EACH OF EACH OF YOU AS COMMISSIONERS FOR PROVIDING YOUR FEEDBACK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF MOVING THE DAY AND TIME OF OUR REGULAR COMMISSION MEETINGS.

WE GOT A RANGE OF FEEDBACK FROM, UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT WE ARE STILL EVALUATING.

UM, THE CHANGE WAS MORE SORT OF UNANIMOUSLY PALATABLE FOR THE OTHER COMMISSION, THE LONG BEACH, UH, COMMUNITY INVESTMENT COMPANY WHO WE HAVE ALSO ASKED TO MOVE TO HELP US WITH OUR COST SAVINGS MEASURES.

[00:25:01]

UM, AND AS DISCUSSED LAST MONTH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF, OF MANY THINGS THE CITY'S LOOKING AT FROM A BUDGETARY PERSPECTIVE AS WE LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL SMALLER STEPS TO HELP US WITH OUR COLLECTIVE NEED FOR COST CONTROL IN THIS, UH, FINANCIALLY CHALLENGING TIME.

UM, SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR PROVIDING YOUR FEEDBACK.

WE'LL EVALUATE THAT, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE 'CAUSE SOME FOLKS ASK FOR SOME ADDITIONAL TIME AND WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT THOSE RESPONSES AND WE'LL, UH, FOLLOW UP WITH YOU IN THE COMING MONTHS.

UH, AND WE APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY AND YOUR FEEDBACK AND CONTINUING TO WORK TOGETHER ON THIS TOPIC.

UH, THAT CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT? IF THERE ARE NONE, WE'LL NOW TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.

IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT JUST ON ITEM ONE, PLEASE LINE UP AT THE PODIUM IN PERSON.

SEEING NONE.

OKAY.

VIRTUALLY, IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE.

NOW, IF DIALING IN TELEPHONICALLY, PRESS STAR NINE NOW.

THERE APPEARS TO BE NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM CHAIR.

I'M GONNA OPEN THE VOTE FIRST FOR ITEM ONE OH OH OH.

FOR, PARDON ME.

THANK YOU.

UM, CALL FOR THE VOTE.

THANK YOU.

OH, THERE YOU GO.

DOESN'T WORK.

VICE SUGAR.

SUGAR SAFA.

I CAN TAKE A PURPLE.

YES.

YES.

THANK YOU.

MOTION IS CARRIED.

THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM.

ITEM NUMBER TWO

[2. 26-56529 Recommendation to approve the minutes for the Cultural Heritage Commission meeting of Tuesday, September 29, 2026.       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM? THE MOTION WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BODAK AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PIEL.

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MINUTES CLERK'S? TEAM? IS IT POSSIBLE THAT A CONFIRMATION ON THE MOTION? AND SECOND, I BELIEVE THE ITEM STILL ON THE SCREEN IS FROM ITEM ONE? YES.

UH, THE MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO.

IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BODEK AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PIZO.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MINUTES? IF NONE, WE'LL NOW TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.

IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER TWO, PLEASE LINE UP AT THE PODIUM AT THIS TIME.

SEEING NONE VIRTUALLY.

IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE.

NOW.

IF DIALING IN TELEPHONICALLY, PRESS STAR NINE NOW.

SEE NONE.

THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU.

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL FOR THE VOTE.

VICE CHAIR GFI.

UH, YES.

MOTION IS CARRIED.

THE SCREEN SHOULD BE UP SHORTLY.

THANK YOU.

UH, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM.

ITEM NUMBER THREE IS A RECOMMENDATION.

SORRY.

BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM, CAN WE JUST GET A, A REPORT OUT ON THE VOTE SINCE THE SCREEN ISN'T REPORTING THROUGH? YES.

UM, THE MOTION WAS CARRIED.

FOUR ZERO.

THANK YOU.

ITEM NUMBER THREE IS

[3. 26-56530 Recommendation to conduct a study session on the Mills Act Program to evaluate potential future modifications to the program, including changes to application requirements and program administration.       Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM? IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PIZO AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BODEK FOR ITEM THREE.

THANK YOU.

UM, I NOW TURN THINGS OVER TO STAFF FOR THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

I'M EXCITED TO, UM, HELP INTRODUCE THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS REQUESTED FROM THE COMMISSION WHEN WE BROUGHT FORWARD, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MILS ACT CONTRACTS EARLIER THIS YEAR, A REQUEST TO FURTHER STUDY THE, UM, PROGRAM OVERALL AND ITS ADMINISTRATION.

IT'S ALSO BEEN A REQUEST, UH, FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS AS WELL.

UM, AND I WANNA RECOGNIZE AND THANK, UM, OUR STAFF HERE, UM, MARISSA AND ALEJANDRO WHO'VE BEEN HARD AT WORK, UM, PUTTING TOGETHER

[00:30:01]

AND I'LL NOW TURN IT OVER TO THEM.

GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

UM, WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO BE BRINGING YOU A STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW THE STATUS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM, UH, AFTER IT WAS REINSTATED A BIT MORE THAN A DECADE AGO IN 2015.

SO WE ARE LOOKING AT THE PROGRAM TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S OPERATING AS A BEST USE OF CITY RESOURCES TO SUPPORT PRESERVATION GOALS, AND THAT IT HAS LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY, UH, INCLUDING THAT STAFF IS ABLE TO EFFECTIVELY MANAGE EXISTING CONTRACTS WITH AVAILABLE STAFF RESOURCES, AND ALSO PLAN FOR NEW CONTRACTS FOR THE LONG TERM.

WE ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE PROGRAM IS SUPPORTING BROADER CITY GOALS, INCLUDING GOALS AROUND EQUITY AND ACCESS FROM THE CITY'S 2030 STRATEGIC VISION.

UM, AND THIS EVENING WE'RE LOOKING TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION AND FROM THE PUBLIC TO INFORM POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM.

SHOULDN'T WORK.

NO, I'M NOT ABLE TO ADVANCE THE SLIDES.

I'LL HAVE ALEJANDRO KEEP WORKING ON THAT AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.

UM, SO THIS EVENING WE'RE LOOKING TO PROVIDE BACKGROUND ON THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM GENERALLY.

SO THE STATE LEGISLATION AND THE HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM IN LONG BEACH.

OH, THERE WE GO.

WE WANNA, UM, PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT PROGRAM WITH STATISTICS ON THE EXISTING ACTIVE CONTRACTS, REVIEW THE CURRENT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, UH, INCLUDING THE PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR APPLICATIONS, WORK PLANS, AND VALUATION LIMITS.

WE'VE DONE SOME RESEARCH, UM, ON MILLS ACT PROGRAMS IN OTHER CITIES, SO WE HAVE SOME COMPARISON OF THOSE OTHER PROGRAMS WITH THE THE LONG BEACH PROGRAM.

AND THEN WE HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POTENTIAL UPDATES TO THE PROGRAM.

SO AFTER THE STAFF PRESENTATION, THERE'S TIME FOR THE COMMISSION AND THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE PROGRAM AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

UH, WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE IF I'M ABLE TO DO THAT VERBALLY.

WAIT.

SO THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM IS ENABLED BY STATE LEGISLATION THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 1972 AND BECAME EFFECTIVE IN MARCH OF 1973.

AND IT'S CODIFIED IN BOTH THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, UH, AND THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE, UH, RELATED TO HOW MILLS ACT REASSESSMENTS ARE DONE.

AND THE LEGISLATION IS NAMED AFTER STATE SENATOR JAMES MILLS FROM SAN DIEGO, WHOSE WORK IN PRESERVATION AND CALIFORNIA WAS INSPIRED BY THREATS TO DEMOLISH THE HOTEL DEL CORONADO AND WHO HELPED TO CREATE THE MILLS ACT, UH, AS A WAY TO PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE TO SAVE SIMILAR PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STATE.

SO IT'S HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND THAT CONTEXT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MILLS ACT BECAUSE IT WAS CREATED PRIOR TO PROPOSITION 13.

SO AT A TIME WHEN MANY PROPERTY OWNERS WERE EXPERIENCING RAPID CHANGES IN YEARLY PROPERTY TAXES, AND IT WAS ALSO ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO MANY OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROTECTIONS THAT EXIST TODAY.

SO THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT IS A JOINT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER.

AND IN TERMS OF THE CITY'S GOALS FOR THE MILLS ACT, IT, THAT INCLUDES PROVIDING A PUBLIC BENEFIT THROUGH THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE CITY, ENCOURAGING THE DESIGNATION OF NEW LANDMARKS AND EXPANDING EQUITY AND ACCESS TO PRESERVATION INCENTIVES.

AND THEN FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE MILLS ACT HELPS TO FUND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CONDITION OF THEIR HISTORIC PROPERTY, PROVIDES ACCESS TO THOSE TAX SAVINGS TO OFFSET THE COSTS OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.

AND IT PROVIDES A POTENTIAL INCENTIVE TO BUYERS OF PROPERTY BECAUSE THE CONTRACT AND THE TAX BENEFIT TRANSFERS TO NEW OWNERS.

SO A MILLS ACT CONTRACT IS EXECUTED FOR A MINIMUM 10 YEAR TERM, AND THE CONTRACT IS

[00:35:01]

SO THE PROPERTY OWNER AGREES TO COMPLETE A WORK PLAN FOR REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE THAT'S BASED ON THE NEEDS OF THEIR SPECIFIC HISTORIC PROPERTY, CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION STANDARDS, UM, AND THE CITY'S CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PROCESS.

SO AN INSPECTION OF THE PROPERTY, UM, IS CONDUCTED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF A NEW CONTRACT, AND THEN SHOULD BE CONDUCTED EVERY FIVE YEARS AFTER RECORDING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS COMPLYING WITH THOSE CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS.

UM, ALTHOUGH THAT ONGOING INSPECTION CYCLE IS ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH THE PROGRAM, UM, PARTICULARLY A PROGRAM LIKE LONG BEACH, THAT INCLUDES OLDER CONTRACTS, UH, AND THE ADDITION OF NEW CONTRACTS EVERY YEAR.

SO CONTRACTS ARE RENEWED AUTOMATICALLY EACH YEAR FOR A NEW 10 YEAR TERM, WHICH MEANS, IN EFFECT, THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT RUNS IN PERPETUITY UNLESS THE CONTRACT IS EITHER NOT RENEWED OR CANCELED.

SO THAT MEANS WHAT I WAS REFERENCING EARLIER, THAT THE CONTRACT TRANSFERS AUTOMATICALLY TO NEW PROPERTY OWNERS WHEN A PROPERTY IS SOLD.

THERE ARE TWO MAIN WAYS TO REMOVE A MILLS ACT CONTRACT FROM A PROPERTY.

UM, EITHER THE CITY OR THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN REQUEST A NON-RENEWAL.

AND AFTER THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL IS RECEIVED, THE CONTRACT SUNSETS OVER THE REMAINING 10 YEAR TERM OF THE CONTRACT OR THE CITY CAN INITIATE A CANCELLATION IF THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT, HAS ALLOWED THE PROPERTY TO DETERIORATE TO THE POINT THAT IT'S NO LONGER QUALIFIES AS A HISTORIC RESOURCE, OR IF THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS FAILED TO COMPLETE THAT WORK PLAN FOR REHABILITATION THAT'S IN THE CONTRACT.

SO THAT CANCELLATION REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING, UH, WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CANCELLATION AND CANCELLATION IMPOSES A PENALTY OF 12.5% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, ON THE OWNER IF THE CANCELLATION IS APPROVED.

SO AFTER A MILLS ACT CONTRACT IS RECORDED, THE RECORDING TRIGGERS THE LA COUNTY ASSESSOR TO REASSESS THE PROPERTY USING AN INCOME CAPITALIZATION METHOD.

SO THAT METHOD FOR REASSESSMENT IS SET BY THE MILLS ACT STATE LEGISLATION.

UM, SO THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE ANY INPUT ON THAT REASSESSMENT, BUT IT'S NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT TO CAUSE AN INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER.

THE COUNTY ASSESSOR ALWAYS ASSESSES PROPERTY TAXES ON THE LOWEST POTENTIAL VALUATION, WHETHER THAT'S THE EXISTING ASSESSMENT UNDER PREP 13 OR THE MILLS ACT REASSESSMENT.

AND SO WITH THAT INCOME CAPITALIZATION METHOD FOR, UM, ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY, GENERALLY PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE PURCHASED THEIR PROPERTIES MORE RECENTLY, PARTICULARLY IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, ARE MOST LIKELY TO BENEFIT FROM A MILLS ACT CONTRACT.

LONGER TERM OWNERS LIKELY WON'T BENEFIT BECAUSE THE MILLS ACT ASSESSMENT IS LIKELY TO BE HIGHER THAN THE ASSESSMENT UNDER PROP PROPOSITION 13.

UM, BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE THE PRO CONTRACT TRANSFERS WITH THE PROPERTY, IT MAY BENEFIT A NEW BUYER WHO WOULD OTHERWISE RECEIVE A STEPPED UP ASSESSMENT BASED ON THE SALES PRICE OF THE PROPERTY.

SO WHAT I'VE TALKED ABOUT TO THIS POINT ARE THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SET BY THE STATE LEGISLATION.

UM, BUT THE STATE LEGISLATION ALSO ALLOWS EACH CITY WITH A MILLS ACT PROGRAM TO ADOPT THEIR OWN CRITERIA FOR NEW CONTRACTS AND FOR ADMINISTERING THAT LOCAL PROGRAM.

SO IN LONG BEACH, THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM WAS ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 1993.

IN 2006, THE PROGRAM WAS PAUSED, UH, TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROGRAM, AND THEN THAT PAUSE WAS CONTINUED IN RESPONSE TO THE RECESSION.

AT THE TIME OF THAT PAUSE, THERE WERE 37 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT HAD A, THAT HAD AN APPROVED MILLS ACT CONTRACT, INCLUDING THREE CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS.

AND THEN AFTER THAT PAUSE IN 2015, THE CITY COUNCIL REINSTATED THE PROGRAM WITH SOME UPDATED REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING NEW APPLICATIONS, PROCEDURES FOR CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS, AND SOME OTHER LIMITS

[00:40:01]

THE PROGRAM WAS ALSO BRIEFLY PAUSED IN 2021 AND 2022 IN RESPONSE TO THE PANDEMIC.

SO THE MAJORITY OF THE MILLS ACT CONTRACTS, UH, 130 CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED SINCE THE PROGRAM WAS REINSTATED ON AVERAGE PRE 2006.

BEFORE THE, THE PAUSE, THE PROGRAM WAS AVERAGING, UM, ABOUT THREE NEW CONTRACTS PER YEAR.

AND THE VOLUME OF APPROVED NEW CONTRACTS HAS BEEN MUCH GREATER IN THE PAST 10 YEARS AND CONTINUES TO INCREASE.

SO IN LONG BEACH, UM, PROPERTIES ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A CONTRACT.

PROPERTIES NEED TO BE DESIGNATED AS INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS ELIGIBLE TO BE DESIGNATED AS LANDMARKS OR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND AS PART OF THE APPLICATION, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO PREPARE A DETAILED AND SUBSTANTIAL 10 YEAR WORK PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY THAT MEETS THE CITY'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

UH, STANDARDS APPLICATIONS ARE ASSESSED BASED ON THOSE PRIORITY CRITERIA THAT I'VE MENTIONED, AND WE'LL GO INTO A BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT COMING UP HERE.

THERE'S ALSO A CAP ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTS PER YEAR, UH, AND THERE ARE VALUATION LIMITS FOR PROPERTIES, AGAIN, BASED ON, UM, PROPERTY TYPES.

SO THE CURRENT PRIOR PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR A MILLS ACT APPLICATION ARE, UM, IF THE, THE PROPERTY IS A UNIQUE OR IMPORTANT HISTORIC STRUCTURE IN PARTICULARLY POOR CONDITION AND IN NEED OF SIGNIFICANT RESTORATION.

IF THE PROPERTY IS A POTENTIAL LANDMARK THAT'S NOT DESIGNATED, THAT'S NOT IN A DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT, OR IF THE APPLICATION INCLUDES THE USE OF LOCAL LONG BEACH, UH, LABOR AND MATERIALS IN THE WORK PLAN.

UM, AND PART OF STAFF STAFF'S EFFORTS TO, UM, THINK ABOUT HOW TO EXPAND ACCESS TO LANDMARK DESIGNATION, WE PROVIDED SOME CLARIFICATION IN THE 2026 APPLICATION, UH, THAT PROPERTIES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE RACE AND SUBURBANIZATION HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT OR PROPERTIES THAT REPRESENT UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIES OR DIFFERENT TYPES OF HISTORIC RESOURCES WOULD QUALIFY AS A UNIQUE OR IMPORTANT HISTORIC STRUCTURE FOR THAT FIRST PRIORITY CRITERIA.

THERE ARE ALSO LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF NEW CONTRACTS THAT CAN BE APPROVED EACH YEAR BASED ON PROPERTY TYPES.

SO IT'S A MAXIMUM OF 12 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, THREE DUPLEXES OR TRIPLEXES, FOUR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR MIXED USE PROPERTIES, AND ONE NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

THERE'S ALSO A MAXIMUM OF TWO PROPERTIES OF, OF ANY TYPE THAT ARE PARTICULARLY EXCEPTIONAL, CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT, OR AT RISK OF DEMOLITION.

THERE ARE ALSO VALUATION LIMITS ON, UH, WHICH PROPERTIES CAN RECEIVE A CONTRACT.

SO FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, THE VALUATION LIMIT IS, UH, JUST OVER 1.7 MILLION FOR DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES.

THE VALUATION LIMIT IS PER DWELLING UNIT AND IS JUST OVER 1 MILLION FOR EACH DWELLING UNIT.

THERE'S NO VALUATION LIMIT THAT'S IMPOSED ON MULTIFAMILY OR MIXED USE PROPERTIES.

AND FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, THE VALUATION LIMIT, UH, IS SLIGHTLY OVER, WHAT 4.4 MILLION.

THERE'S NO CAP ON THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE EXCEPTIONAL, CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT OR AT RISK OF DEMOLITION.

UM, BUT FROM THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE, NO MORE THAN TWO OF THOSE, UM, KINDS OF CONTRACTS CAN BE APPROVED EACH YEAR.

SO FOR THE CURRENT PROGRAM, THERE ARE 167 ACTIVE MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH AN ADDITIONAL SIX CONTRACTS THAT WERE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL THIS YEAR AND WILL BE RECORDED BY THE END OF THE YEAR.

THE EXISTING CONTRACTS RESULT IN AN APPROXIMATELY $400,000 REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

UM, THAT IS A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL GENERAL FUND, BUT IT DOES INCREASE EACH YEAR AS NEW CONTRACTS ARE BEING APPROVED.

SO PART OF WHAT WE LOOKED AT FOR THIS STUDY SESSION WAS THE DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT MILLS ACT CONTRACTS, INCLUDING

[00:45:01]

SO A TOTAL OF 48 CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR, UM, INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS.

ANOTHER 95 CONTRACTS ARE FOR, UM, CONTRIBUTORS TO HISTORIC DISTRICTS, AND THEN 24 ARE FOR CONTRACTS THAT ARE BOTH LANDMARKS AND CONTRIBUTORS TO A HISTORIC DISTRICT.

DRAKE WILMORE HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS THE LARGEST NUMBER OF MILLS ACT CONTRACTS OF ANY HISTORIC DISTRICT.

THERE ARE 23 IN DRAKE WILMORE, UM, FOLLOWED BY BLUFF PARK, BLUFF HEIGHTS, AND CALIFORNIA HEIGHTS.

THERE ARE, UM, FOUR SMALL HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT HAVE NO MILLS ACT CONTRACTS IN THEM.

THOSE ARE BRENNER PLACE, ELLIOT LANE, MINERVA PLACE, AND WILTON STREET.

AND THE REMAINING 10 HISTORIC DISTRICTS HAVE 10 OR FEWER MILLS ACT CONTRACTS EACH, UH, IN THEM.

SO THE LARGEST CONCENTRATION OF MILLS ACT CONTRACTS, UM, ARE REALLY IN AREAS WITH LARGER HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

SO THAT INCLUDES, UM, MIDSHORE DOWNTOWN AND BIXBY KNOLLS, UM, PARTICULARLY COW HEIGHTS, UH, ON THIS MAP.

AND, UH, THE MAP ON THE RIGHT IS SHOWING, UH, THE MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITHIN THE CITY'S COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS.

AND THIS IS, UM, IN PART A REFLECTION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN THE CITY.

AND I THINK DEMONSTRATES THAT THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE MILLS ACT IS PART OF AN ONGOING AND LARGER EFFORT TO INCREASE AND IMPROVE THAT DISTRIBUTION OF DESIGNATED LANDMARKS ACROSS THE CITY AS A WHOLE, AND TO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORY OF OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY, UM, BEYOND THE EXISTING HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND LANDMARKS.

SO STAFF ALSO MAPPED THE EXISTING MILLS ACT PROPERTIES ONTO THE 2026 OPPORTUNITY MAP FROM THE CALIFORNIA TRACK TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S TCAC.

UH, HCD IS THE ACRONYM.

SO THE OPPORTUNITY MAP IDENTIFIES AREAS WITH CHARACTERISTICS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH POSITIVE ECONOMIC, EDUCATIONAL AND HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR LOW INCOME FAMILIES, AND PARTICULARLY LONG, LONG TERM OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN.

IT ALSO IDENTIFIES AREAS THAT HAVE A HIGHER POTENTIAL FOR NEGATIVE HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR VULNERABLE POPULATIONS.

SO THE, UM, OPPORTUNITY MAP SCORES NEIGHBORHOODS BASED ON THOSE ECONOMIC AND EDUCATIONAL IN, UH, INDICATORS RELATIVE TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE SAME REGION.

AND THE FINAL SCORES ARE DIVIDED INTO HIGH RESOURCE, HIGHEST RESOURCE, HIGH RESOURCE, MODERATE RESOURCE, AND LOW RESOURCE.

SO HIGHEST RESOURCE ARE THOSE AREAS WITH THE HIGHEST ASSOCIATION WITH POSITIVE ECONOMIC, EDUCATIONAL AND HEALTH OUTCOMES.

UM, ALSO SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE, UM, CENSUS TRACKS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED AS HIGH POVERTY AND SEGREGATED AREAS BASED ON, UM, CRITERIA AROUND THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF POVERTY RATES AND RACIAL SEGREGATION.

AND IN LONG BEACH, THERE ARE, UM, FIVE HIGH POVERTY AND SEGREGATED AREA TRACKS, UM, ALL OF THEM WITHIN LOW RESOURCE AREAS.

SO THE OPPORTUNITY MAP IS ONE WAY TO HELP INFORM POLICY THAT INCREASES ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY HOUSING MOBILITY FOR LOWER INCOME FAMILIES.

AND USING THESE KINDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC INDICATORS IS SOMETHING THAT OTHER MILLS ACT PROGRAMS, UM, HAVE DONE IN CALIFORNIA IN AN EFFORT TO UNDERSTAND WHICH COMMUNITIES AND WHICH RESIDENTS ARE ACCESSING THE BENEFITS OF THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM.

SO THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES HAS WORKED ON A SIMILAR EFFORT, UM, UNDERTAKEN AFTER THEIR PROGRAM WAS PAUSED IN 2022, UM, USING SPECIFICALLY THE OPPORTUNITY MAP.

SAN FRANCISCO ALSO HAS A SIMILAR EFFORT LOOKING AT PRIORITY EQUITY GEOGRAPHIES, UM, WHICH USES SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ME, UH, METRICS, BUT A SIMILAR INTENT TO IDENTIFY HIGHER DENSITIES OF VULNERABLE POPULATIONS AND HOW THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM INTERSECTS WITH THOSE COMMUNITIES.

SO APPROXIMATELY 44% OF CURRENT MILLS ACT CONTRACTS ARE LOCATED IN LOW RESOURCE AREAS IDENTIFIED ON THE OPPORTUNITY MAP.

UH, 48% OF MILLS ACT CONTRACTS ARE LOCATED IN THE HIGHEST OR HIGH RESOURCE AREAS.

AND THIS DISTRIBUTION IS LIKELY A REFLECTION OF, OF A FEW DIFFERENT FACTORS, UM, INCLUDING WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, INCLU IN TERMS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXISTING LANDMARKS AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS ACROSS THE CITY AS A WHOLE.

UM,

[00:50:01]

WE ALSO THINK THAT IT IS INDICATIVE OF, UM, SOME POSITIVE MOVEMENT IN THE CITY'S EFFORTS TO MAKE THE M ACT PROGRAM MORE ACCESSIBLE TO COMMUNITIES IN THE RESOURCE AREAS.

SO SINCE 2021, THE FIRST M ACT CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN WRIGLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT AND GRANT NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND ADDITIONAL HISTORIC, UH, ADDITIONAL MOSA CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN HELLMAN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT AND SUNRISE BOULEVARD.

UM, AND ALL OF THESE HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE FULLY LOCATED WITHIN, UH, LOW RESOURCE CENSUS TRACKS.

AT THE SAME TIME, THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM, UH, IS NOT COLLECTING DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ON CONTRACT RECIPIENTS, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE RACIAL DISPARITIES CITYWIDE AROUND HOME OWNERSHIP WITH 57% OF WHITE RESIDENTS BEING HOMEOWNERS COMPARED TO 24 AND 31% OF BLACK AND LATINO RESIDENTS RESPECTIVELY.

THE CITY IS ALSO MAJORITY RENTER, AND THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM DOES NOT DIRECTLY BENEFIT RENTERS BECAUSE IT IS A PROPERTY TAX INCENTIVE.

SO THERE IS MORE EFFORT NEEDED AROUND OUTREACH AND DATA GATHERING TO ENSURE THAT THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM CAN BE ACCESSED EQUITABLY, EQUITABLY.

AND WE'RE WORKING IN THE PLANNING BUREAU TO RAMP UP THESE EFFORTS, PARTICULARLY OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM AND ALSO PLAN FOR IMPROVED OUTREACH EFFORTS FOR ENGAGEMENT AND ACCESS.

SO THE STAFF REPORT ALSO PROVIDES A COMPARISON OF THE LONG BEACH PROGRAM WITH OTHER CITIES, UH, PARTICULARLY LOS ANGELES, SAN FRANCISCO, PASADENA, AND SAN DIEGO.

SO SIMILAR TO LONG BEACH, ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN ACTIVE FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

THREE OF THE PROGRAMS ARE CURRENTLY ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

THAT'S SAN DIEGO, SAN FRANCISCO, AND PASADENA.

THE LOS ANGELES MILLS ACT PROGRAM HAS BEEN PAUSED SINCE 2022 TO ASSESS THE PROGRAM AND TO CONSIDER CHANGES TO ITS, UM, REQUIREMENTS, UM, PARTICULARLY WITH A FOCUS ON HOW TO MAKE SURE THE PROGRAM IS SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE.

SO THE INFORMATION ON CITY OF LOS ANGELES, UM, IS BASED ON APPLICATION INFORMATION FROM WHEN THEIR PROGRAM WAS ACTIVE, UH, BUT ALSO CONSIDERS THE WORK THAT LOS ANGELES HAS DONE TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THEIR PROGRAM.

SO THERE'S A VERY WIDE RANGE OF TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTS AMONG THE PROGRAMS, UH, FROM MORE THAN 1500 IN SAN DIEGO TO 45 IN SAN FRANCISCO.

BUT THERE ARE SOME COMMON THEMES ACROSS THE PROGRAMS, UM, RELATED TO HOW, UM, NEW APPLICATIONS ARE ASSESSED AND HOW THE PROGRAM IS MANAGED.

SO PARTICULARLY AROUND THE USE OF PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING APPLICATIONS AND CONSISTENT METHODS OF, UM, EITHER CAPPING PROPERTY VALUATIONS OR, UH, CAPPING THE TOTAL REDUCTIONS IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE FROM THE PROGRAM.

SO RELATED TO THE PRIORITY CRI CRITERIA, AMONG ALL OF THE PROGRAMS, THERE'S AN EMPHASIS ON RECOGNIZING PARTICULARLY UNIQUE OR SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

THERE'S ALSO A FOCUS, UM, ON ENSURING THAT WORK PLANS ARE SUPPORTING SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT IN THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE A MILLS ACT CONTRACT.

AND, UH, THAT THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT IS BEING USED TO PRESERVE PROPERTIES THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE AT RISK OF DEMOLITION.

THERE'S ALSO AN EMPHASIS AMONG THE PROGRAMS AND THE PRIORITY CRITERIA TO SUPPORT THE RETENTION OF EXISTING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, UM, OR TO SUPPORT ADAPTIVE REUSE PROGRAMS THAT CREATE NEW HOUSING.

AND THAT INCLUDES, UH, CITY OF LOS ANGELES PRIORITY CRITERION FOR MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES THAT REQUIRES PROPERTIES WITH MORE THAN 20 RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION SHOWING, UM, THAT THE PROPERTY INCLUDES THE PRESERVATION OR ADDITION OF DWELLING UNITS FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS.

SO THAT THAT AFFORDABILITY CRITERIA IN LA IN LOS ANGELES,

[00:55:01]

SO THE CITY WAS STILL REVIEWING HOW EXACTLY TO IMPLEMENT THAT AFFORDABILITY CRITERIA, AND THERE'S NO DATA YET ON THAT IMPLEMENTATION, BUT IT DOES HIGHLIGHT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM TO SUPPORT AND WORK IN CONCERT WITH OTHER CITY PRIORITIES AROUND HOUSING AND AFFORDABILITY.

SO THREE OF THE FOUR PROGRAMS ALSO HAVE PROPERTY VALUATION LIMITS, UH, LOS ANGELES, SAN FRANCISCO, AND PASADENA.

SIMILAR TO THE, UH, VALUATION LIMITS THAT LONG BEACH USES, LOS ANGELES AND SAN FRANCISCO ALSO HAVE AN OPTION SIMILAR TO LONG BEACH, TO EXEMPT PARTICULARLY EXCEPTIONAL PROPERTIES FROM THOSE VALUATION LIMITS.

AND THEN TWO OF THE PROGRAMS HAVE A CAP ON THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION TO THE CITY.

SO, UH, IN LOS ANGELES, THE ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE LOSS, UH, WHEN THE, UH, PROGRAM WAS OPERATING WAS CAPPED AT NO MORE THAN $2 MILLION TOTAL FOR ALL CONTRACTS THAT'S WITH EXISTING AND ANY NEW CONTRACTS THAT ARE, UH, THAT WERE PUT INTO PLACE.

UM, THOUGH BASED ON LOS ANGELES'S PROGRAM ASSESSMENT, THAT CAP WAS DIFFICULT TO ADMINISTER OVER THE WHOLE COURSE OF THE PROGRAM.

AND THEN IN SAN DIEGO, THERE IS AN ANNUAL CAP OF NO MORE THAN $200,000 REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE FOR THE NEW MILLS ACT CONTRACTS APPROVED EACH YEAR.

AND THEN, UM, WE'VE HAD SOME QUESTIONS IN THE MOST RECENT, UM, MILLS ACT APPLICATION CYCLE, PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS AROUND CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS.

SO THAT IS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE LOOKED AT IN COMPARISON WITH OTHER CITIES.

SO ALL OF THE COMPARISON CITIES, EXCEPT APPLICATIONS FROM CONDOMINIUMS AND, UM, HAVE ENTERED INTO CONTRACTS WITH CONDOS.

LOS ANGELES AND SAN FRANCISCO, UH, REQUIRED THE APPLICATION TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS A HUNDRED PERCENT PARTICIPATION FROM ALL OF THE CONDO OWNERS IN THE BUILDING IN LOS ANGELES.

THAT APPLICATION, UM, COULD REQUIRE CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE CCNRS TO SPECIFICALLY ENFORCE THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT.

IN CONTRAST, PASADENA ACCEPTS APPLICATIONS FROM A HOMEOWNERS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH A PETITION, UH, SHOWING SUPPORT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN A CONDO BUILDING.

SAN DIEGO TAKES AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT APPROACH, UM, AND THEY ACTUALLY PERMIT INDIVIDUAL CONDO UNIT OWNERS TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR THEIR OWN UNIT IN A HISTORIC BUILDING.

SO EACH CONDO OWNER PAYS ALL OF THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM, AND THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR PARTICIPATION FROM THE HOA OR OTHER, UH, UNIT OWNERS IN THE BUILDING.

UH, AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR SAN DIEGO IS THAT THEY HAVE, UM, 323 MILLS ACT CONTRACTS WITH INDIVIDUAL CONDO UNIT OWNERS, UH, ACROSS 10 DIFFERENT CONDO BUILDINGS.

THAT'S, UH, 323 MILLS ACT CONTRACTS FOR THOSE INDIVIDUAL UNITS OUT OF THEIR TOTAL, SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 1500 MILLS ACT CONTRACTS.

SO WITH ALL OF THIS INFORMATION, THERE ARE A FEW CONSIDERATIONS IN BALANCE FOR THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM.

IT'S ONE OF THE FEW FINANCIAL INCENTIVES THAT'S AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR PROPERTY OWNERS, AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT TOOL TO ENCOURAGE DESIGNATION OF NEW LANDMARKS AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

BECAUSE OF THE PROGRAM, PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE INVESTED IN HISTORIC PROPERTIES TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY'S NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE LOCAL ECONOMY.

BUT THERE'S ALSO CONCERN THAT THE PROGRAM PRIMARILY SUPPORTS, UM, AFFLUENCE SINGLE FAMILY HOME OWNERS IN A DIVERSE CITY THAT IS MAJORITY RENTER.

THE PROGRAM IS ALSO A COMMITMENT OF CITY RESOURCES, SO STAFF TIME TO MANAGE THE PROGRAM, AND ALSO THE REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GO TO THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND.

THE FEES FOR THE MILLS ACT, UM, HELP TO RECOVER STAFF COSTS FOR THAT ADMINISTRATION, UM, INCLUDING FEES FOR THE INSPECTIONS.

UM, BUT IT DOES REMAIN CHALLENGING TO EFFECTIVELY ADMINISTER A PROGRAM WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTRACTS, INCLUDING CONTRACTS THAT ARE OVER 20 YEARS OLD AT THIS POINT.

SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, STAFF HAS SOME POTENTIAL UPDATES FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER AND TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON.

SO FIRST IS THE EXPANSION OF THE PRIORITY CRITERIA TO INCLUDE,

[01:00:01]

SO FOR CULTURAL HERITAGE, THIS CRITERIA COULD, UM, EMPHASIZE THAT HISTORIC RESOURCES, UM, INCLUDE PROPERTIES THAT MAY NOT BE THE BEST, UM, ARCHITECTURAL EXAMPLES, BUT ARE A REFLECTION OF THE SHARED HISTORY AND VALUES AND BELIEFS OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND RECOGNIZING THAT THESE KINDS OF RESOURCES MAY HAVE HAD MORE CHANGES OVER TIME AND SHOULD STILL BE A PRIORITY FOR A MILLS ACT CONTRACT.

IN TERMS OF PUBLIC BENEFIT, THE MILLS ACT IS A USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE PROGRAM REALIZES A PUBLIC BENEFIT, SO THAT, UH, FOR THE PRIORITY CRITERIA COULD BE AN EMPHASIS ON IMPROVING PUBLIC ACCESS TO HISTORIC PLACES, AND ALSO ENSURING THAT THE MILLS ACT PROPERTIES RETAIN, UM, VISIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER THAT MAKE HISTORIC PLACES, UH, IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT FOR AFFORDABILITY.

STEPH IS ALSO CONSIDERING, UH, PRIORITIES SIMILAR TO LOS ANGELES, THAT WOULD, UM, REQUIRE DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PRESERVATION OR ADDITION OF AFFORDABLE DWELLING UNITS, UH, IN MULTIFAMILY OR MIXED USE BUILDINGS WITH MORE THAN 20 UNITS, PARTICULARLY WITH AN EMPHASIS ON PRESERVING NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UH, AND AN EMPHASIS ON, UM, PROVIDING RENTERS IN THE CITY WITH, UH, BENEFITS FROM THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM.

IN TERMS OF UPDATES TO THE CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION STAFF, UH, IS CONSIDERING, UM, UH, RECOMMENDATION TO SWITCH THE APPLICATION CYCLE TO EVERY OTHER YEAR RATHER THAN ANNUALLY.

THAT HAS A COUPLE OF BENEFITS, INCLUDING THE POTENTIAL FOR STRONGER, UM, APPLICATION POOLS ON THAT EVERY OTHER YEAR CYCLE.

IT ALSO PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR STAFF TO FOCUS ON OUTREACH EFFORTS, UH, AND ONGOING INSPECTIONS IN THAT OFF YEAR.

THOSE REGULAR INSPECTIONS ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE MILLS ACT CONTRACT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE VERIFICATION THAT THE APPLICANT IS COMPLYING WITH THE WORK PLAN AND WITH THE CONTRACT THAT EVERY OTHER YEAR CYCLE INCLUDES MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STAFF TIME TO REVIEW THOSE EXISTING CONTRACTS AND TO WORK WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, INCLUDING POTENTIALLY ON NON-RENEWALS OF EXISTING CONTRACTS WHERE THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

WE ALSO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO LIMIT THE CONTRACT DURATION FOR NEW CONTRACTS TO 20 YEARS.

ONE OF THE MAIN CHALLENGES OF MANAGING A MILLS ACT PROGRAM IS THAT THE CONTRACTS RUN IN PERPETUITY, AND THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO TRACK THOSE CONTRACTS OVER DECADES, INCLUDING EACH TIME A A PROPERTY IS SOLD.

LONG BEACH, UM, HAS A RELATIVELY MODEST NUMBER OF MILLS ACT CONTRACTS, UH, BUT IT REMAINS A CHALLENGE TO DEDICATE STAFF TIME TO PROPERLY MANAGE THE PROGRAM.

SO IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THAT 20 YEAR CONTRACT DURATION, IT WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY TO SEND A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THE 10TH YEAR OF THE INITIAL 10 YEAR TERM OF THE CONTRACT, AND THEN THE CONTRACT WOULD SUNSET OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS FOR A TOTAL DURATION OF 20 YEARS.

SO THIS APPROACH STILL PROVIDES A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR REHABILITATION AND RESTORATION TO TAKE PLACE ON THE PROPERTY, AND WOULD STILL PROVIDE A SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN TERMS OF REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAXES.

BUT IT ALSO HELPS WITH, UM, REDUCING SOME OF THAT ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN OF MANAGING CONTRACTS OVER TIME.

AND THEN FINALLY, RELATED TO CONDOMINIUMS, STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING A CHANGE TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR 100% PARTICIPATION, UH, FROM ALL UNIT OWNERS AT THIS TIME.

THAT REQUIREMENT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2015 WITH THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE PROGRAM, PARTICULARLY DUE TO CHALLENGES WITH MANAGING MILLS ACT CONTRACTS FOR THREE CONDO BUILDINGS THAT PREDATE THAT REQUIREMENT AND HAD LESS THAN 100% PARTICIPATION IN THEIR INITIAL CONTRACTS.

SO WE HAVE HEARD FROM DOWNTOWN CONDO OWNERS IN HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT 100% PARTICIPATION IS A BARRIER TO THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM, WHICH PROMPTED US TO LOOK AGAIN AT THAT REQUIREMENT AND TO LOOK AT HOW OTHER CITIES ARE MANAGING.

UM, THIS QUESTION I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THAT THAT 100% REQUIREMENT IS NOT UNIVERSAL AMONG ALL MILLS ACT PROGRAMS, BUT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LARGE CITIES.

AND, UM, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THE POSITION THAT THE FULL CONSENT FROM ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE WORK PLAN THAT'S

[01:05:01]

THERE ARE ALSO LEGAL CONCERNS WITH ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT, UH, IF THAT CONTRACT HAS RECEIVED PARTICULARLY AN OBJECTION FROM AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER.

SO THAT REQUIREMENT FOR 100% PARTICIPATION IS NOT RECOMMENDED TO CHANGE.

AND FINALLY, UM, STAFF WILL BE WORKING ON A STRATEGIC OUTREACH PLAN TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO, TO THE PROGRAM, AND THAT INCLUDES, UM, MAPPING OUR EXISTING LANDMARKS CONTRIBUTORS TO HISTORIC DISTRICTS, AND ALSO POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES USING OUR AVAILABLE RESOURCES LIKE THE RACE AND SUBURBANIZATION HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT, THE CITYWIDE HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT, UM, THAT IS IN DRAFT FORM CURRENTLY.

AND WORKING WITH OUR COMMUNICATIONS TEAM TO PROVIDE EDUCATION SUPPORT AND MULTILINGUAL ACCESS TO ENCOURAGE PROGRAM PARTICIPATION IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY.

WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT POTENTIAL FOR IDENTIFYING PARTNERSHIPS WITH COMMUNITY, UM, ORGANIZATIONS TO, UH, IMPROVE OUR OUTREACH AND, UM, RESEARCH ON OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUNDING SOURCES THAT COULD SUPPORT LANDMARK DESIGNATION, UM, IN DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES.

SO WE ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WOULD BE A MULTI-YEAR EFFORT TO MAKE THE PROGRAM MORE ACCESSIBLE IN A VARIETY OF FORMATS TO DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE NOT PARTICIPATED IN THE PAST AND TO HELP, UH, INCREASE THE REACH OF THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM.

SO I HAVE BEEN TALKING FOR QUITE A WHILE.

UM, , THANK YOU ALL FOR LISTENING.

UH, I, UH, WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU PARTICULARLY TO ALEJANDRO PLACENCIA, UM, FOR HIS STEWARDSHIP OF THE MILLS ACT PROGRAM AND HIS, UM, REALLY THOUGHTFUL RESEARCH AND LOOK AT THE CURRENT PROGRAM AND, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON POTENTIAL UPDATES.

UM, AND ALSO WANTED TO, TO THANK GINA CASILLAS, WHO'S NOT HERE THIS EVENING, BUT WHO IS THE, THE PLANNER WHO PROCESSES ALL OF THE NEW MILLS ACT CONTRACTS EACH YEAR, AND DOES A REALLY EXCELLENT JOB OF EXPLAINING THE PROGRAM TO THE PUBLIC AND WORKING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TO GET THEM THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO THANK YOU TO BOTH OF THEM.

UM, AND THEN THIS IS A STUDY SESSION, SO THERE'S NO ACTION FROM THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FEEDBACK ON THE PROGRAM.

AFTER THIS STUDY SESSION, STAFF WILL REVIEW INPUT FROM THE COMMISSION AND FROM THE PUBLIC, AND WE WILL DRAFT RECOMMENDED UPDATES TO BRING BACK TO THE COMMISSION IN EARLY 2027.

SO ANY CHANGES THAT ARE MADE TO THE PROGRAM WOULD BE MADE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION AND THEN ULTIMATELY WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU, MARISSA.

THANK YOU FOR THAT EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, ALEJANDRO AND GINA AS WELL FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK ON THE PREVIOUS YEARS OF APPROVING CONTRACTS WITH THE HOMEOWNERS AND LANDMARK DESIGNATIONS.

UH, AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO TURN THIS OVER TO THE COMMISSION IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU.

UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER PIZZA.

UM, AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT WAS AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, AND THANK YOU.

I KNOW THAT TOOK A LOT OF WORK AND IT'S QUITE IMPRESSIVE.

UM, I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

SO THE VALUATION ON WHAT'S BEEN DETERMINED TO DATE, I'M ASSUMING THAT'S CHANGED OVER TIME BECAUSE OF PROPERTY VALUES.

HOW OFTEN IS THAT REVISITED? I'M CURIOUS.

UM, AND THEN THERE WAS A QUES THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT, UM, IT COULD EXCEED THOSE AMOUNTS IF IT'S AN EXCEPTION, EXCEPTIONAL ARCHITECTURAL, UH, MERIT OR, OR, OR SOMETHING.

AND MY QUESTION TO THAT IS WHAT DEFINES THAT? HOW DO, WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS OF EXCEPTIONAL? SURE.

UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

EXCUSE ME FOR THAT.

GOOD QUESTION.

UM, SO THE, UM, VALUATION LIMITS ARE CHANGED, UH, EVERY APPLICATION CYCLE.

SO IT DOES HAPPEN ANNUALLY.

UH, IT'S TIED TO THE A CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

SO THOSE, THOSE NUMBERS DO MOVE.

AND SINCE THE START OF THE PROGRAM, UH, THEY'VE ACTUALLY, SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS OR VALUATION LIMITS WERE ACTUALLY UNDER A MILLION DOLLARS.

SO NOW THAT IT'S AT 1.7 FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, IT'S, UH, IT'S A PRETTY REMARKABLE DIFFERENCE.

UM, THE SECOND PART OF THAT QUESTION, I'M SORRY, THAT WAS, CAN YOU REMIND ME AGAIN, COMMISSIONER, WHAT DEFINES THE EXCEPTION? SOMETHING THAT WOULD GO BEYOND THE SURE VALUATION? UM, SO A WHILE BACK, I THINK MAYBE SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, MIGHT REMEMBER THIS ONE, BUT, UM, THE FRANK HOUSE, UH, IS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT.

SO THAT'S THE, UM, ED EDWARD KILLINGSWORTH HOUSE, UM, UH, OVER IN NAPLES.

UH, IT'S, IT'S REALLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT, UH, MID-CENTURY BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE, UM,

[01:10:01]

UH, SO THAT ONE WAS INELIGIBLE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE VALUATION.

UH, IT WAS ALSO OUTSIDE OF AN HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND SO THINGS LIKE THAT ARE, ARE SORT OF AN EXTREME EXAMPLE WHERE WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, AN ARCHITECTURAL GEM, UH, THAT POPS UP FROM TIME TO TIME THAT IS INELIGIBLE.

SO THINGS LIKE THAT.

UH, BUT THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES THAT MIGHT TIE BACK TO, UM, CULTURAL HISTORY OR SOMETHING THAT IS AT RISK FOR DEMOLITION.

SO, UM, THAT'S SORT OF A BIG PICTURE EXAMPLE OF HOW TO THINK ABOUT IT OR LOOK AT IT.

THANK YOU.

THAT WAS GREAT.

THANK YOU.

UM, I ALSO WAS CURIOUS IF YOU MOVE TO THIS EVERY OTHER YEAR CONCEPT OF PROVIDING THE MILLS ACT ON THE OFF YEARS, YOU TALKED ABOUT, UM, WORKING WITH THE EXISTING CONTRAST CONTRACTS.

I'M FOLLOWING UP, WOULD THAT OFF YEAR STILL PROVIDE A WORKSHOP FOR PEOPLE? WOULD YOU BE STILL PROVIDING THAT WORKSHOP EVERY YEAR SO PEOPLE WOULD AT LEAST HAVE A GOOD JUMPSTART MM-HMM .

FOR THE YEAR THAT IT WOULD BE SUPPLYING? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY WE COULD LOOK INTO AS WE STARTED TO IMAGINE WHAT A TWO YEAR CYCLE WOULD LOOK LIKE, IT TAKES US A FULL 12 MONTHS TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS EACH YEAR, RIGHT? LIKE, WE'RE STILL FINISHING THE, UM, EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL LAST MONTH THAT YOU ALL RECOMMENDED IN JUNE, THAT WE BEGAN LAST DECEMBER WITH A PRESS RELEASE ON.

SO PART OF THE IDEA WITH A TWO YEAR CYCLE IS WE COULD SPREAD IT OUT A LITTLE BIT TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE TIME, UM, AND BACK AND FORTH.

AND SO WE HAVEN'T COME UP WITH EXACTLY WHAT THAT WORKSHOP WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WHEN, UM, BUT OUR THINKING IS, 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW THAT TIMEFRAME IS SO COMPRESSED WHEN WE HAVE TO OPEN AND CLOSE IT IN ORDER TO MAKE IT TO THE TWO HEARING BODIES AND EXECUTE THE CONTRACTS ALL WITHIN ONE YEAR.

UM, THAT THERE COULD BE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT OUTREACH TO YOUR POINT.

AND ALSO MORE TIME FOR APPLICANTS TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THE BEST APPLICATION POSSIBLE.

'CAUSE SOMETIMES IT CAN BE A REAL RUSH TO TRY TO GET THAT ALL DONE IN THOSE FIRST COUPLE MONTHS OF THE YEAR.

SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION.

GREAT.

THAT THAT IS SO TRUE.

IT IS ALWAYS A PUSH TO GET TO GET THAT APPLICATION DONE FROM WHAT I HEAR.

UM, AND THEN, UH, UH, 1120, OH, UM, YOU MENTIONED, UH, THE LIMITING, UM, THE CONTRACT TO 20 YEARS.

UM, THOSE THAT HAVE ALREADY ENTERED CONTRACTS IN PERPETUITY, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? UH, WOULD THOSE BE STILL UPHELD OR THEY WILL BE CHANGED OR ENDED OR RENEWED, OR HOW WILL THAT WORK? I'M CURIOUS.

YEAH, SO I'M GONNA GIVE AN OUTLINE AND IF THE ATTORNEY HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, SHE CAN, SHE CAN WEIGH IN.

BUT, UM, UNDER THE STATE LAW, THE CONTRACTS AUTOMATICALLY RENEW EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

SO YOU ALWAYS HAVE 10 YEARS MORE LEFT.

UM, AND SO, SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS SPECIFIC TO NEW CONTRACTS TO, FROM THE BEGINNING SET THE EXPECTATION THAT IT WOULD BE A 20 YEAR TERM, BUT ALSO TO BEGIN THE NON-RENEWAL PROCESS AFTER YEAR 10.

UM, AND THEN ON EXISTING CONTRACTS, STAFF HAVE BEEN DOING WORK TO ANALYZE, ARE WE STILL GETTING AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF WORK PROGRAM FOR WHAT THE TAX INCENTIVE IS? UM, UH, IT'S MORE OF A CASE BY CASE ANALYSIS TO SEE.

WE'VE EVEN HAD, UM, EXISTING CONTRACT, UM, RECIPIENTS COME TO US TO SAY WE WANNA END THIS PROCESS.

BUT IT IS A, A MANY YEAR PROCESS TO DO THAT.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOCUSED ON MOVING FORWARD, BUT IT WOULD ALSO GIVE US SOME CAPACITY WITH THIS TWO YEAR CYCLE TO FOCUS MORE ON WHERE ELSE NON-RENEWAL WOULD MAKE SENSE.

THANK, THANK YOU.

AND THEN, SORRY, MY LAST QUESTION, UM, IN TERMS OF THE A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR CONDOMINIUMS, UM, I, I'D BE CURIOUS WHAT THE, THE CONTRACTS WE HAVE WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE THE A HUNDRED PERCENT, THE MILLS ACT IS NOT AT A HUNDRED PERCENT CONDO OWNERS RIGHT NOW, AND THOSE CHALLENGES, UM, I, I WOULD JUST WANNA AS AN IDEA SAY, DOES IT MAKE SENSE ONLY KNOWING THAT ONE OF THE CONDOMINIUMS THAT DID TRY TO GET A MILLS ACT THIS YEAR HAD ONE OWNER THAT DIDN'T, UM, UH, WANT TO DO IT.

UM, IS IT WORTH SAYING 100% MINUS ONE OR 100% MINUS TWO, UH, OWNERS OR, OR SOMETHING THAT AT LIVES AT LEAST GIVES AN OUT, UH, TO ONE OR TWO OWNERS THAT ARE HOLDOUTS? UM, AND I DON'T KNOW THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT'S SOMETHING TO EXPLORE AND I'M WELCOME TO ANY OTHER IDEAS TOO, .

YEAH, WE CAN CONTINUE TO TAKE FEEDBACK ON THAT.

UM, I THINK MARISSA OUTLINED STAFF STILL CONTINUES TO RECOMMEND THAT 100% THRESHOLD BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGES FROM SOME OF OUR OLDER CONTRACTS THAT ARE NOT 100% AS WELL AS LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER CITIES DO.

UM, AND THEN THE SPECIFIC CHALLENGE WITH THE APPLICATION THAT CAME FORWARD THIS YEAR WAS IN ADDITION TO NOT HAVING 100% WE HAD IN WRITING AN OBJECTION, UM, FROM SOMEONE.