Loading...
CC - 09-12-95MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 12, 1995 APPROVED CITY OF RO,SEMEAD DATFn y' BY The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Vasquez at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilmember Imperial The Invocation was delivered by Pastor Alex Lopez of the Neighborhood Covenant Church ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Councilmembers Bruesch, Imperial, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem Clark, and Mayor Vasquez Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 25, 1995 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 1995, be approved as submitted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: AUGUST 8, 1995 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 8, 1995, be approved as submitted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: AUGUST 22, 1995 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 22, 1995, be approved as submitted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC 9-12-95 Page #1 • PRESENTATIONS 0 Certificates of Appreciation were presented to the following seven members of the Garvey Pool aquatic staff who participated in the successful rescue and resuscitation of an eight year old boy: Lucille Padilla, Raelene Felix, Brian Almeida, David Shelley, Marcus Chan, Paul Mansfield, and Kevin Do. Mayor Vasquez introduced Dave Tierney and Bill Baca from Congressman Matthew Martinez's office. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Nell Soto, Vice-Mayor from the City of Pomona and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Boardmember, explained the AQMD is conducting an Outreach Program to inform cities of their new streamlined rules and regulations which will enable cities to better meet those regulations and to eliminate any friction as may have been encountered in the past. Oscar Abarca, Director of Government Affairs, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 Copely Drive, Diamond Bar, stated he is representing AQMD Governing Boardmember Soto's Outreach effort to acquaint local officials with the AQMD program. Mr. Abarca explained that through their air quality management plan, the number of unhealthful air quality episodes had been reduced in this area; however, the AQMD is sensitive to the impact that the regulations have had on the business community. Mr. Abarca continued that the new AQMD Board is moving toward a more business sensitive and friendly direction and outlined the steps the Board has taken. John Rauth, 4528 Bartlett, Rosemead, reported a fire in a vacant lot that occurred on September 9, 1995 at 8723-29 Mission Drive. Mr. Rauth continued that that property is surrounded by rentals, it is unkempt, overgrown with weeds, and no weed abatement had been done. Mr. Rauth continued that the Fire Department was able to gain access through the narrow driveway but is concerned that emergency vehicles may not be able to access other narrow or blocked driveways throughout the City. Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, stated that last January he observed the overhead electrical wires sparking on Pine Street, south of Newmark and reported this to SCE but has not received a response yet. Mr. Tripepi stated that the SCE Area Representative will check into the matter and call Mr. Nunez. Robert Angles, 9147 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, referred to the approved minutes of June 27, 1995 at which time he discussed removal of curbs along Valley Boulevard and noted that the paragraph by Mayor Pro Tern Clark on eminent domain is not correct. Mr. Angles continued that Valley Boulevard is a disgrace, it is not developed nor used to its full potential due to the lack of parking for small businesses. Councilmember Clark thanked Mr. Angles for bringing the error to our attention and stated that the approved minutes will be corrected and will be on the September 26, 1995 meeting. Mrs. Clark stated again her belief that small businesses should not be sacrificed for the sake of traffic flow by removal of the bubble parking spaces. Mr. Angles voiced his concern again about the proper disposal of the American flags and asked what has transpired since. Mr. Tripepi responded that Mr. Robles from the Rosemead Boys and Girls Club should have or will be contacting Mr. Angles regarding his participation in the committee to dispose of American flags. Mayor Pro Tern Clark stated that she had also asked that Mr. Robles contact Mr. Angles and assumed that he had. CC 9-12-95 Page #2 II. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None III. LEGISLATIVE A. RESOLUTION NO. 95-42 - CLAIMS AND DEMANDS The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 95-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $929,593.33 NUMBERED 14013 THROUGH 14183 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL that Resolution No. 95-42 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. B. RESOLUTION NO. 95-43 CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS ON DEL MAR AVENUE, WALNUT GROVE AVENUE, AND SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 95-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE REQUIRES THE FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS IN THE AREAS SET FORTH ON EXHIBIT A HERETO MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL that Resolution No. 95-43 be adopted setting a public hearing on September 26, 1995, regarding the formation of the Underground Utility Districts. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. C. RESOLUTION NO. 95-44 - OPPOSING SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF THE PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMITTEE The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 95-44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD OPPOSING SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF THE PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION CC 9-12-95 Page #3 i Councilmember Bruesch stated that he cannot support the "Whereas" of this resolution that opposes the CRC recommendation allowing K-12 school districts to raise additional revenues through increased sales taxes with a majority vote of the people as he has worked long and hard on this issue. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that Resolution No. 95-44 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Imperial No: Bruesch Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Bruesch stated for the record that he supports the Resolution with the exception of the aforementioned "Whereas". IV. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-A RELEASE OF BONDS - TRACT MAP NO. 49136, 8835 MISSION DRIVE CC-B REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES/APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE LATE CLAIM (OPERATING INDUSTRIES LANDFILL - MONTEREY PARK) MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH that the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC-C REQUEST FOR SOLICITATION OF BIDS FOR ROSEMEAD HANDYMAN GRANT PROGRAM - 54TH BID PACKAGE VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS: COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR:, I need a refresher. What are the requirements to be eligible for this Handyman Grant Program? Are there any financial requirements? FRED STILLIONS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR: Yes. First of all, to be eligible for the Handyman Grant Program, they have to be 62 years of age or older and they have to be a homeowner/occupant. They have to live in their property and their income has to fall below the 80% of the median income, which is the H.U.D. prescribed income level. TAYLOR: This was thoroughly checked out... income. What about property and assets. STILLIONS: Yes sir. The income levels were checked. We have copies of their income tax statements that they filed last year if they filed income statements. If they didn't, we have their letters from the Social Security Department if they are on social security. We have verification of all the incomes of the individuals. TAYLOR: That includes business income, property rentals, and such? STILLIONS: Yes sir. TAYLOR: I would like this in the minutes verbatim. COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL: I would like to rise to a point of information, Mr. Mayor. CC 9-12-95 Page #4 • • VASQUEZ: Yes, Jay. IMPERIAL: A question comes up and I would like it on the record also. If an individual does get this approved and it is all done and two months later they sell the property and leave, what happens? Is there any specific amount of time they have to spend in that home once it is approved. STILLIONS: No. IMPERIAL: So, they can sell it three days after it's over and go on to get a better price for their property. STILLIONS: Yes sir. IMPERIAL: I want the record to show that. MAYOR PRO TEM CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I was under the impression that there was a covenant put in there about staying 10 years. TAYLOR: No. There's never been anything... FRANK TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER: That's not for a handyman grant. STILLIONS: These are grants. CLARK: What am I thinking of then? TRIPEPI: You're thinking of loans... upon sale or death... CLARK: Is there any way we can put in a stipulation that would... that seems like a real loss. TAYLOR: We did a study a couple of years ago on how many were still the owners and I think it's time to do it again ...to see how many current owners are still in these homes that were done. IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. The reason I brought this up is because it's always been a thorn in my side that a lady came in here one time, she was offered this loan, she said she would take it and she also indicated to us that as soon as it was completed she was going to sell her house and leave. My question to her was, "you're going to sell it for the money aren't you?" And, she said "Yes." To me, in my opinion, this is a gift of public funds and I want it in the record because this has been a thorn in my side for a long time. We have no covenant, none whatsoever in this agreement that says you have to be in that house for one year, two years, three years, before you decide to sell it. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Is there a reason why we can't put that in there, what Mr. Imperial is saying. Is there any Federal restrictions on it? STILLIONS: No sir. We sure can. TAYLOR: Does it sound reasonable to put it in there for two years. IMPERIAL: That's a gift of public funds as far as I'm concerned. STILLIONS: We do a Deferred Loan Program, and that puts a covenant on the property, there's a payback on that. IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. To the City Attorney, is there any reason why we can't put a covenant in there. CC 9-12-95 Page #5 0 I'll .n_.......,.- 11 1 6 ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: I'm not totally familiar with the rules and regulations of this program and I suspect that we're going to run afoul of those regulations if we try to do this. I also think there is a problem with enforceability. It is set-up as a grant program and is reviewed on the basis of a grant with no payback. It certainly is something we can look at. IMPERIAL: I would like a legal opinion on this. BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. VASQUEZ: I think Gary had a question first, Bob TAYLOR: It was what Mr. Kress was saying. It's a grant and I think rightfully so, but the question was that if we know that we're going to be paying for the improvements for somebody to sell a property rather than to live in a better condition, then I think the stipulation of one or two years, by simply stating that the funds would be reimbursable puts people on notice that at least the intent was to help them have a better home to live in, not to improve it to sell it just to get a better price out of it. So, if we can look at it from that approach maybe the City Attorney can check it out and bring it back to us. BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. As with any program, you're going to find these people who are shysters and.take advantage of this situation. We find that with anything that we do, any program we come up with that is going to happen. The vast majority of people that use this are long-time residents, or fairly long-time residents. I don't want to see anything that is going to jeopardize the program for our long-time residents who use it properly. But, I do agree that we need to research the possibility of putting some type of covenant for recovery of costs and I like to get some legal background on this so we can do it. IMPERIAL: 1 believe if a person is really in earnest and they appreciate what the government and this grant is doing for them, they would have no problem signing a covenant and ensuring that the taxpayers are going to get their monies worth out of this. So, I would like this conversation verbatim. TRIPEPI: I think we understand Council's direction. The Council certainly is split philosophically and has been forever on the CDBG funds, who gets them and who doesn't get them. I just would like to point out to the Council, this body also sits as the Rehabilitation Appeals Board. You sit it in that other room each evening that you have those meetings, you listen to people who plead hardship, who say I need a grant or I need a large loan. One of the additional intents of this program is to improve the housing stock of this City. Granted, you may have somebody who comes in and say I can't afford to fix it up and I need a grant to do it. Would you deny that grant if you thought that person, after having the work done, was going to sell it, when in fact that family has now purchased that house and can live in the house in your community that is no longer substandard. I think that's an issue you should keep in the back of your mind. Granted someone is going to sell it and there will some dollars exchanged on the sale of the property. But, the City also gets an improvement in the housing stock within the community. That's all I have to say. IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. The City Manager did ask a question on that and I would like to at least let my feelings be known. Yes, I would deny that if I thought they were going to fix that house and sell it. We're looking at one hell of a lot of homes in this community that can use that kind of work. I think if we do this with the understanding that they might sell this thing but it's going to improve the condition of that house, I don't think that's good enough. VASQUEZ: Well, we are going to have staff look into it. STILLIONS: I just want to say that my experience with the program is that the majority of the people that are in the program, to apply you have to be at least 62 years of age or older, the majority of people we have apply are in there 80's and they've lived in Rosemead for 30, 40, 50 years or longer and at that point I don't think they are interested in selling and moving. We've seen a very small turnover in property. CC 9-12-95 Page #6 0 s CLARK: Can we, while we are researching this, move these along because I would hate for these residents to be waiting for their fix-ups. VASQUEZ: Is that a motion. Do I hear a second. BRUESCH: I'll second that motion. VASQUEZ: Please vote. Vote taken from voting slip: Yes: Clark, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: Taylor TAYLOR: I would like the review on my question as far as the income requirements. VASQUEZ: Staff is directed to look into that. IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I would like the record to show that the reason for the Yes vote was Yes, I do want to fix-up any property that needs it in the City, but No, I do not want to enhance somebody's wealth with taxpayers money when they are going to get their house fixed then move out of the community and that's my point. Mr. Mayor, as long as we're doing this, I would like to go over the records, and I know this is a long time job, I would like to find out how many absentee landlords we have in this community, what conditions their house is in, and what we can do about this. And also, again, if a person is of the mind they like Rosemead and they want to stay, and if we can help them fix that house, they won't have any problems signing the covenant. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Isn't this an owner/occupied requirement. STILLIONS: Yes. TAYLOR: Jay, it wouldn't apply to absentee landlords. BRUESCH: I brought that up a couple of years ago and it was knocked flat. TRIPEPI: This applies to homeowners. IMPERIAL: The point I was getting at, Councilman Taylor, is this. We need to know what's happening in our City. I think a few years back when I had requested we check out all the absentee landlords in this community, I think it was someplace in the area of 21 percentile. What is that percentage 8 to 9 years later, is it somewhere in the area of 51 or 52%? TRIPEPI: 50 or 60% IMPERIAL: That's what I mean. It's a problem that is getting increasingly worse and we need this information to go along with everything we're doing and that's my reason for requesting it. Thank you. VERBATIM DIALOGUE ENDS. V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION A. REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF OCCUPANCY PERMIT FEES FROM CLIFF MARCUSSEN, OPTIONS, 3505 N. HART, #230, ROSEMEAD Councilmember Bruesch recommended denial of Options request CC 9-12-95 Page #7 • • MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that the Council deny the request for waiver of occupancy permit fees from Cliff Marcussen, Options. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Taylor stated that the denial is not against the organization, but in fairness to the other non-profit groups in the City and with Options projected $15 million budget, the City should be entitled to the occupancy permit fees charged as Options pays many, many fees to other groups. Patty Johnson, Program Manager at Options, stated that Options are State and Federally funded and are basically a housing for those funds. The administrative costs are taken off the top and they also provide services to the parents and providers in the community. Councilmember Bruesch stressed that if fees are waived for one group then it will set a precedent for all other non-profit groups. VI. STATUS REPORTS A. STATUS OF PROPOSED LOS ANGELES COUNTY LIBRARY COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS: TRIPEPI: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. This is a report on the proposed County Library Community Facilities District (CFD). As I stated to the Council and we have been passing correspondence back and forth, unless the Council wishes or desires to opt into that District this year, there is no need to take an action this year because the Council's action last year was not to opt into the District. So, unless you wish to change that action from last year, you need do nothing at this particular time and we will notify that Board by the 14th of September of the Council's action. TAYLOR: My biggest concern about this particular item is that ...do you recall the Alhambra School Board when they formed the Benefit Assessment District, as far as they assessed all of the properties with the exception of Rosemead proper. They went ahead and assessed all those and they didn't tell the people that in order to stay out of it there had to be a majority protest. I can't remember the exact figures, but there were about 1,000 that wrote in and formally protested it, but they didn't tell them that they had to have, I believe it was, 12,000 or 19,000 that they had to get to get the majority plus one to stop the Benefit Assessment District. My concern here is that on Page 5 in the middle of the program and the top of the page is Part IV - Method of Apportionment..., read the Legal Requirements under Sections 53342 and 53343, (Mr. Taylor begins quoting) "...of the Act permit local agencies to levy benefit charges for services and facilities authorized by this chapter, which includes library services and facilities. Section 53342 states that: "For any community facilities district or zone thereof, a legislative body may fix and collect charges in the same manner as for miscellaneous extended services in county service areas." Government Code Section 25210.77a provides for charges for miscellaneous extended services in county service areas, and states that: "...a county may fix and collect charges for a particular extended service ...The revenue obtained thereby may be in lieu of, or supplemental to, revenue obtained by the levy of taxes. The charges may vary by reason of the nature of the use...to correspond to the cost and value of the service. The charges may be determined by apportioning the total cost, not otherwise offset by other available revenue, or the extended service area to each parcel therein in proportion to the estimated benefits from such service to be received by each parcel"(end quotation). Reading through this, there is so much in here that is similar to what the Alhambra High School District did when they formed a Benefit CC 9-12-95 Page #8 Assessment District. Where is it in here that says anything of how the people can oppose this. Normally there is a clause... you cannot levy a benefit assessment district, at least when it was formed in Alhambra, there is a way to prevent it. There is nothing informing people in here, do they even have the option. Last year, I believe it was 16 cities out of 48 or 49 that ...52...last year there were in favor of joining. So, they at least had 32 or 2/3 did not want to join. My concern is that nobody is taking any action and if you get a bureaucratic agency that looks out and says "Hey, we're not getting any resistance to doing this, let's go ahead with it and see what happens", then it's too late. My biggest concern is if we don't go on the record that we are opposed to imposing fees without any consent or approval of the people... how many of you have seen the fire assessments that they imposed three years ago. Mr. Angles, did he leave? Business districts. My brother got the first assessment at $600, the second year they raised it to $1600 and I don't know what it is this year, but that was to be a one type of a deal. They also did it to the homeowners and I don't know the status of it. I didn't get all the information on it. But, if we don't at least say No we don't like this, then the County is going to say that nobody opposed them. BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I hate to be put into the position of choosing either or and what this makes this body look like if they vote against it is that they are voting against expanding or the same level service of the library. I don't think that is the issue. I read through this a couple of times when they first had it come out in the middle of summer. I do realize that libraries are an asset to the community, they do help property values. Our library, especially with the changing cultural balance in our area, has become even a more viable cog in our community machinery. But, the point is, it isn't the library we're talking about. It's the method of going after the taxpayer. It's like trying to remove one more level. I don't want anyone in this community thinking that if a Councilperson on this Council votes No on the CFD that they're voting No on the library because it isn't that. Sometimes we are faced with an either/or decision that either side is equally bad. But, in this case, we have to look at what the body politic is saying to us throughout not only this community, but all communities. And what they are saying is, "Hey guys, why are you making decisions without our input?" And this is exactly what this is. So, I intend to vote No on the CFD, not because I'm against the library, I'm not wanting to close down the library even one hour, much less one day. But, I have to sometime make that decision to say I'm listening to you public, I will not allow another thing happening to you without your input. IMPERIAL: I can agree with what Councilman Bruesch said. I would like to go on record as saying that I think this Council, and I personally will support the library, but I won't do it with the taxpayers money. Taxpayers money comes in all phases. I don't understand why they would put in a special program, for instance, making a cultural center program someplace. I don't understand why they would give $750,000 to an Asian Youth Center, which was defeated and yet we're talking about closing our libraries down. It's all taxpayers money. I don't understand how we come to these conclusions. I don't know why this happens. The last time this came through, 11 cities out of 51 accepted it. They took those 11 cities and the unincorporated areas and passed a tax for those people. A week later it comes out in the paper that each County Supervisor had a fund of $1.6 million to use on any project they wanted. They killed that vote. Two weeks later they came out with the County found $30 million they didn't know they had, which I think is an insult to our intelligence, and here we go again. I know people in this community that are suffering, they are on a fixed income even if they own their homes. They are still on a fixed income. They can't afford the necessities of life, they are doing without and we are talking about taking their money and putting it into another project. I say let the City give the libraries any help they can, but not with the taxpayers dollars. I thank you. BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I would like to make the motion that we receive and file this TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Well, he hasn't got a second to that yet. CLARK: Second. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I make a motion that we table that motion and substitute the motion that we vote on this item to not endorse this item... BRUESCH: We already have. CC 9-12-95 Page #9 VASQUEZ: I think we just had a second. TAYLOR: Your motion was to take no action on this. My motion is that we vote on it and send it to the County so they know what we've done. A no action vote is nothing happens and they don't get notified. BRUESCH: What I'm saying is we don't have to do that, we've already done it. TAYLOR: No. Not this year we haven't. IMPERIAL: If that's a motion, I'll second it. VASQUEZ: There's already a motion and a second. BRUESCH: I will withdraw my motion. TAYLOR: My motion takes precedent, Mr. Mayor. TRIPEPI: A motion and second would take precedence over the table... TAYLOR: My motion was to table that motion and put in an alternate motion that we vote on this to let the County know that we're not opposing the libraries, it's the method of funding that is wrong. BRUESCH: I will respectfully remove my motion with the approval of the second. Maggie. CLARK: We didn't join it last year, so we're not joining now. TAYLOR: But we took a vote though last year and the thing is they brought it up again this year and if we don't take action officially as a body, they'll sit down as an agency and think nobody is resisting and let's do it. KRESS: Well, that's not really the process. CLARK: But, they can't do it. KRESS: The City can only be included in the District if it consents. TAYLOR: But, a part of it is to give them a message down there that we're not sitting here with not saying a word and letting them do it without an understanding that there are some cities that will take the initiative and let them know we are opposed to it. BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. May I make a suggestion that the motion stands with the proviso that staff develops a letter to send to the L.A. County Library system restating our vote from last year and say that we still stand by our... TAYLOR: It's got to go out tomorrow, Bob. With a letter... as long as we can understand tonight that it's to notify the Board that we're not in favor of the method, it has nothing to do with the... BRUESCH: My motion is that we receive this, file it and direct staff to send out a letter tomorrow to the library system staff reiterating our opposition to the CFD because of what Mr. Taylor said and not because of the library but because of the method of imposing a tax. TAYLOR: The way your motion is... I still make the motion that we table it and I call for the question that we table your motion. VASQUEZ: We vote on the issue, Gary, that we table... TAYLOR: Yes. To table the motion and the alternate motion that we vote to notify the County Board that we're not in favor of their method. CC 9-12-95 Page #10 U Vote taken from voting slip: Yes: Taylor, Imperial No: Clark, Vasquez, Bruesch Absent: None Abstain: None TAYLOR: What's the action now. 1101 BRUESCH: So the motion I read, is reiterate my motion that we table this action and direct staff to write a letter reiterating our opposition to the CFD imposition of the assessment of the $22. TAYLOR: .1 would like the minutes verbatim and the vote as was taken tonight. BRUESCH: Maggie, I added a proviso, do you accept that. CLARK: Yes I do. KRESS: You're asking staff to communicate to the County that the Council again considered this option this evening, reiterated their position that they do not give their consent to join the District. BRUESCH: And for the reasons stated that we are against the method of raising the funds. TAYLOR: Nancy, do you understand the individual names for the voting. TRIPEPI: Before the question is called for I would like Mr. Taylor to review and approve that letter before it goes out because this is a 3-2 vote and it's 2-3 the other way and I want to make sure that letter is clear and I want unanimous, at least guidance, that the Council... Mr. Taylor, you and I can agree on the way that that letter is going to be worded. TAYLOR: Fine. I think the concept that we're supporting the endorsement that last year we took action not to support and we're doing the same thing this year. As long as they get that communicated to them, that is the intent. CLARK: I would like the record to show that the reason I'm supporting the current motion is that I do support the libraries. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I think in all fairness and this is verbatim, that all of us are in favor of the libraries. It has nothing to do with the libraries as such. It does not over ride the right of the voters, the people, to decide what the taxes are. BRUESCH: I would like to acknowledge to the audience the presence of local library staff and I would like to say to them that in no way shape or form do any of my comments besmirch the quality of the service you give to this community and I applaud your efforts in running a fine organization here. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I think that would be "ditto" for the entire Council. It has nothing to do with the library staff at all. Just the policy that the people are entitled to vote on taxes. BRUESCH: Call for the question. VASQUEZ: Please vote. TAYLOR: And your motion, clarify it. BRUESCH: The motion states that we receive and file this packet, direct staff to send a letter to the library district and the County Board of Supervisors that this Council offers any support to our library system but not with the taxpayers dollars. CC 9-12-95 Page #11 Vote taken from voting slip: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch, Imperial No: None Absent:. None Abstain: None VERBATIM DIALOGUE ENDS V. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS A. CITY FINANCE COMMITTEE Councilmember Imperial requested that a study session be scheduled. Mayor Vasquez announced that the study session on the City Finance Committee will be held on October 3, 1995, at 7:30 p.m., City Hall Conference Room. A. COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR 1. Requested an update on the employee discrimination lawsuit. Mr. Wagner stated that the employee has signed the Workmen's Compensation Waiver and the case has been settled. Councilmember Taylor requested a copy of the signed waiver. B. COUNCILMEMBER BRUESCH 1. Reported a malfunctioning sprinkler head on the northwest embankment of Walnut Grove Avenue and the 1-10 underpass. 2. Inquired about the status of the City check to J.A. Blash for the 4th of July Carnival. Mr. Wagner responded that the report will be complete as soon as he receives an accounting from the Sheriff's Department. VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS: 3. BRUESCH: I had four or five constituents contact me yesterday, not yesterday, the day before yesterday. Apparently, last weekend, and I think it was through the weekend, there was a dead dog at the corner of Walnut Grove and Garvey. Some of the people that contacted me were not residents of Rosemead and they were quite upset in knowing the fact that they thought that they were doing a favor to the City by calling up, and they were directed to call the Animal Control. When they did, the Animal Control machine was not on. Hence, the body of the dog became a very odorous problem on that corner, and twice I got call backs from people. I was wondering if there is a call about a situation like that with an animal really smelling and causing problems at a major intersection, is there anyway that our staff could just make the call right away instead of having to rely on citizens to call somewhere else because they don't live here. TRIPEPI: Absolutely. I would have a Maintenance Man pick it up in the truck, the one that's on-call, and put it in a bag if I'd have known about it. I can say, Mr. Bruesch, I drove by that intersection and I believe I was behind you or next to you and I didn't see a dead animal at that intersection, did you? BRUESCH: Well, what had happened was that it had been knocked down south and was at the driveway in the little breezeway in back of the... TRIPEPI: So, it wasn't laying in the intersection? BRUESCH: No. It wasn't, but it was still smelling. TRIPEPI: I would have had a. Maintenance Man pick it up if someone would just have called me. CC 9-12-95 Page #12 BRUESCH: Well, they did call the switchboard and the only response they got was to call Animal Control, and this was not just one person, this was five calls. Three people, two of which made two calls about it and both of those people called Animal Control and the answer machine, or whatever... it was after hours. They called Animal Control at 6:00 or 7:00 p.m. in the evening and it was Thursday night and Friday night. They said that the machine wasn't on or anything like that, by the time they called back City Hall, City Hall was closed. Couldn't staff... TRIPEPI: Yes we could. I'll take the Maintenance Man and have him pick it up. There's no reason for it to lay there so long. BRUESCH: Ok. TAYLOR: Bob, I'd like your comments in the minutes verbatim, only because of the fact that I won't vote for that County contract. You're just verifying the reason I won't vote for it. Mr. Nunez has personally picked up dead animals and taken them off the streets. The only reason I want it in the minutes is that you've made complaints about it, I've made complaints about it and now City staff is volunteering to go out and do their work. They're not available. TRIPEPI: Mr. Taylor, I'm not volunteering to do anybody's work. The City to me is the City. If there's a dog laying out there, I'm going to get it picked up. I'll deal with the other problem later, but I'm certainly not going to let it lay there because I can't get a hold of Animal Control. Don't take that the wrong way, but I'm just wanting... TAYLOR: I understand what you're doing Frank, and I say volunteering... you are ending up doing their work is my point. IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. This happened about three or fours years ago. We went through this. We even had the lady from Animal Control come down here from the County and promise that it would never happen again. It happened again. So, there is a period of time in between, but it has happened and I can certainly agree that the County contract leaves a lot to be desired. VERBATIM DIALOGUE ENDS. C. MAYOR PRO TEM CLARK 1 . Stated that the Resolution that Council passed to tighten up League of California Cities policies came before the Administrative Services Committee last Friday and Mayor Pro Tern Clark thanked Councilmember Imperial for his excellent job in lobbying to get it through. VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, stated that the Animal Control in Baldwin Park does not receive calls any more and was referred to Downey Animal Control. Mr. Juan Nunez continued that he now calls staff, as staff seems to get a better response from Animal Control than the citizens do. IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further action at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held on September 26, 1995, at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: City Clerk CC 9-12-95 Page #13 APPROVED: