Loading...
CC - 02-22-94APPROVED % CITY OF ROSE EAD MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DAT 3- '/2 ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL BY FEBRUARY 22, 1994 The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Bruesch at 8:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilmember Taylor. The Invocation was delivered by City Treasurer Foutz. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Councilmembers Clark, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez, and Mayor Bruesch Absent: Councilmember McDonald - Excused APPROVAL OF MINUTES: FEBRUARY 8, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 8, 1994, be approved as corrected. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. PRESENTATIONS: - None I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE A. Robert Angles, 9147 Valley Blvd., reported a drive-by shooting at KISS-KTV at 3:45 a.m. on Friday, February 18, 1994. Staff was directed to obtain a copy of the Sheriff's report and copies of all violations filed against this establishment. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None III.LEGISLATIVE A. RESOLUTION NO. 94-09 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 94-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD. ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $641,866.71 NUMBERED 8656 THROUGH 8778 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Resolution No. 94-09 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. B. RESOLUTION NO. 94-10 - APPLICATION FOR PEDESTRIAN FUNDS UNDER SB 821 The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: CC 2-22-94 Page #1 RESOLUTION NO. 94-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR PEDESTRIAN FUNDS UNDER SB 821 AND APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF ITS PEDESTRIAN PLAN MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Resolution No. 94-10 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Staff was directed to place an article in the City Newsletter regarding proper use of deep watering systems for City trees. C. RESOLUTION NO. 94-11 - NOMINATING MARGARET CLARK AS TREASURER FOR THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY DIVISION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 94-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD SUPPORTING MARGARET CLARK FOR THE POSITION OF TREASURER OF THE LOS ANGELES DIVISION OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Resolution No. 94-11 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. D. ORDINANCE NO. 741 - AMENDING THE REGULATIONS REGARDING SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH CONSOLIDATED' DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. - ADOPT Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, was concerned with the wording of the revised ordinance. After some discussion, this item was deferred to the next regular meeting for further revision. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (CC-A and CC-B REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION) CC-C REIMBURSEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4504 AND 4521 SULTANA AVENUE CC-D AUTHORIZATION TO EXPAND IN-HOUSE GRAFFITI REMOVAL PROGRAM MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC 2-22-94 Page #2 • 0 CC-A AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND INFORMATION DEVELOPM IN CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, MAY 2-4, 1994 Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, stated that this still sounded like too much money. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK that the Council authorize the Finance Director to attend the Information Development Corporation User Conference in Charleston, South Carolina, May 2-4, 1994. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez No: Taylor Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Taylor stated that his vote was not against the employee but felt that the trip was unnecessary. CC-B AUTHORIZATION TO DISCONTINUE THE ANNUAL 5K/10K RUN Mayor Bruesch asked the Council to consider holding this event for one more year to see if participation might increase. Michael Burbank, Director of Parks and Recreation, noted that only 21 of the runners lived in Rosemead. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the Council discontinue this activity. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION & ACTION A. AUTHORIZATION TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS: TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. The way this particular organization is being set up right now, it's a semi-informal organization where everybody gets together once a month and discusses issues. What it's coming to now is becoming a formal structural organization and on Page 3 of there's so many different sections in this item, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, a Joint Power Authority. It's the middle section on Page 3. It doesn't say what the dues are going to be as far as being a member of it and it's a voluntary program. They will not force you to do anything except pay the mandatory dues and those dues it puzzles me what they're leading to. It becomes on page... BRUESCH: Might I explain what this it because I've been privy to the complete process of going through this. First of all, the Council is aware that SCAG, Southern California Association of Governments, is attempting to have what they call bottoms up planning process. In other words starting from the local areas let the local areas build the regional plans and then take the regional plans to SCAG for approval for the general plan for the whole area. What has happened throughout the region, all the way from Imperial Valley all the way up to Santa Barbara, is that areas have formed these COGS, these Councils of Government, as a planning tool to meet the requirements of State and Federal mandated programs. What is happening is that many of cities including our own, are getting voluminous requirements of data to meet the requirements of certain plans, the AQMP, the CMP, all these State and Federal mandated plans and what is happening is that staffs at the local cities are just overwhelmed with the amount of paper work, the amount of staff time that has to be done on these. Well, what these COGS are doing is getting staff so that areas can get CC 2-22-94 Page #3 • lJ BRUESCH CONTINUES: all the data in one central area so that a staff like our staff could go to the COG and say well we've got to meet these requirements; do you have that data for us; yes here it is. Basically, it's taking decentralizing the function of SLAG which personally I think is a great idea because SCAG is a super agency. TAYLOR: Yes, but SCAG has been failing it what it is supposed to be doing. SCAG has found a way to and again the word might be subterfuge, SCAG is the one that is going to be coming around backing these organizations. I'd like to... let me finish what I started to say on Page 3 here, subsection 8; it will serve as a mechanism for obtaining state, federal and regional grants to assist in financing the expenditures of the Council, that being the San Gabriel Valley Council there. Section 9, make and enter into contracts including contracts for the services of engineers, consultants, planners, attorneys, and single purpose public private groups. Number 10, employ agents, officers and employees... this isn't what's required right now but we seem to manage meeting our requirements, getting the regulations... number 11, apply for, receive and administer a grant or grants under any federal, state or regional programs. Number 12, receive gifts, contributions and donations of property, funds, services and other forms of financial assistance from persons, firms, corporations and any governmental entity. It will lease, manage, maintain and operate any buildings, works, or improvements. To me it's the way it's functioning now, if you're meeting and you get together with the different cities and you talk about what needs to be done; we come back with in-house staff, it all has to be processed here anyway. But once we start building buildings, hiring employees, it becomes a perpetual organization of another layer of I'm going to have to say local government because it is basically the cities creating another organization to the same thing that the... BRUESCH: May I deal in two what ifs, okay? And I'll answer my questions. First of all, what if the COG was not formed for this area? Well, then two scenarios pop up. Number one, SCAG retains the power and takes all the mandates and mandates certain plans including traffic plans and parking plans on cities which they have the power to do right now and are not doing so because they're waiting for these COGS to be formed. The second... TAYLOR: Mr. Bruesch. How long has SCAG been in existence? BRUESCH: Since the early... TAYLOR: How many decades? BRUESCH: Early 70s. The second what if. What if... TAYLOR: Two decades and you can go ahead with what you're saying. It's been two decades that SCAG has been trying to become a regional, it is a regional body, dictating to the cities. So, they can't do what they want to do on their own because the cities are remaining independent. That's throughout the whole southern California. BRUESCH: But the second what if. What if nothing is done? Like you said, what is SCAG has lost its power, doesn't have the ability to impose these things and the cities say the heck with this, this is just another form of government. Two things happen then. Number one, the State legislature has already said regional government. They want to form these regional government bodies. Number two, the State and the Federal governments have the authority right now to come in and impose things upon cities that are mandated by federal government including the removal of transportation funds, the removal of waste water treatment funds; all forms of monetary penalties for not complying with the rules. So, this gives us a choice. Do we do it ourselves in the subregion of the San Gabriel Valley where we know most or do we abrogate our authority to SCAG, to the State or the Federal government and let them do it for us? CC 2-22-94 Page #4 0 0 TAYLOR: Well, Mr. Bruesch, we have been able to hold SCAG off and they are one of the principal movers for this program. They will supply the programs for the cities to review and then unknowingly it's like the spider in the web, you get trapped because they've given you the programs that you're supposed to adopt and right now SCAG is at a stalemate because the cities believe it or not, they unite individually as far as whenever the State, take for example the budget process last. How many of the cities didn't want taxes taken away and they protested. And most of the cities won in a lot of the cases. We were one of the primary winners where they couldn't take excess funds. So SCAG is trying to find another way after over 20 years, they haven't been able to implement their programs. BRUESCH: Okay. Throughout the process of the discussions about the COG I brought up those very issues, Gary. And I said what happens if we don't form this? What happens if we say just hey we're not going to do this? What is the stick? I mean we know what the carrot is, you're going to get funds, $100,000 here, $100,000 there. What is the stick? What can they do? And I asked them to list them and the listing I got was tens of millions of dollars being withheld, either at the SCAG level or at the State level because we're not complying with the mandates. You know both the National League of Cities and the US Conference of Mayors has this big thing going about unfunded federal mandates and unfunded state mandates. Well, basically this is what they're imposing upon us with these rules and regulations. And I see no other way out. I really see no...we cannot fight against these mandates, standing alone. We have got to combine with a force of law so that we do the work that is necessary and if these mandates are impossible to comply with, we have at least the structure there that can take the issue to the court of public opinion. Is there any further discussion on this item? CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I'd just like to point out I was on the review committee that reviewed this document and some of the input and I tried along with the councilwoman from Bradbury, Bea LaPisto-Kirtley, to get a two-thirds vote required for setting the dues and we were voted down unfortunately. I think this is something we need to enter into but I think we're going to have to watch very carefully how the money is spent and what the dues are going to be. I do not want to see an organization where it's government money so let's just take in more and let's just get a bureaucracy of employees and I am somewhat concerned about the role of the Executive Director because I think we have a lot of talent out there in our City Managers and staff who are very interested in some of the transportation issues and other things that they'll be dealing with and I think we can do a lot of it in-house and I do not want to see a very high paid executive director doing the work that we could ourselves. BRUESCH: And my main concern throughout the process was the fact that I was very worried about the quorum requirement that basically that one-half of one-half of the cities could determine policy. One of the things that was agreed to is that the meetings will be held in the early evening and it was stated that and I agree with this, in the early stage of the formation of this process it is imperative that every city that has questions such as was stated by Councilwoman Clark be at these meetings and voice these questions because I do believe that with at least with the first couple of meetings that we will have full attendance because there's going to be a lot of questions like that and that's really the purpose of the whole organization. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. What you're discussing and what Mrs. Clark is discussing are valid questions to be raised but they have already decided the answers to those questions even though you disagree with them. BRUESCH: No. They haven't made that decision yet. TAYLOR: Then what leverage do you have as far as getting these items changed prior to membership? You're concerned about the voting one-half of one-half of the cities or 25% will control it. CC 2-22-94 Page #5 • BRUESCH: The agreement was that all meetings would be held not during like SCAG does, during the workday where most councilpeople are at their regular jobs. That was one of the givens that was agreed to. TAYLOR: But those answers are already in the six pages of by-laws that are in the back of this and the joint powers authority, the agreement, table of contents, there's probably 25-30 pages of what you're already joining. But on Page 2 it states here of the questions how much will the cities have to pay to belong to the Council of Governments? It is unknown what the governing board of the COG will adopt in the way of a budget. What is known that a grant will be available from the Southern California Association of Government or SCAG. SCAG will give the councils the money to implement their program that they've been trying for 20 years. BRUESCH: No. To begin the COG, not to implement their program. TAYLOR: In the long run, SCAG is the implementor of trying to get control of the cities which they failed for 20 years to do. BRUESCH: See, the problem isn't just well, it isn't primarily SCAG. The problem is the CMP, the Congestion Management Plan, and the AQMP, the Air Quality Management Plan. These things are mandated. These things are and the RCP, which is the Regional Comprehensive Plan, these things have been mandated by the state and federal governments and our staff has just begun compiling what we have to do. Am I correct in assuming that? And a lot of these plans are due the last of June, if I'm not mistaken. Which plan is due in June? AL RODRIGUEZ, CITY ENGINEER: Every June, except I understand recently this June, traffic council required a CMP. That's one of the things that's required in June. And coming up in May and in March other elements of the CMP will be required. BRUESCH: See. And it's one of the things that this facilitates is to have our needs part of the regional plan. If we're not in this group and every other city is, that regional plan will be their ideas and we will have to comply to it.' VASQUEZ: Mr. Mayor. If we accept this tonight can we pull out if we see necessary? BRUESCH: Yes. TAYLOR: You can pull out on a 60-day notice but you will be responsible for all debts incurred and correct me if I'm wrong. It states in there that any obligations that while you were a member that you will pay and when they start assessing these dues, whatever they may be, as long as you're a member what is assessed you will be liable for. Is that correct? BRUESCH: Up to the time that you withdrew your membership. TAYLOR: That's my interpretation of the way it says, you will pay, and it says it's interesting when you read through the program, it states you will not be forced to do anything except pay the dues and that's in parenthesis in several sections, except to pay the dues. So, and we don't even know what they are yet. So, we're walking into a Pandora's Box, what's behind the door. So, until you get your questions answered, if you can get the right answers for them, I'm not in favor of joining this until you get your questions answered. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. What was the final consensus on you said one-half of one-half, was that for the dues or ? BRUESCH: A quorum is one-half. TAYLOR: A quorum is 50% of the members that show up and the majority of that quorum which could be 25% of the total members of the city. Do you follow? CC 2-22-94 Page #6 CLARK: Yes, but was that for setting the dues also? BRUESCH: The argument went this way. A couple of us mentioned the fact that we did not like the idea of 25% of the cities in the San Gabriel Valley determining the policy for the rest of the cities and the idea was said well that would make it incumbent upon cities to participate in the process of debate then and somebody said well you don't participate in debate in SLAG meetings because they're held during the middle of the day in far-reaching areas like that and I said well how about making it a policy that we have our meetings in the early evening or late afternoon, make them working meetings not dinner meetings, that we're there for a purpose and working together. That would enhance membership as long as everybody knew how important these plans that were being discussed and the provisions that were being discussed and it was agreed to at that time that that's when the meetings would be held to enhance the availability of the meeting to the general membership. CLARK: So, it can be 25% of the membership can decide. BRUESCH: If nobody shows up. Yes. CLARK: I don't like that. TAYLOR: Well, that's true but again on Page 2 I'd like to read it is the clear intent among the cities that the council shall not possess the authority to compel any of its members to conduct any activities or implement any plans or strategies that.they do not wish to undertake, in parenthesis, except payment of dues. So, and again, what you were saying a while ago. What happens if you don't want to go along with it? If they're dictating to you at the federal, the county, or the state level, you're going to have to go along with them, whether you like it or not because they're going to dictate to you whether you're in this council or not. BRUESCH: May I defer a question to Mr. Rodriguez? Al, you know the process that the City has to go through to meet the requirements, the data requirements, of these plans, and you also have been privy to the process of formation of this COG. Do you feel that the existence of this COG would facilitate the work that has to be done by our City, by itself? Or do you just think it's a window dressing? There, I put you on the spot. TAYLOR: Al, let me say this much, we've been doing it on our own now haven't we? Mr. Mayor, we've been doing it on our own, haven't we? RODRIGUEZ: Yes. I think with the exception of AB 939, I think we employed... TAYLOR: I think we've been doing a good job, keeping up with them rather than having another official taxing agency.. When I say taxing, charging the dues and again on Page 1, another section, the public interest requires that an agency with the aforementioned goals, meaning this council, not possess the authority to compel any of its members to conduct any activities or implement any plans or strategies that they do not wish to undertake except for the payment of dues. So, what they bill you, you're going to pay. I'd make the motion that we not join at this time until we get more information on what they're going to charge. BRUESCH: Would you like to have people from the San Gabriel Valley Association come and address this body? TAYLOR: No. They're welcome to come but I want the agreements back to this Council so we can all read and find out what they really are going to charge and what authority will you have. You're locked in either way. So, I'd just make the motion that we not join at this time until the questions are answered. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. CC 2-22-94 Page #7 BRUESCH: Well, there is a time schedule have the first meeting March the 24th. Cl I know that they want to TAYLOR: It says right in here if they don't have them by March the 24th it will go until June until... BRUESCH: No. No. No. Their organizational meeting is going to be March 19th or 20th. I've got it down here. The organizational meeting will be on March the 17th I believe, Saint Patrick's day. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. Do we know how many cities have joined to this date? BRUESCH: All cities have joined except two. DONALD J. WAGNER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: I thought it was 22 as of last Thursday. BRUESCH: Well, they have... let's see... VASQUEZ: South E1 Monte. BRUESCH: Since last Thursday they've had three more so I believe... South E1 Monte has said they're not going to join and there's one city that has not replied and there's about three other cities that are in the process of voting besides ourselves. So, out of the 39 cities, they've got about 28 on board, I think it is. CLARK: Now, I have one more question. When they meet to decide the dues will that be done at one meeting? In other words, the representatives will be there, one member from each city and they will decide at that meeting without input from the other councils that they're representing. BRUESCH: Well, that really depends on how the city directs their delegate to proceed. Does the delegate proceed on their own cognition or do they go back to the City Council and ask for direction? CLARK: That's got to be a policy decided because if they're going to vote that night you won't have, whoever's the representative, will not have the chance to go back to the Council. BRUESCH: Which would almost preclude people voting on anything, the delegate voting on anything, until all councilmembers were afforded the chance to look over the agendas. And that could be a requirement made that... CLARK: But will the staff or whoever prepare an estimated dues and have the councils decide and then... BRUESCH: Before any meeting it could be required that all members of all city councils receive a copy of that agenda with all the backup materials so that they can look over it. and if there's... CLARK: But who's going to prepare the document saying how much dues each city would be assessed? BRUESCH: That's going to be decided in the first meeting. If not then, the second meeting. You see, that's what I mean. If there is a question of policy of saying well we don't want our delegate to proceed on any vote without prior approval of the council, then the policy can be established that all agendas be passed out to all members of councils not just the delegates so that members of the councils if they have a question they can talk about it prior to the meeting. That could be a policy statement, also made. We have a motion. Is there a second? The motion again is that we do not join at this time. Hearing no second, is there a substitute motion? CC 2-22-94 Page #8 • • TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. There's been several questions raised by the members of this Council because they're not clear even in their by-laws and the guidelines that they have and the way it's written now you're joining this the way what they're proposing right now, it's a blank check. Once you join it it's a question well how do you change it? And I'm just reluctant to join an organization that we don't know what the budget's going to be. How they're going to implement it and how they're going to spend the money except create another layer of bureaucracy. No other way to put it. BRUESCH: Well, one'of the things that I was arguing about right along and I still will argue about in terms of setting up this type of organization is my distaste for the way SCAG operates. I'm on record many times.of complaining the fact that they kind of proceed in a vacuum. Part of that is really City Council fault because throughout the years as they've insulated themselves from us the participation as councilmembers has slackened off to the point where very few people go to these meetings and SCAG has assumed well, nobody cares, we'll do what we want and I'm very adamant in saying that if a COG is set up, being that it's going to be local, being that it's going to be conveniently placed at a convenient time, it is really incumbent upon the cities to.become directly involved in the operation of this type of setup, its governance. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I have to disagree in the sense that SCAG has not been able to implement their programs and we will become a pawn of SCAG. We think that we're creating a San Gabriel Valley Association of Cities will now become a Council of Government but it will be manipulated by SCAG and it even states that they're going to give us the seed money that they have to get the organization going. BRUESCH: The point is and I'll give you one good example. The people on one of the, I believe the Riverside COG, some of the COGS by the way have been in operation surrounding for the last four or five years. TAYLOR: What is a COG? BRUESCH: Council of Governments, C-O-G. TAYLOR: Okay. BRUESCH: The SCAG said bring in your subregional plans from each area and then we're going to amalgam them into a regional plan. Okay? What happened was that they brought them in and they already had their plan made and they began matching, well if it matched, okay, we'll subnote it, if it doesn't match, we'll just ignore it. And a couple of the subregions, COGS, noticed this and they had the staff to go over these regional plans which are absolutely required and match it to their subregional plan and they said wait a second, SCAG you said that you're going to amalgam all these plans and all you're doing is matching it with what you already have precluded as being your plan and due to that action, the subregional plans and the regional plan was put on hold so that the COGs could have more input in establishing that particular segment of the plan. TAYLOR: And they're still on hold. BRUESCH: Right now, they still are on hold. TAYLOR: And that's the point I was trying to make, exactly, when I said SCAG would be coming and implementing their plan and you just confirmed it. BRUESCH: No, they're not because the COGS were there, they said wait a second, you can't do that. You were telling us that it's from the bottom up, we want to make sure that our plans are being used for that purpose. Now, I doubt if...when you get material this high on all three plans that anybody is going to be able to sit down and read those things and match it if you're doing it on a part-time basis. We're beating a dead horse. What is the consensus of this Council? CC 2-22-94 Page #9 • 0 BRUESCH CONTINUES: Do we need to have somebody come back and get more information? Do we need more paperwork on this? It seems that everybody's in a nebulous area right now. Mrs. Clark, what do you feel? CLARK: Well, I think we need to join it for our protection but I think we need to watch very, very carefully the policies that are formed at the very beginning and I'm very concerned and we could withdraw almost immediately before we're even assessed if we don't like what's going on but I think we're going to have to be... BRUESCH: Mr. Vasquez, what are your...? VASQUEZ: I'm just concerned. I don't want to jump into this right away. I need more information and because of Margaret Clark's concerns and I don't like another layer of government, that's first of all but I still don't want to say no to it. TAYLOR: We're not saying no to it in the sense that it states right in here that new members can join. In other words once you find out when they establish what these rules will be...it wouldn't be so bad if you were going to form these by-laws and rules before and then you were voting on them. What's happening is we're voting to accept the stuff (by-laws and regulations that) they have before us. BRUESCH: Okay. Can we do this then? We still have one meeting before the formation meeting which is our first in March. I'd hate for us to be out in the cold when all this discussion is going to be brought up on the floor at the first meeting and they're planning on... TAYLOR: You're entitled to go to these meetings, Mr. Bruesch. BRUESCH: No. If you're not a part of the COG you cannot send a delegate. TAYLOR: In other words this organization now, the way it's formed, you cannot participate in it. BRUESCH: No. We are now...we have... TAYLOR: Sounds to me like they're already dictating what you're doing. BRUESCH: They disbanded the San Gabriel Valley Association of Cities (SGVAC) at the last meeting. TAYLOR: Then who's supplying this information if it was these cities? BRUESCH: It is the SGVAC is the organization that set up this material. As of the next meeting, March the 19th, 17th, the new organization will be formed and all these questions you're asking are going to be discussed. In fact the comment was made that there's going to be a 5-7 hour meeting. A lot of things are going to be covered in that first meeting and they may have to put the agenda over to the next monthly meeting in order to get everything in that they need to. TAYLOR: So, there's no functioning organization right now. BRUESCH: There is now no, we're in the interim, yes, you're right. TAYLOR: So, this is floating out here all powerful with no organization controlling it? BRUESCH: However, let me remind you that 28-29 of the 39 cities... TAYLOR: There's 29 cities listed in here. What are you saying 39? And these have not all joined. South E1 Monte's listed on here and they haven't joined. CC 2-22-94 Page #10 0 0 BRUESCH: What I'm saying is that there's only a few that have not joined. Most of them have already agreed to join, passed resolutions to join. So, on that formation night all those cities who have already agreed to join will meet and set up the ground rules and determine who can vote and the amount each city will have to pay for dues and so forth and so on. So if we don't come to resolution by that time then we won't have any input into those debates. TAYLOR: Well, I think it's turning to management by crisis. Jump in and see what they have, let's see what their program is because if you cannot attend those and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Kress, what happens with the Brown Act as far as these meetings being open to the public? BRUESCH: They have to be open. ROBERT L. KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: It specifies in the documents that... TAYLOR: Yes, it does. KRESS: I think what Mr. Bruesch is saying is if you want to participate and you want to have a vote then you need to join the organization prior to the organizational meeting. You can sit in the audience. No one could deny you that right but you wouldn't be able to participate and vote.' TAYLOR: But we're voting on the agreement here the way it is to join. KRESS: Correct. TAYLOR: And that's what wrong with the thing. It's not the fact that... you're voting to accept it as is and then you go to the meeting and say well why did you join when you read what was in there if you didn't like it? BRUESCH: And the other thing is when they discuss subregional plans, the congestion management plan, the AQMP, we can come up with our compliance from our city but when it comes to overall plans like regional housing needs or whatever, we will not have a voice in that. That can be opposed (proposed) by the COG. TAYLOR: Well, most of those things are dictated as you said by federal programs, state programs and we get right down to the nitty-gritty of it, if you are a public citizen or a private citizen and you attend these meetings and if you are denied just the common courtesy of asking questions as an interested city, if you cannot ask questions at these meetings then the hell with them. I mean that's what the Brown Act's all about, to let people attend and ask questions. BRUESCH: Yes, but the point... TAYLOR: If you can't participate then you don't.... BRUESCH: But the point is you don't have the vote. TAYLOR: Well, you're joining:..you don't need to have a vote when you're already joining the program as is. BRUESCH: Well, no, no. Because in front of this body is going to be all these plans and all these recommendations and just as an example, the trolley lines, Pasadena has gotten what they want because they've controlled the votes in these transportation committee meetings. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor, we've gotten what we want too, because they wanted to bring those trolley lines right down Valley Boulevard out here... BRUESCH: No. We're talking about a fixed-rail trolley line. TAYLOR: These were fixed-rails. They were going to bring in... CC 2-22-94 Page #11 • • BRUESCH: No. They were buses. TAYLOR: No. No. When you bring in electric buses you have to put in overhead power lines to run them. BRUESCH: There's a difference. TAYLOR: That's what they wanted to do. BRUESCH: Yes, but this is a fixed-rail, it's rails. TAYLOR: These are fixed ...you call it fixed-rails, Z call it fixed-power lines. Once they bring these power lines all the way down Valley Boulevard with the beautification programs that we have and then you start to bring in all these overhead power lines. We told them we weren't going to do it so we won our issue also. And thank God that it didn't go in in one sense because they're in such financial crisis now that they would be deeper in the hole. I think we're beating a dead horse. If you're going to do something with it, do it. BRUESCH: What is the consensus? Should we ask somebody to come and give us more information? Do we go out? I don't see anymore information that they've put on this other than the packet you've received. Do you want to have somebody at the next meeting give you more an outline of what's going on? Or do you want to vote at this time to join and then have everybody show up at the formation meeting on the 17th and if everybody doesn't like what they hear they can withdraw. We need to move on this item. CLARK: How could we it? Could,we do that? At the meeting, withdraw? TAYLOR: You've got to give them 60 days notice. VASQUEZ: After 60 days. BRUESCH: Well, 60 days. We can say okay you have your 60-day notice. TAYLOR: They vote in whatever the assessments are at that time, you're a member of it. CLARK: If we join are we choosing a delegate tonight? BRUESCH: Not necessarily. We can do that at the next meeting. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. It seems to be a...I think we'd just like to wait and see...bring it back to the next meeting and.try to get your questions answered. BRUESCH: Okay. Do you want staff to contact people from the COG staff? TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'd like it in writing so everybody can read it and understand it. They'll tell us that the moon is blue if they come here. WAGNER: What particular questions are you talking about? Because all the information that they provided... BRUESCH: What particular questions would you like... TAYLOR: What questions would I ask? Let's put this in verbatim and then Mrs. Clark's questions and your questions and my questions... golly, that's that the only way to remember all of them. Sorry, Janice, but that's... BRUESCH: It's only 45 minutes of debate. Time and a half. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I think maybe we should go ahead and join and have that voice because I'm afraid ...this is going forward. There's already enough cities in there. They're going to go ahead. And CC 2-22-94 Page #12 • CLARK CONTINUES: they're going to make decisions that are going to affect us regardless whether we're in there or not. BRUESCH: That's my big fear. CLARK: As far as transportation and all these other things. If they want a trolley line we're not going to be able to stop it unless we're in there and fighting at the time. TAYLOR: No, we stopped it on our own here, Maggie. CLARK: I know but I mean... BRUESCH: It got stopped because they lost the funding. CLARK: They didn't have an organization. VASQUEZ: Mr. Mayor. Isn't this in a sense a continuation of the San Gabriel Valley Cities Association? Just being called something else? BRUESCH: Yes, it is a continuation. But it does give them a little bit more authority under SLAG to operate as a regional body. If it's not this SCAG will use another regional body. Their by law empowered to set up regional, subregional bodies that will have force of law. So, if it's not this COG it will be something else that they set up. You see, so I'm...one way or the other something similar to this is going to be set up. Either we do it or SLAG does it because it's part of the law. We're being mandated. Throughout the last year and a half when they started the discussion of this it was made very clear to us that this was a requirement that had to be done. Al, I'll put you on the spot again. You've been on that technical committee and you've sat through a lot of the debates from the standpoint of a staff person, do we have wiggle room on this? Or is it pretty well set that this is the way we have to go? RODRIGUEZ: I think we have a choice. Obviously, that's what staff's recommendation is that you have a choice. TAYLOR: A choice of what, Al? RODRIGUEZ: If 1 understand it correctly, one of the goals of the COG would be to take a unified approach to some of the regional plans as the Mayor pointed out and as Councilman Taylor pointed out, we've been doing these on our own. I think we can continue to do these on our own. I think you have the staff to do that. Or you have the choice of joining what I envision might be an organization that will recommend, join this consortium, we'll tackle this issue together. I don't what those will be. I don't know if it will be cost effective. We won't know until they come up with costs. But we do have a choice. BRUESCH: Let me tell you. I think one of my big fears about not joining and I've expressed this to people in the organization is that if we don't join that's one less vote against a group of cities forming a mini consortium within the group and getting a majority of votes all the time and getting what they want on these regional plans and our area being left out in the cold. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. You can join ...this is already formed as a basic core. The by-laws are written, the regulations are in there. It's very thorough. As I said there's 25 maybe 30 pages in here. That's not what we're voting on. That's not what they're going to be voting on the next meeting as such. It's ...you're voting to join an organization that has a blank check waiting to fill in for the city to start paying and as you've mentioned several times, SCAG is the prime mover behind this. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. If we joined and the assessment, the dues, was what we did not think was appropriate and we gave an immediate 60-day notice. Would we be assessed for that 60 days or would we...? Do you know? CC 2-22-94 Page #13 0 • KRESS: I can't tell from these documents. I think if you expressed your intention as a member at the organizational meeting that you'd made a policy error; that you did not want to in fact join this organization, I would think that they would let you out of that obligation. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I would go along with the notion also that if you were a city interested in joining this and it does state in here, there's a section on how new members can join. They'd be more than happy to get Rosemead as a central, heart of the watermelon, you might say, because we're in the center of the Valley. The being is that raise the questions, have a little bit of leverage that if they're not going to give you the benefit of the doubt at that meeting, then say well, we don't want to join because we don't think this is right. That's the time to say why you don't want to join, not to say well, we joined, we weren't sure, now we want to get out of it. BRUESCH: Well, the point is though, Mr. Taylor, again, if there are substantial discussions about setting policy there and you're not a member you can't vote. TAYLOR: You can still stand up and inform the other members what the problem is. That doesn't negate any constructive input. Maybe the other members will say gee we never thought of that. But at least you're not already in with all the guidelines that they've already got. BRUESCH: But let's do this what if again. What if the vote on that particular policy came out 19 to 18 and if you'd had the vote you would have been able to defeat it. TAYLOR: I don't believe in what ifs when the thing is you go to discuss the program. There's just too many what ifs. BRUESCH: There's something wrong. I feel something's wrong. If we're going to go and fight for issues it is like blowing against the tornado. After you're discussion is over, you have no vote. You don't have a say. You can talk all you want... TAYLOR: Well, you've got to stop and think then, the majority of these cities have already agreed to this agreement by joining. BRUESCH: No. I disagree with that contention. TAYLOR: Well, wait a minute now. What did they approve when they joined? Didn't they get the same agreement? BRUESCH: The discussion at the meeting last Thursday was all of this will be on the table to discuss. TAYLOR: That's not what it says right here. BRUESCH: No. I'm... TAYLOR: You're agreeing to this agreement. BRUESCH: Well, all I can say is what I went even to the technical committee lot of the things that you're bringing questions came from various cities... was discussed time and again and meetings at various times and a out came from the same TAYLOR: Then how were they answered? BRUESCH: Again, this is the document which was brought up from a consensus of.... TAYLOR: Then they've already been answered. If my questions were already asked and they've already answered them and this was the consensus of it, what's that tell you? CC 2-22-94 Page #14 BRUESCH: Okay, well, like I said, I will go with what the majority of the Council directs. However, I must caution you that when we're dealing with regional plans and a subregional plan has come up and this body is going to be the body that comes up with that regional plan and it deals with housing, mobility, everything, economic survival, development and we're not part of that decision making process we can make all our plans that we want, we're still part of that subregional plan and they can mandate things on us that we don't agree to if we're not part of that... TAYLOR: I think at this point, Mr. Mayor, we can't discuss it much more as far as like I said, beating it to death and I'd like to move on to the next item then. BRUESCH: Well, is there a motion? One way or the other we have to... TAYLOR: We don't have to... just defer the issue to the next meeting. BRUESCH: Do you want additional information? Do you want a person here? TAYLOR: Whatever the questions were... END VERBATIM DIALOGUE VI. STATUS REPORTS A_ TRACT MAP 51544, 8445-8463 MISSION DRIVE VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS: TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'd like it in the record. The letter, Mr. Kress, would you state what you...the letter was sent to Dolly Leong. KRESS: Yes. The staff report indicates that the attached letter was sent to prospective lenders. I didn't have any information as to who those prospective lenders might be so I sent three original copies of the attached letter to Dolly Leong via Express Mail on February 9, 1994. I've had no response whatsoever to that letter. I've had no inquiries. Otherwise the status report is correct. TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. The reason I asked Mr. Kress to make that statement is the fact that we have done what we said we would do and it's up to Mrs. Leong to present those letters to her lending institutions and give us the courtesy of a response back to it. If she doesn't do that, yes or no, they did accept it, they didn't accept it, she didn't present it to them, I think that we're trying to meet her halfway and work with her. So, again, this should be in the minutes to follow up what we did at the last meeting. That we're trying to do everything possible. And if she's not following through with it then we don't know what the answer is. CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I just have to say something. This was supposed to speed up the process. And I don't see any speeding up of the process. The houses were to be demolished and they are not in progress to this date I believe. End of conversation. BRUESCH: There are certain frustrations that come with public office and this is one of the greatest frustrations. When you're trying to make it a win-win situation for everyone involved, to make everyone happy and to speed up a process and we keep on being thwarted and that's all I can say. It's complete thwarting of what we're trying to do, improving that area of our City and I believe that we have been extremely patient on this case. I believe that we have explained our points carefully. We explained at the last meeting very succinctly why the requirements are there and I believe that the party in this matter was completely clear on why we did it, yet nothing's being done. It's just like ...I would like the City to proceed in doing what they need to do to get those buildings demolished. Doing whatever the law requires. END VERBATIM DIALOGUE CC 2-22-94 Page #15 VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS A. COUNCIL14ElBER TAYLOR 1. Asked that all councilmembers receive the information packet that is provided by the State Water Education Foundation regarding the water projects throughout the State. VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None IX. CLOSED SESSION A. LITIGATION - TRANSPORTATION LEASING vs. CITY OF ROSEMEAD The City Council adjourned at 10:05 p.m. to a Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9A for the purpose of discussing Transportation Leasing vs. City of Rosemead. The Council reconvened in open session at 10:30 p.m. The Council met in a Closed Session for the purposes stated by the City Attorney and listed on the Agenda. During the Closed Session the City Council received a report regarding the case of Transportation Leasing vs. Caltrans and Cities. During the Closed Session the City Council voted unanimously to approve a settlement agreement that presented by counsel, directing that the Mayor be authorized to sign the settlement agreement at such time as insurance counsel has provided assurance to the City that all of the participating insurers in the settlement have made the required deposits. There being no further action to be taken at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 22, 1994. Respectfully submitted: CC 2-22-94 Page #16