Loading...
CC - Item 7A - Minutes 07-28-09Minutes of the REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 28, 2009 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Clark at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Ly INVOCATION: Mayor Clark PRESENT: Mayor Clark, Mayor Pro Tern Taylor, Council Member Armetnta, Council Member Low, and Council Member Ly.'.t OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth, Cq-Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Saeki, Director of Finance:Brisco, Director of Parks and=Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, DeputyPublic Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda./ 1. PRESENTATION • National Night Out Mayor Clark presented a proclamation to Chief of Police M`uraka'm an`d':stated she wanted to give a special thanks to the Sheriff's Department f`r providing the s'e`Nices they do~to the City. Public Safety Coordinator`Mandy Wong addressed Council and stated that there had been a drop of 50% in burglaries from June 2008 to June 2009 .~Ms. Wong also thanked everyone who was involved in the Neighborhood Watch and stated;that the Block Oaptains would be recognized in the upcoming National Night Out ceremonyMs. Wong-a`so invited everyone to attend the National Night Out and 501h City Anniversary ceremony-that was sch-eduled-for Au`gust'4,!h from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Mayor Clark'presented a proclamation to the-Area Civil Defense Management for their 501h year Anniversary of providing'publ c service. BrendalHunemiller was present to receive the proclamation; Ms. Hunemiller thanked Council :ahd city staff. S'helstated that the Area Civil Defense Management had been serving the City for officially 50,years but thai the organization was created in the first weeks of War War Il. She stated it has been such a privileg"61o work with all the cities and congratulated the City of Rosemead for its tremendous efforts to prep/e the city, city staff, and the community at large to prepare in the event of catastrophe. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE Yolanda McKnight - representative of the American Cancer Society stated that on behalf of the organizations she wanted to thank the Mayor, Council and staff for participating in the Relay for Life event. She stated she has participated with several communities and that this was the first time that the Mayor and Council Members walked during the event. Ms. McKnight added that the city had raised $3,000 and thanked Mandy Wong, Sean Sullivan, and Aileen Flores for putting the event together. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 1 of 15 ITEM NO. -I A Mayor Clark thanked Ms. McKnight for doing all she does in this organization. Fred Mascorro - stated that the city made it a great event; he added that last year the Rosemead community raised $6,000 and this year the city had raised $25,000. He thanked John Scott for having his daughter play the harp during the ceremony and thanked Mandy, Aileen, and Sean for all their help. Nancy Wilson - stated she wanted to informed Council regarding the Dial-A-Ride service or lack of service; she stated that when the services were changed there were a lot of promises made but they had not been met. Mrs. Wilson informed Council about a recent incident that occurred with ~the transportation services; her husband, who is 83 years old, called for service and was left in the 95 degreelieat for an hour and was never picked up. When Mrs. Wilson called Dial-A-Ride they informed her thattierstreet was closed; however, Mrs. Wilson stated it was not closed and that this was not the only occasion;thiis ha'l _ ned. Mayor Clark asked staff to look into this situation. Lillian Sacco - asked why the driver of the transportation.services can there is a severely disabled person, raining, or it's too hot o'uti,she hop( that. Mrs. Sacco stated she was there tonight to give Council an.updat Angeles Grand Jury on July 16th regarding the City of Rosemead's failu the building and operation of the Wal-Mart supercenter. Earlier in the y the request had been filed too late for the 2008-2009 Grand Jury sessic Chairperson to resubmit the report in July. Mrs. Sacc`o'stated, she had for the three Council Members who requested copies for their review.,_. Gilbert Urbina - stated hem program named the "MonterE stated that years ago he use( baseball team; however, he Mayor and fiq a solution Director of Pai an Ad Hoc Yo two for aide in appointed 6 m Mr. MontgomE uncil to ask fo J that most of Park for his pr Jo permit him the some and knock on the:doors when )uncil could do something about on the request submitted to the Los a to provide adequate oversight of and reported in a Council meeting but bufwewere encouraged by the revisions and had copies he stated he ran a baseball participants were Rosemead residents. He am but had left due to the politics with the rse Garvey Park again and the snack bar. of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott and try and Recreation Montgomery-Scott stated that this Council showed interest in the creation of Committee for iwo reasons; one to ensure that the local youth was being represented and a.d`evelopment of youth programs. Mr. Montgomery-Scoff stated that Council had recently bers t6-the committee and that there was still one vacancy for representation of Muscatel. Scott`iitroduced the committee: Cynthia Amezcua, Rosemead High School Samantha Hallman, Garvey School David Chen, Temple Intermediate School Roxanne Tuang, San Gabriel High School Jonathan Loc, At-Large Member Bonnie Pao, At-Large Member Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 2 of 15 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes May 12, 2009 - Regular Meeting May 26, 2009 - Regular Meeting June 30, 2009 - Special Meeting B. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2009.39 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2009-39, f&,'payment of City expenditures in the amount of $899,974.55 numbered 66753 through-66830. ' Resolution No. 2009.40 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 200930; for'"payment of City expenditures in the amount of $448,005.01 numbered 100435 through~,100458 and 66831 through 66884. D. Approval of Specifications and-Authorization to Solicit Proposals for Janitorial Services for City-Owned Buildings, Facilities and Parks, The City of Rosemead currently uses,outside contractual services to perform regular janitorial services•at its;facilities, buildings and parks'~Services performed by contract include.regular janitorial and maintenance services, carpet cleaning, dust removal, restroom cleaning and'solid wastecollection within~Cifty facilities. Currently, the City contracts with United Maintenance Systems company on=a month-to-month basis. If approved, this proposal would''enable the,City-to eenteainto a fixed cost maintenance contract for a period of three (3) years witthtand,option to extend the contract for two years (2) additional years. Recommendation: Thatthe~City Council approve the specifications forjanitorial and maintenance services and"authorize staff to solicit proposals from the list of qualified janitorial maintena11nce firms. E. Me\andum. ~f Agreement for the Administration and Cost Sharing of the Coordina'tedamplementation Plan for the Los Angeles River and Tributary Metals Total Maximum:Daily Load (TMDL) The Los Angeles River (LAR) and Tributaries Metals Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), adopted by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, requires that watershed cities and agencies (regulated entities) fund a coordinated implementation program. This report outlines the requirement for these efforts, their foreseeable costs, the proposed implementation through a cost sharing agreement, and fiscal management through the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG). Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 3 of 15 Recommendation: That the City Council approve the implementation administration and cost sharing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the SGVCOG and authorize the City Manager to execute the MOA. Council Member Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of the June 23, 2009 and April 28, 2009 minutes and Items C and F. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The minutes of April 28, 2009, were deferred to the following City'Counc A. Minutes June 23, 2009 - Special Meeting . Council Member Polly Low made a motion ,,seconded by CouncW i minutes of June 23, 2009 with the clarificatiomtlfat Council Member Traffic Commission selection but had been pr'esent'durin9•closed s Yes: Armenta;-Clark, Low, Ly, No: Nonez! u,. C. ~Ordina the R•1 Meeting. Steven Ly, to approve the vas not present during the Vote resulted in: Reading Municipal Code Amendment 09.01 Amending the R-1 Zone and Conditional Use Permit Requirements in July 14, 2009,1he City,)Council reviewed the proposed Municipal Code Amendment 09- amending Density Requirements in the R-1 Zone and Conditional Use Permit uirements in the R-1 and R-2 zones at the first required public hearing, which resulted in otion,,for approval. Ordinance No. 876 is now before Council at the required second Recommendation: That the City Council ADOPT Ordinance No. 876 at its second reading, thereby APPROVING Municipal Code Amendment 09-01. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 4 of 15 Council Member Low stated that this had been brought to her attention during "Chat with Council"; she stated that a resident was remodeling his house and he was planning to build to 2700 square feet; however, the way this ordinance is written it will require him to have a CUP and to pay an additional fee. Mrs. Low stated she wanted to request from Council that the ordinance be approved without Section 6 and have staff bring back more information. Mayor Clark stated she felt that the city needed to keep the threshold at 2500 square feet for a home and asked that staff work on a schedule fee where if it's a homeowner just expanding,his home, perhaps the fees can be waived. Mrs. Clark stated she wanted to keep the ordinance as is with'the threshold being 2500 square feet. She added that the previous Council had amended the ordinance so that if a house was 3000 square feet or greater then it had to come to the Planning Commission for review and that for years it had been 2500 square feet. Mrs. Clark stated that the reason why she wanted to putt;_back to 2500 square feet was because they were large homes and that she had received lots of'complaints `regarding mansionization and she felt the Planning Commission should review those projects to ensure the proper guidelines were being followed. Mrs. Clark made a motion that the ordinance=be approved as is with the~option that Council will be looking at changing the schedule. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated he seconded the motion and include that'staff could bring back anything at anytime for Council' review and added that there had to be consislence•so that Council would not be accused of playing favoritism with any individual properties u City Manager Allred stated that staff would be bringing to,Council in the next few meetings a Master Fee Resolution for their review. 1 Council Member Low stated she u ei stood the intent,of preventing,masionization but that had already been addressed by reducing the floor area'ratio. Mrs. Low felt that by moving the threshold to 2500 square feet the process for residents and"staff to get the projects approve ,,would be longer. She added she was asking that this be brought back with information on what4he impact iffittiis goes back to 3000 versus 2500. Mayor Pro/u;'Taylor statbcl staff provided a report to Council giving them a list of homes that were over 2500 and the average was 2700 ysquare feet. Principal Planner Bermejo stat d that was co rect; staff had looked at the building records that had been issued for new:home construction!.from present date back to May 2008 and out of the 36 new issued permits the average squarefeet of homes was 2575 square feet. Council Member Armehta stated she agreed with changing it back to 2500 square feet because even the report stated a concern that large homes are impacting residential neighborhoods and that is very important to take into account. Council Member Ly asked if this was changed back to 2500 square feet would it make any homes legal non- conforming. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 5 of 15 Mrs. Bermejo replied that any home with a current permit that is over 2500 square feet threshold, if they wanted to make any type of addition to their home they would have to come to the Planning Commission for approval but they would not be considered legal non-conforming. Interim City Attorney Montes stated that any expansion of the use would require the CUP. If it was an interior remodel thatjust required a footprint then that would not require a CUP; however, if they were going to expand the use then they would need to comply with the CUP. Council Member Low asked what the process was to go through a CUP. Mrs. Bermejo stated that the applicant filled out an application and submitted if°with,l5 sets of their plans along with their color rendering, staff then sent out the application-for review and`comments, staff checked the plans against the municipal code to ensure they complied and'thenstaff would schedule a public hearing. She added that the average time to process a CUP•was about 3 months and the appli ation fee is $925. ssi~~ ~M ~I 1r . Mayor Clark asked what the process was without the CUP, . Mrs. Bermejo replied that the applicant submits an application and'goes.through the city's general site review process. The applicant submits two sets of th~eir proposed plans and the application fee of S225; the turn around time is approximately two weeks., Council Member Low stated that then the months rather than two weeks... , Mrs. Bermejo Council Member Ly asked to go through the.Planninc Mrs. Berm'elo stated it no Council Member Low stated tt build one third of his lot size, < Council Member Ly stated if it staff look into CUP process?ar learnt that Rosemead is theoi the CUP;p ocess did i and applicant had to wait three additional time for review. square feet issue did not apply did they have care of over the counter. Ming city's FAR limit of 35%, which meant that the owner can only the mansionazation and prevented the impact on the neighbors. okay he would like to make a slight amendment to the motion and ask that ng back more information. He stated that in talking to staff earlier he had city that does a CUP on a residential area. Mayor Margaret Clark made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Gary Taylor, to adopt Ordinance No. 876 at its second reading, thereby approving Municipal Code Amendment 09-01. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Ly, Taylor No: Low Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 6 of 15 Abstain: None Absent: None Council Member Low stated that she fully supported most of the ordinance; however didn't agree with limiting the threshold to 2500 and having the resident go through additional process when it is unnecessary. Council Member Ly stated that his concern with the whole process is the concept of the CUP for the residential area and added that when they are talking about property rights Council finds a good balance on what is good for the community and what the rights are of the individual to buildon his own land. F. Interim Standardized Emergency Management System`(SEMS) Plan Government Code 8607, the Emergency Services,Act4reequires eacfi,local agency, in order to be eligible for any reimbursement of response°telated costs, to adop't?and use the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) plan when responding to major emergencies that involve multi-agencies`. ; In addition, a Homeland Security Presidential Directive'has ordered the creation of the National Incident Management System (NIMS), which, requires cities to adopt NIMS into their SEMS plans. In 2006, City Council.adopted a resolution`stating the City would implement NIMS into its SEMS plan., As Disaster Management Area D is still cureently.developing the SEMS plan to incorporate NIMS, the City has;developed an interim`pIan to nsure'that the requirements of the Emergency Services Act are met. As~recommended'by the City's Area D Coordinator, The Council<will.consider adoption of the interim SEMS plan to ensure that the City can meet the minimalrequirements topbe eligible for emergency response-related reimbursements. approve and adopt the interim SEMS plan. Council Member Ly stated plan,listed some positions staff would be updating it( Public InformatioObnagi requirements. Council Member Steven approve and adopt the ii as a good one but had a few concerns. He stated that the and it also included an old organization plan. He asked if that was correct and that it was also one of the State's made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to rim SEMS plan. Vote resulted in: . Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 7 of 15 4. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Park Monterey- Closure Impact Report Big Island Property, LLC (Hawaii Property, Inc.), the owner of the Park Monterey mobile home. park located at 7433 Garvey Avenue, submitted a Closure Impact Report (the "Report") to the City of Rosemead on July 21, 2008 to change the use of mobile home spaces (1A, 2A, and 3A) into a parking lot for a future mixed use development. The Report was presented to the City Council for conside`ration•at its June 23, 2009 meeting. At that time, the City Council directed staff to arrange, or an indepe `dent appraiser to provide a valuation of Units 1A and 3A (2A is currently owned by the park owner). Once the appraisals were completed, staff was also directed'to coordinate a meeting between all affected parties to discuss the results of the appraisals. This information'was to be presented to the City Council at its July,,14, 2009 meeting However, at the,request of the attorney representing Park Monterey and tlie.attorneyrepresenting Spaces 1A'and 3A this item was continued to the City Council's July 28, 2009 to allow each party the time needed to review all the appraisals and to negotiate an-acceptable agreement between all parties. The negotiations took. place without the Citkinvolvement and information will presented to the City Council verbally; by;the attorney representing Park Monterey on July Regardless ofrthis•information, it remains imperative that the City Council review the Report and either accept it as complete or add additional mitigation measures pursuant to California Govemment Code Section 65863.7(e) provided those measures do not exceed the reasonable; cost of relocation. It is legal counsel and staffs opinion that appropriate mitigation measures,l av~e;been,provided,an'd that no further mitigation measures are recommended given,the option of replacement within the same park and payment of moving costs as being rea'so'nable options for'relocation, as well as the fact that neither resident requesteda;hearing ohjttie,Report. City Council review, accept and file the "Closure Impact Mayor Clark recuses herself frorfVthe dais at 7:50 p.m. 1 11 -1 Interim City Attorney Montes`reviewed the staff report. Elena Popp - stated she was the attorney representing the two tenants being displaced; she stated that the first point she wanted to make was that a legislative body can not take any action on an impact report without first determining that the action is consistent with the general plan and in particular with the housing element. State reports indicate that the city has failed to adopt a current housing element and due to this the required element of consistency can not be made; therefore, this action should not be taken. In addition, California Environmental Quality Act requires that the planning documents that lead to any approvals look at the impact Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 8 of 15 that the closure will have on residents. Mrs. Popp referred to California Section Code 65862.7 (e) and stated that it seemed the City Attorney had misinterpreted the code. She stated she saw two problems; one that the cost did not have to have a limit and that cost of relocation could also mean other type of cost for physically moving the unit and there wasn't any evidence of what the units actually cost; other cities have adopted relocation plans that include that the City of Rosemead is not including. Ms. Popp stated that they were requesting that the plan be changed to include that the required appraisal that was being utilized was a face value appraisal and that there not be a limit of $8,000 for relocation cost. The displacement of these tenants is going to cost them at least a rent differential of about $1,000 a month and that is a huge impact on a family In addition the amount that they are going to be given to relocate isn't enough,to buy~,another mobile home of the same age or size. Linda Lester - attorney representing the property owner of Park Monterey statedtshe wanted to respond to Ms. Popp's comments. At the beginning Ms. Popp stated that the-city was withouVanyjurisdiction to make this ruling. Ms. Lester stated that her client had complied with all'tfie jurisdiction requirements regarding notices. Ms. Lester stated she believed that Council or staff member had remarked thalfWcity really didn't have power to order the park owner to pay a certain amount~She reiter'ated that they had. complied with the I 'N statute and believed the city did not have the authority to makel'adecision tonight. Ms. Lester,added that in place value was not appropriate because what that came down to was,to force the park owner to purchase his own property back. fe~ Council Member Ly stated that at the last meeti that was inline with the appraisals that were coi Economic Development Administrator Ramirez information with the city. z staff to conduct,an appraisal and asked how rk owners and the tenants. parties had shared that ~r N Ms. Popp stated she had lustreceived the appraisal and stated that one appraisal from;the!city;came;;in.at_$12,05 Council Member'Lyasked the^Interim"City Attorney because tie was hearing conflicting arguments i be happy to share them with Council. She what their appraisal came in at was $30,000. the Council had in terms of authority on this issue Interim City,Attorney Montes replied this was a very odd statute in the law because we have a private mobile home owner that has decided thafsome or all of the mobile home park they want to use for something other than a mobile park and becauseof,this the legislature had determined that the mobile home residents are in a particularly situation`6ecause,they do not share the same living conditions that say normal renters do. The have adopted this statute an6asically what it means is that they put some relocation type requirements onto private mobile home owners somewhat similar to relocation obligations the city would have if it was acquiring property and had to relocate residents. This is a slightly modified situation because we are dealing with a private property owner and only dealing with a certain property owner, which is mobile home property owner. The statute indicates that if the mobile home owner is contemplating changing the use of their property they must generate this report and the report is supposed to indicate who is going to be impacted by the closure and how the property owner will address those impacts. That report is to be presented to the City Council and Council is to determine whether or not that report meets the requirements of State law. Additionally that statute gives Council authority to do two things; one is to adopt its own ordinance to add additional Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 9 of 15 procedures requirements, which the city has not done and second it allows you to impose conditions on the closure to mitigate impacts on the residents provided that the conditions do not exceed reasonable cost of relocation; however, reasonable cost has not been defined by legislature. Mr. Montes stated that the scope of authority for Council tonight was to determine whether or not that report meets the requirements of the law. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that as far as the report he did not see anything that the city had done wrong and asked the City Attorney if he saw anything that needed to be corrected. He addressed the comment that Ms. Popp had made about the environmental impact that this relocation might hha`ave /f . Mr. Montes stated she raised CEQA as an objection but he did not believe,that the review of the relocation impact report constituted as a project under CEQA. Mr. Montes added that the`action of Council tonight was not a project and this review is not subject to CEQA. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated it was a dilemma when you are I but there are conditions, contracts, and leases and they ar&w it was a dilemma that the owner wanted to use the property,, w the requirements set by State law, which says there are relocE did not know how to arbitrarily set appraisals of the value becz he was very discouraged because Council had postponed this tenant's attorney comes up tonight and says ilieyhave the apt good faith. He stated his reaction to this was Oat\ouncil nee next step was., h- Council Member Low stated she sure it addressed all the different meet State requirements'and the Council Member Armenta did have to follow State la that this does`not occurin reiterated that other ordin Cynthia Melendrez - stated h her and move to another place somewhere to move that was j kirig'about someone's,home for many years made to go into perpetuity Mr. Taylor stated ch he lias a right to do so but needs to meet ins assistance that is required, 'He added he se that,w'as a market issue. Mr. Taylor stated em,for~'a~month to get the appraisals and the aisals`now he didn't think they were acting in ad to adopt-the plan and then see what the that the re ponsibihty of thg1tywas to review the report to make hat were mandated by the State. Mrs. Low stated she felt it did should be approved. use Council may not agree with everything but future Council can look at other ordinances so added thafCouncil's hands were tied in this situation and at so that residents could be protected in the future. ma,was the inability to take the money the property owner was offering e the amount was not enough. She stated that all she wanted was her place. Jay Kiartanson - stated tfiat wtien the zoning first came into play there was a meeting scheduled for the tenants to come to the city and at that time the tenants were told that the zone change would not affect any of the residents until the project was in phase 2; this project is only in phase 1. He stated that based on the amount the property owners were offering them they could not go and buy another mobile home that was exactly the same. Elizabeth Ramirez - stated she was a single mother of two and asked Council how she was going to take $12,500, take her 2 year old and 12 year old, purchase a mobile home with this amount of money. She stated that maybe not tomorrow but eventually this'would put them on the street. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 10 of 15 Council Member Armenta asked Interim City Attorney Montes what the ramifications were if she motioned to include in place value and relocation fees comparable to that of the mobile home. Mr. Montes replied that the issue is between the two parties, somebody was going to end up either paying more than they wanted or receiving less than they wanted. In terms of determining what constitutes reasonable cost of relocation that is being debated in front of Council now. As you have heard from both parties there are dramatic impacts on both parts depending on what Council decides to do. In the report what is indicated as reasonable cost is $8,000 for relocation plus the value of the mobile home not in place. If Council believes the report satisfies the requirements of.the law and indicates.ttiat the impacts of the I /1 residents will be mitigated then Council approves it. If Council believes additional mitigation is required, as long as it does not exceed the reasonable cost, of relocation then CounciC an;impose additional mitigation. Council Member Armenta motioned that the appraisals should be,based= plac6alue and the relocation fees should be comparable to those of the mobile park. w Mr. Montes stated that the logical extension of that was~ttiat iifdhey were}closing the entire park,they would essentially have to buy another mobile park to build in their own.property:: Council Member Armenta stated that in light of the new informatioh,that~was brought up about staff not knowing these mobile homes were in phase 1, she wanted this looked mto because this was affecting residents' lives. `h` iN_7 ? Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated he did not have a existed the issue is that they safnon phase 1. Council Member Ly aske clarify her motion. Council MemberyArment+ and the relocation1 feess A Mayor-Pro: lem Taylor sl you are going'to face the Motioned was these three mobile homes to Ms.'irmenta's motion and asked if she could please ratedlfiat tier motion was-,that the appraisals should be based on place value be comparable in another the mobile park. it is. precedent and when those other 40 units came up motion died on the floor. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Polly Low, to accept and file the "Closure Reporttf (Vote resulted in: Yes: Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: Armenta Absent: None Recuse: Clark Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 11 of 15 Council Member Sandra Armente stated for the record that she had abstained because she still believes the appraisals should be based on place value and if she had voted no it would state she didn't agree with State law. B. California Mission Inn Pet Fair on August 29, 2009 On May 5, 2009, staff was informed of an event planned by the California Mission Inn, on behalf of the San Gabriel Valley Humane Society, to be held on/August 29, 2009. The event will consist of a 3 mile dog walk, a dog show, and a pet fair that will take place partially on the grounds of the California Mission Inn, 8417 Mission-Drive; with a majority of the event taking place within the public rights-of-way and a,City'park (Sallffanner Park). All proceeds from the event will benefit the San Gabriel Valley'Humane Society, a "1,(c) Non-profit organization, which is in danger of closing.its doors due to a lack of funding. he event will feature celebrity judge Cesar Milan, of National Geographic Channel notoriety'and is expected to draw crowds in excess of 1,000 people. The event will also include live music and food vendors as a part of the pet fair.;.'.' Based on details provided from.California Mission Inmstaff.determined that this event will significantly impact the neighborhoods' around the facility, especially to residents on adjacent streets. The City has been working with~California Missionlnn to help mitigate any potential problems at that may arise from the4agnilude.of this.event` The California Mission Inn has also requested that-the City reduce`orwaive the fees associated with personnel costs and/or overtime associated with providing City.services. Itis estimated that City and Los Angeles County,Sheriff staff time will cost approximately $8,321. Recommendation: That the-City Council;, .r 1 1 6thorize temporary street closures around the perimeter of the Mission Inn to accornmodafe.the dog,walk and show. 2. Provide„direction,'regarding the requested support'related to this special event. Mayor Clark retumdo'Jo'the dais`ai 8:38 p.m. Community DevelopmentDirector Saeki reviewed the staff report. waiver or reduction of fees for City staff Mayor Clark asked if the city used shuttles vs. utilizing the Boys Scotts parking lot what would the difference in cost be and would it have some financial incentives for the Boys Scotts. Mr. Saeki responded that the city had not proposed that to them but wanted to use that parking lot because it was rarely used. He also added that the city could shuttle people from Rosemead High School and City Hall utilizing the Dial-A-Ride and the Super Shuttle. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 12 of 15 Council Member Ly asked if it was possible to negotiate with the Sheriffs Department on lowering the cost a bit more. Mr. Saeki responded that ultimately what could be done was that the city's special assignment officers could adjust their work schedule, so that instead of working on Monday they could work on Saturday, and that would offset the cost. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that the report discussed the overtime and reducing the earnings, he thought it was a good idea but stated it had to be done with everybody and not just the'Sherifrs Department. Second, he asked Mr. Saeki if he recalled that in the past people of the eastside of,California Mission came to Council and complained about the parking. And added that this was the first time-he heard the Humane Society was closing down. Mr. Saeki stated they are not going to close down but that they are goj g through' tou'gh•financial times. C.C. DeGraff - stated she was currently in the board of diirech Executive Director for California Mission Inn. She added that terminated some board members for misappropriation of funds and fo to keep their doors opened due to the misappropriation of fund's.' brought up she thought of having the event,at the California Missioi volunteering and helping her with the shelter., A'previous fundraiser, but the difference with this one is that a celebrity.willIbe_attending. S the neighbors who had complained about California Misson,lnn had they would be fine with this event as long as they were notified in adva I Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that as long as she I that took away from his' concern regarding this residents. for the Humane'Society and also the ck~in February of this 'year they had r=the past months theyihad been trying When the idea of the fundraiser was because her residents had been lready been done in this location atetlAhat the previous issues with resolved and that she was sure care of the issues with the surrounding neighbors Taylor asked how they intended to notify the C.C. DeGraff replied that they had~&aftedAyers ,and"'that as soon as Council approved this item the flyers would be distributed: X f; Council Member Ly stated he,had no problem with the street closure but had reservations with waiving or reducing the city's fees; simply because there would be impacts to the surrounding areas. Council Membei Low stated she,agreed with Mr. Ly and based on the current budget asked if the city council pay half and the organization pay-the other half of the fees. Mayor Clark asked that since the city was thinking of negotiating for animal services was there a way that any money spent by the city could credited to the city's animal service. C.C. DeGraff - stated that was possible and would have to sit with her board to discuss. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 13 of 15 Council Member Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Polly to approve the street closure and direct staff to go back and renegotiate the cost of the event with the Humane Society . Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None C. State Budget Crisis Impact • Update The Governor and legislative leaders announced I had been reached to balance the State's $26 billic efforts, the proposal includes significant hits to'loc finalized. staff has been able to determine,ttiat the Utilization of Proposition 1A to borrow Pr State will borrow 8% of each city's prope the 2008-09 fiscal year. For Rosemead, $600,000 from the General.Fund. The S three years with interests proposal on July 20th that a deal ately, despite lobbying hile details are still being local oovemment. The ie based on actual receipts for to a loss of approximately ed to repay these funds within 2. The seizure of $1.7 billion in Highway~Users-T,.ax (Gas Tax) from local government. This is.a proposed two year seizure with $986.6611ion in fiscal year 2009-10 and $750 million iri,fiscal year 2010:11. Staff believes that this equates to a complete .taking of all of our 2009-10 Gas Tax of approximately $900,000 and 75% of our 0-11 Gas Tax. 7 2r` --w 3. -.The seizure of $1.35 billion in edevelopment tax increment funds through a straight taking of $350'million and an"ERAF shift of $1 billion. Rosemead's portion of the $350 million seizure is (approximately $300,000 and approximately $850,000 for the $1 billion .ERAF shift.?` Efforts to gain opposition to the proposed State budget by Legislators in the Assembly and Senate are continuing. Additional details regarding the State budget and its impacts on Rosemead will be communicated to the City Council as they are received. In order to deal with tl' ese'pcif ntial losses work has commenced on contingency plans for additional budget expenditure"reductions and new revenue options, particularly along the lines of needed updates to the City's development related fees and business license programs. Recommendation: No City Council action is required at this time. Assistant City Manager reviewed the staff report and gave Council an update on the report. Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 14 of 15 Mayor Clark stated Council Member Ly and herself had attended the League of California Cities conference in Sacramento and that they had gotten together with Counties, Cities, and School Boards and the idea was that the State is broken and there is not confidence in the State's legislature. Council Member Ly stated that everyone agreed to protect local funding. Juan Nunez - suggested that Council write them a note with the word "no". 5. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL Mayor Clark congratulated Brian Saeki on his new baby boy Nate. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned in memory of David Montgomery=Scott's mother-in-law at 921 p.m. The meeting was also being adjourned to August 5, 2009 at 5:00 p.mc ATTEST Gloria Molleda City Clerk - ` 1 i i Rosemead City Council Meeting Minutes of July 28, 2009 Page 15 of 15