CC - 07-27-93• • APPROVED
CITY OF ROSEM AD
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DATE
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
JULY 27, 1993 DY
The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to
order by Mayor Bruesch at 8:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilmember Clark.
The Invocation was delivered by Pastor Bill Miller of the United
Methodist Church.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmembers Clark, McDonald, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem
Vasquez, and Mayor Bruesch
Absent: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JUNE 22, 1993 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD
that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 22, 1993, be approved
as clarified. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 13, 1993 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ
that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 13, 1993, be approved
as clarified. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
The Council presented Certificates of Appreciation to the members
of the July 4th Parade Committee and the Rosemead High School Key
Club. .
A July 4th Parade Banner was presented to the Council by the
Parade Committee and the Rosemead High School Key Club.
I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
An explanation of the procedures for the conduct of public
hearings was presented by the City Attorney.
A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM ALEXANDER CATANIA
DEVELOPMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL) TO P.D. (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) IN ORDER TO
CONSTRUCT SIX DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AT 3134 AND
3122 BARTLETT AVENUE, ROSEMEAD. (ZC 93-195)
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Michael Battaglia, Project Manager, 1125 W. Foothill, Azusa,
summarized the project and asked Council to approve the request,
stressing that an oak tree would be saved.
CC 7-27-93
Page #1
•
Speaking in favor were Paul Hannosh, 8711 Lincove Lane, who was
happy that the tree would be saved and Charlene Cejas, 75 Brent
Avenue, Pasadena, who read excerpts from a letter sent by the property,
owner, Frances Lewis, asking approval of this project.
Speaking in opposition was Mary Louise Arellano, 3136 Bartlett
Avenue, who lives next door to this project and objected to six units
as being too much of an increase in density and that the area is
crowded now.
Speaking in rebuttal, Mr. Battaglia stated that the project was
smaller than it might have been and that they had tried to work with
the neighbors.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 735
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 TO P.D. FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 3122 AND 3124 BARTLETT AVENUE (ZC 93-195)
Councilmember Taylor objected to the size of the rear yard
setbacks.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ
that Ordinance No. 735 be introduced on its first reading and that
reading in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: Taylor
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilmember Taylor objected to the 15-foot backyard instead of
the 25-foot as the R-1 zone calls for but did not require that the
ordinance be read in full.
Mayor Bruesch stated his appreciation for treating trees as an
asset and not as a problem.
III.LEGISLATIVE
A. RESOLUTION NO. 93-38 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-38
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $150,877.06
NUMBERED 6606-6607, 6609-6616, 6618, 6628-6635, 6640-6642,
6645, 6647 and 6659 THROUGH 6734
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MCDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK
that Resolution No. 93-38 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC 7-27-93
Page #2
0
•
Mayor Bruesch questioned the check to the Internal Revenue
Service/Sunshine Car Wash and asked for a memo explaining Check No.
6641 in the amount of $12,131.25 to the J.A. Blash Shows, Inc. for the
July 4th Carnival, showing how much money the carnival actually made
and inclusion of a copy of the Carnival agreement.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 93-39 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-39
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF
$369,456.73 NUMBERED 6601-6605, 6608, 6617, 6619-6627,
6630, 6636-6639, 6643-6644, 6646, 6648-6650 and 6742
THROUGH 6795
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ
that Resolution No. 93-39 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
C. RESOLUTION NO. 93-40 - SUPPORTING MAYOR BRUESCH AS A NEW
APPOINTEE TO THE AQMD SEAT
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-40
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
SUPPORTING THE CANDIDACY OF MAYOR ROBERT W. BRUESCH FOR THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR
that Resolution No. 93-40 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (CC-A, CC-B, CC-H, and CC-I REMOVED FOR
DISCUSSION)
CC-C ACCEPT BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY
ON TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD AND NEW AVENUE TO BORAL RESOURCES,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $372,835.95
CC-D AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMENT
ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONFERENCE IN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE,
SEPTEMBER 19-22, 1993
CC-E EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT WITH SMI, INC. FOR SIGNAL
MAINTENANCE SERVICES
CC-F AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT CLAIM FILED AGAINST THE CITY BY
POOLSAVER, INC.
CC-G AUTHORIZATION TO PAY PROPERTY DAMAGE CLAIM FILED AGAINST
THE CITY LESLIE DeVITO IN THE AMOUNT OF $351.40, 9331
MARSHALL STREET
CC 7-27-93
Page #3
• •
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR
that the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC-A SUPPORTING AB 238 (Alpert) EDUCATION: FUNDING FOR ATHLETIC
ACTIVITIES
. Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez stated opposition to this item because of
the economic situation at this time.
Councilmember Taylor stated the intention to vote no because of
the additional tax burden.
Mayor Bruesch noted that this did not approve the tax itself,
merely allowed the question to be placed on the ballot for the
electorate to decide.
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR
that this item be tabled and no action taken. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, McDonald
No: Bruesch
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC-B ACCEPT BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR WALNUT GROVE AND MISSION
STORM DRAIN
Mayor Bruesch expressed concerns that the low bidder had only
been in business for two years.
Robert Kress, City Attorney, stated that this was not sufficient
grounds to reject the low bidder.
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER McDONALD
that the Council waive the irregularities in the bids; accept the bids
and award the contract to Southern California Underground Contractors,
Inc. in the amount of $688,558.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign the
contract on behalf of the City. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: Bruesch
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Mayor Bruesch stated that he needed more information about this
contractor.
CC-H PROPOSED INCREASE IN MAXIMUM GRANT FOR
REHABILITATION HANDYMAN GRANT PROGRAM
VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS:
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Under this particular item here the homeowner has
an option to come in for two grants. By that I mean it's $4,000 now
and I think it's within 24 months they can come in and apply for a
second grant. Is that still the way it's written up?
MARK FULLERTON, CDBG SPECIALIST: That's correct.
CC. 7-27-93
Page #4
0 •
TAYLOR: I'd like to in the past this has served the City very well
and it's reached many people and I believe that it's still reasonable
to keep it the way it is and help more people even if it's the minor
modifications, they can come back and get another $4,000 grant to
improve their property.
BRUESCH: Point of information. In the...
CLARK: Is that true? Can they come back?
TAYLOR: They can get two $4,000 grants. Isn't that correct, Mark?
Do you want to clarify that?
FULLERTON: Within a two-year period they can reapply for the program
within two years, two fiscal years.
TAYLOR: But they get two separate $4,000 grants.
FULLERTON: Correct.
BRUESCH: Point of information. In the surveyed cities is that the
case also? Isn't that the case also?
FULLERTON: That information was not, that was not asked because those
particular items was unique to the City of Rosemead. We just asked
because it was similar in the federal program.
BRUESCH: I asked for this to be put on the agenda mainly because I
had an experience with my own father. Out where he lives they're
allowed one grant of $5,000 and he couldn't even get a roof for
$5,000. There wasn't a contractor who was willing to give him a roof
for $5,000.
TAYLOR: I disagree with that, Mr. Bruesch. If we go back and check
how many have we done, 250 of these, 300?
FULLERTON: The entire program since it started we've done almost 600.
BRUESCH: Gary, I'm telling you we went through this last summer.
TAYLOR: Mr. Bruesch. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying that the
City of Rosemead we've put on many roofs if you go back and look at
those reports. We've put on many roofs. That's the only point I want
to make. Not that you had an incident where one example said they
couldn't get a roof on.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I'd like to move the recommendation from staff.
I think they show that you could buy bread for $.25 some time back and
now it costs $.75 and you want to still give them the $.25 they're
only going to get a third of a loaf of bread. So I think the criteria
that staff has given for this increase is logical and I think the
costs have gone up. You're going to do a lot less with the $4,000
today than you did ten years ago.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Clarification. In the construction industry the
prices are coming down, period.
McDONALD: That's why the houses cost $389,000.
TAYLOR: That's why they're not selling in Rosemead right now. We
know that.
McDONALD: So we know the cost is up at $389,000 and you're going to
them $150 to buy the house.
TAYLOR: No, they're priced too high and they're not selling. And I
know for a fact personally that the prices are coming down on all
construction.
CLARK: Mr. Mayor. If we increase this to $6500 does that mean a
homeowner can apply twice for $6500?
CC 7-27-93
Page #5
•
•
TAYLOR: That's the way the program's still written, it's $13,000.
FULLERTON: Once the program is completed they may apply within two
years. However, one of the benefits we believe is that it will
eliminate some of the number of applicants returning because within
the current threshold sometimes we in some cases we cannot complete
all of the deficiencies within a given project so therefore they
return.
TAYLOR: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor.
Mark. If you have two programs
$4,000 and get that and then coi
two-year period I would like to
has started can you tell us how
grant of $4,000 tax just free?
There's a fallacy in that statement,
right now and they can come in for
ne back and another $4,000 in a
know the individual once this program
many have come back for the second
FULLERTON: I can't. I don't have that information.
TAYLOR: Because I would have to say that the need for require it or
the ease of doing it I know people that have come back for the second
one because it was so easy. Now, instead of coming back and getting
$8,000 free there's no restrictions, no requirements other than the
24-month period they can come back and get $13,000 free so I have to
vote no on it for that reason.
CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I'd like to have this deferred and get more
information. I'd like to know how many people have come back and
possibly look into the putting a limit on the second year. If we're
going to increase it to $6500 the first year and then have maybe $3000
or $4000.
BRUESCH: Could I suggest something? If the amount of time is the
worry why not lengthening that time before they can come back?
TAYLOR: The point that Mark made was that it would tend to defer them
from coming back the second time.
BRUESCH: Yes.
TAYLOR: Okay. If that's the truth of the statement and if we want to
rely on that I would go in favor of you just drop the second year.
Amend that out.
BRUESCH: There's been a request to defer and bring back more
information. In that information I'd like to ask also how many times
in the past five or six years have we had some money left over in the
Handyman, have we had a surplus last year or the year before?
FULLERTON: Yes. We've had surpluses but they are based on the budget
amount. It's normally $250,000 we always expend somewhere between
$220,000 and $240,000.
BRUESCH: So really we've been just about hitting what the need is out
there. We haven't turned anybody away.
FULLERTON: Correct.
BRUESCH: Okay. That's the question I have.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. Why don't we have Taylor give his amendment,
how he would accept it?
TAYLOR: I'd like it deferred with Mrs. Clark's comment and I'd like
it the minutes verbatim what we're discussing so we understand that if
this goes up to a $13,000 grant again it's becoming a very select
program. So I think we need to consider that that arbitrarily that's
a lot of money to be giving out and there's a lot of people that can't
qualify with it as far as who owns their property, tenants, what have
you there's a big distinction who's going to get this money.
CC 7-27-93
Page #6
• o
BRUESCH: And I'd also like us to look at all the Handyman grants over
the last three years and see how many times those lists of things had
to be X-d out because of things they wanted and actually needed to
bring up their houses to code were X-d out because they went over the
limit.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'd like a clarification that this is not a case
where many of the items were X-d out.as far as leaving a code
violation. This is the options. Once you see what this list
provides. It provides almost anything and correct me Mark if I'm
wrong. It provides for painting of any part of the house, reroofing,
water heater installation, cabinets, repairs, front doors, back doors,
flooring. What does it not provide for?
FULLERTON: It does not provide for additions, for.upgrades of
existing equipment and primarily the key is that the priorities of the
program addresses code violations or code deficiencies and for senior
citizens, the program is only for senior citizens.
TAYLOR: Okay. The point I'm trying to make, though is, additions of
course is major construction but as far as existing the facility, Bob,
they can have just about anything, even if it's not a Code violation,
they can have painting done on the interior rooms, it's wide open so
to speak.
McDONALD: We might as well just give the money back to the Federal
government. We wouldn't want somebody to fix up their house like
you've always asked for, Mr. Taylor, to Rehab some of these houses and
the criteria for those people to be able to get that loan is what,
Mark? What's the senior income qualifications? They're going to take
this money and run it sounds like.
BRUESCH: I don't mean to cut off debate but there has been a request
to defer. Will the maker of the motion defer the?
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. One point of clarif information on this that I
think we did a study did we not or this is the residential, the
deferred loans where 50% of the homes after they were correct me if
I'm wrong that approximately 50% of them sold the homes afterwards?
FULLERTON: I don't recall that...
McDONALD: Well, I would imagine eventually that all of the homes will
be sold.
TAYLOR: No, no. This was once they were fixed up and they had the
City's assistance and part of this program but you mentioned giving it
back to the Federal government. Everybody today knows that the
Federal government has such a debt and this easy come, easy go, a lot
of the spending is they need to be told that you can only have so much
tax money. So,. it's not just the fact that we want to give it back to
the Federal government. I'm not saying that. I'm saying we need to
be prudent and spread the money to as many as we can rather than just
up it to $13,000.
McDONALD:. We have the standard of living index and when was it last
adjusted, Mark?.
BRUESCH: It's been asked to defer and we will defer this...
McDONALD: You'll be having a vote on the deferral, please.
BRUESCH: Okay.
CLARK: A what?
TAYLOR: They're asking... Mr. McD.onald's asking for a deferral vote on
this item.
McDONALD: For $2500 you're making a big show. Here we go.
CC 7-27-93
Page #7
VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS
A. GANG ALTERNATIVE AND PREVENTION PROGRAM (GAPP)
Mayor Bruesch asked staff to prepare a formal proposal and
return it to the Council for consideration.
B. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK
1. Congratulated all involved on the success of the recent
talent show.
VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
A. Glenn Clanton, 3244 Leyburn Drive, spoke to the need of
running a tight ship during hard financial times.
There being no further action to be taken at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m. to Tuesday, August 3, 1993, at 7:00
p.m. for a meeting with the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce Committee to
discuss formation of a business assessment district tax.
Respectfully submitted:
-t-c GCS /~UCL-C~-~c~✓
ty Clerk
CC 7-27-93
Page #9
TAYLOR: $2500 what?
McDONALD: Increase over the $4000.
TAYLOR: No. From $8000 to $13,000 is $5000.
McDONALD: 250 [2500] each time.
TAYLOR: That's correct. It's not that simple, 250 [2500], it's
$5000.
McDONALD: You make a deal about this. We put that money out in the
community on how long have we done that? As long as the City's almost
been in inception, this year over the...
CLARK: We haven't killed this. We just want more information.
What's wrong with two more weeks?
McDONALD: What more information do you need?
CLARK: I already said what I want.
McDONALD: Good.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. There's been a request to defer this and in all
the years that you've been on this Council it's been a common courtesy
that if somebody asks to defer it...
McDONALD: I'll accept the deference, Mr. Taylor.
TAYLOR: Thank you.
BRUESCH: Okay, we're going to defer this.
END VERBATIM DIALOGUE
CC-I REQUEST FROM CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL FOR ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL REFUSE RATES
Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez ascertained that if the dump fees go down,
the refuse rates would be adjusted down.
Mayor Bruesch asked if the City could pay the residential
increase instead of the residents, and then have this year's increase
added to whatever the increase would be next year.
Councilmember Clark concurred with Mayor Bruesch, opposing the
rate increase coming so soon after the surcharge had been imposed,
adding that she had received numerous complaints over the recent rate
increase in the cost for replacing a water heater.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY MAYOR BRUESCH that the
Council approve the request by Consolidated Disposal, Inc. for a 1.8%
adjustment in residential, commercial, and industrial refuse rates
effective August 1, 1993; have the City pay the residential increase
to the contractor this year; direct staff to find a way to pay for it;
and add this year's increase to next year's increase, at which time
the contractor would reimburse the City. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: Taylor
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor requested a memo regarding the exact cost that
the City would be advancing for the residential trash increase.
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION & ACTION - None
VI. STATUS REPORTS - None
CC 7-27-93
Page #8