CC - 08-08-89•
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL ISATE
AUGUST 8, 1989 nv
The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to
order by Mayor McDonald at 8:18 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilman Bruesch.
The Invocation was delivered by Pastor Wilfred Su of the First
Evangelical San Gabriel Valley Church.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmen Bruesch, DeCocker, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem
Imperial, and Mayor McDonald
Absent: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 25, 1989 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 1989, be approved as
submitted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Mayor McDonald thanked the Southern California Edison Company for
allowing members of City staff to attend Edison's Big Creek Workshop
and hydroelectric facility.
I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Bill O'Connor, 4635 Fendyke Avenue, cited a problem with weeds
on Valley Boulevard adjacent to Reliable Lumber and on Rosemead
Boulevard at the railroad overpass.
B. Holly Knapp, 8367 E. Whitmore Street, reported a burglary ring
that is working the mobile home parks masquerading as a cleaning
service and asked the Council to consider adjourning in the memory of
Superintendent Roger Temple.
Mayor McDonald requested that staff prepare flyers to warn
residents of the burglary ring and to include it in the newsletter as
well as posting a notice at the Community Center.
Councilman Bruesch suggested that a permanent feature of the
newsletter be a senior's corner to provide pertinent information.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
An explanation of the procedures for the conduct of public
hearings was presented by the City Attorney. The City Clerk then
administered the oath to all those persons wishing to address the
Council on any public hearing item.
A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF A PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING A REQUEST FROM LIN MAY
CORPORATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A
92-ROOM MOTEL AND FREESTANDING RESTAURANT AT 8930 E. MISSION
DRIVE (CUP 89-446)
Mayor McDonald stated that the applicant had requested that this
public hearing be continued to the meeting of September 12, 1989.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
CC 8-8-89
Page #1
0
Frank Forbes, 822 Victoria Drive, Arcadia, representing the
applicant, stated their intention of beginning discussions with
Caltrans for traffic reconfiguration and reiterated their request that
this item be continued for thirty days.
Fred Mascorro, 9303 Rose Street, was opposed to the project
because motels tend to be used as permanent housing for low-income
persons and could be dangerous for the school children.
Joe Vasquez, President of the Rosemead School District Board, 3633
Marybeth Avenue, presented a School Board Resolution in opposition to
this project, citing concerns with the safety of the children
attending the two schools that are near the site.
Holly Knapp, 8367 E. Whitmore Street, cited the problem with
traffic and the proximity to schools as her objections to this project
and stated the preference for a supermarket at that location.
Terry Helie, 8929 E. Lawrence, lives adjacent to the site and
stated that the building will be three-stories tall, blocking his view
of the mountains. Mr. Helie also was concerned that the hotel/motel
would affect traffic flow in the area.
Luis Chavez, 8936 Lawrence, lives adjacent to the site and was
concerned that his view will be affected by the erection of a
three-story building.
Councilman Bruesch requested the applicant to have current and
complete information when this item is returned in thirty days.
Mayor Pro Tem Imperial was concerned that there was not a need in
Rosemead for another hotel/motel.
There being no objection, this public hearing was continued to
September 12, 1989 at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Rosemead City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770.
At 8:55 p.m. the Council adjourned to a Closed Session to discuss
a Sheriff's Department personnel matter and no action was taken. The
meeting was reconvened at 9:35 p.m.
III.LEGISLATIVE
A. RESOLUTION NO. 89-42 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-42
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $534,560.50
NUMBERED 24979-25000 AND 25803 THROUGH 25943
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH
that Resolution No. 89-42 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Decocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 647 - APPROVING A CITY-INITIATED ZONE CHANGE
FROM R-3 TO R-1 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8328 MISSION DRIVE,
4633-47 EARLE AVENUE, AND 4622-35 DELTA AVENUE (ZC 89-166)
The following ordinance was presented to the council for adoption:
CC 8-8-89
Page #2
L
ORDINANCE NO. 647
•
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-3 TO R-1 FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 8328-8420 MISSION DRIVE, 4633-4647 EARLE AVENUE
AND 4622-4635 DELTA AVENUE
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
Ordinance No. 647 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
C. ORDINANCE NO. 648 - IMPOSING A 45-DAY MORATORIUM ON THE
ISSUANCE OF NEW CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ON
OR OFF-SITE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES - URGENCY
The following ordinance was presented to the council for adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 648
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
IMPOSING A 45-DAY MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF NEW
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ON OR OFF-SALE
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES AND DIRECTING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION TO INITIATE A STUDY WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPING
APPROPRIATE ZONING REGULATIONS GOVERNING SUCH USES
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
ordinance No. 648 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
D. RESOLUTION NO. 89-43 - FOR THE TRANSFER OF NEWMARK AVENUE
STORM DRAIN NO. 1258 TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY FOR MAINTENANCE
PURPOSES
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-43
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,
CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER
AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS
MISCELLANEOUS TRANSFER DRAIN NO. 1258 IN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT,
AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
Resolution No. 89-43 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC 8-8-89
Page #3
•
_J
E. RESOLUTION NO. 89-44 - AUTHORIZING A REWARD FOR INFORMATION
LEADING TO THE IDENTITY, APPREHENSION AND CONVICTION OF ANY
PERSON CAUSING GRAFFITI IN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
The following resolution was presented to the council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-44
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
AUTHORIZING A REWARD FOR INFORMATION LEADING TO THE IDENTITY,
APPREHENSION AND CONVICTION OF ANY PERSON CAUSING GRAFFITI IN
THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL
that Resolution No. 89-44 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
F. RESOLUTION NO. 89-45 - RELATING TO THE DENIAL OF AN APPEAL
REGARDING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SEAFOOD CITY
RESTAURANT
Leroy and Cleo Young, 7533 E. Garvey Avenue, thanked the Council
for its efforts.
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-460 FOR THE ON-SITE SALE
OF BEER AND WINE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7540 E. GARVEY
AVENUE dba SEAFOOD CITY RESTAURANT
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR that
Resolution No. 89-45 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: Bruesch
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Bruesch was opposed because of the proximity of alcohol
sales to the schools.
G. RESOLUTION NO. 89-46 - TO ALLOW REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT
FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN MELROSE AVENUE, ECKHART ALLEY,
MUSCATEL AVENUE, AND ARTSON STREET
The following resolution was presented to the council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-46
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO
REDEVELOPMENT PAYMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN MELROSE
AVENUE (JACKSON/WEST END), ECKHART ALLEY (WHITMORE/SHORT
END), ARTSON STREET (CHARLOTTE/GAYDON) AND MUSCATEL AVENUE
(GARVEY/KLINGERMAN)
CC 8-8-89
Page #4
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH
that Resolution No. 89-46 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: Taylor
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor stated his approval of the project for Muscatel
Avenue only but that the other streets were too far out of the project
area.
H. RESOLUTION NO. 89-47 - TO ALLOW REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT
FOR LANDSCAPING IN WALNUT GROVE AVENUE
This item was deferred to the next regular meeting.
I. RESOLUTION NO. 89-48 - TO ALLOW REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT
FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN NEWMARK AVENUE
RESOLUTION NO. 89-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE
NEWMARK AVENUE SEWER PROJECT
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that
Resolution No. 89-48 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor,
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEMS CC-G AND CC-J REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION)
CC-A AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
CONFERENCE IN SAN FRANCISCO, OCTOBER 22-25, 1989
CC-B AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT CLAIM FILED AGAINST THE CITY BY
FRANK TREJO
CC-C RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR LANDSCAPED MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT
THE COUNTY LIBRARY
CC-D AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY FILED BY
TONY LIEM CHOI, TAI NGUYEN, CHRIS CHOI, CHRISTY CHOI, NHAT
NGUYEN, AND NGA HOANG CHOI
CC-E ACCEPTANCE OF STREET EASEMENTS - FERN AVENUE (FALLING
LEAF/SAN GABRIEL), NEWMARK AVENUE (FALLING LEAF/PINE) AND
CHARLOTTE AVENUE (GARVEY/SOUTH END)
CC-F APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 20126 - 8054 GARVEY AVENUE
CC-H ACCEPTANCE OF WORK - STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN PROSPECT AVENUE
(GARVEY/WHITMORE)
CC-I AUTHORIZATION TO FUND ATTENDANCE OF SHERIFF'S DEPART
REPRESENTATIVES AT 1989 CALIFORNIA SEXUAL ASSAULT
INVESTIGATORS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL TRAINING SEMINAR IN
SACRAMENTO - OCTOBER 4-6, 1989
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that the
foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None Absent: None Abstain: None
CC 8-8-89
Page 45
CC-G MUTUAL RECISION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
AND ROSEMEAD FOUNDATION, INC. AND APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE ROSEMEAD CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A VISITORS'
INFORMATION CENTER
VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCILMAN TAYLOR.
JUAN NUNEZ: 2702 Del Mar. Maybe I should let you discuss what you
intend to do with this agreement or are you going to go through with
it..... the agreement on the Chamber of Commerce or the.....?
McDONALD: It's on the agenda for us to vote on, Juan.
NUNEZ: Okay. I think that according to the ballot measure that we
approved and voted on, people in the City of Rosemead, ordinance
submitted to the voters that reads this amendment was unanimously
approved by the Rosemead City Council. It's Ordinance No. 587, on
July 8, 1986. It is submitted to the voters in compliance with
Proposition 62 consisting of provisions proposed to be deleted or
stricken or new provisions proposed to be inserted or added are
printed in bold type to indicate they are new. And then the
ordinance, the tax imposed for the privilege of occupancy of the motel
and I won't go through all that but I'll go to Section 2 where it's
the City of Rosemead and the Rosemead Building Trust Fund, an
affiliate of the chamber of Commerce, agreed on terms and conditions
regarding the construction and operation of Rosemead Visitor's Center,
then the Finance officer shall earmark 25% of the total funds
collected hereunder for such projects for a period of four years from
the effective date hereof. The Ordinance shall become effective
September 1, 1986. I believe it was for that time frame that we, the
people, voted for that proposition to allow the Chamber of Commerce to
have that money, whatever was collected, whether they thought that
they would get, I believe that they thought they would get $450,000 or
$500,000, that's irrelevant. The proposition was only whatever came
out of it, 2%, for those four years. Now, you intend to.... well, it
was discussed on May the 2nd I believe, that it may be extended and
according to the new agreement, be extended for nine years.
TAYLOR: Total of nine years.
NUNEZ: Well, a total of nine years.from '86 to '95. I think that you
Councilmen that voted on that or intend to vote for it, I think maybe
you should button your britches and stick to an agreement. An
agreement was made two and a half or three years ago to fund it for
four years. Now, if that money isn't there, that shouldn't be your
consideration and I believe the agreement was that if they didn't
start construction by that time then the money would revert back to
the City.
BRUESCH: Mr. Nunez. May I remind you, I don't think I'll convince
you of this point, but may I remind you that in the last seven years
there has been about a seven fold increase of property values within
the City of Rosemead which... especially in commercial land
values ...and something like that was not foreseen back three, four
years ago.
NUNEZ: Well, I think that that sometimes is, you know like they say,
hindsight is better than foresight and if we could all make agreements
like that and come back and find out that we did not meet our goals in
a certain time that we can come back and write up another agreement to
satisfy our.....
McDONALD: Mr. Nunez, the situation is that we're with the Chamber of
Commerce developing an information center for the City of Rosemead,
not for the Chamber of Commerce, for the City of Rosemead. City of
Rosemead wants the information center to pass out information on the
City of Rosemead like most cities do. So, as the City body here, what
we would like to do is see the implementation of that visitors'
program. The TOT (transient occupancy tax) was to help house also the
Chamber of Commerce. So, we decided that we would certainly like to
CC 8-8-89
Page #6
• o
McDONALD CONTINUES: see an information center and it's going to be
from here unto perpetuity, not for four years, not for nine years, but
as long as this City is here, that information center's going to be
there. Information on the City is going to be passed out. We're
going to be part of the maintenance of that program and what we've
done is made an agreement to work with the Chamber of Commerce to
provide that and with the same monies. All we're doing ...we're not
changing anything other than the extent that we had projected four
years, now we're projecting nine years.
NUNEZ: You say that for perpetuity, you're going to extend it to
eternity whenever this agreement is over.....
McDONALD: we're going to have to maintain our Visitor's Information
Center (VIC) once we establish it. The monies we thought were going
to be there in four years aren't there but we still intend to
establish a VIC.
NUNEZ: I think you're violating the trust of the people that voted
for that....
McDONALD: I don't think you understand exactly what you voted for,
then.
NUNEZ: Well, according to the proposition... that's just what it
reads. And the agreement that was made with the City, with the
non-profit organization, was for four years.
McDONALD: For the TOT tax. That money is going now into the General
Fund. In four years they're going to have so much money. But we're
going to take money out of the General Fund to maintain the VIC and
also to help build it. It doesn't make any difference what it's
called, money-wise, because we're going to use that money anyhow.
NUNEZ: I believe in the meeting that you had on May the 2nd, I
believe it was, there was a lot of talk being talked back and forth,
between you, the Council and the Chamber and there was somebody
referred to as a banker. The banker must have been a banker that was
doing business for the Chamber or that the Chamber contacted for
financial assistance or financial......
FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER: Juan, wait a minute. If I might....
McDONALD: Hold it, just one second. Let the City Attorney explain
the situation.
ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: The voters had some explanation of how
these funds were intended to be used but the voters actually voted to
increase the TOT. The Council can use those funds, they're General
Funds. The Council is free to enter into a contract with the Chamber
of Commerce which is not subject to voter approval and that's what
they're proposing to do. I reviewed all these documents and I do not
see a problem with what is being done here. It's a policy question
and not a legal question.
TRIPEPI: Let me go one step ...what we have to try to establish is,
and we may not be able to do that, and if not, then nothing is going
to address your question ...you have to look at this as a City project
in partnership with the Chamber. That's what it is. If we, if the
Council budgeted $500,000 to do a street project and it came in at
$650,000, they wouldn't say that since it's $500,000 we're not going
to build it. It's for the community, we need it, we're going to build
it. That's what they're saying in the case of this VIC. Now, if you
don't agree, and that's certainly your prerogative, I'm not saying you
have to, but you have to look at as a City it's not a Chamber
project, it's a City project. It's something that assists the
community in putting out the word to visitors what this community is
all about. That's what it is. The City council has elected to
support that project by however long it takes to get it constructed.
In this case they feel that nine years is adequate. That's what it
is.
CC 8-8-89
Page #7
s o
NUNEZ: It's a Chamber of Commerce project. Why doesn't the City
build the building, purchase the property and rent it out to the
Chamber instead of in ten years giving it title free to the Chamber,
whoever may be in charge of the Chamber.-..I can understand.....
TRIPEPI: It only stays with the Chamber as long as it's operated as a
VIC which is in support of the City. That's what we wanted, the
Council.
NUNEZ: Why cannot the City, as I say, build a building or rent a
building and lease it out to the Chamber of Commerce, minus the
services that the City would be paying for that promotion, that the
City would be getting.....
McDONALD: We looked into several of the alternatives and we thought
that was the best one....
BRUESCH: ....extend of how much does it cost for this additional
service because it is an additional service that the Chamber will be
giving to the City. It's not something that is normally done by
Chambers of Commerce. When you look at brochures about cities that
are sent out all the time, a lot of those come from city general
funds. What we're saying now is that we're going to have the Chamber
run this VIC for us. Yeah, we could contract with them and rent it
out and have an agreement like that but this is a lot more straight
forward and in the long run, I think it's going to be cheaper.
NUNEZ: Well, I don't know. As I was referring to the remarks that
the banker made. He wanted something concrete that he could set his
hands on to be able to say here's so much money, loaned it out to you,
you know, we're loaning out a mortgage, we're mortgaging you, we're
mortgaging the City for this amount of money. Now, in your agreement
it's only for nine years but that mortgage may last longer than that
and there's no turning back.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Nunez, you've been a friend of mine for a long time to
this date when I tell you, you're wrong. I wasn't here the night of
this meeting but I will tell you that we not only need the happy
people in this City but we need a healthy business community and
that's brought on by the help of the Chamber of Commerce and this City
is going into a joint venture with them. I think if we want to
pioneer against something, we should be looking at what they're doing
to us in Sacramento, like Prop. 103, Prop. 13, the death penalty.
I'll be glad to help you with those, Mr. Nunez, but I take offense to
the fact that we even indicated that this might be tainted. I've said
my piece and I think you know what I mean.
McDONALD: Thank you very much, Mr. Nunez. I think we've given you
the legal opinion. If you're against it, that's fine. I don't think
we're going to convince you of it but we go with the legal analysis
not the public your individual input and I think you brought up a
good point....
NUNEZ: You may go with your legal advice but I'm going to sure work
against any kind of tax proposal that comes in the future for the city
because I cannot.....
McDONALD: You don't pay this tax, do you?
NUNEZ: No, I don't pay this tax but still I think that perhaps if the
tax was less more people would come and use the motels in Rosemead.
McDONALD: The tax was not going to ever lapse. It was still going to
go into the General Fund.
BRUESCH: It is presently at the low range. Other cities are charging
9-10-11%.
McDONALD: We're the least in the Valley. Thank you very much for
your input.
CC 8-8-89
Page #8
U
L
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I believe that this is a very critical issue and
we had our discussion verbatim in the minutes for the last session,
I'm going to ask that this be in here verbatim, also. I disagree with
this project. I'm not against the Chamber. I support the Chamber in
their concept of what a Chamber of Commerce does. The benefit that
we're going to get out of this as a VIC, I'm going to put a ratio of
10% on it, 90% of it is going to be Chamber functions. At this time
I'd like to make a request that the Council be given copies for the
last year of the Board meetings for the Chamber of Commerce and I
would like a current listing of paid up members of the Chamber of
Commerce. Getting back to the main issue, as far as when this was
voted on three years ago by the voters I did take and a politician has
to take the flak. I don't mind it. i supported it at that time as a
concept of helping to support the Chamber in a reasonable fashion.
What happened now, this has exploded into a million dollar subsidy for
a private concern. It's not a public entity. The Chamber of Commerce
is formed by business people for business people, primarily. That's
the first concept. They are not a public agency. And again, I'm not
faulting the Chamber for what their business is, if they can come to a
City Council and get a million dollars, that's the name of the game.
If they can do it, that's fine. We've only subsidized one other
business in this community of a thousand businesses and 45,000 people
and that was the write-down, the subsidy for the K-Mart property in
the redevelopment project. We bought it for something like a
$1,600,000 and subsidized the costs, a write-down of over a million
dollars. Now, the Chamber has a function and they do a good job as
the Chamber. If you will go back over the past several years and
review the budget appropriations for the Chamber of Commerce, we have
appropriated the funds for them to supplement the City and give out
information for residents, businesses, promoting the City of Rosemead.
I think we're currently paying them something like $28,000 a year and
that's what that money goes for but to buy property and a building for
a private entity, I can't go along with that and I think the
voters ...this is a fraud on what they voted for three years ago. As I
stated, I am going to vote no on it and I don't criticize the chamber
members as such; if it's there, they're going for it but it's the
policy that we're voting on and I won't go for it. There is another
solution to this. We're going to be building another community center
and I'm going to assume or make the statement, it'll be somewhat like
what we have across the street, here. That's going to be built in the
near future, hopefully. And a question to Mr. Burbank, in regard to
the operation of these centers and such, what is going to happen to
Zapopan Center in your opinion, Mr. Burbank? The biggest
complaints we've had about that center, Mr. Mayor, is that it's too
small for a lot of the City functions for the senior citizens,
whatever it may be. We're going to have a building down there that I
think would be a good potential for the Chamber to use. The comment
was made in those minutes that we had, that the people in the southern
part of the City thought it was great when the Chamber was down there
on Garvey Avenue. Zapopan, and I think it needs to be considered, is
a much more ideal situation because it's centrally located right on
San Gabriel and Garvey. And the majority of the businesses are in
that area, number wise, on Garvey and San Gabriel Boulevard. I think
we do have a viable alternative, rather than a write-down of almost a
million dollars for one business. I'm not opposed to helping the
Chamber but I'm not going to vote for a give-away of funds. That's
all I have at this time.
McDONALD: Okay, gentlemen. Do I have a motion?
NUNEZ: Juan Nunez, 2702. I would like to ask the question, is there
any councilmembers that belong to the Chamber of Commerce?
McDONALD: Mr. DeCocker is a member. An associate member. Mr.
DeCocker? He's asking if any councilmembers are members of the
Chamber. Are you a member of the Chamber?
DeCOCKER: Yes, sir.
NUNEZ: Would a member be in conflict of interest, for voting?
CC 8-8-89
Page #9
• o
KRESS: No. Just as several members participate in the Boys Club and
voted on that matter, school board matters, other matters, that is not
a conflict of interest.
TAYLOR: I think it becomes a monetary interest, Mr. Nunez. If they
were to gain from it then there's a conflict but they're just on a
membership or advisory.
IMPERIAL: This is the reason, Mr. Nunez, I resigned from the Board of
the Boys Club because at that time there were three members from the
Council which constitutes a majority of the Council and I didn't think
it was healthy even though there was no problem, I resigned.
DeCOCKER: Juan, I was a member of the Chamber before I was elected.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Question to my fellow councilmembers. What is
the Council's reaction to using Zapopan for a Chamber building?
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I love it.
TAYLOR: I think it's a viable solution rather than an outright
turnover of another million dollars in tax money.
IMPERIAL: In fact, Mr. Mayor, I would like to suggest that we take
that into consideration; build that center over there as soon as
possible; and go a little further with that. I'd like to go four
stories on that center on Garvey and put three stories senior citizen
housing for the people in the trailer courts. The people that need
it. I would like to propose we look at that new center on Garvey as
not only a bigger center than what we've got right here but the
second, third, and fourth floor be senior citizen housing for the
people in the trailer courts that are handicapped and senior citizens.
I think we can come up with a viable plan to get it done.
BRUESCH: Point of information, Mr. Mayor, directed to our staff. By
voting on this tonight we're not saying that that money must be used
on the VIC because if it isn't it reverts back to the City, correct?
KRESS: Getting those funds if in the circumstances contained in the
agreement, just as you have before.
BRUESCH: The point I made was that in the language of the resolution
it says that should that money not be used in x number of years it
will revert back to the..... I want the public to know that so that if
the idea of using Zapopan as our VIC/Chamber headquarters were a
viable solution and acceptable to the Chamber that money would go
directly back into the General Fund, would it not?
KRESS: If that provision were made and agreed to there would another
agreement or an amendment to this agreement that everyone would agree
to and that would be the... some funds perhaps would flow for the
operation of that building but the physical building would be
available for the Chamber's use.
IMPERIAL: As I get the drift from Mr. Taylor, we're talking about a
city-owned building, we lease it for a dollar a year maybe to the
Chamber of Commerce to take care of their needs. Is that correct, Mr.
Taylor?
TAYLOR: Mr. Imperial, I think it's a much more viable solution to get
a better use out of that building than the complaints that we have
,received over the past years as being a second-rate community
building.
IMPERIAL: I think it's a very good idea.
McDONALD: Mr. Taylor, would you make a motion to the effect that we
give the Zapopan Center to the Chamber of commerce when we complete
our Community Center?
CC 8-8-89
Page 410
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Make it available at a reasonable rate and by
reasonable rate it can be a tokenism. Again, a granting of a special
concession to one business out of a thousand in the City the
Chamber should not be exempt of any operating costs of a normal
business. The Chamber.....
McDONALD: We're talking about including our VIC.
TAYLOR: We've already got that, Mr. Mayor. The Chamber's obligation
with the money....
McDONALD: The people have voted $400,000, also.
TAYLOR: That's right. Because that's the emphathetic way of getting
the people involved saying gee, it's going to be our VIC. You can
only do so much for a VIC. We are a fully developed City. We're not
going to be promoting land deals and speculations. When they come in
the people normally go a City government to find out about the City.
Anytime I go into a City for information, general plan, business
opportunities, I go to the City. If I'm in there for business, I'll
go to the Chamber of Commerce. They're two separate entities. But
since we're giving the Chamber twenty something thousand dollars, they
have agreed to provide information for visitors, residents, citizens,
we're already doing that. Now we're going to supplement it to almost
a million dollars, as far as this project goes but it's still not
clear how much annual operating money we're going to give them.
IMPERIAL: Is that a motion, Gary, then that you are saying when our
new center is built, the Chamber, that building will be leased to the
Chamber for a token, we'll say a dollar a year, to meet their needs
for as long as they need it?
TAYLOR: I think we need to discuss the fee, and I'm not talking about
a $1,000 or $2,000, a reasonable fee. Again, a dollar is too much of,
a tokenism as far as the other thousand businesses in this City are
concerned.
IMPERIAL: What's your motion, Mr. Taylor?
TAYLOR: I would make the motion that the agreement that we have
before us tonight and again... I'm going to ask that this be brought
back to the next meeting because what we have in this agreement
tonight we need to iron out what kind of assistance we're going to
give the Chamber. Are we going to continue the current agreement we
have for the four years. I think we're on the same wavelength of
getting a solution but what are we going to do with our current
contract?
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Taylor, that was one of the questions I
asked in the conversation that we had with the Chamber and I think it
was..... to my idea it was agreed to that operating the VIC was an
added service to the City, which it is.
TAYLOR: It's not an added service, Mr. Bruesch. Go back in your
annual budget packet; you will be given a proposal by the Chamber of
Commerce, what they're going to provide for the City of Rosemead. For
years that's been listed that they will supply information to the
public and that includes visitor information. What function would a
VIC have ...the comment was made that business people want to meet and
they want to have a meeting hall as such, that is in Zapopan already.
BRUESCH: What I'm getting at is that I think the gist of the
conversation that we had that night was that operating expenses would
be a line item budget entry, you know, what they needed would be
presented to us in our budget session. It would not be a fait
accompli each time that we give x number of dollars. I think that we
kind of agreed to that. I would like to say that that building is
located on a major arterial. However, the interior may not meet the
needs of the services that the Chamber is going to give and it will
need some renovation so, I would go along with allowing the Chamber to
have that building for a nominal fee, whatever is agreed to, along
CC 8-8-89
Page #11
• •
BRUESCH CONTINUES: with using the money that is accumulated in the
fund already for renovation purposes so that the city wouldn't have to
go in there and do anything like that because if the Chamber were to
move in there right now, they would not have the money to renovate it
or make it suit to the purpose of the VIC, either.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'm sure all of us have been in the Chamber
offices. As far as the way they're functioning now, that would be a
big improvement over any office they've ever had, Zapopan Center.
McDONALD: I think we've made the point that if that becomes available
at a reasonable price, it's a viable situation. Let's just continue
this.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'd like to bring it back because this agreement
has a lot of meat and a lot of dollars in it but I think we've got a
viable solution and it's a good solution and the existing building
should serve the Chamber very well. There's a lot of square-footage
in there for what they were asking for in their original proposal
meeting with different motels wanting a room where people could meet
in.
McDONALD: We've never brought up the Zapopan Center before, the
availability of it, how it could be utilized, never discussed it with
the Chamber and I think it's a viable alternative. It will certainly
get our community center off the ground maybe a little quicker. We're
going to table CC-G. Thank you very much for your input, gentlemen.
END VERBATIM DIALOGUE
CC-J DEDICATION OF THE JESS GONZALEZ SPORTS COMPLEX
Councilman Bruesch expressed favor with the project but requested
that the School Board provide a list of the names it would like to
have included on the dedication plaque.
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL
that the Council authorize staff to develop a jointly sponsored
dedication ceremony with the Garvey School District for the Jess
Gonzalez Sports Complex; approve the acquisition and proposed language
for the plaque; set aside Saturday, September 16, 1989, for the
ceremony; and names of the Garvey Board will be provided and approved
by said Board. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION & ACTION - None
VI. STATUS REPORTS
A. HR 2699 (Bates) - PROTECTION OF THE OZONE LAYER
This item required no action.
B. BUSINESS CENSUS
No vote was taken on the recommendation for this item.
VII.MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS
A. CLOSED SESSION - PERSONNEL - TEMPLE STATION INTERNAL
INVESTIGATION STATUS REPORT
This item was handled earlier in the meeting.
CC 8-8-89
Page #12
B. COUNCILMAN BRUESCH
1. Asked that Federal guidelines for recycling by cities be
on an agenda in the near future.
C. COUNCILMAN TAYLOR
1. Requested a status report on the cleanup of the weeds
that Caltrans is responsible for removing.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that Caltrans should have
their crew out there by the end of this week and if not, the City will
remove the weeds.
VIII.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Leroy Young, 7533 E. Garvey Avenue, thanked the City for
trimming the trees on Garvey Avenue.
There being no further action to be taken at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. in the memory of Superintendent of
the Garvey School District, Roger Temple, who recently passed away.
The next regular meeting is scheduled for August 22, 1989 at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted: APPROVED:
•Gei ~l/~tii~Lt~S/ _
V Clerk MA
CC 8-8-89
Page #13