Loading...
CC - Item 9A - Minutes 03-09-10Minutes of the JOINT CITY COUNCIL . AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING March 9, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Community order by Mayor Clark at 6:02 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Cl- Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member/Commissioner Armenta INVOCATION: Council Member/Commissioner Low PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Clark, Mayor Pro Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Low, and Council STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assists Community Development Director Wong, Direct( Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Adrr Public Works Director Marcarello,-and City Clerk 1. PUBLIC COMMENT&FROM TH 2. COMMISSION SENT CALE A Claims and'Deman( ' 4" OResolution No 120,11 ;ommission was called to at 8838 East Valley Ly. iterim City Attorney Montes, arks and Recreation Manager Flores, Deputy Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010-09 for payment of Commission expenditures , in the am"ounti .of $21,352.73 demand nos. 11237 through 11240. Commissioner/Council'Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Armenta, to approve Consent Calendar. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 ITEM NO. Page 1 of 28 3. MATTERS FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & STAFF A. The Glendon Hotel - Request for Proposal (RFP) On July 2, 2008, the Rosemead Community Development Commission acquired the Glendon Hotel located at 8832 Glendon Way for $4.4 million using non-restricted tax increment dollars to fund the transaction. Immediately following the purchase of the property, proposals were solicited from reputable companies specializing in hotel operations thereby continuing the operation of the hotel while a long teredevelopment plan for the site was finalized. The Commission selected.Rosemead Inn,Hotel Partners, LLC as the operator for the hotel. The purchase of the Glendon Hotel was originalyspartt of,an overall;Wger development project (the Glendon Way Project).,However%the Commission is no longerer working on a conceptual development plan for the GlendonWay Project and the property.,is no~,longer need for the purposes for which it was,acgwred. Due toNhe interest by the development community to acquire vacant parcels of land forthe purpose)of developmenfin the City a Request for Proposal (RFP) to sell the Glendon Hotel'is being proposed. Recommendation: That the C advertise and solicit bids from c property through a Request for Economic Development Council Member Polly-116W.! Way property to development interested in doing so" and as x~ '34 KMrs. Ramirez stated that'the•I that prop`er'ty or those original was i"n"an~ENA with Jacobson d thafin 2008 the site ji"Mrs. Low re' opment'Commis lion authorize staff to for the ourchase'of the Glendon Hotel report. n was interested in purchasing the Glendon statement "the Commission is no longer er in an exclusive negotiation agreement with any entity for he agency originally was looking in developing. The agency for a while when the original site was out for proposal. Council Member bw reiterated entire area. Mrs. Ramirez replied the agency wanted to partner up with them so it would develop that the intention and there were five parcels at that time. Council Member Low clarified that she had a discussion with Mr. Wong about developing that area. Her concern was that the agency purchased the hotel with the intent that the city would have control over the development agency and have control of that parcel. Mrs. Low added that if the developer was interested and if they bought other parcels the agency could partner up and work with them and have better use of the land. However, her other concern was that if the agency sells that parcel then they might bring in a third owner and make it more difficult to develop. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 2 of 28 Community Development Director Wong stated that the agency did not have control of the other parcels that are not part of the RFP. At this time staff would recommend Council to approve this and in addition staff wants to see what redevelopment proposals or economic developments might be of interest for this parcel. If the agency has some interest we would rash out with the other adjoining properties and use a redevelopment tool to assist on a project that's agreeable that the city may be interest in or beyond that. At this time staff would like to see what the best use of the property for redevelopment is. Council Member Low stated that the RFP was not just for selling the hotel; it's have in mind and what kind of ideas they have. f Mr. Wong replied that was correct and the agency was not tied or decision to determine if they want to sell the property or a project Council Member Low asked if the agency approves the allowed to reject all the proposals. Council Member Ly stated that he believed there was a time onto a property. City Manager Allred replied that normally years. Council Member Ly stated that the agency was apps the city has only received about;$1~7g,~000 in Transit C , !F1 estimated TOT expected, "t Community Development iar-number%two and that in the analysis report ' -4 Tax. Mr. Ly asked what was to original that the TOPwas estimated at about $50,000 a year. Council Member,Arme`nta„stated by;holding orito'ttieproperty, the city was loosing money every single day, r K 1,1h the intentions were great,at one time but itpbviously it has resulted in a decision were the city is loosing millions of /dollars. Ms. Armenta''a'so addedt she felt that the agency look into the process and see what could"be developed if not a better hotel, otfi things that are going on. Juan Nunez = stated that when thOhotel was purchased, did staff ever find out if there could run it as a hotel. Council Member Steven,Ly"' cc~larifed Mr. Nunez question; what was the purpose of the purchase of the property when it was being negotiated at the time. Mrs. Ramirez replied the purpose of purchasing that property was for a larger development that the agency was hoping to tie-in with the Levitz property. Mr. Wong stated since the former Levitz property reached out to UFC for the long term, it just made sense to continue with the current redevelopment plan. Mayor Margaret Clark clarified the UFC Gym has ,a long term lease there so things have changed. Rosemead Community Development Commission and, City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 3 of 28 they don't like any what other developers ; it's strictly the Council's ,the agency. how long are they can hold agencies may°hbldpublic land for no more than five Mr. Nunez asked if the city does not pay any taxes on the property they own. Mrs. Ramirez replied that the city does not pay any property taxes but the hotel operator does as the operator. Mr. Nunez expressed concern and stated the agency is running out of money. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that he knew there would be great concerns alldut tliat~project and felt it was .going from bad to worse. Mr. Taylor added that the agency has not receiv,Aany money and asked how they would know if the property taxes have been paid.: City Manager Jeff Allred stated that they didn't know and explained that when a party leases public owned land they are responsible to pay impunity property taxes and..the agency does not know 4ifthey actually paid or not. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated if they cannot pay anything to ttie agency,4Ii- y1cannot afford to'`pay property taxes of $40,000 or $50,000 a year when you look at the operating budget they have. Mr. Taylor asked if the agency has the right to reject any or all bids; and how can the age y,~rel~e~:ct a legitimate offer of someone buying it for the asking price. , t,, Mr. Allred replied that this was an opportunity to fihd out.if there are any intefested parties whether they are viable; the agency board has the full discretion as to whether`of n'ot'to accept any offers. The agency will ~k"rd.. :V y evaluate the validity of the offers; the agency is in great<.position to see'rf there is anything out there and this is a free look to what the market wiill•provide. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor stated that the free look was the risk`y,part of it. Mr. Taylor reiterated on the minutes when Mr. Adam Sedlack of UFDGym~rgave ?hourlongwun down as to what was going to happen and in those minutes~he; as a tram systemrrun\ning to three:hotels of clientele using the Ultimate Fighting Gym of UFC He also, stated tliat;they,,woul'd,bring the most unique customers in the City Of Rosemead, what can poss`bly,bem can by "the most#u iique customers". Mr. Taylor asked would they be Rosemead residents that are going,' be coming in or EhMonte, SaniGabriel, Monterey Park, who are these unique customers going to come in an'd fiasa deep seeded,fear were'they are going from bad to worse. When there is a clientele, Mr. Taylor stated in1 yminutes that Wdidn't like where they beat up people and they beat them into submission; because there is a" certain element of people that enjoy it. Ms. Low mention that she would go home and her kids would have it onNand'she.would tell your kids to turn it off, they don't need to watch it. Well that goes on in different neighborhoodsfan`d we're contributing to that type; to me for a business opportunity it's a golden apple and getting into that?hotel business and what'd we can't reject a legitimate offer. Just as this council stated we cannot deny them the right to have that ultimate fitness gym, its' zoned that way and we could put restrictions on it; they didn't want to go with restriction were the city took the most aggressive activities as far as having events down there where people could come in or promotions events; its great to have a gym down there but his concern about it's a golden opportunity, they can expand rapidly and we have no control over it. City Attorney Montes clarified that the RFP that was being requested to be approved was not a request to list the property as a sale and it's not a request to approve a future sale of that property. It's a request to approve a floating RFP on the street and soliciting proposals from potential developers and see what they plan to Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 4 of 28 develop there and what would they be willing to pay for the property. If the agency board ultimately liked one of those proposals they can enter into negotiations with a successful proposer and then approve a sale of the property to that individual. But if they don't like any of the proposals, there is absolutely no obligation to dispose of the hotel property at this time or even when those proposals come in. This is not a situation where you list property and somebody submits and offer based on the listing price and then you have problems rejecting that offer. This is not a list of the property for sale. Council Member Low asked if the agency had to put in money to the hotel or isJhe agency just not getting the $6,000 amount that was committed; also asked about the $100,000 operational agreement that the agency put into the hotel. Z•' Community Development Director Wong replied no, the $6,000 a month is subject to the excess profit and there is no excess profit so the agency is not receiving $6,000 a month" Council Member Low reiterated that it was good to sell the'RFP; the whole goal of that area,is>to develop it. So if we sell the RFP just to see what the developer has n`mind,and wli&Akind of ideas they have it might be a good thing. Ms. Low clarified that she just did not want to sell tt e•hotejfo~ the sake of selling it and have the agency lose money. Council Member Ly stated this has cost tax payers complex deal which fell through horribly and was;boi about half of the original price. Mr. Ly asked how mu causing everyone including this council heart burn; h find any potential developers thatywant to make e the freeway and next to the Rosemead Square area; been hanging for 2 years: Mr:,Ly made a'.motion to a million to get the.hotel and put together this when it was at tt e•topof the market; now its worth jerthe:city was going to hold onto an asset that is ~'dthatthe RFP gave the agency the opportunity to •4j project at#hat location. It's a great location near s the opportunity to move that albatross that has Council Member property taxes. out if the operator has not been paying their City Attorney Montes explaihedxthat if Ney have`not been paying their property taxes, it's a possessory interest tav;ivs an unsecure tax lien. That is;a property tax lien that the County would have to enforce to the ro ert owners; Mr. Montes does-not thirik'the Agency can enforce against the ro ert In terms of the cit P P Y P P Y: Y efforts to collecfthe,tiproperty tax,1uhless~ the city has a special assessments we are collecting on the property, we don't really ha`ve~standing to pursue, that would be the county. What we could possibly do is pursue remedies we have under our agreement if the agreement requires them to pay and they are not paying it, then we might be able to k"specific performance of that agreement or to that manner. Council Member Low asked Mr. Wong what other agencies do when they purchase property; usually the intent is to have it develop but in the mean while what do they do. Mr. Wong replied that normally for this you slowly acquire other parcels in the targeted area and go with a RFP, tract a developer to develop the property. Council Member Low stated it takes time to develop the property and in the mean it just sits there. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 5 of 28 City Attorney Montes clarified that there is no five year restriction. However if the agency had acquire a property through eminent domain you are required to use that for the purpose you acquired it within seven years; but if you acquired it through a negotiated purchase, Mr. Montes was not aware that you have to dispose of it in five years time and would verify for the agency. Council Member Low stated that in other cities or other redevelopment agencies purchase property and they hold on to it until they purchase several of them before they develop. Mr. Wong replied yes or the agency assist's the potential developer in developing the area. Commissioner/Council Member L made a motion, seconded b CommissionerlCouncil Member Low to authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids from qualified^ent tie"s,for the purchase of the Glendon Hotel property through a request for proposal process. Vote resulted in: ' Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly No: None Abstain: Taylor Absent: None± Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that he'd like his gel eral:comments in the minutes and expressed concerns of that project; added that the agency will have to see the proposals,when they,come and see what their options are. 4. MATTERS FROM THE(CHAIRWOMAN & A. Report on tf e`Acquisition of the, GlendoiilHotel and the Subsequent Operating In acEordance~with Yrequest made at the February 23, 2010 joint meeting of the City Council and Comm unity0evelopm`ent•Commission, a report has been prepared by staff on the acquisition dtlie Glendon~Hofel pioperty by the Community Development Commission on July 2, 2008. The report also contains information relative to the management agreement with,Rosemead Inii Hotel Partners, LLC that became effective on October 14, 2008. That the Community Development Commission receive and file the report. Economic Development Administrator Ramirez reviewed the staff report. Council Member Ly stated that in speaking with staff about of the Glendon Hotel he became alerted about certain items. First, there was an agreement made were the agency would put in about $100,000 for upgrades and cost of repairs. The way it was supposed to be divided up was in $50,000 increments, with a list of projects or upgrades that were supposed to be made. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 6 of 28 Mrs. Ramirez explained that the operating agreement states that the agency would give $50,000 within 7 days of that agreement being signed; the additional would be given $50,000 upon permits being pulled, plans being checked, and everything being submitted to the city for their approval. Instead the full $100,000 was given to the hotel operator at one time without any plans being submitted to the city or any permits being pulled; following the expenditure of the $100,000 all receipt along with all accounting were supposed to be submitted the city which the agency has not receive. Mayor Pro Tom Taylor clarify that the agency got the first two months report Mrs. Ramirez stated that staff received the February and March repot in a staff report when their budget was brought to the commission for Mayor Pro Tern Taylor reiterated that for the past year, almost followed up with the monthly requirement report to the commis Mrs. Ramirez confirmed that as of today, she received only. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked what they have said as far as April, May;; October, seven months are missing. Why didn't tfiey;report it, that's for l continuing mess that they have not fulfilled their contract obligations. So other reports? Council Member Low Mrs. Ramirez replied contacted the hotel o from them. Also, forrr staff today. as met with hotel. given to the commission the hotel•operator has not and December 2009 July, August, September, and hd out? But it's another ,commission pursue for the in January, she was asked to take a look at the project; immediately has been contacting them'.weekly; she has been asking for this information re to2them.and the agency has received two months emailed to `d,46 4e' gave an explanation as to why they are not paying the Council Mrs. Ramirez stated Mayor Pro Tem did this happen and why they did not provided any building permits. not involved in the project until now. that in all fairness the employees that worked on the project are gone. Council Member Ly stated on the minutes of April 28, 2009, of the CDC near the end of page four it notes that "Interim Executive Director Stewart- explained that the city is guaranteed a minimum payment of $6,000 under the terms of the agreement" that is not exactly the case. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 7 of 28 1.. Mrs. Ramirez explained the agreement states that the city would only receive 60 percent of any profits that were made. Council Member Ly asked if there are reasons why staff would think that the agency would be guaranteed $6,000 a month regardless. Mayor Pro Tern Taylorstated that is was his understating that there was a $6,000 minimum that the agency would be paid. The keyword in the whole situation was excess profit and that affected the whole thing for last year because there has been no profit. ~ Council Member Ly stated that the agreement was that the agency wodid get $6,000 a month for the first year and then $10,000 a month for subsequent years. In the proposed'agreement and the budget that went along with it, the Commission was solely optimistic, as too how they ould performNnowing what we know now, were there signs where staff should have not,recommended this hotel operator. Mrs. Ramirez explained it wasn't until staff started for staff began to que's'tion this. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor clarified that the commission had anotheroption to take when this was out. But the other person or hotel had a different agreement;,he didn't have all the exceptions, he didn't have that word excess profit. It stated right in there that he was going,to pay us $5,000'0,.$6,000 but there were no restrictions. Mrs. Ramirez confirm that is was going to be $5 000and with ichons Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated it wk -better deal but this one had a little more, if you read the proposal when it came in it was,very optimistic they presented a good case. So there was another option of another hotel person taking charge ofdit)F,or whatever reason we thought it was a better one when it was voted on. Council Memb"ei'A backgroundfor how Mrs., Ramirez~statei been managing tha Mayor Pro Tem\Ta couple of other WE Ahmed Seirafi - R 206 knevi'theamobnt of time that they've been in operation or their rating under conservatorship of hotels. that they created the Rosemead Inn partners as part of managing this site and they have It opened in?`February of 2008."' utma logxplained as part of Ms. Armenta's question about other experience; they did list a but they,also listed other four to six potentials that were to be built or under discussion. semead Inn Hotel operator stated the company's address wasl6388 Colima Road, Suite Mayor Pro Tem Taylorconfirmed that was the address to the corporate headquarters where the other hotels operate, as well as, how it was stated in the agreement. Mr. Seirafi replied no, his signature was not on the.agreement it was his father's signature. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 8 of 28 Mayor Pro Tern Taylor asked if the property taxes have been paid. Mr. Seirafi replied to his knowledge no, they have not received a property tax bill. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor stated it was out of their control they have not received any bills and added that the commission will need to find out from the county assessors; Mr. Taylor reiterated that the hotel operator didn't make any excess profit. /-X, Mr. Seirafi replied no, its been a perform storm for the past twelve to economy, tourism, and the general operation of the hotel. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated they didn't go to purchase or There were five other projects that were approved that were not a single one has been built. ,Al Council MemberLy inquired about the upgrades and the $100,000 the city gave to the. Mr. Seirafi replied the city did not actually put of escrow of $70,000. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor explained there was a wii Mr. Seirafi explained the $70;000 credit plus an a I-C original agreement was:$4.4 million when the city the original owner did not perform accordingly to t was able to negotiate a $70,000 credit-fromithes,E hotel. Taylor Mr. Allred replied.it was the first'time he heard this: the city btel in the facility and done; in terms of the lose money. ;all the plans and with the from the seller at the end $30,000 from the city was put into the hotel. The ed it from the original owner. At the close of escrow ase agreement and the City Manager at the time h in turn was put back to the renovation of the to that the documents the commission had. Mr. Seirafi explained""to.the commission that the city put in an additional $30,000 not an additional $100,000. Council Member Low stateid'the commission might have to go back to the documentation when they closed escrow to see what the credit was. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor questioned the transaction; how would that work when there is a wire transfer of $100,000 put through City Bank. Mr. Seirafi replied the commission had to look at it as two separate transactions, first transaction is when the city purchased the property for $4.4 million. At the closed of the escrow, a $70,000 was negotiated between Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 9 of 28 the city and the seller, thus turning the $4.4 million transaction to $4,330,0000. After the closed of escrow the city put in the $100,000 for the renovation. Council Member Low reiterated that because the city got $70,000 as credit, even though the city gave him $100,000 the city really only gave $30,000. Council MemberArmenta stated that the city wired money; therefore the city did paid $100,000. Mr. Seirafi replied that above and beyond the $4.4 million, originally it was $4.4 million. Council Member Low asked Mr. Seirafi if the city had wired $1 Mr. Seirafi replied yes they did. Mrs. Ramirez replied that she recalled there was a credit go and pull the agreements to look and see what the final Council MemberArmenta stated that the city^paid $100,000 al $30,000 above the $4.4 million akwould have to Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated Council was supposed`to;get a report back o> ow the $100,000 was spent. Mr. Seiraf replied yes, he sent it but it was not a 100% n comp) elbreakdown of cost, of renovations, that $100,000 was applied to; I think snthe range of $80,,0 to $90,000fso far. Council Member Ly state that he'd like}to make a motion to received and file this report but also to send a copy of this report to the District•Attorney:s Office Public Integrity Unit for their review at the very least. Mr. Ly stated the hotel had been an albatross to.the cityand.there have been so many mistakes, and missteps and miscommunicatio on;this issue. On,the Cou cil'level, it would definitely comfort me to know that he city council is ,,,trying to fix anyapromisses' of4the gouncil past and a good faith efforts to send this to the District Attorney,s7office would defmtely;do thatWy,motion is to receive and file the staff report as well forward a copy fo the District Attorneys office. Council MembekWmenta seconded the motion. Mayor Clark stated slie.would,liKe to postpone that motion to at least one more meeting. Mrs. Clark added that she'd like staff to have,more time to answer some more of these questions; I am confused as to what actually happened I don't think sending it to the DA's office without us even knowing what we are dealing with is a good idea yet. Mr. Seirafi stated he was pretty much involve from the begining with the previous council members so if you have any questions how the transactions transpired or what the original intend was. Rosemead Community Development Commission and: City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 10 of 28 Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated when you say you were involved with the previous council members I never met or talked to you before. Mr. Seirafi stated the previous council members and the desired to develop the property, in terms of sense the property was acquired and understanding their.desire in terms. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked Mr. Seiraf if he'd been here before to explain it. Mr. Seirafi replied yes he's been to city council meetings but didn't explain Mayor Clark asked if he had private conversations with prior council Council Member Armenta asked so just for the record you members to determine what the fate of that hotel would bec Mr. Seirafi replied no, and stated that in the meeting's of h redevelopment of the whole area. Council Member Ly stated he would like staffito.bring this item month. the prior council move updated summary in one Council Member Low asked if there was discussion about some receipts d `wring the renovation of the hotel. 1,4 7N Mrs. Low asked if those receipts were all submitted to,the-City. /.,•~F. Mr. Seiraf replied that he turned in copies of the receipts and an excel spreadsheet of monies that were spent for the renovation Mrs. Ramirez clarified that in Iate,F.ebruaryyhe submitted-an excel spread sheet that does not match the receipts he submitted they don't add`up and like he6said they are "shoe box" receipts and he did indicate 14 ' t complete'at t h 0i a and we are still waiting for a complete accounting of that $100,000 and they were, no that isehy,we did not bring tha 11 .1. t to you today.., , n'~ V Council MemberArmenta statedthe original agreement stated the hotel operator would receive $50,000 on the completion o`f;obtaining the necessary building permits. Mrs. Armenta asked Mr. Seirafi how was he able to do that with out'submitting the,proper permits. Mr. Seirafi replied there w tno permits requested or required. We were not doing any type of construction or demolition. Council Member Armenta asked if the language was added in case of. Mr. Seirafi stated he thought in case of, as legal language in the agreement. Council Member Low asked if he needed any type of occupancy permit. Rosemead Community Development Commission and. City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 11 of 28 Mrs. Ramirez stated he was actually going through that license process right now and as far as permits go the City is not sure if he does need permits. The excel sheet shows that there might be something's that may need permits. It indicates air condition, electrical and so forth, unfortunately since we don't' have a plan what he was going to do were not sure if permits were actually needed or not. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated it wasn't just permits; he understood there was no license. Mrs. Ramirez stated he is actually going through that process right now in also his occupancy permit. Council Member Low stated that since this would,be tabled for a month-: submit more "shoe box" receipts. Mr. Seirafi replied he'll put them together in a better format tolbetter u stated that at that time it was moving quickly to do my best to get the as possible take it from what it was, which was not the pretties picturE Possible so I was moving pretty quickly. City Attorney Monies announced that the corihci4ould recess to 5. CLOSED SESSION A. B. Council Council City Council Meeting Agenda The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Clark at 7:10 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Armenta INVOCATION: Council Member Low Rosemead Community Development Commission and' City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Conference with Labor Government'Code Sect Negotiator}for the City: Employ nit: Rosem Conference wi 'Legal 1) GovemmentCoi 54957 Jeff Allred business license and Mr. Seirafi if he could and were 1 renovated went. He ting as soon ?r is soon as at 6:52 pm Initiation of Litigation (1 matter) back from closed session at 7.10 p.m. City Attorney Joseph Monies announced that onvening baclP to Closed Session at the end of the regular meeting. Page 12 of 28 PRESENT: Mayor Clark, Mayor Pro Tern Taylor, Council Member Armenta, Council Member Low, and Council Member Ly. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assistant,City,Manager Hawkesworth, City Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, Deputy Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda 6. PRESENTATIONS • Safe Communities Month Proclamation Chief of Police Lieutenant Murakami accepted the Safe Com Council and the community. A Mayor Pro Tem Taylor commended the Sheriffs bank robbery in the city. • Hometown Hero Military Banner Min Wang - of the Chamber of Commerce policy. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked Afghanistan war. Mr. Wang explained that the~p served on the Vietnam War or /'a" ~?rry'.ys Mayor P(o,,,Tem Taylor asked served6 it four year term'be Mr. Wong stated)that they wog • CERT Training Gradu Chief of Police Lieutenan0mur and training people how to put on the on active iities4Mdnth Proclamation and thanked staff, a grea~j~ob in arresting twospects of a ition on the itary banner program and i fobveterans between the Iraq and or also veterans; they also include those who current soldier that served on the Iraq war right now and has as current active military. 3kami explained the concept of the CERT training by training the community out fires. Council MemberAnnenta stated that she along with other council members will be at a conference in Washington D.C. and will meet with legislators and hopes to talk to them about funding needed for the CERT program. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 13 of 28 Don Kuni - L.A. County Fire department explained that.the CERT program started as a federal funded program; now they are being funded out of a L.A. County Grant. Chief of Police Lieutenant Murakami presented each CERT graduate with a certificate of recognition. Caltrans Presentation Marlene Martinez - representative of Caltrans District Seven spoke about restoration of the 10 freeway. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked if there are any provisions of the off ramp modifications for the vehicle mileage fee. / \ Council Member Ly reiterated is Mr. Taylor meant the hot Ms. Martinez explained that the hot lanes are being handledlby Metro. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked about the VMF fee, anyone fee. Ms. Martinez replied people that use the carpoolslines Gan use the toll at least two people in the car and the Vehicle Mileage~Fee is,not part of Mayor Clark asked how the hot lanes would Ms. Martinez stated that there will tie carneras involve ahd scanners. • High Speed Rail Jose Martinezaregional;manager fo rthe CalifornidUgh Speed Rail Presentation is''available Wthe~'City Clerk's office. 7. will be scarined a mileage of charge when there are in the vehicle. Chuck Lyons - encourages that ltie city repair the Dinsmoor Heritage House and work on future activities and be more oroactivemith,the:community. Juan Nunez - spoke in regards to the workers compensation issue on past Council Member Nunez and how they are not supposed to collect unemployment insurance. Council Member Ly clarified that the city did not grant Mr. Nunez unemployment claims and the State was the one that approved it. The city has challenged it and is working with Senator Gloria Romero for a bill to not have elected officials received unemployment insurance. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 14 of 28 Mayor Clark stated that Senator Romero and Senator Dutton's bill will clarify that elected officials are not to receive unemployment benefits. Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth explained that staff has to rely on EDD to collect the funds from Mr. Nunez; staff is speaking with them and waiting because the city does not have the authority to collect it themselves. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor explained that they may not collect any money form and see and we have no wait to pursue it, the State said it's not their fault ar 8. PUBLIC HEARING A. Extension of Interim Urgency Ordinance by Ordinance No. 874 Establishing Mora On March 24. 2009. the Rosemead imposed a moratorium on the approval of appl use commercial and residential developments City Council enacted l additional period of 10 No. 874, ixed-Used , they will have wait to bite the bullet. 873 and Extended urgency Ordinand6~No. 873, which and use entitlements for mixed- of 45 days. On April 28, 2009, the (tended the moratorium for an In the time allotted under the Initial:Ordinance`and.the First;Ektension, staff has compiled and is continuing to study the substantial•he la th~and+ssafety issues regarding the >a AIr y„ inconsistencieg$Rt veen the City's current zoning regulations and the City's adopted General Plan, as it!.reltes tto,residential and commercial mixed-use developments. Over the last -,e j twelvemonths, the City;has hired 'a land,use consultant and created a subcommittee of Council members to work with staff to studythe zoning regulations and General Plan to identify and addresscohflicts;thatexist,regarding mixed-use developments permitted under theaexisting General Plan and`bses'under the zoning code. Due to a change in the`GeheralOPlan Work Revision Program the twelve month period has not provided A6fficient amount of time to complete the required tasks. Additional time is needed to addressIthe reclassification of parcels that are currently designated for mixed-use development in llie existing General Plan to other land use designations. Therefore, such fJ tOrs,warrant the City Council's consideration of the adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinance v., y 888 to extend,the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by Ordinance 873 and extended by Ordin ncf'fIM for an additional period of one year (March 21, 2011). Recommendation: That the City Council introduce (read by title only) a City Council Ordinance, and adopt, as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government Code section 65858 (b) Ordinance No. 888 entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rosemead, California, extending the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by Ordinance 873 and extended by Ordinance 874 prohibiting the approval of entitlements for mixed-use commercial and residential developments and making findings in support thereof." Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 15 of 28 Principal Planner Sheri Bermejo reviewed the staff report Mayor Clark open public hearing 8:19 pm; there being no comments Mayor Clark closed the public hearing at 8:19 pm. Council Member Low asked what the time frame was and how long the City can have the moratorium for. City Attorney Montes explained that under government code the moratorium canilast for a maximum of two years. The firs) time you adopted the moratorium it only last for 45 days. Then~you have the right to extend the moratorium two times for up to two years total, so this will be your second,exxtension and staff has requested that you grant the full year; we do not anticipate taking the fulbye`artbutbecause you are allowed to extended two times we want to make sure that if something were to happen, if tgets,delayed, if its determined that an additional zoning ordinance modification is needed we don't run'''out of time. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor stated that it's now going on thr General Plan that was processed through were Council asked were the hang up for the zoning classification. City Attorney Montes if you recall the generalrplai in the city's east and west, north side corridors\ttf conform to that; Subsequent to that it was the dei general plan needed to be revisited, and that the April. Those modifications will included with them consistencies issues go away~6/,c hb new general 'plan should bring things into conformance:if any developmer everything is now consisler t Staff mayp~esent on'April Principal Planner zoning code aboi Steven nce No. was amended to it ifwas passes. The it started to gefthis done. The we got that pretty, hashed out; areas of mixed used up and down r,code was never amended to uncil that thatineeded to be revisited, the ould be modified and you will see that in ame dment that will make some of the N., ,x7 ent proposed and zoning code amendment forward and can proceed because ming code may trail off a little bit. to be presented on or about April 13th and the by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor 9. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes February 6, 2010 - Regular Meeting B. Claims and Demands Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 16 of 28 Resolution No. 2010 -18 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010-18, for payment of City expenditures in the amount of $959,835.97 numbered:100747 through 100759 and 68986 and 69105, inclusively. ' C. Del Mar Avenue Resurfacing Project, Phase 2- As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-10 Capital approved a program titled "Del Mar Avenue ReSI overlay, sidewalk repairs, traffic striping, signage signal upgrades, street trees installation, and apr from Garvey Avenue to Hellman Avenue. / Recommendation: That the City Ci complete the improvement project. D. Award of Contract for Lead;Based Paint and Services The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban De lead based paint and, in some insta`hces,,asbes completed on'ajl"Owner-Occupied Rehabilitatioi Loan Programs funded through either the Comr or HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Pro Over the Da; Solicit Bids , the City Council s of asphalt concrete s construction, traffic of this project are and solieitbids to Testing and Risk Assessment ient,(HUD) regulations require that ling, assessment, and clearances be ~ams and Down Payment Assistance Development Grant (CDBG) Program contracted with Barr & Clark for this service. As part of the,procurement requiriamenturider the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG),program, ah•organization.may only receive funding for up to three years for the same program or activity,before'a.new Request for Proposal must be completed. The City's contract with Barr4 Clark will expire on June 30, 2010. U Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Barr & Clark, Inc. for lead based paint and asbestos testi4 assessment and clearances tests of properties according to federal and state laws for FY 2010;2011 with an option to extend the contract for two (2) additional years. Whitmore Street Resurfacing Project - Award of Contract As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-10 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council Rosemead Community Development Commission and, City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 17 of 28 approved the "Residential Street Resurfacing Project", which consists of the rehabilitation of various streets within the City. The project includes the rehabilitation of Whitmore Street from Del Mar Avenue to the Alhambra Wash. Funding for this project is available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Community Development Block Grant program (ARRA 2009, CDBG). Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) regulations require that funds be spent on specific project types and in specific target areas. This project meets the CDBG requirements.' e, Recommendation: That the City Council: 1. Approve plans and specifications for this 2. Authorize the City Manager to enter Company for the construction of the of $220,066; and d 3. Establish an amount of up to $22,000 (10% potential and additional Council Member Ly made a motion, secondei Calendar items with the EXCEPTION of E and Yes: ArmentC.ClaFrk;,Low, Ly, No: None' 'rn Absent: E. AWard,of,Contract?for Senlof'Nutfitlon Meals Provider to cover the cost of any to approve Consent Over the past three (3)-years; the City has contracted with Morrison Management Specialists, In6 MMS) to provide meals for the Senior Nutrition Program. The Senior i Program's mission is to provide high quality, cost efficient, nutritious meals to and to promote the role of nutrition in preventative health and long term care. As part•of,t .procurement requirement under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)°program, an organization•may only receive funding for up to three years for the same program or activity before a new Request for proposal must be completed. The City's current contract for this service will expire on June 30, 2010. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Morrison Management Services, Inc. for a Senior Nutrition Program for FY 2010-2011 with an option to extend the contract for two (2) additional years. Rosemead Community Development Commission and ; City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 18 of 28 with Sully MilleContracting pt Resurfacing Prbjpct,in the amount Council Member Ly asked if Morrison Management Services listed the nutritional values of how much protein is included in each meal. Economic Development Administrator Ramirez replied it was not included and will get that information. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked what the charge is for the residents if the company is charging the city $3.95 or $3.96. Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott replied the fee is curreritly,$1.25 for residents. Mayor Clark stated that if someone can't pay the City does not Council Member Low stated that the contract expired Council Member Taylor stated wasn't worded properlydnd tfie,dates needed correction. Council Member Low asked if the contract was for three years. Mrs. Ramirez explained the contract was year the city is required to go out and bid. Council Member Low stated that it turns out that th Mrs. Ramirez stated there,are not a lofof, providers oL three that could Dossibly orovide the services and two a maximum of'tfiree years and after three years ethe only~company that submitted a proposal. re that that provide this service; She found a total of not response to the proposal. Council Member Ly made a motion; services agreement with Morrison N Yes. Armenta; Clark, 4 ~v. No None XV None Member Low, to approve the professional Inc. Vote resulted in: G. Dinsmoor Heritage House Short, Term Rehabilitation Project During its regular meeting of February 9, 2010, City Council took receipt of the Dinsmoor House Preservation Plan. The plan included a series of projects aimed at rehabilitating the Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 19 of 28 property. As a result, City Council directed staff to propose short-term rehabilitation efforts at Dinsmoor Heritage House with a focus on exterior improvements so as to immediately enhance the buildings current appearance. These should include select projects already identified in the Preservation Plan. Recommendation: That the City Council 1. Determine the scope of proposed improvements to the,Dinsmoor House; and 2. Appropriate funds from the undesignated $55,342.14 (equal to funds received for flooding incident); and 3. Determine whether to appropri Fund balance (up to $28,157 improvements. 44 Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scoftreviewed the"staff, City Manager Allred explained that if Council d pprove the recomme back with a budget amendment at a future meeting td4a b),,the $28,157 Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that $55,000 of thosi Council Member Ly stated;he was v ' <supportive make sure everyone kneyvA t the city," doing. ka ahr'F.und balance in the amount of y,%insurance claims due to 2008 1s from theVdesignated General all proposed exterior and seismic it would be necessary to come Rhe general reserve balance. money for that. House and he just wanted to Julie Gentry - stated that when she,vas,hepreviously;'she gave council a set pictures and new additional pictures of the;tialcony'show how fast the wood deteriorated. Ms. Gentry reiterated that she wants to preserve therDinsmoor'He4itage House and preserve it and have activities; gave a short history of the house, thanked,council and staff forittieirsugport Council Member Sandra Armenta madea motion, seconded by Council Member Steven Ly, to approve the appropriation of fu`nd's from the undesignated General Fund balance in the amount of $55,342.14 and appropriate additional funds to complete all proposed exterior and seismic improvements. Voteir' sultedlfin: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No:None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 20 of 28 10. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. City Investment Policy Modifications The City's Investment Policy (Policy) is reviewed annually to ensure that it best reflects current investing conditions. As those conditions change, minor modifications to the policy should be made to allow the continuation of reasonable returns on investments while maintaining the priority of safety first. With the continuing decline'of yield in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and money market funds the",City needs to move its surplus cash into a more productive investment; to do so requi es minor modifications to the investment policy. The modifications will increase the!potential,for interest rate fluctuation (up or down) but investments will remain secure and`there is no`irisk,of losing invested principal. Staff continues to review the Policy for•ongoing compliance with Government Code Section 53601 and recommends changing the i vestment term for ce`rtifcates of deposit (CD) from 180 days to a maximum of fiveyears as wells allowing investments in.callable, step-up rate government-sponsored enlerprises,(agencies Recommendation: That the City Council al for the remainder of the 2009;,,10 fiscal year. Mayor Pro Taylor asked that this item be deferred current listing of the deposits and which ones want where the dollars were coming from and where the) know how much is being moveZITR and how much don't know how many millions of dollarsare being s Council Member Low City Manager(Allr Director Brisco to modified Investment Policy `esome,more information'in their report he asked for a b clianged,wMr. Taylor'stated that he didn't' know ire going from ~M[Taylor reiterated that he wanted to being move where. We are approving a policy and we eed out and what's the interest rate going to be. city i hanging the is the city actually shifting money. in longer term CD's and asked Finance Finance Director Brisco explained'it shifting'our money out of LAIF, which is the state pool, and the state pool interest rat as continually declined. If we can invest our money in very still safe instruments like CD's and move agency fi'nds,we can still be just as safe like we are in LAIF and earn a higher yield. Also, explained ,.j that at this momentiwaesAtill have)torsee what is available in the market; it might be a CD form Bank of America or Wells Fargolor,,some/lother banks. These things come and go in the market and just like agency bonds they come available,and if it's what you are looking for, you buy them. Mayor Pro Tom Taylor stated that he would like to have all those figures of how much we are talking about and how we choose who is going to pay the most interest. City Manager Allred stated staff can provide council with how much the city has in LAIF and a current snap shot were the money is now. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 21 of 28 Finance Director Brisco explained the current policy is conservative because of the market, now its change and it's very difficult to earn at least 5 percent. LAIF lags in their interest rates; with the change in the market its time to update our policy. B. Preliminary Capital Improvement. Project List for the Parks, Recreation, and General Facilities Master Plan The purpose of the Parks, Recreation, and General Facilities Master Plan is to evaluate programs and facilities and, with community input, to devise,a`A 5-year strategy for meeting residents' ongoing recreational needs. One important element of the Master Plan is a long- range Capital Improvement Projects plan. Z°, At its February 23, 2010 meeting, City Council Projects (CIP) list for the Master Plan. City Cd those projects deemed of concern to patrons list of proposed projects, reflecting those recor Council review and prioritization. Council's apt the Master Plan as only chapters on capital pri unfinished. Recommendation: That the 1 improvements projects list for Master Plan. Director of Parks and Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked $19 million in first phase and at redevelopm{enffund'a'nudffiat hi City Manager Allred replied'tha have ccess to; and the city ha if we were able to do the bond i Mayor Pro Tem T Redevelopment At how staff found $4 the staff report 'eliminary capital and General Facilities shifted to p~iority number 1,2,4,6,8,10, 12, 13 and its roughly gMr,.,Allred mention the City has five million left in the seven million available. gency bond proceeds the city has $5.4 million now that we generate $7 million in redevelopment agency bond proceeds arification because when the council decided to buy a property the the $4.4 million; we were going to borrow money form the city and some City Manager Allred explained that the money that the Community Development Commission used to purchase the property Glendon Hotel, those were redevelopment agency tax increment dollars. Mayor Pro Tern Taylor reiterated that he was talking about the Pham parking lot that was almost $4 million; staff said we didn't have the $4 million and we needed to borrow from the city. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Improvements y be given to cularly, playgrounds A preliminary ns, is respectfully submitted for City e CIP list will facilitate completion of funding considerations remain Page 22 of 28 Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth explained if the Pham parcel would had acquired by the redevelopment agency, the city would have loaned the money to the redevelopment agency to acquire the parcel. However, roughly the $5.5 million that the agency had of an existing bond proceeds, those are tax exempt proceeds so those could be use to acquire the parcel; it could only be use for public infrastructure projects such a park development or pool construction. You cannot use.that money to acquire a property such as the Pham parcel for economic development purposes with those bond proceeds. City Manager Allred clarified there are two different pots of money, one is tax it in the accounts. There is bond proceeds money that must be used for capitalrp $5.4 million available on bond proceeds money for capital projects; and the ,a6 million. We have projects that show the needs of $19 million in phase/1; and'w. pay for the whole thing. That's why we are preparing a master plan and art of that the council already paid for is to have Willdan Financial as part ofthis MIG they will provide how we can generate the short fall. Mayor Pro Tem Taylorstated that all the time this wasttieing;plai to be able to be financed. That was the priority before we did any; Director of Parks and Recreation MontgomerytiScott stated as we merely strategy in taking a look at the city's public infrastructure. I community, we've identify on the bases of evaluation'ezisting~facil categorized then based on priorities 1, 2 and 3 based on thei ',pre there are needs within the However, the master plan action what so ever. It sim those needs over the nett City Manager All some of thes&di to improve it there is a rieed and the is fiscally possible. Council Member Low replied that appr this or right now by approving tt eaist or ~ment money that was just cfs,and the agency has to general another $7 x$12 million short, it won't master plan work program ttracf-for the master plan, that it had d the important thing is that one is ie,needs expressed by the their,conditions. We then ditions. All this does, is identify that lies and replace facilities. pct list does not commit the city any of the community at large to meet at if we have funds to accommodate to achieve list does not mean that for sure Council is going to do all are going to spend any money. Mayor Pro Te ii,74ylor reiterated that the city got it self into a bind when they voted to accept the plan with the priorities at that«time.; that's w,h they are back changing these priorities. At the last city council meeting we had a discussion b ut.kids getting hurt and falling off equipment, and that's why we went back to fix these things first and before yo take the $10 million to fix the pools and let these kids sit for another five years. Director of Park and Recreation Montgomery-Scott explained it was a combination of phase 1 projects. The purpose of presenting these were in two fold, in general approve a list, second you would establish the priorities for these projects specially with MIG; staff would do the best they did was recommend based on what they saw; but ultimately what is included in this list and their priority would be establish by this council. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 23 of 28 Mayor Pro Tern Taylor stated that's why we are in a revise state were all the safety issues are going to be done first, that is why I couldn't figure out why they; were listed as phase 2; which is 5 - 9 years and phase 1 is for is 1-4 years. Council Member Low stated that if we have the money to do it. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that is exactly the whole point now, we're getting around to it to make sure that there was funding. Another thing that was a concern on the proposal is who;i§Oe La Rosa, who is the bonding company. A-? City Manager Allred stated that De La Rosa is one of the bonding firms~that staff.has talked with. We have interviewed a number of them. Staff proposed to come;to the council sometime in April to make a presentation to council if we should proceed. `aa Mayor Pro Tem Taylor reiterated what we have done in the°past we've,had three or four come and tell us what their rates are going to be for they nieyJ.hat is going to be loaned City Manager Allred stated staff received proposals from multiple`co~m~p~~\~a~nies and we'll provide all the information to the council when we bring it forward. `~a;":~,. Mayor Pro Tem Taylorstated then we are not gdi g~t`support that motioh onight. I need to get clarified as to why that company was picked and we don't know ~what he other,rates are?' Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth,stated that stafftiWbring backvon April 13th a formal proposal to the council and in that proposalit will include rates charges all other information and scenarios we received from all the different companies Mayor Clark expressed concern,and had wcorrection on.the issue of constructing a skate park; we have not even looked at the liabilityissues It i mght work d might not so I am not sure I rather move it to priority 3; so that some of the things that=arg safety;issues and are more pressing needs are already a priority 2. May& Pro;Tem Taylor agreed 't don't waht-to be apart of it because of the liability. Nobody mentions how these kids get hurt, it always gesw6o the deep pockets of the public tax payer. That's my only objection; I like the skating, I knowthree people that have used skateboards and all had broken bones. I am concern with the safety and liabilit Council Member Ly maie'a motion, second by Council Member Armenta to approve a prioritized preliminary capital improvement projects list for inclusion in the Parks, Recreation, and General Facilities Master Plan. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 24 of 28 11. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. Council Member Steven Ly is seeking City Council Support for a Vacant Position on San Gabriel Valley Sector Governance Council Recommendation: That the City Council give staff further direction on this matter. Council Member Ly asked for support to be on the board for San Gabriel Valley'Sector Governance Council. Mayor Margaret Clark made a motion, seconded by Council Member,Saridra Armenta to support Council Member Ly in seeking a position on the San Gabriel Valley Sector, Council. Vote resulted in: \7~\ Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None B. CITY COUNCIL • Appointment of Mayor ' City Cherk^Presiding • Appointment of Mayor Pro T T Newly ap~ ted Mayor Presiding ` A swearing m ceremonyAfor the newly appointed Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem will be conducted?aGthe next regular scheduledimeeting on March 23, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. in the Rosemead~CommunityzRecreation Center? Zz~ . City Clerk Molled'a asked;if,there were any nominations for the next Mayor of the City of Rosemead. liketto°nominate Gary Taylor as Mayor for the City of Rosemead. Also contin ed to. serve the City honorably for many years. Council Member`Armenta statedshe would like to second that nomination. Council Member Stev nWLY made a motion, seconded Council Member Sandra Armenta to appoint Mr. +m,r Gary Taylor as Mayor ofy~tlie City of Rosemead. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead Community Development Commission and. City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 25 of 28 Newly appointed Mayor Taylor stated he would like to nominate Steven Ly for Mayor Pro Tern of the City of Rosemead. Council Member Armenta stated she would like to second that nomination. Commented on Mr. Ly has shown that he has gone above and beyond and shown an interest in Rosemead. He's shown that he cares for the residents and shows integrity in representing the City of Rosemead. Council Member Clark stated that it was Council Member Low's turn since she ISas served on the Council for three years. l Mayor Taylor stated that he's had several disagreements with C tried to get a 64 page report about what happen with Mr. Nunez, for a year and Council Member Low was the third vote that woul get that report. Mr. Taylor reiterated that he did not go into the;cl getting the report from the investigator. Also, stated_ that the mp the lawsuit." Council Member Low stated for the record Mr. Taylor was entitle there was information given in closed sessiorfwhen Mr. Taylor did Member Clark was at all the closed sessions Council Member Clark reiterated that maybe theyc that the City Attorney stated they could not get the ni Mayor Taylor also disagreed wheh'Council Member she was the 3m vote to stop`puttinq information in the ghat was goi mberLow. If you recall when we not g`et that report it was concealed ve to allow the rest of the council ions because'council was not fered and costthecity,$400,000 in f the closed sessions and that nd. Also, stated that Council the investigator and recalled in regards to the minutes. Mr. Taylor added that btes for discussion that the council had. Council Member Low stated thatshe,recalled'asking.those minutes in tape and broadcast because we were going back and;fo[U vakut,what'should, be in tfie minutes. Mr. Low stated that it takes staff more time when minutes are'on verbatim-and'at that time• things were very political. Mayor Tayl r replied that it was not political;-it/was information to the public of what the council is doing and three of the council members voted' , to not disclose any comments that were made and put in the minutes. Council Member Lowreiterated tfiat the tapes records.word by words of the minutes. Mayor Taylor stated thahthe City Clerk verifies what was said and not change them. Council Member Low stated that there were situations where the City Clerk had to go back after time because council did not agree what should be in the minutes. Mayor Taylor stated that the City Clerk did not do anything wrong it was that the importance of things were not in the minutes. Mr. Taylor added why Ms. Low voted to spend $40,000 to send him to the grand jury. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 26 of 28 Council Member Low clarified that she agreed because Mr. Taylor had disclosed closed session information that was not public. Mayor Taylor asked Ms. Low what was the closed session information he disclosed. Council Member Low replied that it was information related to the lawsuit and felt that certain information should not be disclosed because it could hurt the case and the city. Council Member Armenta asked who paid for the. attorney in the case. Mayor Taylor replied that Join Powers Authority Insurance paid, Mayor Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Me Mayor Pro Tern of the City of Rosemead. Vote resulted Yes: Armenta, Low, Ly, Taylor No: Clark Abstain: None Absent: None 12. COMMENTS FROM MAYOR & CITY money. to appoint Mr. Steven Ly as Mayor Pro Tem Ly asked for a report regarding an~Edison>vacant.lantl"on"Hellman and Stallo Avenue. Second, encourages all to fill .out the census because~the data will help 'the city improve and provide services. Council Member Low statgdshe received a letter regarding a complaint about the senior center and has received another letter of other complaints about code enforcement and building Inspectors. Generally the complaints refer that employees are,being.rude-,and.not.professional. Asked city employees to show asked City Manager Allred J,he:vias.aware of the complaints Ms. Low was talking about. City ManagerAllred stated that h6,-'was aware about the building inspectors; we are meeting with the department head tooresolve the issue. I have not heard about any code enforcement problems. Mayor Taylor be informed so everyone is on the same page. Council MemberArmenta stated that she received the letter Ms. Low is talking about and also added that many staff have done an excellent job trying to resolve the issues. Also, spoke to Mr. Montgomery-Scott and is fully capable of working with staff to resolve the problems. Also, spoke to Willdan about her concerns about the building inspectors. Mayor Taylor asked that council stay inform about complaint about staff. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 27 of 28 Mayor Pro Tem Ly commended former Mayor Clark for working hard and her service to the city as Mayor of the City. City Council recessed back to closed session at 945 pm and reconvened back at 11:45 pm with no reportable actions. 13. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:45 pm. The next joint. Community Development, d mission and City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on March 23, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., respectively at the Rosemead Community Recreational Center at 3936 North Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. , Mayor ATTEST: Gloria Molleda City Clerk Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 28 of 28