Loading...
CC - Item 7A - Minutes 03-09-10Minutes of the JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CC REGULAR MEETING March 9, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor Clark at 6:02 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member/Commissioner Armenta INVOCATION: Council Member/Commissioner Low PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Clark, Mayor Pro TemNice Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Low, and Council STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assist Community Development Director Wong, Direct( Montgomery-Scoff, Economic Development Adn Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk 1. PUBLIC 2. - None Claims ;il Member/Commissioner Ly. Attorney Montes, s and Recreation Affairs Manager Flores, Deputy Resolution No. 2010 - 09 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010-09 for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount 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 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 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 an 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 the $6,000 amount that was committed; also asked about the $100,000 operal agency put into the hotel. Community Development Director Wong replied no, the $6,000 a month 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 whc So if we sell the RFP just to see what the developer has in mind and wh a good thing. Ms. Low clarified that she just did not want to sell the hotel agency lose money. just not getting ,,nt that the to the excess profit and of that area is to develop it. Df ideas they have it might be sake of selling it and have the Council Member Ly stated this has cost tax payers $4.5 million to get the hotel and put together this complex deal which fell through horribly and was bought when it was at the top of the market; now its worth about half of the original price. Mr. Ly asked how much longer the city was going to hold onto an asset that is causing everyone including this council heart burn; he added that the RFP gave the agency the opportunity to find any potential developer that may want to make a good project at that location. It's a great location near the freeway and next to the Rosemead Square area; it offers the opportunity to move that albatross that has been hanging for 2 years. Mr. Ly made a motion to accept the RFP. Armenta asked how the agency might find out if the operator has not been paying their property City Attorney Monies explained that if they have not been paying their property taxes, it's a possessory Council Member Low asked Mr. Wong what other agencies do when they purchase property; usually the intent is to have it developed but in the mean while what do they do. interest tax; it's an unsecure tax lien. That is a property tax lien that the County would have to enforce to the property owners; Mr. Montes does not think the Agency can enforce against the property; In terms of the city efforts to collect the property tax, unless the city has a special assessments we are collecting on the property, we don't really have 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 seek specific performance of that agreement or to that manner. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 5 of 28 Mr. Wong replied that normally for this you slowly acquire other parcels in the targeted area and go with a RFP, attract 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. City Attorney Montes clarified that there is no five year restriction. However if the agency had acquired 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 assists the potential developer in developing the Commissioner/Council Member Ly made a motion, secs to authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids from qual Hotel property through a request for proposal process. Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly No: None Abstain: Taylor Absent: None Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that he'd like his general commen that project; added that the agency will have to see the proposals are. 4. MA in: merlCouncil Member Low purchase of the Glendon s in the minutes and expressed concerns of when they come and see what their options Report on the Acquisition of the Glendon Hotel and the Subsequent Operating Agreement In accordance with a request made at the February 23, 2010 joint meeting of the City Council and Community Development Commission, a report has been prepared by staff on the acquisition of the Glendon Hotel property by the Community Development Commission on July 2, 2008. The report also contains information relative to the management agreement with Rosemead Inn Hotel Partners, LLC that became effective on October 14, 2008. Recommendation: That the Community Development Commission receive and file the report. Economic Development Administrator Ramirez reviewed the staff report. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 6 of 28 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. 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 Tem Taylor stated that it was his understanding 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 would 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 would perform. Knowing 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 looking at it in January that staff began to question this. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor clarified that the commission had another option 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 or $6,000 but there were no restrictions. Mrs. Ramirez confirmed that is was going to be $5.000 and with no restrictions Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated it was a 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 of it. For whatever reason we thought it was a better one when it was voted on. Council Member Armenta asked if staff knew the amount of time that they've been in operation or their background or how long they've been operating under conservatorship of hotels. Mrs. Ramirez stated that they created the Rosemead Inn partners as part of managing this site and they have been managing that. It opened in February of 2008. Mayor Pro Tom Taylor explained as part of Ms. Armenta's question about other experience; they did list a couple of other hotels but they also listed other four to six potentials that were to be built or under discussion. Ahmed Seirafi - Rosemead Inn Hotel operator stated the company's address wasl6388 Colima Road, Suite 206. Rosemead Community Development Commission and CO Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 8 of 28 Mayor Pro Tern Taylor confirmed 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. Mayor Pro Tem 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 Tem Taylor stated it was out of their control they have not commission will need to find out from the county assessors; Mr. Taylor make any excess profit. Mr. Seirafi replied no, it's been a perfect 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. Council Member Ly inquired about the $100,000 the city gave to them. ~d any bills and added that the ted that the hotel operator didn't months in terms of the the sense to lose money. and they got all the plans and ire done; specifically with the Mr. Seirafi replied the city did not actually put in $100,000; the city received a credit from the seller at the end of escrow of $70,000. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor explained there was a wire transfer for $100,000. Mr. Seirafi explained the $70,000 credit plus an additional $30,000 from the city was put into the hotel. The original agreement was $4.4 million when the city purchased it from the original owner. At the close of escrow the original owner did not perform accordingly to the purchase agreement and the City Manager at the time was able to negotiate a $70,000 credit from the seller which in turn was put back to the renovation of the hotel. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked where was that reference to that in the documents the commission had. Mr. Allred replied it was the first time he heard this. Mr. Seirafi explained to the commission that the city put in an additional $30,000 not an additional $100,000. Council Member Low stated the commission might have to go back to the documentation when they closed escrow to see what the credit was. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 9 of 28 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 close of the escrow, a $70,000 was negotiated between the city and the seller, thus turning the $4.4 million transaction to $4,330,000. After the close of escrow the city put in the $100,000 for the renovation. Council Member Low reiterated that because the city got $70,000 as $100,000 the city really only gave $30,000. Council Member Armenta stated that the city wired money; Mr. Seirafi replied that above and beyond the $4.4 million, $4.4 million. Council Member Low asked Mr. Seirafi if the city had wired Mr. Seirafi replied yes they did. Mrs. Ramirez replied that she recalled there was a cri go and pull the agreements to look and see what the Council Member Armen ta Mayor Pro Tem Taylor sta Mr. Seirafi replied yes, he s $100,000 was applied to; I I stated the Ly stated t to the Dist A been an ns on this is council is trying to Attorney's office w( copy to the District city paid supposed range en though the city gave him city did paid $100,000. vas and additional $30,000 above the was above the $4.4 million and would have to a report back on how the $100,000 was spent. breakdown of cost, of renovations, that to $90,000 so far. d like to make a motion to received and file this report but also to send a mey's Office Public Integrity Unit for their review at the very least. Mr. Ly )ss to the city and there have been so many mistakes, and missteps and in the Council level, it would definitely comfort me to know that he city of the council past and a good faith effort to send this to the District that. My motion is to receive and file the staff report as well forward a Council MemberArmenta seconded the motion. Mayor Clark stated she 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. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 10 of 28 Mr. Seirafi stated he was pretty much involved from the beginning with the previous council members so if you have any questions how the transactions transpired or what the original intent was. 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 desire to develop the property, in terms of sense the property was acquired and understanding their desire in terms. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked Mr. Seirafi if he'd been here before to explain it. Mr. Seirafi replied yes he's been to city council meetings but didn't explain anything then. Mayor Clark asked if he had private conversations with prior council members. Council Member Armenta asked so just for the record you never had any meetings with the prior council members to determine what the fate of that hotel would become. Mr. Seirafi replied no, and stated that in the meetings of the redevelopment to move forward of the redevelopment of the whole area. Council Member Ly stated he would like staff to bring this item back with an updated summary in one month. Council Member Low asked if there was discussion about some receipts during the renovation of the hotel. Mrs. Low asked if those receipts were all submitted to the City. Mr. Seirafi 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 late February he submitted an excel spread sheet that does not match the receipts he submitted; they don't add up and like he said they are "shoe box" receipts and he did indicate they were not complete at that time and we are still waiting for a complete accounting of that $100,000 and that is why we did not bringing that to you today. Council Member Armenta stated the original agreement stated the hotel operator would receive $50,000 on the completion of obtaining the necessary building permits. Mrs. Armenta asked Mr. Seirafi how was he able to do that without submitting the proper permits. Mr. Seirafi replied there were no permits requested or required. We were not doing any type of construction or demolition. Council MemberArmenta asked if the language was added in case of. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 11 of 28 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. 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 some things 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 we're not sure if permits were actually needed or not. Mayor Pro Tern 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 obtaining a business license and also his occupancy permit. Council Member Low stated that since this would be tabled for a month she asked Mr. Seirafi if he could submit more "shoe box" receipts. Mr. Seirafi replied he'll put them together in a better format to better understand were the money went. He stated that at that time it was moving quickly to do my best to get the place renovated and operating as soon as possible take it from what it was, which was not the prettiest picture and getting it operating 4 as soon as possible so I was moving pretty quickly. City Attorney Montes announced that the council would recess to closed session at 6:52 pm 5. CLOSED SESSION A. the City: Jeff Allred and Su Tan Rosemead Emplovee Association B. Code 54956.9(c): Initiation of Litigation (1 matter) Council reconvened back from closed session at 7:10 p.m. City Attorney Joseph Montes announced that Council would be reconvening back to Closed Session at the end of the regular meeting. 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. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 12 of 28 FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Armenta INVOCATION: Council Member Low 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 Communities Month Proclamation and thanked staff, Council and the community. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor commended the Sheriffs department on a great job in arresting two suspects of a bank robbery in the city. • Hometown Hero Military Banner Program` Min Wang - of the Chamber of Commerce gave a brief presentation on the military banner program and policy. Mayor Pro Mr. Mayor Pro Tem served their four Mr. Wong stated that War for veterans between the Iraq and or actve duty but also veterans; they also include those who ced how would a current'soldier that served on the Iraq war right now and has be classified as. be classified as current active military. • CERT Training Graduates Chief of Police Lieutenant Murakami explained the concept of the CERT training by training the community and training people how to put out fires. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 13 of 28 Council Member Annenta 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. 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 • Caltrans Presentation Marlene Martinez - representative of Caltrans District Seven spoke abc Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked if there are any provisions of the off ramp fee. Council Member Ly reiterated is Mr. Taylor meant the hot Ms. Martinez explained that the hot lanes are being handled by Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked about the fee. Ms. Martinez replied people at least two people in the ca Mayor Clark asked how the Ms. Martinez stated that the High Speed Rail Pry Jose Martinez - regional m Power Point Presentation is 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Ff of recognition. of the 10 freeway. vehicle mileage on the off ramp will be scanned a mileage carpools lanes can use the toll lanes free of charge when there are hicle Mileage Fee is not part of this project. two people in the vehicle. scanners. the California High Speed Rail in the City Clerk's office. THE AUDIENCE Chuck Lyons - encourages that the city repair the Dinsmoor Heritage House and work on future activities and be more proactive with 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. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 14 of 28 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 receive unemployment insurance. 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 from Mr. Nunez, they will have to wait and see and we have to wait to pursue it, the State said it's not their fault and we have to bite the bullet. 8. PUBLIC HEARING A. Extension of Interim Urgency Ordinance Adopted by Ordinance No. 873 and Extended by Ordinance No. 874 Establishing Moratorium on Mixed-Used Developments On March 24, 2009, the Rosemead City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 873, which imposed a moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for mixed- use commercial and residential developments for a period of 45 days. On April 28, 2009, the City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 874, which extended the moratorium for an additional period of 10 months and 15 days, In the time allotted under the Initial Ordinance and the First Extension, staff has compiled and is continuing to study the substantial health and safety issues regarding the inconsistencies between the City's current zoning regulations and the City's adopted General Plan, as it relates to residential and commercial mixed-use developments. Over the last twelve months, the City has hired a land use consultant and created a subcommittee of Council members to work with staff to study the zoning regulations and General Plan to identify and address conflicts that exist regarding mixed-use developments permitted under the existing General Plan and uses under the zoning code. Due to a change in the General Plan Work Revision Program the twelve month period has not provided a sufficient amount of time to complete the required tasks. Additional time is needed to address the reclassification of parcels that are currently designated for mixed-use development in the existing General Plan to other land use designations. Therefore, such factors warrant the City Council's consideration of the adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinance 888 to extend the Interim Urgency Ordinance adopted by Ordinance 873 and extended by Ordinance 874 for an additional period of one year (March 21, 2011). Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 15 of 28 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." 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 City Attorney Montes explained that under government code the mo years. The first time you adopted the moratorium it only last's for 45 the moratorium two times for up to two years total, so this will be yon requested that you grant the full year; we do not anticipate taking thi extended-two times we want to make sure that if something were to determined that an additional zoning ordinance modification is need Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that it's now going General Plan that was processed through where asked where the hang up for the zoning classifica City Attorney Montes if yot in the city's east and west, conform to that; Subseque general plan needed to be April. Those modifications consistencies issues go a~ should bring things into co everything is now consiste Principal Planner f zoning code about City can have the moratorium for. ium can last for a maximum of two Then you have the right to extend cond extension and staff has year but because you are allowed to )en, if it gets delayed, if it's e don't run out of time. started to get this done. The we got that pretty hashed out; the general plan was amended to include areas of mixed used up and down ;ide corridors, that was passed. The zoning code was never amended to at it was the decision of this council that that needed to be revisited, the ~d, and that the general plan would be modified and you will see that in ude with them a zoning code amendment that will make some of the the new general plan amendment proposed and zoning code amendment ice if any development comes forward and can proceed because f may present on April or the zoning code may trail off a little bit. General Plan is targeted to be presented on or about April 13th and the Council Member Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to introduce Ordinance No. 888. 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 16 of 28 9. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes February 6, 2010 - Regular Meeting B. Claims and Demands 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 - Authorization to Solicit Bids As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-10 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council approved a program titled "Del Mar Avenue Resurfacing", which consists of asphalt concrete overlay, sidewalk repairs, traffic striping, signage installation, curb ramps construction, traffic signal upgrades, street trees installation, and appurtenances. The limits of this project are from Garvey Avenue to Hellman Avenue. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids to complete the improvement project. D. Award of Contract for Lead Based Paint and Asbestos Testing and Risk Assessment Services The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations require that lead based paint and, in some instances, asbestos testing, assessment, and clearances be completed on all Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Programs and Down Payment Assistance Loan Programs funded through either the Community Development Grant (CDBG) Program or HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program. Over the past three (3) years, the City has contracted with Barr & Clark for this service. As part of the 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 contract with Barr & Clark will expire on June 30, 2010. 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 testing, 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. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 17 of 28 Whitmore Street Resurfacing Project- Award of Contract As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-10 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council 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. Recommendation: That the City Council: 1. Approve plans and specifications 2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into Company for the construction of the Wh of $220,066; and 3. Establish an amount of up potential and additional un Council Member Ly made Calendar items with the E it project; th Sully Miller Contracting Resurfacing Project in the amount as contingencies to cover the cost of any Lion work. resulted to approve Consent Nutrition Meals Provider hree (3) years, the City has contracted with Morrison Management (MMS) to provide meals for the Senior Nutrition Program. The Senior am's mission is to provide high quality, cost efficient, nutritious meals to promote the role of nutrition in preventative health and long term care. As part of the 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. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 18 of 28 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. 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 Tern 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 currently $1,25 for reside Mayor Clark stated that if someone can't pay the City does not turn them away. Council Member Low stated that the contract expired June 30, 2009. Council Member Taylor stated wasn't worded properly and the dates needed correction. Council Member Low asked if the contract was Mrs. Ramirez explained the the city is required to go out Council Member Low Mrs. Rarr three that Council services Ly made a ant with Mi No: Absent: year to year with a maximum of three years and after three years that they were the only company that submitted a proposal. ,iders out there that provide this service; She found a total of and two of them did not respond to the proposal. by Council Member Low, to approve the professional it Services, Inc. Vote resulted in: Low, Ly, Taylor Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 19 of 28 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 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 General Fund balance in the amount of $55,342.14 (equal to funds received for property insurance claims due to 2008 flooding incident); and 3. Determine whether to appropriate additional funds from the undesignated General Fund balance (up to $28,157.86) to complete all proposed exterior and seismic improvements. Director of Parks and Recreation City Manager Allred explained that if Council did approve the recommendation it would be necessary to come back with a budget amendment at a future meeting to take the $28,157.86 from the general reserve balance. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that $55,000 of those reserves is insurance money for that. Council Member Ly stated he was very supportive of the Dinsmoor Heritage House and he just wanted to make sure everyone knew what the city was doing. Julie Gentry - stated that when she was here previously she gave council a set pictures and new additional pictures of the balcony show how fast the wood deteriorated. Ms. Gentry reiterated that she wants to preserve the Dinsmoor Heritage House and preserve it and have activities; gave a short history of the house, thanked council and staff for their support. Council Member Sandra Armenta made a motion, seconded by Council Member Steven Ly, to approve the appropriation of funds 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. 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 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 requires 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 risk of losing invested principal. Staff continues to review the Policy for ongoing compliance with Government Code Section 53601 and recommends changing the investment term for certificates of deposit (CD) from 180 days to a maximum of five years as well as allowing investments in callable, step-up rate government-sponsored enterprises (agencies). Recommendation: That the City Council approve the attached modified Investment Policy for the remainder of the 2009-10 fiscal year. Mayor Pro Taylor asked that this item be deferred for some more information; in their report he asked for a current listing of the deposits and which ones want to be changed. Mr. Taylor stated that he didn't know where the dollars were coming from and where they are going from. Mr. Taylor reiterated that he wanted to know how much is being moved out and how much is being moved where. We are approving a policy and we don't know how many millions of dollars are being shifted out and what's the interest rate going to be, the policy or 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 rate has continually declined. If we can invest our money in still very safe instruments like CD's and move agency funds we can still be just as safe like we are in LAIF and earn a higher yield. Also, explained that at this moment we still have to see what is available in the market; it might be a CD form Bank of Fargo or some other banks. These things come and go in the market and just like agency available and Mayor Pro Tem Taylorstated 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. America or Wells bonds they come if it's what you are looking for, you buy them. City Manager Allred stated staff can provide council with how much the city has in LAIF and a current snap shot where the money is now. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 21 of 28 Council Member Low asked if the city is Finance Director Brisco explained the current policy is conservative because of the market, now its changed 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. 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 15-year strategy for meeting residents' ongoing recreational needs. One important element of the Master Plan is a long- range Capital Improvement Projects plan. At its February 23, 2010 meeting, City Cour Projects (CIP) list for the Master Plan. City ( those projects deemed of concern to patron list of proposed projects, reflecting those rep Council review and prioritization. Council's the Master Plan as only chapters on capital unfinished. Recommendation: That the 1 improvements projects list for Master Plan. Director of Parks and Mayor Pro Tem $19 million in firE and shifted to a proposed Capital Improvements emended that priority be given to cularly, playgrounds. A preliminary ns, is respectfully submitted for City e CIP list will facilitate completion of funding considerations remain a prioritized preliminary capital Recreation, and General Facilities the staff report rity number 1,2,4,6,8,10, 12, 13 and its roughly iention the City has five million left in the available. City Manager Allred replied that the redevelop agency bond proceeds the city has $5.4 million now that we have access to; and the city has the capacity to generate $7 million in redevelopment agency bond proceeds if we were able to do the bond issuance. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked for clarification because when the council decided to buy a property the Redevelopment Agency didn't have the $4.4 million; we were going to borrow money form the city and some how staff found $4 million. 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 Tem 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 Page 22 of 28 Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth explained if the Pham parcel would have been 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 used to acquire the parcel; it could only be used 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 inc rement money that was just in the accounts. There is bond proceeds money that must be used for capital pro jects and the agency has $5.4 million available on bond proceeds money for capital projects; and the ability to generate another $7 million. We have projects that show the needs of $19 million in phase 1; and we' re $12 million short, it won't pay for the whole thing. That's why we are preparing a master plan and part of th e master plan work program that the council already paid for is to have Willdan Financial as part of this MIG contract for the master plan, they will provide how we can generate the short fall. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that all the time this was being planned; one critical statement was that it had to be able to be financed. That was the priority before we did any of these projects. Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scots merely strategy in taking a look at the city's public it community, we've identified on the bases of evaluat categorized them based on priorities 1, 2 and 3 bass that there are needs within the community to improv However, the master plan approval of prioritized cal: action whatsoever. It simply identifies that there is a those needs over the next 15 years if that is fiscally City Manager some of thesE stated as we presented the important thing is that one is )ossible. mine that if we have funds to accommodate to achieve frastructure. Identify the needs expressed by the on existing facilities and their conditions. We then ~d on their present conditions. All this does, is identify facilities, to expand facilities and replace facilities. ital improvement project list does not commit the city any need and the desire of the community at large to meet Council Member Low replied that approving this list does not mean that for sure Council is going to do all this or right now by approving the list or mean we are going to spend any money. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor reiterated that the city got it self into a bind when they voted to accept the plan with Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 23 of 28 the priorities at that time; that's why they are back changing these priorities. At the last city council meeting we had a discussion about kids getting hurt and falling off equipment, and that's why we went back to fix these things first and before you 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 established by this council. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that's why we are in a revised 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 is De La Rosa, who is the bonding company. 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. 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 the money that is going to be loaned City Manager Allred stated staff received proposals from multiple companies and we'll provide all the information to the council when we bring it forward. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated then we are not gi to why that company was picked and we don't kn Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth stated that council and in that proposal it will include rates cl all the different companies that motion tonight. I need to get clarified as ier rates are. ring back on April 13th a formal proposal to the other information and scenarios we received from Mayor Clark expressed concern and had a correction on the issue of constructing a skate park; we have not even looked at the liability issues. It might work it might not so I am not sure I rather move it to priority 3; so that some of the things that are safety issues and are more pressing needs are already a priority 2. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor agreed, I don't want to be apart of it because of the liability. Nobody mentions how these kids get hurt, it always goes to the deep pockets of the public tax payer. That's my only objection; I like the skating, I know three people that have used skateboards and all had broken bones. I am concern with the safety and liability. Council Member Ly made 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 Mayor Margaret Clark made a motion, seconded by Council Council Member Ly in seeking a position on the San Gabriel resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 'A B. CITY COUNCIL Appointment of Mayor of Mayor Pro A swearir conducte RosemeE City Clerk Molleda asked Council Member Ly stat( stated that Mr. Taylor has Council Member Armem Council Member Steven Gary Taylor as Mayor of Governance Council. Armenta to support overnance Council. Vote Mayor Presiding the newly appointed Mayor and Mayor Pro Tern will be it scheduled meeting on March 23, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. in the the next Mayor of the City of Rosemead. linate Gary Taylor as Mayor for the City of Rosemead. Also to serve the City honorably for many years. would like to second that nomination. nade a motion, seconded Council Member Sandra Armenta to appoint Mr. 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 has served on the Council for three years. Mayor Taylor stated that he's had several disagreements with Council Member Low. If you recall when we tried to get a 64 page report about what happened with Mr. Nunez, we could not get that report. It was concealed for a year and Council Member Low was the third vote that would not approve to allow the rest of the council get that report. Mr. Taylor reiterated that he did not go into the closed sessions because council was not getting the report from the investigator, Also, stated that the employees suffered and cost the city $400,000 in the lawsuit. Council Member Low stated for the record Mr. Taylor was entitled to attend the closed sessions and that there was information given in closed session when Mr, Taylor did not attend. Also, stated that Council Member Clark was at all the closed sessions and knew what was going on. Mayor Taylor stated that Mr. Nunez was not entitled to closed session under State Law because he was an elected official (Government Code Section 54950-54963). Council Member Clark reiterated that maybe they could not get the notes from the investigator and recalled that the City Attorney stated they could not get the notes. Mayor Taylor she was the 31 regards to the minutes. Mr. Taylor added that s for discussion that the council had. Council Member Low stated that she recalled asking those minutes in tape and broadcast because we were going back and forth about what should be in the minutes. Mr. Low stated that it takes staff more time when minutes are on verbatim and at that time things were very political. Mayor Taylor 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 Low reiterated that the tapes record word by word of the minutes. Mayor Taylor stated that the City Clerk verifies what was said at the meeting and no one gets to 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, Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 26 of 28 Mayor Taylor stated that the City Clerk did not do anything wrong and she only summarized the minutes but sometimes they needed to be changed because the importance of the discussion was not in the minutes. Mr. Taylor also asked Mrs. Low why she voted to spend $40,000 to send him to the grand jury for not participating at those closed sessions. Council Member Low stated that she agreed to send him to the grand jury 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 Armenta asked who paid for the attorney in the case. 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. Mayor Taylor replied that Joint Powers Authority Insurance paid, which is taxpayers money. Mayor Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to appoint Mr. Steven Ly as Mayor Pro Tern of the City of Rosemead. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Low, Ly, No: Clark Abstain: None Absent: None 12. COMMENTS Mayor Pro Tem Ly asked for a r Second, encourages all to fill out n vacant land on Hellman and Stallo Avenue. data will help the city improve and provide services. Council Member Low stated she 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 Mayor Taylor asked City Manager Allred if he was aware of the complaints Ms. Low was talking about. City Manager Allred stated that he was aware about the building inspectors; we are meeting with the department head to resolve the issue. I have not heard about any code enforcement problems. Mayor Taylor stated that council should 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 Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 27 of 28 Taylor ,qqobhl TY COUNCIL _ 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 informed about complaints about staff. 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 9:15 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 Commission 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. Gary Taylor, Mayor ATTEST: Gloria Molleda City Clerk Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2010 Page 28 of 28