Loading...
CC - Item 8A - Minutes 4-13-10Minutes of the JOINT CITY.000NCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING April 13, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor Taylor at 6:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner/Council Member Sandra Armenta INVOCATION: Commissioner/Council Member Margaret Clark PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Taylor, Mayor Pro TemNice-Chairman Ly, Council Member/Commissioner Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Clark, and Council Member/Commissioner Low. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, Public Affairs Manager Flores, Deputy Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None 2. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 -13 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -13 for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount of $59,957.93 demand nos. 10081 through 10082 and 11253 through 11259. Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Low, 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 April 13, 2010 Page 1 of 31 ITEM NO. 3. MATTERS FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & STAFF A. Tax Increment Bonds for Public Infrastructure Projects - Formation of Team Over the past six months the City Council/CDC have been developing Rosemead's Strategic Plan and the Facilities Master Plan. Ongoing efforts are being made to identify financial resources to fund many of the projects that have been identified. The potential funding sources include special revenue funds, grants, stimulus funds, public-private partnerships, reserves and bonds. In terms of bonds, staff has focused on tax increment bonds that could be issued by the Community Development Commission. Such bonds would be repaid through existing property tax increment revenues and would not increase the tax burden on any residents or businesses in the community. As provided to the Commission a few weeks ago, the CDC currently has over $5 million in available bond proceeds related to the 2006 tax increment bond issue. Since the 2006 Bonds are tax-exempt, the proceeds may only be spent on public infrastructure projects and may not be used for facility maintenance or economic development purposes. Proposals have been received from various underwriters and fiscal consultants to evaluate the feasibility of issuing additional tax-exempt bonds to generate additional funds for the completion of the projects identified in the Strategic and Facility Master Plans. Based upon these discussions, it was initially contemplated that the CDC could generate an additional $7 million in bond proceeds to complete certain public infrastructure construction projects. As our discussions with the proposed underwriter have progressed, it has now been determined that the CDC could safely issue bonds with net proceeds of approximately $9.6 million while still leaving sufficient funds available for regular operations of the Commission. Recommendation: That the Community Development Commission take the following actions: 1. Authorize staff to work with the underwriting firm of De La Rosa and Company to develop the necessary documents and financial analysis to issue tax-exempt bonds from the CDC in the amount of $10.76 million resulting in net proceeds of approximately $9.6 million. 2. Authorize staff to work with Urban Futures Incorporated to prepare the fiscal analysis for the potential bond issuance. 3. Authorize Orrick, Herrington & S_ utcliff LLP to serve as bond counsel for the potential bond issuance. Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth noted that Tax Increment Bonds are paid through tax increment revenue. Proceeds fund public infrastructure within or adjacent to project area and cannot be used for programming. Staff solicited proposals to determine bond debt. De La Rosa, a leader in industry for tax allocation funding, has received high quality ratings for agencies they represent. Rosemead currently has a BBB+ rating and this company will allow an opportunity to upgrade to an "A" rating. This will help with interest rates. Their proposal has the lowest fee schedule. He also noted the need for a fiscal consultant to review the existing property tax base. Urban Futures has low fees and an excellent track record. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 2 of 31 Lastly, he introduced members of Crick Bothwell, bond counsel, who handled the 2006 bond proceeds and will continue to do excellent work for the City. Mr. Hawkesworth requested that the Commission provide direction regarding size of the financing; previously $7 million was given as a feasible amount without having an adverse impact on existing activities. Staff now thinks $9.6 million can be issued while still preserving existing programming obligations. Chair Taylor- asked what the figure was. Mr. Hawkesworth - We were looking at net proceeds of-$9.6 million. Vice Chair Ly - In the staff report, one of the goals was to get bonding to set aside money for capital improvement, but what about blight? How much are we setting aside to eliminate blight in project areas one and two? Mr. Hawkesworth - These infrastructure projects will help to eliminate blight Vice Chair Ly- These will be public projects, but what about rehabilitation programs so businesses within project areas can improve their facades? How much go toward those programs? Mr. Hawkesworth - We will still offer normal operations, but project area one tax increment fund will cease in 2013, and we will only have funds for the debt service payment. We will have funding through 2013, but we will lose those funds through the county and it will have an adverse affect on Commission's ability to offer programming. Vice Chair Ly- Garvey still needs a lot of work, and we haven't fully addressed the "less than quality" development. I want to make sure there is enough money left since project area one still needs some uplifting. Mr. Hawkesworth - Depending on what the Commission wants to do about eliminating blight, it would be up to the Commission to determine how to make improvements. The existing bonds are tax exempt, so you can't partner with a developer on project that utilizes the existing bonds. Commissioner Low - The focus tonight is to go forward with issuing the bonds. How we spend the money will be decided later. Executive Director Allred - Tonight's action is to form the team, the bond issue would be decided at a later date. Commissioner Low- It's important to issue bonds and to make sure we continue to have tax increment to continue to improve the project areas. If we don't do this, we have less money and we don't have a chance to improve the project areas or the Garvey corridor. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 3 of 31 Vice Chair Ly - We want to make sure that whatever we end up bonding that we are not taxing the agency or limiting the amount of money we would normally be using to improve project area one. The state is always trying to take our money, and we hope the initiative will help with that. Is the state able to take bond earnings? Agency Counsel Montes - There has been no attempt by the state to take the bond proceeds. They are governed by a set of laws and it would be a new effort on their part. One of the defenses against them is that they are already committed to pay bond issues. It gives us an extra level of protection. Commissioner Armenta - This is a great opportunity to generate money and improve project area one without increasing taxes. Chair Taylor- Question on page 4 of the staff report. This will be one of the fastest bond issues in the City's history and wondered what happens when they issue the new tax roll? What's the potential down side? Mr. Hawkesworth - One of the points of having the fiscal consultant is that they do the analysis on the tax roll, including impacts, appeals on the tax roll, in order to know what the property taxes are going to do. Eric Scriber, fiscal consultant, has completed an analysis of tax rolls, to the extent that the City has new information; they would have to redo their work. Eric Scriber - The City receives that data in August, and in the event you get close to the "gray" zone, it might have a slight impact on marketing, the sophisticated buyers know it. We are in that window where we have the data, where interest rates are, the federal and local economy are in place for a successful transaction, to the extent you have new data, you will have to reset the data and integrate the new process: Part of the action is to get a handle on the level of funding; the team has run a lot of different scenarios. Staff's direction up to this point is to leave sufficient cash flow after debt payment to carry on the programs. The Commission will need to approve a "not to exceed amount" which will come back to the Commission on June 8th Commissioner/Council Member Low made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Ly, to approve staff's recommended action. 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 April 13, 2010 Page 4 of 31 4. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR & COMMISSIONERS A. The Glendon Hotel Financial Statements At the March 9, 2010, Commission meeting, additional information was requested related to the purchase price of the Glendon Hotel, the monthly financial statements for the hotel operation, and remodel expenses of the hotel. On July 2, 2008, the Commission acquired the Glendon Hotel (formerly known as the Rosemead Inn) located at 8832 Glendon Way for $4,336,243.84 using non-restricted tax increment dollars to fund the transaction. The original purchase price was $4,407,616.15. However, during the final walk-thru of the property it was discovered that numerous furnishings that were to be included in the sale were missing. As a result, the Commission received at $71,372.31 credit. Immediately following the purchase of the property, proposals were solicited from companies specializing in hotel operations to continue the operation of the hotel. The Commission selected Rosemead Inn Hotel Partners, LLC as the operator for the hotel. An independent auditor has been engaged to document the expenditure of the $100,000 provided by the Commission to Rosemead Inn Hotel Partners for renovations Recommendation: That the Community Development Commission provide staff with additional direction. Economic Development Administrator Michelle Ramirez and Finance Director Steve Brisco noted the purchase price, monthly financial statements and remodel expenses expended on the hotel. In reviewing the monthly financial statements of Rosemead Inn Hotel Partners, it was determined the Commission is owed about $4,000 from June through September, 2009. What the operator stated in the monthlies was incorrect. They have made little to no profit, basically they are working at an overall loss. The operators have been asked to provide monthlies that were correct Mr. Brisco- The Commission has received each month separately and combined them into one page to compare them side by side. There was no attempt to change any data. Mrs. Ramirez - The operator was double counting expenses. Mr. Brisco- We added the budget column and after subsequent approval by Council, I found irregularities in the received statements. Mr. Brisco - Yes, page 1 of 3, for April and May, they couldn't find the revenues, so it shows a loss. It was easy to extrapolate the TOT. The operating agreement prohibits him from taking a management fee out, and that is shown. Commissioner Armenta - It should be noted that this agreement was made by the previous majority on the Council. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 5 of 31 Mr. Brisco - One of the requirements of the operating agreement was to provide the Commission with monthly statements, showing the comparison between monthly and budget amounts. Reconciled bank statements were not provided so there is no way of verifying information. These are most of the important findings. We are going to write a letter to the operator and tell him of findings and that we think there is more income that he owes the City. He underpaid the TOT tax based on the numbers he gave the City. We contracted with the City auditor and compared documents - the invoices did not reconcile with the list. The auditors will trace it back to a bank statement and will perform their due diligence to report back to the Council. We are trying to find out if he did actually $100,000 we advanced him and did he do what he was supposed to do. Executive Director Allred - We currently have an RFP process underway, the deadline is April 15th, to find reputable hotel operators to take over this operation. Commissioner Low- Question for the Agency Counsel, the City has done its best to reconcile this information, if it doesn't look like they can come up with receipt, is there any legal action we can take to have operator reimburse the City? Agency Counsel Montes - He is required to keep reports, you have potential ground for termination and breach of contract, if you can prove it, you can sue for those. To be determined would be how much of the 100,000 are you out? You have to work with auditors - he has an obligation to the contract, you can seek the reimbursement, but you have to know what you are dealing with. At a certain point, you may wish to terminate contract, put operator on notice, and let them know they have a limited period of time to cure the deficiencies. Commissioner Low- We need to continue the audit and see how much money the City lost as of today Mrs. Ramirez - Without cause, the Commission can terminate the agreement with 30 days notice. Executive Director Allred - We want to keep hotel open and not vacant which will cause another problem. We can replace the operator when we receive the new proposals. Commissioner Low-Agreed we need to find another hotel operator. Vice Chair Ly-That's what we are trying to do now with the RFP process. What other hotels has the current operator managed? Chair Taylor- The operator stated they had 2-3 hotels they are operating and 4-5 in development. Mr. Brisco - The company name is Cross Meridian. Vice Chair Ly - On the original RFP there were two names for the company. Mrs. Ramirez - We had two names that responded.' Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 6 of 31 Chair Taylor- This and one other.... Vice Chair Ly- What was the rationale forgoing with the other operator? Commissioner Low -They were willing to give the City a little more than what the other proposal gave Mrs. Ramirez - They guaranteed $6,000 per month Vice Chair Ly- This was in the minutes that were approved. Staff and Council thought it was $6,000 guaranteed - there was an omission made on some level, if the original approval was to give the City $6,000 in revenue. I was not on the council and Mr. Taylor and Ms. Clark didn't vote for this contract. Everyone thought it was $6,000 a month; we should have gone with the other company. Commissioner Armenta - Plus we wouldn't have given them $100,000 Commissioner Low - The property owner also gave us credit to fix it up Chair Taylor- Somebody took it out of the hotel after we had purchased it, something in this current statement from the owner, saying $70,000 for the credit and $30,000 for expenses. This is another "fly in the ointment," he thinks he was entitled to the $70,000. Commissioner Clark- He thought the City only came up with the $30,000, but overall the City did hand over $100,000 and the purpose was to fix up the hotel. The hotel was in such bad shape, the previous owner gave the purchaser some credit. Vice Chair Ly- No doubt it was blighted when we took it over. We committed to an albatross, and now the operator is putting receipts in a shoebox, this is worse than the state's accounting!. It is kind of dumbfounding we put ourselves in this mess, we have just scratched the surface on what the operator is doing. We don't have all the information and I am at a loss as to what else we can do, this is the taxpayer's money. Chair Taylor- We need to go ahead with the audit, one thing I would like to get clarified, in the weekly newsletter, the letter inferred it was at the hotel, but the lady was stabbed in the apartments across the street and fled across the street and died, I would like to get the sheriffs report on that. Vice Chair Ly made a motion that staff continue with auditing of the financial statements and give a report in two weeks. Executive Director Allred - The audit is only on the list of expenditures, not on financial statements. We could do that, it will be a report telling you what the independent auditors found, also the same with the profit and loss statements. Mrs. Ramirez - We need longer than next meeting as the auditors are having a hard time making an appointment. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 7 of 31 Executive Director Allred - As soon as possible. Vice Chair Ly- A copy of the report that was given to us a month ago should be sent it to the District Attorney's Public Integrity Office. Commissioner Clark- I don't think it is a good idea until we know what we are going to do. Chair Taylor- D.A. is going to come back asking, "Where is the information?" Vice Chair Ly - At some point, the final report should be send to D.A., when we have done as much research as possible. They have been big on cracking down on everyone; however I will withdraw that part of my motion now. Commissioner Armenta - I agree with Vice Chair Ly, there are too many holes in the stories, who puts their receipts in a shoebox? Things are not flying, after we get the audit, I do want to see this going to the Grand Jury. Chair Taylor- I would agree with you. Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Ly made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Low, to approve staff's recommended action. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The Commission/City Council recessed to Closed Session to discuss the following two matters at 6:41 p.m. 5. CLOSED SESSION A. Public Employee Performance Evaluation Government Code Section 54957; Council Appointed Officials (City Manager and City Clerk) B. Conference with Legal Counsel 1) Government Code 54956.9(c): Anticipation Litigation (2 matters) City Council Meeting Agenda The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Taylor at 7:05 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 April 13, 2010 Page 8 of 31 FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly INVOCATION: Council Member Sandra Armenta PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Taylor, Mayor Pro TemNice-Ch airman Ly, Council Member/Commissioner Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Clark, and Council Member/Commissioner Low. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, Public Affairs Manager Flores, Deputy Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda No reportable action to report out of Closed Session. 6. PRESENTATIONS Proclamation of Recognition for Deputy Sheriff David Lopez The Council presented Deputy Sheriff David Lopez with a Proclamation of Recognition and commented on the Deputy's accomplishments. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Sharon Esquivel - spoke about the beauty of Sally Tanner Park and thanked Council for announcing the City meetings in the local newspaper. Expressed concerns about the length of time yards sales signs are remaining in the community. Oscar Magana - Spoke about the Council's and staff support for Rosemead Youth Association League. Confirmed their new board members and current activities (purchase of uniforms and treasury information). Commented on the beauty of the park and expressed some small concerns about the status of the park restrooms. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Inquired as to the date and time of the Closing Ceremonies. Mr. Magana - Affirmed it is June 5th, 9:00am, at Rosemead Park. Marissa Castro-Salvati - Representing Southern California Edison, remarked on some of the highlights of Edison activities that are benefitting the City of Rosemead including: Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project, the Smart Connect (smart meters) deployment, plug-in electric vehicles and electric transmission site, the Care program (20% discount), energy management assistance, rebate programs, levels of payment plans, "clocking" the number of volunteer hours, and employee contributions. She mentioned the Rule 20a Undergrounding Project which should come back to the Council within the next few meetings and the "Direct Install" Programs. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 9 of 31 Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Inquired about the direction on open and green space in negotiations with Edison and noted his frustration in not being able to connect with Edison on this issue. He noted that the City is "under" its numbers for green space and that Edison had corresponded with the City about turning part of Klingerman Park into a parking lot. He expressed support for turning Hellman/Stallo into green space. He expressed his frustration that it took 7 requests for meetings to get someone from Edison staff to come to the Council meetings. Ms. Castro-Salvati - Expressed her difference of opinion with Mayor Pro Tern Ly. She noted Edison was waiting for a proposal from the City to move forward with beautifying and using the park. She also commented that there may be risk if Edison allowed the City to install landscape and then they needed to move it for their own purposes. Noted that Edison staff still needs to evaluate as to whether that location will be used as a "laydown yard" (a place to store equipment while construction is being undertaken). Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Inquired as to whether a letter was sent regarding the Hellman matter. Parks and Recreation Director Montgomery-Scoff - The City has been working with Edison within two years in regards to open space. Mayor Taylor- Noted that Mr. Ly had been trying.to find out what is going on over the past six months. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Noted a recent letter that appeared in the newsletter. Mayor Taylor- Sounds like Edison was trying to work with us and would like to know if staff has been, informing the Council. Mr. Montgomery-Scoff - Sat down and met with Marissa and the facility manager regarding the Klingerman issue and parking lot. We spoke about "trading" the Klingerman parcel for the one at Walnut Grove and Rush. He noted that concept plans were given to Edison, noting that the Tehachapi project was going to have an effect. Mayor Taylor- When were the two concept plans submitted? Mr. Montgomery-Scott- The second time was at meeting in December Mayor Taylor- When was the first time? Mr. Montgomery-Scott- Several months before that. The remaining issues are what actually can be developed on the Edison corridor and that Edison has noted that something of permanence cannot be constructed, however grass, picnic tables, and other items of a non-permanent nature are allowable. Mayor Taylor- The laydown yards and the Tehachapi line take priority over developing the park space, however, the Council is well aware that Edison serves a large regional area. He admires Mr. Ly for what he is trying to do. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 10 of 31 Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Understands what Edison needs to do, however, he is concerned that sometimes he feels that the City is treating the City as the "City of Edison" rather than being a great corporate partner. He noted that Edison's headquarters are in the City of Rosemead. Mayor Taylor- Disagrees with Mr. Ly's opinion and noted the number of volunteer hours and money that has been contributed to the City of Rosemead by Edison. He requested a copy of the document that Ms. Castro-Salvati said was in the materials prepared for the meeting. Council Member Armenta - It is there, but it is not detailed Mayor Taylor- He agrees with Mr. Ly trying to move forward with this, however, he does not agree with the statement that Edison is not a good corporate partner. They have been in the City since 1950 and would like to see more emphasis on what will happen on San Gabriel Blvd. Is that part of Tehachapi Line? Ms. Castro-Salvati -Affirmed that the process in the City of Rosemead is to add on existing towers and it should be a more simplified process. Noted Edison allowed the City to use Edison's property for the "Yard Sale" event and have been working closely with businesses. Hopes that Council understands that there are complexities to the issues at hand and that the "park licenses" cannot be done overnight. She noted that the transmission staff need to be involved in such projects. David and she have been talking about doing a project on Walnut Grove and Rush. Mayor Taylor- When will that project be done? Ms. Castro-Salvati - It can done pretty quickly because there are no wires. Mayor Pro Tom Ly - I have no problem in being the lone voice, but would like on the next agenda there to be an item about green space and Edison's property in the City of Rosemead. Mayor Taylor- There is such as thing as political intimidation. Ms. Castro-Salvati - This would allow a third place, there were only 2 we included in the "RMC," staff asked if they could include the third parcel. Mayor Taylor- Is that feasible? Ms. Castro-Salvati - I don't know where we are at on that project. Mayor Taylor- Would like to "nail that down" would like to understand the practicality of the property. There appear to be many inoperative vehicles. Council Member Low - Recommended if Marissa could look into that matter. Inquired as to whether she is working with City on underground transmissions? Is this the same issue I was "nagging" you about? Ms. Castro-Salvati - This would be for undergrounding of distribution. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 11 of 31 Council Member Armenta- Expressed concerns regarding "laydown yards" many of which are in residential neighborhoods. How are they going to feel about poles laying down in the street? Ms. Castro-Salvati - Noted that the poles would not be stored at these facilities. Council Member Armenta - Concerned that materials (poles, tractors) that would be used for Tehahapi project are going to interfere with residents. What is Edison going to do to beautify during the months the yards are being used. Is there something Edison can do to beautify? Ms. Castro-Salvati - This could take a month or so, hopefully not that long. We currently don't have construction schedule. Council Member Armenta - Expressed concerns that residents are going to see these materials in Edison's right of way. Ms. Castro-Salvati - I will make an inquiry as to the status of the laydown yards. Juan Nunez - mentioned that he has a petition with the State General to inquire as to whether the President is actually a United States citizen. He also spoke about NAFTA. Mayor Taylor- The superhighway, up through U.S.? Mr. Nui)ez - Expressed concerns that this is going to take jobs away from the United States. Mentioned "ships" would be unloading in Mexico, south of Mexico City, and the goods would be traveling up to the United States and Canada. He noted this may put, a lot of people at the docks out of work, because there is cheaper labor in Mexico. Mayor Taylor- Noted that the speaker had been speaking about this matter for many Council meetings and noted that the City does not have much control of this matter. Mr. Nunez - He quoted from an article in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune about the matters occurring in Greece. Mayor Taylor- Noted we took TARP money and assisted other countries from going into bankruptcy. He doesn't necessarily condone this. 8. PUBLIC HEARING A. General Plan Amendment 09.01 The City of Rosemead proposes to amend the General Plan Land Use Element to designate four key areas (nodes) in the City for mixed-use development with limitations on both residential density and building height. The current General Plan allows for mixed-use development along all major commercial corridors in the City. If the proposed amendment is Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 12 of 31 approved by the City Council, the majority of all existing portions of the City that are currently designated for mixed-use development would change to their prior land use designation as stated in the 1987 General Plan. The General Plan Amendment also proposes to create a new High Intensity Commercial land use designation over two commercial areas of the City. The proposed High Intensity Commercial land use designation would affect the following properties: 3900 and 3910 Walnut Grove Avenue, 8614 Valley Boulevard, 7867, 7907, 7913, 7919, 7931, and 8001 Garvey Avenue, 3011 and 3033 Denton Avenue, and 7938 Virginia Street. Lastly, the Circulation Element will be modified to address the proposed land use changes, and the Resource Management and Public Safety Elements will be revised to comply with Assembly Bill 162. On March 1, 2010, the Planning Commission was presented with this matter and adopted Resolution No. 10-03 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 09-01 to the City Council. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2010-23 (Exhibit E), considering an Addendum (Exhibit F) to the Certified Final Environmental Impact Report and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Rosemead General Plan, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and approving General Plan Amendment 09-01. City Manager Allred introduced the Community Development Director and the consultant who make a brief presentation on the proposed General Plan amendment. Principal Planner Sheri Bermejo - The City plans on updating the Land Use Element of the General Plan and outlines the intent of the amendment. She noted it would be in compliance with AB 162. An overview was provided on the updates proposed for the Land Use Element, circulation element, the resource management, and the public safety element. She noted the Land Use Element is used to provide a vision for the Council to make long-term land use decisions. She provided a historical perspective of various updates and historical actions taken by the City Council. She mentioned the current update would primarily focus on mixed-used and high-intensity commercial use sites. Four nodes are proposed: 1) on Ivar and Muscatel, 2) Valley Blvd., 3) Garvey Avenue will have two nodes. Two modes are proposed: high-density and medium density. The subcommittee selected these locations: 1) east side would provide enhancement to the City's "entrances" and 2) the other nodes would provide a highlight for the downtown area and away from single family neighborhoods. These would also meet the regional "housing needs assessment." She spoke about the high-intensity land use designation which would expand job development and tax revenues. She noted that there needed to be at least one high use retail outlet or overnight accommodation. She mentioned that there will be an increase in proposed housing units offered, while there will be a reduction in retail development. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 13 of 31 The consultant noted the circulation element was improved by virtue of the technical analysis that was done in concert with the proposed land use element. The traffic analysis was "rerun" and found that there would be less traffic impacts than under the current land use plan. She noted that compliance with AB 162 was required. It requires that the City needs to consider flooding and groundwater recharge issues in the land use plan. It applies to all cities throughout the State. She affirmed that the public safety element also needs compliance with AB 162 in terms of coordination with other agencies that have input in how the City responds to flooding and discharge. City Attorney Joseph Montes - Affirmed that staff reviewed the environmental considerations of the new land use plan and mentioned that there are areas in the City which still have environmental impacts, however, they are the same areas that had environmental impacts during the last update (2008). Noted that the Resolution is Exhibit E, and on page 11, there are objectives with a cross-reference. The final printing of the amendment will have the final page numbers inserted prior to the Mayor's signature. Mayor Taylor opened the public hearing and public comments at 8:10 p.m. Steven Wells - Requested to amend the Resolution, in regard to a property that would revert back to the old commercial zoning, 8828 Glendon Way. This is the vacant lot next to the hotel. His family owns the property and noted that the staff, at the time of purchase, believed it was not appropriate for commercial development. He noted that staff said that a "multi-family" use would be more appropriate than a commercial use to keep in "character" with the surrounding area. Mayor Taylor- Would it be appropriate to change,it to low density? Mr. Wells- Would like it to be the same as "Brown" next door, which would be a buffer. Mayor Taylor- If it is brown or yellow, it is 0 - 30 units, it is still the same density. Mr. Wells - Would prefer the designation as "high-density" residential, because it would be a good "buffer" between the commercial into the residential area, and make the property "developable." Mayor Taylor- Confused about what the difference between yellow or brown. Is it still 0 - 30 units? Mrs. Bermejo - Clarified that yellow would only allow for 0 - 6 units, and the brown color would be high- density is 0 - 30. Mayor Taylor- Why does it state yellow to 0 - 30? Mrs. Bermejo - That was the previous density. It is not currently high-density residential. It was a mixed-use allow residential with 0 - 30 units. Today it is proposed as commercial. Council Member Clark-Why is it yellow? Mayor Taylor- It is very microscopic. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 14 of 31 Mr. Wells - It would not be appropriate as a R-1 property, and would be better utilized as a high-density property as a "buffer." Plans have been previously submitted for a 15-unit property, however there was a moratorium at that time. Council Member Armenta - As the property owner, can you clean up the weeds on the property? Mr. Wells - He has people bidding on the property for the weed abatement. Council Member Clark- What is the zone right now? City Manager Allred -It is "professional office" with design overlay. We are eliminating "mixed use" on that property. We currently have an RFP for the hotel property use which would like to see potential for that land to be joined with the Glendon Hotel property. That is why it is zoned "commercial." Director of Community Development Stan Wong - Wants to keep it "commercial" and that there are other options, such as restaurant, and other uses that are ancillary to the hotel which would increase-the property's land use value. Council Member Clark- Inquired if they wanted to build apartments, could they ask for a General Plan amendment to fit their project? Would tonight's action preclude them from building apartments? Mr. Wells - It would "reset" the clock back to many years ago. Council Member Clark- Do you have plans right now? Mayor Taylor- For what? Mr. Wells - For thirteen apartments. Mayor Taylor- Does this need to be considered now? Mr. Wells - Noted that they would like to reserve this as potential for property development. Mayor Taylor- This hotel project has been a "white elephant" City Attorney Montes - Complete public testimony and reserve any decision until all public speakers have been heard. Ho KY - Mr. Ho is the owner of a shopping plaza 8623-29 East Garvey. He supports mixed-use and hotel development and that we need high quality development in the City. Stephen Chan - GE Property Management and noted he was the broker for Reliable Lumber. He noted that the dream of the developer is to build a hotel on that previously purchased site. They are looking for a retail tenant on that property site and would like to establish financing for any "quality" hotel project similar to a San Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 15 of 31 Gabriel Hilton. In the meantime they are trying to find a 5 - 8 year tenant and eventually get a hotel development there. He spoke about the various potential tenants which may rent the property in the near or short-term and welcomed the Council's input. Mayor Taylor- Does Howard's appliances want to move from San Gabriel to Rosemead? Mr. Chan -Yes. Mayor Taylor- Does not see Howard's moving there for only 5 to 8 years, especially since you will be trying to build a hotel there in the future. Mr. Chan - What they have been asking is for 5 years, with two five-year options. Today, it is very rare for any landlord to sign a lease for 50 years or more. Right now we are searching for the best solution. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Does the San Gabriel Hilton contribute over $1 million in taxes to the City of San Gabriel. Mr. Chan - Yes, and the current "TOT" is 10%. Council Member Low - Encouraged Mr. Chan to work with Mr. Stan Wong Mr. Chan - Asked if a highest F.A.R. can be set to entice a hotel developer to come in and suggested giving them guidelines regarding how big a hotel they can build, since it is somewhat risky in today's economy. They want to get to a hotel development, but are trying to find a bridge between the current usage and a final hotel development and suggested that a higher F.A.R. may assist in that goal. Simon Lee - His firm has worked on several projects within the City and thanked the Council for their support of business development. Spoke on behalf of the new owner of the previous "auto auction site" at 8001 Garvey Avenue. They have been working hard to communicate with staff and have City involved in conceptual stage to final development for the benefit of the whole community. Introduced the project team for the development. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Read from a letter submitted by the developer. The argument the developer is making is that the City staff has not done due diligence of their full analysis of the proposed General Plan. Mr. Lee - Suggested that the speaker continue. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Requested input from the City Attorney regarding staff's due diligence. City Attorney Montes -All requirements have been met."and stated the "noticing" requirements which require the speaker to raise all issues during the public hearing, to preserve their future rights. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 16 of 31 Andie Adame - Land Use Consultant, Metado Investments LLC, and spoke about the potential of her client's site. The project is in the "pre-design" phase. The general plan amendment decreases the FAR, which will dramatically reduce the value of the land and its potential development ability. The project may not be able to be developed and the project team needs time to determine the best and highest use for the site. Recommended the FAR to be increased to 2, and that the moratorium will prohibit an "undesirable project." Requested that 1) the City exempt the auto-auction site and defer the land use change, or 2) move forward with an amendment and allow the FAR to be increased along with the approval of a specific plan. Council MemberArmenta - Inquired if the staff had contacted the property owner to let them know of the proposed update to the General Plan. Mr. Adame - Was not aware of that request, but would like one of their speakers to respond. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Asked if their proposed project would be like the one at Del Mar and Valley, which has a FAR of 2.0. This was also designated as mixed -used, and what you are asking of us was determined during the March 2009 election cycle. Jim Ries -Works with the Land Use Consultant firm, and was tasked to look at Planning documents to determine what should be done with the project site. The City documents all discuss "financial solvency" of the City, the Strategic Plan's focus is to create financial stability to meet the goals of the City, ensure the City's financial viability, and a vision for the project site. The team is concerned there is not enough evidence currently to validate this vision. Research shows that there are currently 100 vacant big box retail spaces in Southern California. Hotels are also finding it difficult to get occupancy right now. Their client's desire is to develop a project that has a stable revenue stream and to work with the City staff to create such a project. The key to success may be not to focus on projects that are susceptible to fluctuation but rather have a strong balance. The project site needs flexibility in its land use and FAR to encourage the most potential for the site. Kevin Ennis - Richards, Watson and Gershon, represents Metado Investments. Requested two potential alternative courses of action 1) exclude auto auction site from update to Land Use development, with the text and maps to show no change from the current designations or 2) direct staff to modify text to permit the FAR, which can be modified pursuant to an adopted specific plan. The second alternative would not automatically allow an alternate FAR, but allow the developer to prepare a proposal. The first alternative is their preference. Either option would allow the developer to bring a viable project to the City. City Manager - Is there a specific recommendation regarding language you would like to see? Mr. Ennis - In General Plan amendment, on page 212, which lists high-intensity usage. We would add that the FAR would be .385 or higher due to an adopted specific plan. Council Member Low- If General Plan is approved as proposed, and a project comes in that needs an amendment to the General Plan, something that would need a higher FAR, and we work with a developer, can we still do that project? Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 17 of 31 Mr. Ennis - We are not trying to avoid public hearing process Council Member Low- The General Plan reflects the desire of the community and as times change, the Council could possibly support an alternative plan in the future. City Attorney Montes - As a point of clarification he described the General Plan, which are "general" rules regarding land use. These get refined through the Zoning Code, which will be updated in a few months, and by the specific plan process, which are specific rules which apply for a specific piece of property. The City Council still has to hold a public hearing and the developer still needs to go through the administrative process. The City is only allowed to make four total amendments to the Land Use element each year. A specific plan is typically used for larger sites, which are unique in some way. Brian Lewin - First, noted that the (population) figure is going to be closer to 80,000 and that the proposed plan does not properly address the increasing density. The intent of the existing General Plan was to redirect some of the density in the community. Feels that the community wants good development and major retailers to come to the community. Negative messages may be going out to those retailers. Noted that retailers were not coming to Rosemead, with the exception of Target. The last General Plan sent a message that there was a different mentality in Rosemead and it seems like the proposed plan wants to go back to the "old mentality" that was not as business-friendly. Requested to add a line to 1-13 or 2-15, to the effect that the mixed-use nodes be expanded as development warrants. It would give the City flexibility in the future to expand uses if nodes were going well - would give less of a sense of a major policy "reversion" and more of a sense of better managing growth. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Noted that the residents would probably be willing to "wait" until the right project came into the City. He referenced the Wal-Mart project and that the proposed General Plan focuses the resident's land use philosophy towards what they want to see in the community in the future. Mr. Lewin - Thinks that about 2500 people would disagree that Wal-Mart was a good project. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Rosemead currently does not have the type of density that would work for certain types of mixed-used development projects. Thanked Council members Low and Clark for responding to this. Would like to see a nice project at the auto auction site, however, the City needs to "take it slow" and adopt the more restrictive commercial development guidelines. Mr. Lewin - Would like to put a positive spin on attracting businesses rather than make it seem like we are moving backward. Council Member Low- Is this recommendation a good thing to do, do we have to go through the whole process again? Mayor Pro Tern Ly- What are some "unintended consequences" of this recommendation from Mr. Lewin? Mr. Wong - This current proposed update gives more flexibility and any increase in FAR will change the traffic impacts and the consultant will have to reevaluate. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 18 of 31 Mr. Lewin - Add language that nodes may be expanded, to neighboring properties, if it works to expand further on Valley or Garvey depending on the node. Would like to see the addition of general language, more of an idea or a "vision" or "objective" that if these nodes are working out, they the City "may" want to expand them. Sends a message to developers and also lets them know that the City wants to move forward at a rate and volume that is appropriate. Council Member Low- Wants to send message that we want a "good, quality project" and would be open to amending or changing the General Plan. We want to make sure that by adopting the proposed plan, we are not shutting out any good potential development or developers. City Attorney Monies - The General Plan Goals and Objective language "telegraphs" what the City Council's policy is in regards to development. The Council may be willing to put mixed-use in other areas, it does not commit the City Council, they would still need to come in with an amendment, but it telegraphs that they could come in with proposals for such. Mayor Taylor closed the public testimony and public hearing at 9:18 p.m. Council Member Clark- Does not feel it is necessary to add language about future expansion. During the previous Council majority, three projects came in which were approved for a General Plan amendments. There are two nodes where 60 units per acre would be allowed because they would not affect the adjacent land uses. She is not in favor of any addition of language. Anyone can come in and submit a good project. Council MemberArmenta - Council members Low and Clark did an incredible project with staff in putting the proposal together. Staff tried to contact potential buyers in the area to advise them of the proposed General Plan update. The proposed plan is for the, betterment of the community. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Agrees with Mr. Well's concerns on Glendon Way. Whoever buys land for hotel and the adjacent land can that matter be dealt with? How would we go about it, if we revert back to high-density residential? City Attorney Montes - The high-density residential is not a designation that was considered by the Planning Commission for that site. This would have to go back to Planning Commission. If you left it as mixed-used at that particular location, it would not need to go back to the Planning Commission, but it would be the only property designated as mixed-use in that entire area. Mayor Taylor- No, it would be just a continuation of the existing zone. Mrs. Bermejo -The current designation is mixed-used commercial residential. We are proposing commercial. The property next to it is low-density residential which is only 6 units. Mayor Taylor- The documents are misleading. What if we leave at 0-30 units? Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 19 of 31 Mrs. Bermejo - Then you are leaving it as residential commercial mixed use. We would not be allowing stand-alone commercial development. There are existing ratios that have to be met. One would allow 30 units and the other would allow 60 units to the acre, there would be a ratio of residential to commercial development. Mayor Taylor- How is a variance done? City Attorney Montes - A use variance is not allowed in this area. Mayor Taylor- What options do we have with Mr. Well's property? City Attorney Montes - It can be mixed use or commercial. Mixed use would be to leave it as currently designated. Mayor Taylor- Still concerned because maps seem identical as far as commercial and the yellow residential. Bottom line, what can be done for Mr. Wells, instead of making him sacrifice? City Attorney Monies - The two options are to leave it as mixed use or to designate it as commercial. Mr. Wong - You would have to change the implementation table. We would prefer to have the property owner develop a plan and have the owner submit it. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - For auto auction and Bar Lumber site; Mr. Wong you were involved in the 210/57 freeway area project, can you describe the project you developed in Glendora? Mr. Wong - It is 35 acres and consists of an 11-screen theatre, Best Buy, Bed Bath and Beyond, several restaurants, 480,000 square feet on 39 acres. It was about a 35% FAR. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - The owner was able to "pencil in" a good project with a low FAR. Mr. Wong - However there were lower land costs Mayor Taylor- Referred to Presentation Slides 7 and 8, Node 1, left hand top side, it is proposed to be "light blue" color is proposed land use, on the draft land use, and it's designated at mixed use residential commercial at 30 dwelling units per acre. Referred.to discrepancies on various documents. What are we doing with commercial center in the City Hall area? Right next to Library is public facility to mixed use. Mrs. Bermejo - There are two maps, 1 is Exhibit A, shows various colors what the current plan is and what it is moving to. The other map is the draft land use plan and those would be the final colors if the plan is adopted. The Library property area would be available for mixed use. Mayor Taylor- Why is the light blue not on City Hall? Mrs. Bermejo- Public facilities will be changed to mixed use. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 20 of 31 Mayor Taylor- Why over City Hall and Library? Mrs. Bermejo - These properties could be recycled in the future for other uses Mayor Taylor- I don't think we are ready at this stage in the game to allow for mixed use commercial to come into this area. He disagreed with the way it is being presented tonight and would like Library and City Hall to remain as public facilities. Inquired as to the information that there are at least 100 big box retails are vacant in Southern California. Referenced the mixed-use projects that were approved by the Council, but that several of them collapsed. Expressed concerns regarding the viability of mixed-used developments. He also noted an article he distributed about the City of Monterey Park; they are not providing the major retailers. He noted that it was not the Council's prerogative to condemn an existing business. Going back 10-20 years, we are a "built-out" City; we can keep this as a commercial area, same as Walnut Grove and Valley, and can watch the tax base collapse. We need to have commercial property zoned for that. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Thanks to Target, Macy's and Wal-Mart, the sales tax revenue base has been solidified. There are certain surrounding cities dealing with high deficits, while the City of Rosemead has been fortunate to have these retailers. The City of Rosemead needs more retail that serves the needs of the community and that adds to the revenue base. Thanks to Mayor Taylor and Council Member Clark. He made a motion to approve the recommendation by the Planning Commission. Council Member Armenta - Second the motion Council Member Clark- Need clarification on Reverend Wells' property Mr. Wong - We recommend that the Council approve the proposed updates to the General Plan for that parcel, and have the owner come back with a proposal for an amendment to the General Plan if he wants to develop the property in the future. Council Member Clark- If he had to apply, could we waive his fees? Mayor Taylor- I would tread lightly on that, because we would be asked by other businesses to waive fees, too. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - He didn't come to the Planning Commission meeting to object. Mayor Taylor- Called for the question. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Low, to approve staff's recommended action. 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 April 13, 2010 Page 21 of 31 Mayor Taylor made a minor correction on March 31, 2010 minutes (should state it was a Special Meeting). 9. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes February 9, 2009 - Regular Meeting March 9, 2010 - Regular Meeting March 17, 2010 - Special Meeting March 31, 2010 - Special Meeting Council Member Low requested that the Council defer action on the March 9, 2010 minutes. B. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 - 22 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 - 22, for payment of City expenditures in the amount of $1,655,564.81 numbered 100778 through 100798 and 69242 and 69368, inclusively. D. Ordinance 887 - Second Reading: Approving Zone Change 10.01, Amending the Zoning Classification of Eight (8) City Parks to the 0-S (Open Space) Zoning Designation On March 9, 2010, the City Council reviewed the Ordinance No. 887 approving zone change 10-01, amending the zoning classification of eight (8) city parks to the 0-S (Open Space) zoning designation. The following parks will be affected by this zone change: Angelus Park, Garvey Park, Guess Park, Klingerman Park, Rosemead Park, Sally Tanner Park, Triangle Park, and Zapopan Park. Ordinance No. 887 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 887 at its second reading. Del Mar Avenue Resurfacing Project, Phase 2 - Award of Contract 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, and appurtenances. The limits of this project are from Garvey Avenue to Hellman Avenue. Recommendation: That the City Council: 1. Approve plans and specifications for this improvement project; Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 22 of 31 2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Sully Miller Contracting Company for the construction of the Del Mar Avenue Resurfacing Project in the amount of $306,199.64; and 3. Establish an amount of up to $30,620 (10%) as contingencies to cover the cost of any potential and additional unforeseen construction work. Council Member Clark made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Ly, to approve Consent Calendar with the EXCEPTION of the March 9th and March 17th minutes and Item numbers C, E, and G. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None A. Minutes March 17, 2010 -Special Meeting Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Low, to approve the minutes of March 17, 2010, with the amendment that Council Member Armenta, Council Member Low, and Mayor Pro Tern Ly met with Congresswoman Judy Chu. Vote resulted: Yes: Armenta, Low, Ly No: None Abstain: Clark, Taylor Absent: None C. Ordinance 883 - Second Reading: Approving Municipal Code Amendment 09.03, Amending Chapter 17.12 of Title 17 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code Relating to the Amortization of Nonconforming Poultry Slaughter Businesses On March 23, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance 883, which approved Municipal Code Amendment 09-03, for first reading. That ordinance would amend the Zoning Code to require that all non-conforming poultry slaughter businesses in the City cease operation within two (2) years. The Ordinance introduced by the City Council requires only the elimination of poultry slaughtering within the City limits. Other permitted uses or legal non-conforming uses that are otherwise permitted in the zone in which a poultry slaughter business is located, such as the retail sales of poultry, would be allowed to continue at the given location. Additionally, poultry which is slaughtered outside of the City could be sold within the City limits. Ordinance No. 883, includes a fixed date in Section 17.12.105 of the new Municipal Code Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 23 of 31 section for the end of the amortization period (May 12, 2012) which would be two (2) years after the effective date (May 13, 2010) of the Ordinance to reflect the revision to the Ordinance made by the City Council during the first reading of the Ordinance. The Ordinance is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 883 at its second reading. Council Member Clark made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to adopt Ordinance No. 883. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Taylor No: Low, Ly Abstain: None Absent: None E. Budget Cleanup Amendments From time to time, throughout the fiscal year, cleanup amendments to the original budget are necessary due to program modifications, changes in estimated funding levels, new funding opportunities and so forth. In the interest of clarity, program changes that require budget amendments are routinely approved by City Council but the budget amendment step of the process is saved for one or two comprehensive cleanup amendments per year. Recommendation: That the City Council and Community Development Commission approve: 1. Resolution No. 2010-24 appropriating $1,281,300 for various expenditures; and 2. Resolution No. CDC 2010-12 transferring $500,000 to the City Capital Projects Fun for Street Maintenance Projects. Finance Director Steve Brisco - Before staff can spend money, there needs to be appropriations made for the legal authority to spend. These are projects that wefe approved in the past year. Need to move money from other funds to pay for these projects. There is a corresponding revenue source for each of the items. We are just using the appropriate funding source for them now. Mayor Taylor- He thought the plan check expenses are self-covering. Assistant City Manager Matt Hawkesworth - Noted the ratio of fees that go to the consultant and to the City. More people are coming in and requesting plan check services. We now have received revenues and are required to update the appropriated amount to reflect the additional revenues. Mayor Taylor - Concerned about statement number 2 on "e" - transferring funds to CDC, do we need to officially start the CDC meeting? Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 24 of 31 City Attorney Montes -The intent of the agenda is that all meetings of the City Council are joint meetings of the Council and Commission. You can continue this item to the next CDC meeting. Mayor Taylor- This is not the way it states at various points in the agenda, it needs to be cleared up so that we are not creating "double confusion." City Attorney Montes - The 6 p.m. portion of the agenda identifies Council/Commission but the 7 p.m. identifies only Council. City Manager Jeff Allred- The CDC resolution will go to the next CDC meeting G. City Street Sweeping Services - Award Contract At its February 23, 2010 meeting, the City Council approved specifications and authorized staff to solicit proposals for street sweeping services. The services include street sweeping of residential and commercial City streets at least once weekly, Monday through Friday. Regular street sweeping services are critical in ensuring that City streets are kept clean, aesthetically pleasing and safe for both the motoring and pedestrian public. On March 16, 2010 the city received four (4) contractor proposals for completeness, understanding of scope of work, methodology, experience and proposed cost. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Athens Services for street sweeping services at an annual cost of $167,910.08 for the first three (3) years, with an annual option to renew for the following two (2) years. The new contact would take effect on July 1, 2010. Jean Hall - spoke on behalf of herself and Ron Esquivel, requested approval to award sweeping contract to Athens and commends staff on their bidding process which results in savings to the City. She is pleased to see the recommendation from staff as long as the City receives satisfactory service. Feels that Rosemead should move forward while they have the chance. Joan Hunter - supports staff's recommendation and commends staff for their involvement in developing the bid process which resulted in the City receiving considerable savings. Noted that the proposal would keep the City "clean and green" and that their reputation is good in their other contract cities. Juan Nunez - The paving of Garvey, but there has been a post missing at Evelyn and Garvey for at least a year. Chris Carlos, Athens Services, introduced members of the Athens Team, and commended staff on their fair and comprehensive RFP process. They provided an overview of their reputation, as well as their environmental consciousness. He noted that Athens is,prepared to handle the closure of the La Puente landfill in the next 5 years and affirmed they have not defaulted on any contract during their existence. Athens has agreed to transport to their recycling facility so that Rosemead can receive the maximum recycling credits. Invites any resident to visit their materials recovery facility and would be open to any questions from the Council. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 25 of 31 Mayor Pro Tem Ly - He has visited the facility and noted that he was impressed with their professionalism and concern for the surrounding community. Mayor Taylor- Deferred to Ms. Clark and will defer this item for two weeks (the next regular meeting). 10. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2010.11 On February 9, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the City's Five Year Consolidated Plan covering the period July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2015 which includes the FY 2010-11 Annual Action Plan. A Five Year Consolidation Plan as well as an Annual Action Plan is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in order for the City to receive federal funds under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) programs. The Consolidated Plan is a planning document for the jurisdiction, an application for federal funds under HUD's formula grant programs, a strategy to be followed in carrying out HUD programs, and an action plan that provides a basis for assessing performance. The City's current Plan is set to expire on June 30, 2010. The Annual Action Plan includes the proposed activities, resources and expenditures for the CDBG and HOME Programs. Recommendation: That the City Council review and finalize its CDBG and HOME funding recommendations under the City's Annual Action Plan for the Fiscal Year 2010-11. Economic Development Administrator Michelle Ramirez reviewed the staff report. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve the item as recommended by staff. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None B. City Investment Policy Amendments. The City's Investment Policy (Policy) is reviewed annually to ensure that it best reflects current investing conditions. As those conditions change, minor adjustments to the Policy should be made to allow for 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), as well as money market funds, the city needs to move its surplus cash into more productive investments; to do so requires minor amendments to the investment policy. The proposed amendments will increase the potential for interest rate fluctuation (up or down) but investments will remain secure and there is no risk of losing Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 26 of 31 invested principal. With this report adjustments to investment policies for certificates of deposit (CD) and government-sponsored enterprises (agencies) are being recommended. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Investment Policy with the proposed minor amendments. Finance Director Steve Brisco - Noted that with the current market situation, the policy needed to be reviewed earlier in the fiscal year. Over the past year or two, we reviewed how we could earn the best return. We were previously adequately invested in LAIF,,however, now the market has surpassed LAIF. We have brought additional information: 1) how we invest in CD's - we formally had 180 days for CD's, which is fairly short - we would like to increase that investment period to 5 years which is in compliance with the Government Code, and 2) we were formally allowed to invest 20% and we would like to to do 30%, the longer the term the greater the interest rate. Noted the City's historical investment policy in regards to investing in agencies. He also noted the information regarding "STEP" increase rates. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to the rate of return on the various investments. Mr. Brisco - Noted the comparison between staying with LAIF and moving to another investment. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to where the other percentage of the investment is going? Mr. Brisco - Discussed "high grade paper" and other forms of investments. As we work with brokers and dealers, they might recommend something better; we always have the ability to say "no." He feels more comfortable investing in agencies because he is familiar with their operations. Council Member Clark- How safe are these proposed investments? Mr. Brisco - They are bonds so we are not losing any principal. If they pay the full face value, we may not be able to find something with that high of interest rate. We do not have much risk, the principal is completely insured. CD's are insured, we could invest in CD's that are insured but they have a lower rate. Suggesting that we invest in FDIC insured CD's many of which are insured up to $250,000. Council Member Low- In regard to the insurance, is that already in policy? Wherever we invest it should insured. Council Member Armenta - Or do we already have it? Mr. Brisco - When you buy Treasury Bills, they are backed by the Federal government, if you put too many restrictions in place regarding insurance, it does not allow the City the flexibility to invest. We are concerned with safety first, we are not going to invest in anything where the principal is not secured. Council Member Low made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve the item with minor amendments. Vote resulted in: Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 27 of 31 Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None C. Guidelines for the Display and Maintenance of Newsracks - Rosemead Municipal Code Section 12.12 As part of the City Strategic Plan, staff was directed to develop revisions to the City's current municipal code governing the placement and upkeep of newsracks in public right-of-way areas. The updates included in this ordinance are intended to help ensure that newracks are kept in good repair and maintained in an attractive condition. Further, this code helps to ensure the appropriate placement of newsracks to help maintain pedestrian safety and accessibility on sidewalks. Recommendation: That the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 893, amending Section 12.12 of the Rosemead Municipal Code regarding the installation and maintenance of newsracks. Deputy Director of Public Works Chris Marcarello reviewed the staff report. Mayor Taylor- What is clarification for the fee schedule, $20 for 2 years? On schedule it is asking for an annual fee. Mr. Marcarello - It should be a $40 total cost, for 2 years at 20 dollars per year. $20 annual and over the course of the two year process it would be $40. As proposed it would be a two year process. Mayor Taylor- All the fees would be for 2 years? Who would notify all the vendors? Mr. Marcarello - We would bring back for second reading and a notification process for approximately a month. Staff would develop mailers to be sent to all property owners were newsracks exist. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concern regarding the explicit information as to what "offensive material" is and the description that includes "under the age of 13." Mr. Marcarello - Perhaps it needs clarification. Mayor Taylor-This tells me that there is something not right. City Attorney Montes - This is language from original code. Mayor Taylor- Other than a child under the age of "puberty." Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 28 of 31 City Attorney Montes- Would prefer to take it off, even though you would not be able to have the "Coppertone" girl. However, the odds of that happening are very slim. If the Council is not comfortable, then just delete the parenthetical. Mayor Pro Tem Ly - It is going to read the same, but put a period after the phrase "any such person." Brian Lewin - Thanked the Council for bringing this forward, sounds like the concerns he expressed will be going away, but wanted to clarify that Ordinance would apply to newsracks that are not actually on public property, but are in the "public sphere." Mayor Pro Tem Ly - Like in a parking lot> Mr. Lewin -A specific example, there are three newspaper racks behind other rows of racks, that are not in the public right of way, but they are still somewhat publically accessible. City Attorney Montes - Ordinance only covers the right of way, the newspaper racks on the Post Office adjacent site may be covered by the Federal Government rules, not the City rules. Mr. Lewin - Can we preempt what the racks near the Post Office are doing? Council Member Low- Asked staff to do research. Council Member Armenta - Seconded the motion Mayor Pro Tem Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve the item as amended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 11. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. Mayor's Appointments for 2010.2011 Each Year, a listing of City Council Member appointments to a variety of regional and state committees and boards is prepared and submitted by the Mayor. To assist the Mayor, members of the City Council had the opportunity to complete the "Mayor's Appointments for 2010-2011" form listing each individual's preference for the particular committees and boards. As of April 8, 2010 the City Clerk's office received a preference list from Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly and Council Member Margaret Clark. Attached is the current listing of Mayor's Appointments and the preference list form Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly and Council Member Margaret Clark. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 29 of 31 , Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Mayor's Appointments for 2010-2011. Mayor Pro Tern Ly - Would like to submit Council Member Clark's name for the Vector Control liaison. This item was deferred to the next meeting. B. Property Maintenance and Parkway Vegetation Policy Property maintenance and weed abatement issues related to properties within the City are currently governed by Sections 8.44 and 12.08 of the Rosemead Municipal Code. These Code sections provide a tool for staff to work with and encourage property owners to properly maintain their properties. The Council has requested that this item be placed on the agenda for a review and general discussion regarding the current policies in place. Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction regarding the current Municipal Code policies. Mayor Taylor noted that this item was already taken care of administratively. C. Downtown Rosemead Subcommittee The City's Strategic Plan for 2010 and 2011 includes a directive to form a subcommittee with representation from the City Council and the Planning Commission to work with staff on drafting potential plans for downtown Rosemead along Valley Boulevard generally between Rosemead Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Recommendation: That the City Council appoint two members of the City Council to serve on the Subcommittee with representatives of the Planning Commission and the Community Development Department on the development of potential improvement plans for downtown Rosemead. Mayor Taylor- We went through a "knock down drag out" about what we were going to do on Valley Blvd. and suggested that staff be "brought up to speed" on the history of the issue. Council Member Clark and Mayor Pro Tern Ly volunteered to be part of this Committee. City Manager Allred - Planning Commission will be asked next Monday night to have a member volunteer. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve Council Member Clark and Mayor Pro Tern Ly as appointees to the Committee. 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 April 13, 2010 Page 30 of 31 12. ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 10:58 p.m. to the next joint Community Development Commission and City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on April 27, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., respectively. Gary Taylor Mayor ATTEST: Gloria Molleda, City Clerk Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2010 Page 31 of 31