CC - 07-11-89APPROVED
CITY OF ROS F AD
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DAT f
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
JULY 11, 1989 BY~'~t
The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to
order by Mayor McDonald at 8:05 p.m. in the council Chambers of City
Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilman DeCocker.
The Invocation was delivered by City Treasurer Foutz.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmen DeCocker, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem Imperial, and
Mayor McDonald
Absent: Councilman Bruesch - Excused
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JUNE 27, 1989 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR
that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 27, 1989, be approved
as submitted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Alice Ferl, 8652 Edmond Drive, expressed concerns with illegal
fireworks that endanger the neighborhood. Ms. Ferl suggested that
stricter enforcement and severe penalties might curb their use.
Mayor Pro Tem Imperial asked that the subject of illegal fireworks
and possible solutions be a future agenda item.
Councilman Taylor requested a report from the Sheriff's Department
on the number of citations issued for the week prior to the fourth of
July for the illegal use of fireworks and the subsequent disposition.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
An explanation of the procedures for the conduct of public
hearings was presented by the City Attorney. The City Clerk then
administered the oath to all those persons wishing to address the
Council on any public hearing item.
A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF A PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING A REQUEST FROM SEAFOOD CITY
PARTNERSHIP FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON-SITE SALE OF
BEER AND WINE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A NEW RESTAURANT AT 7540
GARVEY AVENUE, ROSEMEAD, dba SEAFOOD CITY RESTAURANT (CUP
89-460)
VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS:
LEROY YOUNG, 7533 E. Garvey Avenue: Mr. Mayor. I just would like one
question answered. My wife and I are the applicant, are we not? We
paid the money for the appeal and so the process is just reversed. We
are first, and then we have the chance for rebuttal. I'd like a
ruling from the City Attorney on that.
ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: No. You're the appellant but that
really means that we start from scratch. You're really not proposing
that anything be granted.
YOUNG, L.: But what is on the agenda is an appeal. It's an appeal.
It isn't he's already gone through his. This is an appeal of it.
So. we're the applicant. We paid to have this hearing.
CC 7-11-89
Page #1
•
KRESS: That's the way the Council hears
project is presented and then you'll have
world to present your opposition.
i
these matters so that the
all the opportunity in the
YOUNG, LEROY: Could we have the minutes of this meeting recorded and
written verbatim and then get a copy when it's over, please?
KRESS: That's a Council decision.
TAYLOR: I would agree with that.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. What fee had to be paid for this to be heard
and how much was that?
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I think we need to clarify it. This decision was
already made by the Planning Commission. Mr. and Mrs. Young made the
appeal. The ruling tonight would be whether to grant their appeal or
to deny it. They are the applicant here tonight.
McDONALD: Any further questions from the Council at this time?
IMPERIAL: My question is why and I'm not going to say whether I agree
or disagree with this thing, my question is why people that are
concerned, that aren't business people, people concerned with their
neighborhood, would have to pay a fee even though that's what the
ordinance says. I'd like to see this Council consider waiving that
fee.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Again, we discussed this at the last meeting. I
tend to partially agree with what Mr. Imperial is saying but it's a
question of playing favoritism. Whether it's the Youngs or anybody
else, there is a procedure to go through. They did have their process
at the Planning Commission. I don't like to see them have to pay the
fee but there are the procedures to be followed and once you break
down those rules you can't be selective about it. I don't like to see
the residents pay these fees but that's the way it's set up to stop
arbitrary appeals and random appeals. There's got to be a process. I
can agree with what he's tending to say but we've got to follow the
regulations.
IMPERIAL: I think, then, we ought to look at that ordinance and
determine whether we can have an appeal to be judged whether there
should be payment or not on a case by case basis, Mr. Mayor.
McDONALD: Staff will look into that and make a recommendation,
please. All right. At this time let's have the staff report on the
hearing, please.
DONALD J. WAGNER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The
item before you tonight is an appeal submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Young
regarding a Planning commission decision to grant a beer and wine
license in conjunction with property located at 7540 Garvey Avenue
doing business as the Seafood City Restaurant. The Planning
Commission meeting on June 5th approved the Conditional Use Permit
subject to the attached conditions. Attached for your review are the
staff backup reports that were originally submitted to the Planning
Commission and some background information on it. Staff is
recommending that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission
decision and deny the appeal. It would be appropriate at this time,
then, to open the public hearing and receive comment.
McDONALD: Thanks, Don. The public hearing is now open to consider
the appeal of the Planning Decision regarding the request for the
Seafood City Partnership for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The
original applicant has the right to speak first. Is the original
applicant here to speak and present his input? Please when you come
to the podium give your name and your address, please.
LIM: My name is Harry Lim, address 7771 Garvey Avenue, Suite B,
Rosemead. I'm a representative for Seafood City. I'm here tonight to
request for the Council and the Mayor for in favor of granting the
cc 7-11-89
Page #2
LIM CONTINUES: CUP for the Seafood City for their new restaurant. We
have went through the Planning Commission, twice, at their public
hearing. We have really respect.... the Planning Commissioner went to
all the trouble and listen to all the problem that we have about the
neighborhood about the alcoholics in that neighborhood or down on
Garvey. But we finally have the unanimous vote, four to one, in favor
of granting the CUP for Seafood City. But, also after that meeting I
noticed that a lot of citizens of Rosemead, they were against the CUP
so when I went outside in the lobby over there, we had a little talk
about they would invite me over to the Garvey School District to have
a meeting with them so I said that I would. I did go to the Garvey
School District for the Board meeting but when we got there, we didn't
have a chance to give our view to the Board meeting. They were
already set up, all ready to appeal the CUP to the Seafood City. We
really didn't have a chance to talk to the school board, at all. As
far as this beer and wine license, I think it's not a money maker for
Seafood City to have a beer and wine license in there. What they
really want that beer and wine license is for the convenience of the
customer. This restaurant is not a beer bar, it's not a restaurant
where they have a "happy hour" or that type or where you could buy a
pitcher full of beer and sit there and drink. What this restaurant is
is a family type of seafood restaurant. You can go into that
restaurant (unintelligible) three generations. You can go in there,
there's the grandfather, the father, and baby sit on the one table.
But a lot of times they have business people go in there, they like to
have a glass of wine or bottle of beer with their dinner, with their
meal. So, at that time the Planning Commission put in about fifteen
conditions in there. The owner's willing to comply with every one of
those conditions. I hope that the Council will take a look at some of
those conditions. They willing to meet all the conditions in there.
The only time they will be able to sell beer and wine is only when
they are buying food in there. So, this is not like a liquor store or
a 7-11 store where you could go in and buy a six-pack of beer and walk
out of there or anything else, so I hope that the City Council and the
Mayor would grant this CUP. Thank you very much.
McDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Lim. Now we have a number of people that
wish to speak. Anybody else wish to speak in favor of the seafood
Restaurant? Sir, come up forward.
BARRY DANIEL: Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers. I'm Barry Daniel,
owner/operator of Freeway Nissan, 8930 E. Mission Drive, Rosemead.
I'd like to first of all thank the Council and especially Mr.
Tripepi's management team for the successful breaking ground and going
forward with our operation. Without your gentlemen's help we would
have been way behind in our project. Let me just start by thanking
you for that. I'm speaking on behalf of the Seafood Restaurant as a
Chamber member and a businessman in Rosemead. When this came up at
the Chamber meeting and I heard there was some opposition I felt it
was an opportunity for a businessman to speak out for a fellow
business person in this City. We've operated at the existing location
for five years in Rosemead. If we do 12 million dollars a year in
sales that would represent over the last five years close to 4 million
dollars in sales tax of which, by my records, the residents of
Rosemead have contributed $39,000 out of almost 5 million dollars.
It's a difficult situation coming into the City and being successful.
It's difficult to survive in many cases. I can well appreciate these
people opening up a new restaurant, investing a large amount of money,
and then being discriminated against. We're open seven days a week
from seven in the morning until ten at night. Most of the time, we
have a staff of forty people, most of the time we send out for food.
We eat most of our food on the premises at Freeway. We go to the
Sizzler for food, which is out of this area; we go to the Mexican
restaurants or the Chinese restaurants in Alhambra; we're constantly
driving out of the area. If we have people in from the factory or
from the banks, even if we don't drink, we want them to have the
opportunity to sit down in a restaurant and have a glass of wine or a
beer if they so choose. My experience eating at the Bahooka, eating
at the Sizzler, eating at several other restaurants around this area,
and the Sizzler is a classic example, it's very close to Rosemead High
CC 7-11-89
Page #3
•
BARRY DANIEL CONTINUES: School. We go in
conduct themselves as good business people
there and drink there conduct themselves a;
difference between this situation and many
on a regular basis, day in and day out. I
opportunity to address....
•
there all the time and they
and the people who eat
s good citizens. I see no
restaurants that I eat in
thank you for the
McDONALD: Thank you very much, Mr. Daniels. Anybody else wish to
speak in favor of the original applicant?
Betty Dondanville, President of the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce,
concurred with the remarks made by Barry Daniel.
McDONALD: Anyone else to speak in favor? Now, we'll have the
opposition speak. Mr. and Mrs. Young, you may speak first You go
last? I see.
LEROY YOUNG, 7,533 E. Garvey Avenue, Rosemead. I'm kind of puzzled on
some of these things I know you people on the Council and I
consider you to be my friends and I'm your friend. By all the good
things we hear about these alcoholic beverages allowed within 600 feet
of the schools you wonder how in the world did such a stupid ordinance
get on the books. There must have been some logic and some sense to
whoever made this ordinance. They must have put that 600 feet in
there for some reason and I believe it was to protect the children. I
would like to take this letter to Mayor McDonald and members of the
Rosemead City Council regarding the CUP NO. 89-460 by the Rosemead
Planning Commission to 7540 Garvey Avenue, request from Seafood City
Partnership to obtain a new ABC license for on-site sale of beer and
wine in conjunction with a new restaurant, new restaurant, doing
business as Seafood City Restaurant. We need rules to protect the
safety of the children by prohibiting alcoholic beverage licenses too
close to the schools. Moreover, three such licenses now exist within
400 feet of the Garvey School campus, one of them held by the
applicant. Issuing a new license cannot correct a hazardous condition
but it can aggravate it. Accessibility to the parking lot on Prospect
Avenue is also a cause for concern. The reason it's a cause for
concern, you come out on Prospect which is not a business street, you
go south you have to go by the Arlene Bitely School; you go east, you
have to go by the Garvey School; and you go north, you have to go by
the Emerson School; the only way you can avoid passing a school is go
towards Monterey Park. Several councilmembers have worked with the
educational system. As you know, money is allotted for parks,
crossing guards, athletic programs, bands, food, and so forth. This
is to help the children funnel their abilities toward something
beneficial for them to aid in their safe, proper, development. At the
Planning commission meeting, hearing, it was said it's just wine and
beer; everyone drinks that with seafood dinners. Not so, my wife and
I do not drink it and many others do not consume alcohol. The speaker
for the Seafood City Restaurant at the Garvey meeting said he and his
wife doesn't drink it and can't stand the stuff. I compliment him on
that, he has good judgment. More importantly, we don't want drunk
drivers or drunk pedestrians endangering or influencing school
children. The most common way to become an alcoholic is by drinking
alcoholic beverages. Lastly, many residents within 300 feet of this
business location were not notified of the hearing, therefore, the
people of Rosemead and the school children in particular, would
benefit if this Council would deny the Planning Commission's approval
of the CUP. This denial will assist in a safe and sane operation of
our schools. You don't have to have alcohol to be successful-in the
restaurant business and I'll give an example or two. Norm's
restaurant at Valley and Del Mar, they do more business than any
Norm's restaurant I know of including the one over on Sunset Boulevard
in Hollywood and they are very successful. To get a little closer,
McDonald's on the corner of Prospect and Garvey they don't sell
alcohol and that's the best business, McDonald's, in the country. So,
we're not taking away anyone's right to survive or start a business by
not being able to sell alcohol. You might say it's only beer and
wine. The DMV and the Highway Patrol are issuing citations every day
to people who do nothing but drink beer or wine or both. You can get
CC 7-11-89
Page #4
0 0
LEROY YOUNG CONTINUES: awfully drunk.on either one of them. I just
would like one question. On this map I colored the Seafood Restaurant
red because enough is enough and red is the signal for a stop sign.
However, 600 feet encompasses most of the Garvey campus and a great
portion of the Arlene Bitely campus. Mr. (Wash?) who owns the trailer
park across the street from me and myself measured with a 100-foot
tape measure, we measured on a direct line and I say a direct line
because in engineering circles that's the way they measure, they don't
go.... we learned in mathematics, basic math or geometry or whatever
that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. So,
within 600 feet means on a straight line. If you say how far is it
from here to the Pacific ocean you don't go up the middle of it you go
to the nearest point of the Pacific ocean.
IMPERIAL: I rise to a point of information on that. I don't think
that's quite correct, Mr. Young. I can recall my battle with the
Alpha Beta market across the street selling alcohol. Unless the law
has changed it wasn't ...it was 400 feet if I can recall, and it was
not a straight line. What they measured was from the front door of
that business across the street, down to Ivar and down Ivar to the
front of the school. So, unless they changed the law.... we might want
to look at this. Gary, do you have an answer for that? Is it 600
feet and is it a straight line?
GARY CHICOTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING: The 600 feet rule is an ABC code
requirement, not a municipal code requirement but it's 600 feet from
the property in question, it's a radius around the property in
question.
IMPERIAL: Is it a straight line?
CHICOTS: It's a radius around..... from all sides of the subject
property.
McDONALD: Let's clarify that from the code. It's not a restriction,
it's a.... what do they use the 600 feet as criteria for?
ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: It allows ABC to deny a license if the
license is applied for within 600 feet. It doesn't say it's
automatically denied but it give the Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control specific grounds for denial if it's within 600 feet.
IMPERIAL: In other words, it's a tool.
MCDONALD: Do you understand that, Mr. Young, that it's a tool used by
the ABC to give them the authority that if they see a problem with it
they can deny the issuance of an ABC license?
YOUNG: We have a gentleman in here that's an expert on that. He'll
speak a little later and he'll clarify that he knows all about it. I
appreciate.... I'm not arguing with you people because we'll let
someone who knows more about than me do the talking on that portion of
it. I would like to just know one more thing while I'm here. Do I
get a chance to rebuttal or just the one time deal up here for me?
KRESS: I'm sure the Council will bend the rules if you have something
to add before.the hearing is closed.
YOUNG: Just so I won't use too much time, here's another addition
that I would like to submit to you people. This is to the Honorable
Mayor Dennis McDonald and Rosemead City Council and dated today. One
more alcoholic beverage will matter. There are three of them near the
schools already. One, two or ten matters; each one more than the one
before it. Why? Because they do not comply with the law. Section
23789 and Rule 61.4 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control act and related
constitutional provisions. Alcohol and schools do not mix. What
amazes me is how did three licenses get within 600 feet of the schools
to start with. One of them held by Seafood City Restaurant
conglomerate with 12 partners. Rosemead City Council was in charge;
CC 7-11-89
Page #5
LEROY YOUNG CONTINUES: perhaps you can answer how they got there.
The Garvey school's governing board and Superintendent, Principal,
teachers and staff are doing a marvelous job of educating our
children. I will conservatively estimate that at least ten different
languages are spoken and taught in this school district. If each of
you and part of the staff understood and spoke only a different
language you would find it difficult to function properly. Please do
not allow any person or group of people to make it more difficult for
the educators. The safety and well-being of the children should come
first. This safety and law issue must comply with the laws. Your
decision can hinder or help children for the rest of their lives.
Their destiny is in your hands.
McDONALD: Thank you very much, Leroy. The next person I have on the
list here is Joe Vasquez.
JOE VASQUEZ: Thank you, Dennis. I'm Joe Vasquez. I reside at 3633
Marybeth, here in Rosemead. I'm here as a concerned citizen since I
got a phone call from Cleo Young. I wasn't sure what to talk about
but I was concerned since she spoke to me about the increasing risk
for the children near the schools. What I'm here is to ask the City
Council, which you have very many difficult decisions to make, is to
consider the residents, your constituency here in Rosemead, of their
concerns, especially Mr. Leroy Young right now. I have the utmost
respect for all senior citizens and all his knowledge that he has in
this concern for our children. The only thing that comes to my mind
is that I am aware there is a Chris & Pitts across the street and why
wasn't that protested? But when you think about it why keep
increasing the fears that the residents have in that area. Also, I
was thinking if.... I don't know if there was a compromise made if beer
and wine can be sold at hours, maybe in the evenings when children are
not around. It's a question I would like to hear from the Council and
present it to the governing board. I'm sure maybe one or two members
are here. And as a citizen I just wanted not to take up too much of
your time but I'm concerned and I wanted to give my support to the
Garvey School District and Cleo Young and her husband. Thank you.
McDONALD: You want to mention your status in the community here, Joe?
VASQUEZ: I'm President of the Rosemead School Board and I was also
past President of RYA and my interests have always been with our
children and when she mentioned to me about kids and her concerns and
alcoholic, right away, I had to come. Thank you, Dennis.
McDONALD: Any other questions? Thanks again. The next person I have
here is Diane Martinez.
DIANE MARTINEZ: Hi, Mayor, Council people. I am Diane Martinez and
I'm the President of the Garvey School Board and by unanimous consent
of the Board this evening I'm here to represent their interests in
this matter. The Garvey School Board did send correspondence to you
on July 10, 1989, Mayor McDonald and basically outlined our concerns
with regard to the liquor permit. As a threshold matter I'd like to
clear up a misperception that Mr. Lam'set forth. At the time that the
Garvey Board met to consider this issue we have procedures as you do
on how we conduct our meetings. Mr. Lam had an opportunity to appear
and chose to show up late. And, uh, you know, was still allowed to
speak, you know, albeit that it was somewhat after the vote but the
reality was he did not find this important enough to be there on time
and fill out those forms and you know, apply to speak before us and we
addressed that with him at that time. So, I just want to clear up any
misconception that he brought. At any rate, the Garvey School Board
is the first school board, as far as we know, in the state of
California to ban the purchase of alcoholic beverages with public
funds. And we set forth that position because we thought it was
important to let the students know, you know, what our desires were
and what our vision for them was which is to discourage them from the
use of alcoholic beverages. Beyond that, the Board has a statutory
responsibility to provide a safe environment for the school. It's one
CC 7-11-89
Page #6
MARTINEZ CONTINUES: of the reasons why the state established the
600-foot rule that if somebody applied for a liquor license within
that circumference around the school district that we had a right to
oppose it and the school Board by unanimous consent has done that. We
are not ready to abdicate that and so we're coming before you this
afternoon or this evening to ask you to work with us on this
situation. One of the things that's clear to everybody we have to
deal it with a common sense approach is that, sure, having a beer or
wine doesn't sound like an unreasonable thing to do at lunch or at
dinner but the reality is is that the laws that we have and the reason
that they were made was not to deal with somebody who had reasonably
had a glass of wine or a beer at lunch or dinner. Those laws are
really set forth to deal with the people that don't stop there; those
people that would present a clear danger to our children. Now, we
don't need to lose more than or even injure one child to know that our
position was worthwhile. We just don't want to see it go that far.
Our concern is such that, well, most people are generally reasonable,
well, most of our citizens are very good people, we don't want to
create the opportunity for that person who isn't, for somebody who
goes there and abuses that right or that privilege, and you know, we
don't want to have to be talking about this after some child is hurt
and we feel very, very strongly about that. We as a district would
ask you to consider with both heart and mind the issue that is before
you. Initially, as individuals on the Board some of us felt that it's
not that big of a deal but the reality is is that our constituents
believe that it is. We're elected to protect those students, we're
elected to represent those constituents and we took that obligation
very, very seriously when we unanimously not to want them to have the
license. So, if anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to answer
otherwise I thank you for your time.
MCDONALD: Thank you very much, Diane. Okay, the next person I have
signed up here is Saul Leff.
SAUL LEFF: My name is Saul Leff. I live at 318 N. New, Monterey
Park. It just so happens that on my tax bill I get paid...I have to
pay for the Garvey School District so I'm very interested in those
children. I, personally, don't have any children but I do feel
children should be protected. Ms. Martinez brought up about the fact
that that man came in late so I won't go on that again. I will bring
up a few things that Mr. Lim brought up at the school board meeting
and one was didn't need the beer and wine.... just for the convenience
of the customer. Two is, after the meeting he kept saying "Well,
there was a beer and wine there, before. Why can't we have beer and
wine, now?" That grocery store that was there before that they
demolished got their beer and wine license right after prohibition.
The man that owned that property originally I happened to know him
before he passed away. At those days they didn't even know what CUP
was. And he kept insisting that two wrongs don't make a right; that
he should have a license there even though it's going to endanger the
children. But I kept telling him two wrongs don't make a right. If
you'll look at the article that I passed out there Mayor McDonald,
you were pointing out before on the fireworks how narcotics is such a
big, big problem we have here in the state of California and
throughout the whole nation. This is the county figures for fiscal
year 87-88, November 2nd, the last figures available for this
particular deal. If you notice the cost of alcohol arrests and
prosecution is $53,710,475. Now, the big problem that we have with
the narcotics that you brought up there, is only one-fourth to
one-fifth of the alcohol problem. Anybody says alcohol is not a
problem it is a big problem. And the ability of these children to go
to and from school safely as Ms. Martinez.said, is hampered by people
who do drink a little too much. (Unintelligible) by the Institute for
Alternatives Attitudes which is alcoholic deal. Only three percent of
U.S. alcoholics are skid row bums. This will surprise you. Forty-five
percent of the alcoholics are either managers or professionals; white
collar workers. Those are the ones that want the beer and wine to
excess. With that, I'll leave and thank you.
CC 7-11-89
Page #7
MCDONALD: Thank you very much, Saul.
Chavira. Ray?
0
The next person I have is Ray
RAY CHAVIRA: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, staff. My name is
Ray Chavira. I reside at 8824 Little Stone Drive, just across the
tracks from the northern part of your City. I have some material for
each of you. There are two items for each person. I'm here
representing the L.A. County Alcohol Policy Coalition, a non-official
group of the County which advises the office of Alcohol Programs. In
recent years I've been a member of the County Commission on Alcoholism
appointed by the Board of Supervisors to advise it on alcohol policy
matters such as we've discussed here tonight. Also served on the
State advisory board to advise the Department of Alcohol and Drug
programs at the State level appointed by Willie Brown. It's a sister
agency of the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. I serve on
several National advisory boards in Washington and until recently I
was a Planning Commissioner in city of Lynwood when I lived there for
several years. I earn my living as a County Probation Officer, also.
I've been a former school teacher a staff person with the National
Education Association. During much of that time I was also a drinking
teacher. I have many hats, past and present, that I wear. And I was
asked by the staff for the County Commission on Alcoholism to respond
to Cleo's call for help because part of our work is to advise
individuals and groups and communities on how to reduce
alcoholization. I will not talk about alcoholism, tonight, I'm
talking about community and neighborhood alcoholization. The items
which I handed you, one of them is a terrific literature review on
alcohol and youth put out by the Federal government from the office of
Substance Abuse Prevention. Part of it deals specifically with
environmental factors such as being discussed here tonight and what
local government can do. Very little you can do and basically deals
with zoning and planning. Most of it is a State function after repeal
of prohibition. A little bit is still left to-the State and if I make
a very quick parenthetical expression, Ms. Martinez, first time I've
seen her tonight, but her father's being asked to write the
introduction to a publication coming out within a month or so entitled
"Marketing Disease to Hispanics." A national publication put out by
the Center for Science and the Public Interest. It's a companion
piece to one that came out two years ago called "Marketing Booze to
Blacks." Now, if the title sounds somewhat exotic and a little hard
hitting it's because the major ethnic groups in this country, blacks
and browns, have been targeted for quite a few years by segments of
the alcohol industry to sell. And I know they're not the only ethnic
or racial groups in the country but around these parts they are a
major element. Part of our work, just to give you a quick background
and I don't have to go through a case-by-case connection to this, is
to work for example, a few years ago regarding liquor store problems
is south central; proliferation of convenience stores in Lynwood;
on-sale restaurants in Monterey Park; cantinas or Mexican beer bars in
east Los Angeles; and straight bars in Altadena when Supervisor Mike
Antonovich was there. Alcohol retails manifest differently in
different communities. By way of getting closer to home, the type of
license that is being requested of ABC by the applicant, subject to
approval of a CUP, since the ABC cannot issue a liquor license
contrary to a valid local zoning ordinance, is a Type 41 license,
on-sale, beer and wine for eating purposes. Some of you may know this
already but usually the public does not and it struck me as missing in
your conditions as granted by the Planning Commission. A Type 41
license, if granted, carries with it the power and the privilege, and
we're talking privileges, these are not rights per se, they may become
partial rights later, but at first we're talking about a permit
procedure, there is no constitutional right to sell alcoholic
beverages, is that Type 41 license allows the holder to sell packaged
beer and wine, to go. I'll give you some material to show that if you
don't want to take my word for it. It's a very unknown item,
generally. Any on-sale license gives the holder the power to sell
packaged goods, also. In some cases only beer, in some cases only
wine, in some cases beer and wine, both. So, I would submit that in
your consideration of any conditions, should you decide to grant the
permit, that you consider more appropriate language than just saying
we're just going to sell beer and wine with food. You ought to
CC 7-11-89
Page #8
0 0
CHAVIRA CONTINUES: prohibit any packaged sales as part of a process
of granting a on-sale permit, only. Second condition, and the second
item that I handed you, deals with a model ordinance that is being
promoted up and down the State by no less than several key people.
Assemblyman Gary Condit who used to chair the Assembly Governmental
Organization Committee was responsible for an ordinance that preempted
local control over the regulation of counter sale of alcoholic
beverages wherever motor fuel was sold, so called gas station sales,
mini-market sales, convenience store sales with both sets of
products. It's current law. (Unintelligible) at the end of the year,
some portions of it. He, himself, is promoting the model ordinance
that I handed to you; the State PTA is and I sit on their advisory
board along with people like Bill Honig; (Unintelligible) Council of
Alcohol Problems; the District Attorney of this County and his
colleagues in the DA association of the State; the County alcohol
problems structure and the drug system for the County is also
promoting such an ordinance because they realize that there is
something we can all do locally without waiting for Sacramento or
Washington to do for us as we try to fight the national war on drugs
and the number one killer of young people in this Country and anywhere
you go in the United States, is still alcohol. If you're between 15
and 24 in this Country you're going to die from three causes of death;
accidents, usually traffic accidents; murder; and suicide in that
order. Not natural causes but those three. Where you've got kids in
those age groups that normally will be the way they will go. Then a
little closer down to kids in school, beer is 79 percent of all booze
consumption in this State; 79 percent of all alcoholic beverage
consumption is with beer; 15 percent is wine. So, that 94 percent of
all so-called booze consumption is in beer and wine form. Ironically,
the most proliferating, fastest growing, 56 percent faster than the
population here in California, license in the State, is the very one
being sought here, tonight. At the ABC level they call it a Type 41
license. Nothing is growing faster than on-sale, restaurant-type,
pizza-type licenses. Second fastest one is convenience store license,
package store, Type 20. We're talking about beer, chiefly, the drug
of choice of drinking drivers, the drug of choice of young males, the
drug of choice of most of our criminal population. Contrary to what
newspapers may print about the other exotic drugs, this is the number
one drug. It's also one of the cheapest. The price of a six-pack may
be a lot cheaper than a six-pack of Coke in recent years. Getting
closer to home; census tract information. A check with the ABC
office in E1 Monte revealed last week that that census tract is in a
high crime area as defined by the ABC, high crime. What does that
mean? To them, 20 percent over the County average of reportable
crimes by the Sheriff's Department is a high crime district; not in
itself a reason to deny but a reason to consider, carefully. They
have a lot of escape clauses and other things to consider. That
district is in a high crime area, especially so for off-sale
licenses. They like to bifurcate the system and treat off-sale a
little stricter than on-sale. It's 39 percent over, by the way, the
County average in crime. It's already saturated in terms of ABC
perspective for packaged stores. If.this were a packaged store
request, a Type 20, it would be easy to beat at the ABC level,
whatever you did here. In fact, I understand the protestants already
have some protests.before ABC and I think it will delay the process
even without an attorney, probably for a year because of the
administrative hearing process and continuances and if they decide to
hire an attorney, who knows when alcohol will be sold at that
location. These are some of the probabilities or possibilities.
There is also the possibility of compromise. I don't live in the
area, I just came in to this thing recently but those are the politics
of alcohol protest and negotiations in California. With respect to
the connection to kids the average rule of thumb by authorities,
police authorities, who work with the ABC in their sting operations,
when they're looking for illegal sales to minors ...by the way, 65
percent of all violations of the control laws on alcohol in the State
involve illegal sales to minors the rule of thumb is about 50-52
percent of all establishments, even after they're warned by letter and
the news is out and it has to be done so it's not entrapment, by the
cc 7-11-89
Page H9
• 0
CHAVIRA CONTINUES: rules and procedures of the ABC working with law
enforcement authorities about half of the establishments of all types,
will sell to minors. Usually, a 19-year old Eagle Scout or something
like that goes in and it's all done fairly legally but with advance
warning and that's what happens. That's the concern that I would
imagine some of the`protestants here have expressed because they care
about kids, they're in a kids business or whatever it is and that
perhaps local authorities anxious to make a penny on the dollar for
sales tax purposes and who doesn't need money these days for
government operations sometimes may be myopic in that the County costs
for alcohol misuse in this county amount to about four hundred million
dollars a year. It's greater than what Saul has mentioned to you,
that was just drinking driving. Yet, the single greatest cost is not
to the health and safety agencies of the County of which there are
many, all the law enforcement agencies, but the Department of Public
Social Services. It's a welfare problem in Los Angeles County. AFDC
and relief account for the major brunt of that four hundred million
dollars. There are not enough adequate fathers in the family to take
care of the business of fathering adequately. That's why the County
got concerned because the impact, fiscally, on it. well, it has a
piece of the action in terms of human social services which generally
you don't have under the police and fire protection services maybe a
little bit more than that, you may not see the human service factor.
Alcohol is here to stay. The problem is how do you balance what was
brought up earlier by the gentleman from Nissan, business, convenience
and necessity, and the public health, safety, welfare, peace, and
morals. I mention those holy words because they have not been erased
from the Code that empowers the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control
to function. The purposes of the act are to promote the safety,
health, welfare, peace, and morals of the people of the State and
believe it or not to promote temperance. Temperance does not mean
zero use it also means moderation, somewhere in between, zero up the
middle. In closing, I would like to suggest that perhaps in this
particular consideration you might consider a long-term project as
other cities in the County's doing now in addressing the whole
question of spacing distances between a new outlet, and it's pretty
hard to deal with existing ones....
IMPERIAL: This was brought up at the last meeting, sir. I requested
this already.
CHAVIRA: All right, sir.... and consideration points, so-called by
ABC, for churches, schools, hospitals, playgrounds, and treatment
centers. Those kinds of places are the ones that 600-foot
consideration is given, especially for on-sale licenses, but only in a
slight way. They used to in the old days, automatically deny, now
they just consider it because they have an escape clause in their
rules and the escape clause is business, convenience and necessity.
And you know what that could mean. So, again, we ask for a balance,
whatever is in your good wisdom, you come up with, between
environmental factors affecting a community's quality of life and its
young people and granting just one more, after all what difference can
one more make, it makes an awful lot of difference to the bank, one
more could make. In law enforcement it sure does. Certainly, if you
live near the area, it does. But we at the County level, as far away
as you may think Los Angeles is, are severely impacted by alcohol
misuse, especially as it relates to young people and especially in
this County, as it relates to minorities. That doesn't prove that
there's a connection between what happened here in this location and
what may not happen but I would suggest also that maybe one of your
restrictions, should you choose to grant, should include a restriction
based on the model ordinance in which a copy of the conditions of
granting be on the premises, on call, by a peace officer. I would
hope that you have adequate code enforcement. Because what are we
enforcing or what are we operating under if a copy of the conditions
are not present for the appropriate people upon responding to
complaints or in the course of a natural duty to ask, to compare
what's going on with what you request should happen. Code
enforcement, I submit, is pretty hard to pay for sometimes, but if you
CC 7-11-89
Page #10
0 0
CHAVIRA CONTINUES: don't include something along those lines it's a
little difficult to keep granting or not granting. Thank you so much
for your time and patience. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Clarification. I can go agree with 98 percent of
what you were talking about but I believe you made a derogatory remark
that will be in the Minutes, verbatim, about young nineteen year olds
going in for alcohol, Eagle Scouts. Do you recall making that
statement?
CHAVIRA: Yes, sir and I was one of those, once. So, I don't...I
didn't intend it that way. Let me tell you what that means. These
are the normal sorts of people or cadets that the ABC and police
agencies use to perform a sting operation when they're going to check
for illegal sales to minors. They're assuming that they're quality
young people who have been trained to.....
TAYLOR: You're talking about undercover sting or purchasers?
CHAVIRA: It's an undercover sting with appropriate rules and
regulations.
TAYLOR: But who...where did the Eagle Scout come into it?
CHAVIRA: Sometimes they're used, sir.
TAYLOR: I think it's a very poor choice of words. How many Eagle
Scouts are there out of every hundred scouts?
CHAVIRA: Very few.
TAYLOR: That's right. Two, maybe three, out of every hundred. I
just, I think it's a very poor example to use in your talk.
CHAVIRA: Sorry, sir. Sometimes I get picked on because I happen to
be chicano and some people will say well, you mentioned hispanics. It
doesn't bother me.
TAYLOR: No, there are Eagle chicano Scouts; there's Eagle black
Scouts; there's Eagle Chinese Scouts. I think you ought to clean up
that one phrase. I agree with 98 percent of what you're saying.
CHAVIRA: As you can probably guess, I'm used to a lot of speaking and
no one really programs me, it just comes out naturally. Forgive me,
I'm just a recovering alcoholic.
McDONALD: Thanks a lot, Mr. Chavira. Any other questions from the
Council? The next person I have down here is Phyllis Rabins.
PHYLLIS RABINS: Mr. Mayor, councilmembers. My name is Phyllis
Rabins, 226 Coral View, Monterey Park and I've lived there since 1958.
Last year I participated in public testimony before the County
Regional Planning Commission supporting Supervisor Edelman's ordinance
to stop the over proliferation of alcohol outlets in east Los Angeles.
Since then I have been actively involved trying to stop the over
concentration of alcohol outlets by schools. Newspapers do not paint
a pretty picture of the drunk driver. Drunk drivers kill or maim
thousands of innocent of men, women, and children every year. One can
never be smug and say it will never happen to us or anyone we know.
One of the gravest problems facing our youth today is drugs and the
easy accessibility they have to them. Alcohol is a drug and the worst
offender is beer. Sixty-five percent of ABC violations involves sales
to minors. According to Candy Litner, founder of Mothers Against
Drunk Drivers, alcohol is illegal for those under 21 yet there are
approximately four million alcoholic or problem teenage drinkers in
this country. It is too easy for them to drink and drive. we have
been told an alcohol outlet whether on-sale or off-sale should be a
minimum of 600 feet from schools, playgrounds, parks, churches,
hospitals, or treatment centers. There is a model alcohol ordinance
CC 7-11-89
Page #11
RABINS CONTINUES: that was co-written by John Lovell, legal analyst
in District Attorney Ira Reiner's office; Connie Barber, former legal
analyst for the League of California Cities; Earl Thomas, L.A. City
Attorney's office; David Smith, Executive Director of the Independent
Cities Association; Assemblyman Gary Condit; and Ray Chavira and it is
supported by the State PTA. Your sister city, Monterey Park, recently
passed an alcohol ordinance using this model as the guideline and last
night our Council took action to add amendments that will strengthen
the ordinance. The highest priority you Councilmembers have is the
protection of children in Rosemead as well as neighboring communities.
Tonight you have an opportunity to take steps in the right direction.
Number one, I urge the Council to take every action possible to see
that Seafood City Restaurant is not granted a license to sell beer and
wine. I ask you to deny the CUP. It is located approximately 200
feet from Garvey Intermediate and four hundred feet from Bitely
School. That distance is far too close to schools. Number two, I'd
ask you to put steps in motion to see that Rosemead passes an alcohol
ordinance. If you have second thoughts about taking any of this
action I want to refer you to the July 3rd edition of the L.A. Times
which has a story about all the drunk driving arrests at the start of
the fourth of July weekend. It was far higher than last year. And
I'd like to also refer you to the May 31st edition of the L.A. Times
regarding Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, who is deeply concerned
about death and injuries from drunk driving and is endorsing steps in
hopes of saving lives from drunk drivers. He has lent great prestige
and leadership in his fight against alcoholism. He stated that by
1990 the cost of alcoholism will be one hundred and thirty -six
billion dollars a year, not counting grief and human suffering. He
has offered both steps to preserve human life by separating the act of
drinking from driving and I hope that you tonight put the lives of the
children before the sale of alcohol. Thank you.
McDONALD: Thank you very much, Phyllis. We're going to take a quick,
five-minute break and then we'll come right back.
McDONALD: The hearing is recalled to order. Thank you for standing
by. The next person I have signed up here to speak is Antoinette...?
ANTOINETTE FABELA: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers. My
name is Antoinette Fabela. My address is 3055 N. Prospect in the city
of Rosemead. And I'm here this evening as a concerned citizen. I'd
like to present to you this evening a copy of a letter from the City
of Monterey Park from the Mayor, Barry Hatch, which was sent to the
members of the Garvey School Board and concerned residents. The City
of Monterey Park, which has a number of students in the Garvey School
District, is vitally concerned about the proliferation of ABC permits,
particularly near our schools. We are unable to control drugs in
America, even on our school grounds but as elected officials we do
have the ability to have an impact on the most abused of all drugs,
alcohol. It kills more people, destroys more families, and costs this
nation billions of dollars. Please exercise wisdom, authority, and
responsibility to our youth, encouraging the denial of any and all ABC
permits near our most prized treasure, our youth in their school
setting. And I will leave a couple of copies of this so that some
copies can be made and presented to you. Also, I'd like to make the
statement that I'm very sensitive to the past remarks of the last
meeting, to your feelings that one business should not be isolated for
an issue that should be handled at an ordinance level which would be
effective, City wide. And I'm not in opposition to this futuristic
idea but I would like to invite you to include that thought with the
issue that is presently here and right now before you this evening.
In as much as the Garvey School District has responsibility for the
well being of their children, the City is responsible for the well
being of all.citizens which include children of this community. If I
may be so bold as to say and with all due respect, the City, in
cooperation with the Garvey School District, has supported Just Say
No.... doesn't say Just Say Maybe, If, or But, it says Just Say No....
project and also project SANE. I implore you to stand behind your
commitment and support of these programs by revoking approval of this
cc 7-11-89
Page #12
FABELA CONTINUES: beer and wine permit for if you choose otherwise it
is, in my opinion, hypocritical to what you claim you are committed
to. Prove your commitment to your community's well being right here,
tonight, by revoking this permit. I thank you for your time.
IMPERIAL: Antoinette? I love you like a sister, okay, but I don't
agree with what you just said, that we would be hypocritical by having
a mass decision on something, period. Okay? This Council takes things
on a case-by-case basis and I wanted to bring that to your attention.
Okay?
FABELA: That's my opinion, though, and I appreciate your stand.
Thank you.
MCDONALD: Thank you, Antoinette.
adding these little orange sheets
last speaker in opposition.
Now if I haven't made a mistake
up, we have Mrs. Cleo Young as our
CLEO YOUNG: (7533 E. Garvey Avenue, wife of Leroy Young and
co-appellant) Good evening mayor McDonald and Councilmen. This has
been kind of a long, drawn out affair. Sorry about all the problems
we've had but anyway, I have a paper here for each of you that I'd
like to have you read and consider as you go along with me. Some of
them are not done so forgive me if they don't sound right. My helpers
are all out of town. Dear Mayor McDonald and Council. Please deny
this alcohol license number two by the three Garvey schools. I have a
paper here that's a very important notice to all our children and it
says is our children's health and care and safety important to you.
We believe it is. Our values are our strength. I have here a couple
of letters, it will be real quick, about teenagers that started
drinking when they were fourteen year olds and the mother was called
to the emergency room because she was drunk. She swears she had not
been drinking and she wouldn't do it anymore. But the parents lack of
concern thinking that it wasn't dangerous, that it's just a little
glass of wine or beer or something and so the warning signal was there
and five other youngsters were full-blown alcoholics before no time
and that's when she started was fourteen. I have information that
they are starting at eight, now. And also pushing drugs, at eight. I
also have some good papers though, encouraging because some of the
children are getting sick and tired of running out and trying to get
drink and drugs for their friends. So, that's kind of a turn around.
And I think it's a good thing. But anyway, the children of today are
our leaders of tomorrow and if we want the very best from our
children, which we all do, we've got to set the best thing in front of
them and certainly we cannot have alcoholic places where, right in
front of their noses, where they go back and forth to McDonald's, back
and forth to school, three or four times a day. That's why kids think
well, when they get twelve years old if they drink and smoke, they're
full grown adults. And I had a talk.... they have that radio program
talk where you call in.... this lady called in just recently, and said
she wanted to pass this on for what it means for you and lived by
these wonderful neighbors and knew their parents and they were
wonderful people but the daughter and her husband, every time they
went out to eat they let their kids have Shirley Temples and Roy Roger
drinks. And she said today, they're all grown up but they're a bunch
of drunks and they're not worth anything. She said they're just a
disgrace to our country. So, these are the things that we got to
understand that we have got to make a choice. We went through the
Planning Commission and they came and summed it up that one more is
not going to make any difference because they're all up and down the
street, anyway. Well, I'm going to tell you one more car on the
highway in an accident with a drunk driver it can go on for
thirty-five cars and I have seen that demonstrated on T.V. One more
of anything is too much and if certainly one more teenager that
commits suicide because they're high on drugs and addicts of alcohol
because they're only at fourteen or fifteen years old. Certainly
everyone of us has got a responsibility to turn this around and is the
money really that important. That we're going to take money at the
expense of our children's safety. We have got to consider that this
cc 7-11-89
Page #13
C. YOUNG CONTINUES: is number two license for the Seafood Restaurant
and we want make sure that don't think we're on their side because
this is the opposite side and we're in protest of this number CUP
89-460, 7540 Garvey Avenue and they also have ...it's called Seafood
Restaurant.... and they also have another place on Garvey right across
the street from the Garvey School. We have also the Arlene Bitely
School and the Emerson School. Three schools that go back and forth to
school every day and back and forth to McDonald's. And they have to
pass these places. So, they're going also by the cars. Now, these
people who are having an innocent glass of wine or beer with their
meal, right? But how many did they have before they went in and how
many do they drink while they're there? There are.... everybody knows
there's one more drunk in every party and what happens to him? He is
a nuisance. Now, we've had people that have harassed our daughters.
We have four beautiful girls who go down to the Alpha Beta center and
there's not a one of them dare go down there anymore because drunken
people come and addicts that come out and harass them and follow them
home. And they have to run over and through McDonald's and come
around this other way so that they will not be seen where they live.
They don't want to let them where they live. And they're so scared
now they won't go down there anymore. We have drunks that come up
Garvey Boulevard. They're in the middle of the street. They do not
know where they are. We had three drunks, just not in not too long a
time, removed from our front yard and our policemen were very kind and
came right over and took them away. But this is a harassing affair
that people are putting up with people are putting bars up to their
places and we've got the wrong people in prison. So, I beg each one
of you to please ...we don't need the money that bad, now. I know the
Chamber of Commerce is trying to get the money into the City but I ask
you that we don't need it that bad at the expense of the children, do
we? I thank you very much for the privilege of coming here and I love
our country. I fight night and day for it and I thank you.
MCDONALD: Thank you very much, Cleo. That was the last sheet that I
have on people who were speaking in opposition. Is there anybody else
that I might have missed? Okay, Mr. Clark.
JAMES CLARK: My name is James Clark and I'm a neighbor of the Youngs
and very good friends. My address is 3109 N. Prospect. I just want
to say that I concur with virtually everything that's been said here
tonight. I have eight children. We have probably 20 or 30 kids that
frequent our home very regularly that we know and we love them all. I
think.... let's do our best for the kids. It's awful hard being a kid
today. It's hard in 1989 to be a child. There are a lot of things
against them and I think we've had a lot of people with good, sound
reasoning tonight and I just want to throw my support to my good
friends, the Youngs.
McDONALD: Thank you, Mr. Clark. Nobody else speaking in opposition,
Mr. Lim this is your opportunity to come up and speak in rebuttal of
what has been said and to conclude the hearing.
LIM: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the opportunity to say a
few more words. After hearing all these concerned citizens I really
have a lot of respect for all these people who came out tonight so
concerned about the alcoholics. I'm pretty sure all the people in
here; we're all concerned about alcoholics. But by denying the CUP
for Seafood City I don't think that's going to solve the problem. I'd
like to see the City do whatever we can, have some kind of program, we
can do something about alcoholics. But by denying a CUP to the
Seafood City, I think that would be just a penalty for Seafood City.
Seafood City was coming into the City of Rosemead about four years
ago. I personally brought them into the City of Rosemead when they
opened that little restaurant next to Alpha Beta. They were doing
well and after one year they were asked to get a CUP, got a beer and
wine license, and they were serving beer and wine since then. I don't
think they have any incidents or anything happen in that restaurant at
all. So, they were doing so well and they saved enough money to buy a
piece of property to buy the piece of property on the corner of Garvey
CC 7-11-89
Page #14
LIM CONTINUES: and Prospect for one million dollars and they spent
half a million dollars to improve that corner. Now, they'd like to
compete with some other restaurants in Monterey Park or anyplace in
the next cities but now if you deny this CUP I think it would be a
penalty for them not to compete with the other restaurants. It
bothers a lot of people about the...some of the conditions in
there ...the children are going to school at that time. They'll not
really be able to see any of the people that drink in the restaurant.
Also, there's a condition in there ...a guard will be at the parking
lot that the business is open and another condition was the Planning
Commission granted Seafood City for a six-month trial. In this six
months, if they have any problems they could be denied a beer and wine
license. So, I'd like to see the Council and the Mayor grant Seafood
City a CUP. Thank you very much.
MCDONALD: Thank you very much, Mr. Lim.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I would request that at this time that anyone
that had spoken in opposition might have a chance for rebuttal, also.
Maybe Mr. Young because he paid the fees.
McDONALD: Anyone else wish to speak?
UNIDENTIFIED: (Diane Martinez?) With regard to Mr. Lim's comment.
One of the things that he asserted was that Seafood City didn't have
any problems with the beer and wine license before at their other
location and what I'm going to suggest to you is that even if they
did, they wouldn't know it. I mean people would go in there and drink
and what they did after they left that premises is anybody's guess and
that it never came back to roost as a problem for them only means that
they just didn't find out about it. So, I wouldn't lend a whole lot
of credibility to that in terms of a statement. Over all, once again,
the Garvey School Board is looking for your support on this issue and
we appreciate the opportunity to address you. I think that the points
that Mr. Lim raised in terms of let's give it a chance are not really
valid because, you know there's the argument that we bring before you
is that our concern is we don't find out after we've had a tragic
incident that it's not going to work. We want to stop it before it
starts and we don't to create the possibility and that's basically it.
I want to thank you one more time for your time. Okay? Thanks.
McDONALD: Leroy?
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor, I meant one.
L. YOUNG: We've all heard of areas like automobile row and we don't
want the Garvey School area to become alcohol row. Allowing this for
six months and if nothing goes wrong reminds me of playing the
roulette wheel in Las Vegas. If the black number doesn't come up for
ten times you think, well, it's bound to come up next time. Well, it
has just the same chance of coming up on the tenth time as it did on
first. Just because something goes well for six months is no
assurance that it's going to go well from then on. I thank you.
McDONALD: Thank you very much, Leroy. That concludes the public
input on this hearing. It is now opened for Council discussion. Let
me start it off in saying that I don't think there is anybody in this
room that doesn't find alcoholism repugnant. Any time you pick up the
paper on a daily basis some poor, innocent individual is killed,
maimed or incapacitated in some manner because somebody who has taken
a vehicle or has gone astray just in his home, or something because of
alcoholism somebody has been injured. So, I don't think there is any
question that anybody here believes that alcoholism is a problem in
this State, in this Country and also in this community, too, just like
the rest of the drugs are. This is a dilemma for the Council people
that sit here because we have always looked at the ordinances that we
pass, we look at our resolutions and our regulations and we've tried
not to discriminate against anybody. We don't pick one individual out
and say well, you meet all the requirements in this ordinance but we
decided not to give it to you. We've always tried not to do that and
cc 7-11-89
Page #15
• •
McDONALD CONTINUES: we've made every effort to do that. But it's an
emotional issue in this case, I think. When you're talking about
children, you're talking about those little individuals who don't have
the same faculties as the adults and they seem to be a lot smarter in
a lot of different ways and they're injured because maybe an adult
drinks or something like that. So, it's a dilemma for us and I'm
going to have each one of the Councilmen have his input if he likes
and then we'll come up with a decision, here. Mr. DeCocker, do you
have any input?
DeCOCKER: Mr. Avila. Could you tell me the school hours for the
Bitely School and the Garvey school? Thank you. What I hear a
lot tonight and especially from the Youngs is their concern with a
business that has liquor during school hours. What I would like to
propose for your consideration and also from Mr. Lim, is somehow we
come up with some hours that they do not sell liquor, beer and wine,
during school hours, or maybe extend that to one hour after the end of
the school day. That way when children are in the area, no one
leaving that business will have been drinking alcohol. Children going
by the business, looking in the doors, will not see anyone drinking
alcohol. So, as far as the children are concerned they don't see
anything. There's some good built-in conditions. They were alluded
to tonight; a security guard provided for the parking lot during
restaurant operating hours. I'm quite sure and I know the businesses
are concerned... they do not want to see people leaving their
businesses intoxicated to where they can't drive. This is kind of a
safe guard when you have that guard out there all the time. They will
not serve beer or wine without food so you can't go in and just buy
liquor, beer and wine, and just sit there by the hour and consume it.
They do have another condition that beer and wine shall not be served
later than twelve o'clock midnight. We know a lot of times when most
of the accidents happen is after two o'clock when they've had a longer
time to consume alcohol and that's when the accidents happen. So, I
don't know Mr. Lim, would that be an agreeable condition? Cleo,
usually night programs, parents are involved in night programs. In
other words children.... when I was in the school business, your
parents brought you and your parents picked you up and there were
nights when parents didn't show up that I had the Sheriff take the
children down to the station and they waited for the parents to pick
them up. Mr. Lim?
McDONALD: Mr. DeCocker. Why don't we give an example. Maybe no
liquor sales before four o'clock or something like that. What he's
making is a suggestion if we deny the appeal and add that as a
condition, you'd have to accept that condition or you wouldn't get the
CUP, anyhow. Anything you want to add to that, Bob?
DeCOCKER: I was just waiting for a comment from Mr. Lim if that would
be an agreeable condition I'm just thinking about a kind of a
trade off. They're concerned about the drunk drivers that are leaving
the establishment and possibly running over a child or something like
that, this would be a kind of trade off.
IMPERIAL: My suggestion is, Mr. Mayor, is if Mr. Lim is worried about
taking associates to lunch, he take them to the one that's already got
a license.
McDONALD: Anything else, Bob?
DeCOCKER: No, not at this time.
McDONALD: Mr. Taylor. Do you have any input that you'd like to
express? Mr. Young, you had your chance. The Council is
discussing it, now.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. As you said, it's going to be a dilemma but we
have to make a decision one way or the other. And I think there's
going to have to be a concession on both sides. I don't think we're
going to have it all one way. The residents do have a right to come
up and protest the issuing of these licenses and there is a lot of
cc 7-11-89
Page #16
• 0
TAYLOR CONTINUES: validity when they're near schools, even the State
Alcoholic and Beverage Control, they do have that very specifically,
and I believe it's in there for just what we're seeing tonight. If
it's in a particular area there's got to be a lot more scrutiny given
to it. But on the other hand I believe the owner has the right for a
legitimate business that many other businesses in the area have, not
within the 600 feet possibly. I think the biggest problem that we
have with alcohol that youth gets today....I know the liquor stores
and the quick convenience stores I mentioned the problem on the
fourth of July there where there were a couple of carloads of kids
there that parked on the street. They just got out and started
drinking their beer and throwing the bottles on the street, out of
control. But there's a situation where I don't believe they bought
those bottles of beer at a restaurant such as what Mr. Lim is talking
about. But, again, to totally and arbitrarily deny Mr. Lim a
possible solution; that's the dilemma that we do have. And yet I
certainly sympathize with what the residents are talking about. Mr.
DeCocker made, I think, a reasonable suggestion. I would have a
problem even with four o'clock to tell you the truth. That's all I
have at this time, Mr. Mayor.
McDONALD:_ Mr. Imperial?
IMPERIAL: Okay, first of all, there have been several things here
that I find have been said that I find a little offensive and no hard
feelings because I see a lot of my friends sitting out here in the
audience but I would like to clear the air on a few things. First of
all, I would like to say that I know some mighty fine, fine people
that take a drink or two, occasionally. And if that's to be faulted
then that drink that I might take once a year, and I haven't had one
in a year and I had one, then I should be faulted for it if it's just
a plain sin to have a drink once in a while. I'm leading to a point
and the point is this ...no matter how much that this body legislates
or any body and that includes Sacramento, the County, or Washington,
D.C., there will never be any law that they can legislate that will
legislate good old common sense and the lack of it. Okay? You can't
legislate common sense. There has been several comments in here as to
the dangers of drunk drivers. I would like to sit here and tell you
at this time that the vast majority of automobile accidents, drunk
drivers, etcetera, that have been incarcerated within the City limits
of Rosemead are not Rosemead citizens but they're from outside the
City. Okay? And facts and figures will bear this out. So, we're
dealing with something bigger and better than all of us. Okay? I
think a great deal of emotion has been attached to this and rightfully
so. There have been some words that are far reaching words like
prejudice, discrimination, etcetera, that have been used here tonight
that may have not had any bearing on this, on what we're trying to
determine tonight. I, myself, if I had my way and hope we'll get my
way someday that there will not be an additional license issued in
this City. Okay? But to zero in on one individual who is trying to
get a license is not going to resolve the problem. It is not going to
do the trick. This City Council has to do its homework and determine
what they want to do about the problem. Let's go back a few years to
before I became a Council person. I took Alpha Beta to task across
the street because they wanted an ABC license. There was a liquor
store right next door and still is. At the time that center was built
the plan and commitment was there would only be one liquor store there
and nobody else would sell it so we wouldn't be saturating this little
area. Alpha Beta came in, decided they wanted to put alcohol in and I
took them to task. At that time, within a two-mile radius, if I can
recall, within both Alpha Beta markets on the south side of town and
on the north, there were 80 licenses that had been issued. I was
upset with the fact. I still don't like it. I went as far as the
referee with Alpha Beta and all that was determined was that I was in
contempt of court because I made a comment after a committal had been
made to Alpha Beta that they could sell alcoholic beverages, and I did
my homework, that big money wins again, and I was found in contempt of
court that time but released. But the fact remains, it's not a new
problem. It's been there. We're not going to tackle it by zeroing in
on Seafood City or whatever the name of it is. We're going to tackle
cc 7-11-89
Page #17
IMPERIAL CONTINUES: it by doing our homework and saying this is what
we need in the City and this is what we want. Okay? We only need so
many of this kind of restaurants. If we get restaurants, we need
another kind. They don't all have to have ABC licenses. As far as
I'm concerned we can stop right here and not issue any more. But I do
feel like we shouldn't zero in on anybody without a plan. Okay? I
really don't. So, consequently, we're looking at just a small portion
of the problem. Has anybody thought about the....... Diane, I see your
hand. Do you have something to say? I was getting to that.
Okay Mrs. Young, if anybody's kids are out on the street at that
time of night....... they should be supervised. I would like to finish
this if I can, please. Okay. If we want to be looking at anything
should we also be looking at, for instance, right across the street is
a liquor store where you can go in there any time of the day,
including school hours, and find three or four kids in there playing
video machines while adults are walking in, buying the alcohol and
buying, in my opinion, pornographic magazines that they're authorized
to sell, etcetera. I've walked right down here to Mission Valley
Liquor and seen a hat that offended me and wound up buying two of them
off the shelf so that people in this City wouldn't see them and asking
those people that owned that place if they would bring those home to
their kids and they said, no. So, we're not just looking at one
issue, we're looking at many. Okay? This is just a small part of it,
is what I'm trying to say. I think that if we're going to okay this
license, I think that this should be for a period of six months only.
I think that no alcohol should be sold in there until after five or
five-thirty in the evening. I think this should only be good for six
months or until such time as an ordinance is passed by this Council
whether we tell explicitly what we need and we can either deny it from
that point on or adjust it, if this Council does take that. Okay? I
feel by..... Mrs. Young, please.... doing this that we're not only
keeping our commitment to the people in this community, which we
represent but also we're trying to say to a business community, and I
don't believe, myself, I want to get this straight, that a business
has to sell alcohol to be successful. Okay? I don't believe it. But
I think we're also telling the business community that this Council is
also aware that we need a good, healthy business environment in this
City to survive, also. Okay?
MCDONALD: Cleo, thank you very much. You had your opportunity to
input. At this time, let's take a look at a motion, here. And I'll
take the heat, all right? Because this is a family restaurant, I see
it as a family restaurant in its location. It's not a beer bar. It
has no happy hour. It has a past record of conducting itself in a
good businesslike manner in this community. It meets all the
conditions of the present ordinance that we have. I make the motion
that we deny the appeal and add the condition that there is no
packaged sales of any alcohol or wine off the premises; that there's
no sale of alcohol before the hours of five o'clock on school days;
and remembering that the ABC actually makes the final decision in this
case, we're not making the final decision on the issuing of the
license and there will be a hearing where all of you people can be
heard again before the ABC. I make that motion to deny the appeal.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I could possibly support this only if the
alcohol, beer and wine, were sold during mealtimes, only. If this
restaurant was open to twelve o'clock at night, then we'd have alcohol
being served until twelve o'clock at night and if we're talking
about.... dinner time I mean, dinner time only.
McDONALD: I think in this instance people eat at different times.
After five o'clock until whenever the restaurant closes, it's already
a condition as the attorney pointed out, that it can only be served
with food only. I think that kind of covers it that they have to
serve it with food. That's the motion, gentlemen.
DeCOCKER: I'll second that motion, Mr. Mayor.
IMPERIAL: And this is for a six-month period.
CC 7-11-89
Page #18
•
•
MCDONALD: Right. That's part of the conditions.
IMPERIAL: And this can be denied after six months or reconstructed to
meet the needs of whatever the Council comes up with to try to fix
this problem. In other words, if they come with we won't have any
alcohol from this point on, this is what's going to happen.
McDONALD: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
TAYLOR: Yes, Mr. Mayor. A question to Mr. Lim. Our action will
really mean nothing unless he's going to accept the hours. otherwise,
I'll just vote no on it.
McDONALD: We set the conditions here.
hours, we don't issue the CUP.
TAYLOR: We're doing a moot motion then
sense. Question to Mr. Lim? Are you g,
McDONALD: Monday through Friday You
stated?.....
IMPERIAL: What are the conditions, Mr.
If he doesn't accept the
just for appeasement, in one
Ding to accept the conditions?
accept the conditions as
Mayor? I didn't.....
MCDONALD: They're listed on page......
IMPERIAL: I'm talking about the six-month period.
McDONALD: It's a part of the original conditions listed by the
Planning Commission.
IMPERIAL: And no packaged sales, period?
McDONALD: That's an addition that Mr. Chavira pointed out....
IMPERIAL: And during mealtimes, Monday through Friday.
McDONALD: Mealtimes, Monday through Friday. We have a motion and a
second. Gentlemen, any further discussion?
DeCOCKER: Call for the question.
McDONALD: Please vote.
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
McDONALD: The results of the vote was that the appeal by Mr. and Mrs.
Young has been denied by the City Council.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I would like at this time to request that staff
set up a survey again of all business licensed in the community to
sell alcoholic beverages. I would like a survey of other cities that
tells us what they do about alcoholic beverages, how they restrict
them. I want all this information put back together and brought back
to the City Council for a study session because I firmly believe that
this incident that happened tonight should not happen again. I think
that we have to take a stand to restrict the issuance of ABC licenses
and keep the number that we've got at status quo. I believe that when
an individual releases a license then there would be room for one
person to get a license. We're not going to become a dry city, that's
a fact but we are going to be able to restrict licenses. I am very
scared that in the future, at the rate we're going, that everybody, no
matter where you go; you go down to Astro hamburger or you go to
Rick's hot dog stand, everybody is going to be applying for ABC
licenses and we're going to have a problem on our hands.
CC 7-11-89
Page #19
MCDONALD: Thank you, Jay. I would also like to direct staff to take
our ordinance that we have intact now, and compare it to the model
alcoholic beverage ordinance and see if we can tighten up the
restrictions.
END VERBATIM DIALOGUE
A ten-minute recess was called at this time and the meeting was
reconvened accordingly.
B. A PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD REQUIRE
A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED FEET BETWEEN SPRAY BOOTHS
IN THE M-1 ZONE AND LAWFULLY ZONED OR USED RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTY (RES 89-41)
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Dale Denton, 3026 N. Bartlett Avenue, Rosemead, expressed his
approval of this ordinance to provide a buffer zone of two hundred
feet.
Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar, expressed concerns that 200 feet might
not be far enough from the residences.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 645
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING BUSINESSES WHICH
OPERATE SPRAY BOOTHS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL USES
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
ordinance No. 645 be introduced on its first reading and that reading
in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
C. A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF HEARING PROTESTS RELATING
TO THE ASSESSMENT OF CONCRETE IMPROVEMENTS ON STEVENS AVENUE
(GRAVES/GARVALIA)
The Mayor opened the public hearing and there being no one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL that
the Council direct staff to proceed with the street construction
following the expiration of the 60-day period. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
III.LEGISLATIVE
A. RESOLUTION NO. 89-33 - CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
CC 7-11-89
Page #20
RESOLUTION NO. 89-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $628,458.07
NUMBERED 24920-24946 AND 25437 THROUGH 25509 INCLUSIVELY
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR
that Resolution No. 89-33 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
The City Treasurer noted that two checks, numbered 25453 and
25464, had been withdrawn to be voided and reissued because of
incorrect vendor numbers/names.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 646 - ALLOWING A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2405 DEL MAR AVENUE AND 7701-7713 GRAVES AVENUE -
ADOPT
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 646
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-2 AND C-11) TO P-D FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2405 DEL MAR AVENUE AND 7701-7713 GRAVES
AVENUE
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
ordinance No. 646 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
C. RESOLUTION NO. 89-34 - SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF
THE BFI SUNSHINE CANYON LANDFILL
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE BFI SUNSHINE CANYON
LANDFILL
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER that
Resolution No. 89-34 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
D. RESOLUTION NO. 89-35 - TO ALLOW REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT
FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS IN GARVEY AVENUE AT WALNUT
GROVE AND DEL MAR AVENUES, AND VALLEY BOULEVARD AT WALNUT
GROVE AVENUE
CC 7-11-89
Page #21
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
MODIFICATIONS IN GARVEY AVENUE AT WALNUT GROVE AVENUE, GARVEY
AVENUE AT DEL MAR AVENUE AND VALLEY BOULEVARD AT WALNUT GROVE
AVENUE
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR that
Resolution No. 89-35 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
E. RESOLUTION NO. 89-36 - SUPPORTING 0
REGARDING BURNING THE AMERICAN FLAG
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
SUPPORTING A FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT EXPRESSING
STRONG DISAGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT'S
DECISION TO ALLOW THE DESECRATION OF THE AMERICAN FLAG AND
WHICH BANS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FLAG
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL that
Resolution No. 89-36 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
F. RESOLUTION NO. 89-37 - REQUESTING THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL TO DISCONTINUE THE
PRACTICE OF SELLING ANIMALS FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH WHICH COME
FROM THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
This item was deferred to the next regular meeting for staff to
revise the resolution, including options, alternatives and the
possible development of identification procedures for all animals.
G. RESOLUTION NO. 89-38 - HONORING THE 25th ANNIVERSARY OF THE
MUSIC CENTER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-38
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
HONORING THE 25th ANNIVERSARY OF THE MUSIC CENTER OF LOS
ANGELES COUNTY
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN DeCOCKER
that Resolution No. 89-38 be adopted. Vote resulted:
CC 7-11-89
Page #22
Yes: DeCocker,
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
0
Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEM CC-A REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION)
CC-B AUTHORIZATION FOR CITY CLERK TO ATTEND ANNUAL CONFERENCE -
CONTINUING EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN SANTA BARBARA,
AUGUST 13-18, 1989
CC-C ACCEPTANCE OF WORK - 1988-89 SLURRY SEAL ON VARIOUS STREETS
CC-D .ACCEPTANCE OF STREET EASEMENT FOR KELBURN AVENUE
(GARVEY/GRAVES)
CC-E COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL
IMPROVEMENTS IN GARVEY AVENUE AT WALNUT GROVE AND DEL MAR
AVENUES, AND VALLEY BOULEVARD AT WALNUT GROVE AVENUE
CC-F SB 1109 (Kopp) - DRIVER'S LICENSE SUSPENSION: VANDALISM
CC-G AB 2236 (Costa) - HOUSING PROGRAMS
CC-H 1989-90 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR that
the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote
resulted:
Yes: DeCocker, Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC-A ENGINEERING PROPOSAL FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS IN
GARVEY AVENUE AT WALNUT GROVE AND DEL MAR AVENUES, AND
VALLEY BOULEVARD AT WALNUT GROVE AVENUE
Councilman DeCocker expressed the opinion that having
approximately 25% of the total project being spent for engineering
fees was an excessive amount. Mr. DeCocker added that the Council has
nothing with which to compare these prices for their validity.
Alfonso Rodriguez, City Engineer, agreed that this was more than
the 18% usually allocated for such fees but explained that traffic
signal design is very labor intensive.
MOTION BY MAYOR McDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR that the
Council approve the engineering proposal; direct staff to begin the
preparation of the necessary plans and specifications; and authorize
staff to procure the traffic signal poles and mast arms. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Taylor, McDonald, Imperial
No: DeCocker
Absent: Bruesch
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor stated that he tended to agree with Mr. DeCocker
but was unsure of a reliable method to verifty those costs.
Councilman DeCocker requested copies of all the weekly observation
reports:
CC 7-11-89
Page #23
r
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION & ACTION
A. SCHEDULING OF STUDY SESSION WITH PLANNING
It was decided that the City Council would meet with the
Planning Commission on Tuesday, August, 29, 1989, at 7:00 p.m.
VI. STATUS REPORTS
A. NONE
VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS
A. COUNCILMAN TAYLOR
1. Requested a report from staff on all the outstanding
claims that are on file against the.City.
2. Requested a report explaining the increase in the
assessment by the Southern California Joint Powers Insurance
Association (SCJPIA) that is being charged to all member cities.
VIII.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. NONE
There being no further action to be taken at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. The next regular meeting is
scheduled for July 25, 1989, at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted: APPROV
y clerk MAYOR
CC 7-11-89
Page #24