CC - 01-24-06•
i
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
January 24, 2006
Mayor Imperial called the regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council to order at 8:08
pm in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead,
California.
Councilmember Tran led the Pledge to the Flag. Councilmember Clark delivered the
Invocation.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmembers Clark, Nunez, Tran,
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor and Mayor Imperial
Absent: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None
1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Charles Lyons, Rosemead resident, made a request on behalf of parents and students
that walk to Encinitas and Muscatel schools. Mr. Lyons asked that a full cross walk be
installed by the schools to ensure pedestrian safety. He submitted signatures and a
letter from parents to Ken Rukavina, City Engineer.
Councilmember Clark recommended that Mr. Lyons also request a second crossing
guard at those Intersections, as a crosswalk sometimes gives people a false sense of
security.
Brian Lewin, residing at 9442 E. Ralph Street, spoke in support of the recall election.
He indicated petition circulation in four languages, would be done, if required.
Nancy Wilson, residing at 8049 E. Emerson Place, expressed offense when Polly Low
supporters came to her door to show her how to vote in the recall; she also inferred that
some of the Councilmembers might have a conflict of interest regarding Wal-Mart as
they have family members that work there. She asked both sides work with one
another and play fair.
Marlene Shinen, residing at 8447 Drayer Lane, South San Gabriel, spoke about Wal-
Mart construction effects such as dust. She advocated that city officials should monitor
construction efforts.
Juan R. Nunez, residing at 2702 Del Mar, requested the City remove the benches from
the bus stop that doesn't run anymore at Del Mar and Garvey. He also asked that
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page I of 12
•
shopping carts from the 99 Cents Store at Del Mar and Gravelia be removed.
Dolly Leong, residing at 8455 Mission Drive, asked the Council to defer Consent
Calendar Item C. She indicated that she had not received notice the item would
be on the agenda today and she needed time to prepare her documentation regarding
the item.
Councilmember Tran asked Mayor Imperial to defer the item; Mayor Imperial granted
the request. Item description is below:
CC-C REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTION ADJACENT TO A FIRE
HYDRANT BE REDUCED AT 7665 GRAVES AVENUE
A property owner requested that the parking restriction adjacent to a fire
hydrant in front of her property at 7665 Graves Avenue be reduced. The
Traffic Commission deliberated this matter and the request was denied
and referred to the City Council.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council concur with
the Traffic Commission and deny the request to reduce the parking
restriction adjacent to the fire hydrant in front of 7665 Graves Avenue.
Councilmember Clark asked why Ms. Leong had not received the agenda notice and
asked that City staff check the address on file for her.
Linda Kilpatrick, residing at 4716 Walnut Grove, thanked the council for their
responsiveness in paving Walnut Grove after her complaint last year and for repainting
curb street numbers. She suggested that the City pass an ordinance against
abandoned shopping carts. Assistant City Manager Don Wagner explained that the City
has a contract with Shopping Cart Retrieval and most of the stores also contract with
vendors that pick up shopping carts. For unmarked shopping carts, the City relies upon
people calling those in to be picked up by City staff.
Caroline Kunioka, residing at 8400 Wells Street, spoke against the new Wal-Mart and
in support of the Recall Election. She felt the Council had not fully considered seismic
impacts during EIR approval.
Velia Navarro, residing at 2239 N. Angeles Avenue, expressed concerns for the safety
of children due to an open gate at the Wal-Mart construction site. In addition, she asked
how the council proposes to assist smaller stores in the community that might suffer as
a result of the Wal-Mart opening.
Ron Gay, residing at 4106 Encinitas Ave., discussed Mr. Stephen Ly's accusation that
his mother did not know what she was signing when she signed the recall petition. Mr.
Gay stated that Mrs. Ly was not forced or coerced into signing the petition and was
given a hand out that was written in English, Spanish and Chinese to help explain the
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 2 of 12
C
0
issues. According to accounts as expressed to Mr. Gay, Ms. Ly said that her son made
the decisions in the family and canvassers left the literature with Ms. Ly. On their way
off the property, Ms. Ly (as stated by Mr. Gay) then called out to the-three canvassers
and stated she would sign the petition. Mr. Gay also discussed the work connection
between Mike Lewis and City Manager Bill Crowe in Pete Schabarum's office.
Faye Reynolds, residing at, 8979 Beatrice Place, expressed frustration regarding the
lack of mainstream retail and grocery shopping opportunities for residents.
Mayor Imperial outlined his efforts to try and get retailers to set up in Rosemead.
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
3. LEGISLATIVE
A. Resolution No. 2006-01 - Claims and Demands for payment of City
expenditures in the amount of $827,428.71 numbered 51521 through 51577.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2006-01, for payment of City
expenditures.
Councilmember Tran made a motion, with a second by Councilmember Nunez to
approve Resolution 2006-01 for payment of City expenditures in the amount of
$827,428.71 numbered 51521 through 51577. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Imperial, Nunez, Taylor, Tran
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-A APPROVA L OF 2006-07 BUDGET CALENDAR
Review the Budget Calendar for the Preparation of the Annual Budget for
Fiscal Year 2006-07. The proposed budget study session is scheduled for
Tuesday, June 6, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Rosemead City Council
approve the 2006-07 Budget Calendar.
CC-B ACCE PTANCE OF WORK FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON SAN
GABRIEL BOULEVARD
The project has been completed in conformance with the approved plans
and specifications and is ready for acceptance.
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 3 of 12
•
•
Recommendation: Accept the project, authorize recordation of the
Notice of Completion by the City Clerk, and authorize release of the
retention payment 35 days after the date of the Notice of Completion.
CC-D AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
ANNUAL CONGRESSIONAL CITY CONFERENCE, WASHINGTON D.C.
-MARCH 11-15, 2006
Authorization to attend Annual National League of Cities conference in
Washington, DC, March 11-15, 2006. This conference provides the City
Council with the opportunity to discuss issues at the federal government
level.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the
attendance of any Councilmember, City Manager and staff as assigned by
the City Manager.
CC-E REQUES T TO INSTALL PARKING RESTRICTIONS AT 2525 SAN
GABRIEL BOULEVARD
Staff received a request from a business owner at 2525 San Gabriel
Boulevard to install time limit parking. The Traffic Commission
recommended installing 40 feet of time limit parking (green curb) and 16
feet of red curb.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
Traffic Commission recommendation to install green (20-minute time limit)
and red curb in front of 2525 San Gabriel Boulevard.
CC-F REQUEST TO INSTALL RED CURB AT DRIVEWAYS OF MUSCATEL
MIDDLE SCHOOL ON LAWRENCE AVENUE
Staff received a request from the Rosemead School District to install red
curb on Lawrence Avenue adjacent to the easterly driveway to Muscatel
Middle School. This was a recommendation of the Fire Marshall. The
Traffic Commission recommended installing 15 feet of red curb on each
side of the driveway.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
Traffic Commission's recommendation to install red curb on Lawrence
Avenue adjacent to the easterly driveway to Muscatel Middle School.
CC-G REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS FOR SPECIAL ELECTION
CC MIN: I-24-06
Page 4 of 12
• 0
The office of the City Clerk has continued to spend certain funds for the
Special Municipal Election, originally scheduled for Tuesday, February 7,
2006. Although a federal judge has granted a Temporary Restraining
Order which halted the election, the City will have to continue to pay for
temporary staff, the election consultants, Martin & Chapman and other
miscellaneous expenses. We need authorization to do so and thus are
requesting that $200,000 be appropriated at this time. Once all invoices
pertaining to the election have been paid, we will prepare a report
summarizing the costs and post a budget transfer for the total cost of the
Special Municipal Election.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Rosemead City Council
appropriate $200,000 from Unappropriated Reserves for the costs
incurred for the Special Election.
CC-H APPROVAL OF SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK
BIDS FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY ON VARIOUS CITY
STREETS
This project provides for an asphalt concrete overlay on various streets
throughout the City.
Recommendation: Approve the specifications and authorize
advertisement for bids by the City Clerk.
Councilmember Nunez made a motion, with a second by Councilmember Tran to
approve Consent Calendar items (with the exception of item CC-C, which was deferred
at the request of resident Dolly Leong). Voted resulted:
Yes: Clark, Imperial, Nunez, Taylor, Tran
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
5. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION
A. DISCUSSION OF THE FEASIBILITY OF CONSOLIDATING THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD'S GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS HELD IN
MARCH OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS ONTO THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY ELECTIONS CALENDAR HELD IN NOVEMBER OF ODD
NUMBERED YEARS
Councilmember Tran has requested that this item be placed on the
Agenda for discussion purposes.
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 5 of 12
•
C
Councilmember Tran outlined the reasons he felt the council should discuss
consolidation: it will save time, money and staff. Other cities such as South El Monte
and West Covina have gone to this format.
Councilmember Nunez discussed some of the pros and cons of consolidation; he
indicated that inconsistencies existed on the list distributed by the City Manager.
City Clerk Nina Castruita indicated a thorough analysis would have to be done; she
reported some cities that have recently consolidated have decided to switch back, citing
increased costs and delays in receiving final results.
Election Consultant Linda Hudson reported the cities of Maywood and Industry recently
switched back to city elections after consolidation.
Councilmember Nunez requested the City Clerk compile a historical report of cities that
have consolidated with the county and any that have switched back for the past 6 - 8
years to make a fair comparison.
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor made a motion to defer the item for future discussion until further
information is obtained.
Councilmember Nunez requested a timeline for future action be put in place.
Mayor Pro Tern amended his motion, with a second by Mayor Imperial to defer the
consolidation discussion until after the next election. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Imperial, Taylor
No: Nunez, Tran
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Councilmember Clark stated for the record she voted to defer the item because she was
unsure why Councilmember Tran and Councilmember Nunez wanted to extend the
terms for people they were trying to recall.
6. STATUS REPORTS - None
7. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS - None
8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Larry Bevington, residing at 8372 Rush, requested for the record, that the City Council
or City Clerk ask for a rehearing of the Imperial vs. Castruita case. Mr. Bevington
reported that many states in the gm Circuit have asked for reconsideration of Padilla vs.
Lever, the basis for the current litigation. Mr. Bevington also indicated SOC's desire to
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 6 of 12
be a defendant in the lawsuit and was disappointed when he was told this would not be
possible.
City Attorney Peter Wallin interjected that the judge did indicate in his decision that SOC
can come in anytime as an intervener. Mr. Bevington responded he would review the
decision and consult his lawyers to join the suit.
Councilmember Clark asked if SOC also had the right to file an amicus brief with the 10-
page court case (Padilla vs. Lever) given to the council.
City Attorney Wallin responded yes and indicated that many parties have requested the
case be reheard and some have already filed amicus briefs.
Jean Hall, residing on Muscatel in Rosemead, commended the Mayor on his lawsuit
against the recall election. Ms. Hall addressed Councilmember Tran and
Councilmember Nunez and felt their support of the costly recall effort was irresponsible.
Her comments were based a survey she referenced which indicates residents support
the Wal-Mart at a 2 to 1 ratio. She advocated both sides put aside their differences and
work together.
Steven Ly, residing at 3040 Rosemead Place, disputed Ron Gay's account of how his
Mom signed the recall petition. Mrs. Ly's account was submitted in writing for the court
case. He reiterated the benefits Wal-Mart will bring to the City.
David Perea, residing at xxxxx, gave his account of how Mrs. Ly's signature was
obtained for the recall election. Mr. Perea, along with his wife and an interpreter
approached Mrs. Ly regarding the recall petition. He indicated that the account given by
Mr. Gay earlier in the evening was correct.
John C. Davidson, residing at 7542 Melrose Avenue, spoke against the recall; in
addition he advocated that speakers and Councilmembers refrain from personal attacks
and respect each other.
Todd Kunioka, residing at 8400 Wells Street, spoke in support of the recall. He
addressed questions and comments made earlier in the evening. He discussed: the
open letter he posted on the SOC website, child safety by the new Wal-Mart, the lawsuit
filed by Mayor Imperial, the Voting Rights Act and the Department of Justice lawsuit. In
addition, he mentioned that Mrs. Ly, the proponent of the lawsuit filled out a PRIDE
postcard, asking to be removed from the recall petition.
Viet Le, residing at 1615 Charlotte Avenue, spoke in support of the recall and against
the construction of Wal-Mart. Mr. Le indicated him and his high school peers at
Rosemead High School, also speak about the Wal-Mart. He encouraged parents to ask
their children about views toward the issue.
CC MIN' 1-24-06
Page 7 of 12
Jim Flournoy, residing at 8655 Landisview, discussed union support of SOC. Upon
review of documents from the City Clerk's office, Mr. Flournoy reported that in the last 6
months, SOC and Polly Low did not receive any union funds, whereas PRIDE received
$40,000 from Wal-Mart and $1,400 from Rosemead citizens. Mr. Flournoy also
expressed support for the rehearing of Imperial vs. Castruita. In addition, he spoke
about mitigation measures and CC & R's that were not being followed. Specifically he
mentioned that certain equipment being used is not certified, truck traffic has been seen
on residential streets, lack of dust control, and lack of on-site inspectors from the City.
Councilmember Clark was outraged that dust-generating activities were allowed to
happen on a windy day. She asked staff investigate why the violations were taking
place and help monitor activities.
City Attorney Peter Wallin then announced that the council was about to go into closed
session to discuss the lawsuits referenced below. He announced Mr. Imperial would
not be involved in the discussion regarding Imperial vs. Castruita.
Juan Nunez, residing at 2702 Del Mar, asked why the current City Clerk was involved
in the lawsuit, even though it was the previous City Clerk that certified the petitions.
Mr. Wallin explained that Ms. Castruita was sued in her official capacity (not personally)
as the person in charge of the election. Because the proponents of the lawsuit were
seeking to enjoin the election they named her on the lawsuit.
Mr. Nunez following up with his previous discussion topic, also referenced a state
ordinance that identifies shopping carts as private property and makes removal from
shopping centers against the law. City staff asked Mr. Nunez to call if he sees shopping
carts out in the neighborhood and someone will be called out to remove it.
Peggy Baumann, residing at 9305 Scenic Drive, South San Gabriel spoke against the
Wal-Mart and stated that the Edison property sold to Wal-Mart was not sold to the
highest bidder (a home developer). She indicated the sale was influenced by the City of
Rosemead. The area around the Wal-Mart site is primarily residential and she would
like to keep it that way.
The council then went into closed session and returned at 10:35.
9. CLOSED SESSION
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION -
GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.9(a)
Name of Case: Jay Imperial, et al v. Nina Castruita, et al
Name of Case: Garvey School District and Save our Community v.
City of Rosemead
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 8 of 12
• 0
City Attorney Wallin reiterated that SOC made a request to the City Council that
the City make a motion for reconsideration of Imperial v. Castruita. He asked if
there was a motion to take that action.
A motion was made by Councilmember Tran with a second by Councilmember
Nunez to reconsider Imperial v. Castruita.
Councilmember Clark felt that the City should not spend additional funds for this
effort, as it would delay the process. She recommended SOC file an amicus brief
regarding the case.
Councilmember Clark referenced a brief filed by the Attorney for the Clerk from
Orange County involved in Padilla vs. Lever (a case with similar circumstances
involving a recall that went before a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit).
Requests have been made to rehear Padilla vs. Lever to correct some of the
allegations and to determine whether the ruling should be retroactive; in addition,
a request has been made to hear that case en banc (before the entire 9th Circuit
panel). The brief filed in December cites the City of Rosemead's decision to
cancel the recall election in December and urges the 9th Circuit to clarify the
ruling as to whether it is retroactive to prevent abusive use of the ruling.
Councilmember Clark then summarized her point; some of the arguments made
by SOC have already been presented to the 9th Circuit through the referenced
brief. She felt joining the ranks of those seeking clarification on Padilla v. Lever
from the 9th Circuit would be more effective for SOC than involving the City of
Rosemead. Councilmember Clark indicated this was the main reason she would
not support a motion to rehear Imperial v. Castruita.
Councilmember Tran interjected that the City has a responsibility to protect the
best interest of the residents; 4,200 people signed the recall petition. He
reminded the council that the resolution adopted in December, directed the City
Clerk to retain legal counsel to seek declaratory relief and clarification regarding
Imperial v. Castruita. Councilmember Tran reminded the council that the ruling
passed was a preliminary injunction, not a final ruling; as such the City Clerk in
her capacity, can seek action on behalf of resident proponents. Councilmember
Tran stated responsibility to the residents, the previous Resolution passed in
December and his distrust of the City's legal counsel as reasons he would
support a motion to rehear the case.
Councilmember Nunez felt that the City Clerk in her official capacity, qualified the
election and thus has an obligation to protect the process and the citizens.
City Attorney Wallin indicated that the nature of the motion was to instruct the
City Clerk to make a motion for reconsideration of the case on behalf of the
voters.
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 9 of 12
• 0
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor commented he was opposed to the rehearing motion
because of the ruling in Padilla vs. Lever (with almost identical circumstances).
He addition, he reasoned the judge ordered a preliminary injunction for a reason
and he felt Councilmember Imperial and Mrs. Ly had a valid case.
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor called for the question. Councilmember Tran clarified the
motion to authorize the City Clerk to seek reconsideration of Imperial V.
Castruita.
Vote-resulted:
Yes: Nunez, Tran
No: Clark, Taylor
Abstain: Imperial
Absent: None
City Attorney Wallin outlined another motion that was discussed to make a
motion to instruct the City Clerk to appeal the decision that was made.
Councilmember Nunez asked if the motion could be amended to specify the
appeal is made in an expedited manner. City Attorney Wallin indicated this could
be done.
Councilmember Clark commented the appeal process would involve additional
tax payer money to pay for litigation.
Councilmember Nunez said he would vote to support democracy.
Councilmember Tran made an amendment to his motion, with a second by
Councilmember Nunez to instruct the City Clerk to appeal the decision in an
expedited manner.
Vote resulted:
Yes: Nunez, Tran
No: Clark, Taylor
Abstain: Imperial
Absent: None
Councilmember Tran made a motion to instruct the City Clerk to pursue a cross
complaint as authorized by a Resolution passed in December.
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor asked what the disadvantages would be to pursuing
cross complaint.
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page 10 or 12
0
•
City Attorney Wallin responded this would result in additional expenditure of
taxpayer money.
Councilmember Tran argued that the final judgment on this matter has not been
received and the City Clerk needs to protect resident interests and the process.
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor reminded the Council that the court case is scheduled for
March 13.
Councilmember Tran made a motion, with a second by Councilmember Nunez to
instruct the City Clerk to continue with her legal counsel and request a cross
complainant on this lawsuit. Vote resulted:
Yes: Nunez, Tran
No: Clark, Taylor
Abstain: Imperial
Absent: None
City Attorney Wallin brought forth a settlement proposed by Mr. Imperial's lawyer
to accept the preliminary injunction as a permanent injunction and provide
payment of $20,000 to Mr. Imperial's attorney for fees.
Councilmember Clark asked for clarification on why the City would be liable for
Attorney costs.
City Attorney Wallin responded that the Voting Rights Act provides that a
successful litigant in a Voting Rights Act case is entitled to recover their Attorney
fees. If the matter is not settled, the City will continue to incur fees.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Wallin to clarify what happens on March 13 and
how what happens on that date is different from a rehearing.
City Attorney Wallin responded that March 13 is a trial scheduling conference
and at that time, the issues are presented to the judge and a trial date is set for
approximately two months later. A rehearing would be an attack on the
preliminary injunction, which maintains things as they are (status quo) until a final
trial is had. At a final trial, all the evidence goes in and the judge then decides if
a permanent injunction is warranted.
Councilmember Nunez inquired if payment would be required now.
City Attorney Wallin clarified that this is just a proposed settlement and the City is
under no obligation to enter into a settlement; the offer can be accepted or
rejected.
CC MIN: 1-24-06
Page I I of 12
A
M
Councilmember Tran asked if there might be a chance that the judge might
change his mind on the final judgment.
City Attorney Wallin responded that yes, it might be possible, especially if a
rehearing is granted for the Padilla v. Lever case.
Councilmember Nunez clarified that if and when Padilla v. Lever is appealed or
the decision is made to make the ruling retroactive, then that would be the time to
determine whether or not to settle, not now.
City Attorney Wallin clarified he was not making a recommendation one way or
another; his legal obligation is to bring forward the settlement proposal and the
Council has to make a decision.
Councilmember Tran felt it would be premature to settle at this time
City Attorney Wallin asked if there was a motion to approve the settlement
request from Mr. Imperial's attorney.
Mayor Pro Tern Taylor asked if the City would be liable for additional attorney
costs if the City takes no action on the matter.
Councilmember Nunez interjected the City might not be liable for any of Mr.
Imperial's costs, if the case is not successful.
City Attorney Wallin responded that yes, the City would continue to incur attorney
fees, if action is not taken.
Councilmember Clark stated that despite the additional attorney fees, the Council
should let the case go forward, as the March court date is coming up.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor responded that sounded reasonable and indicated the
appropriate course would be not to take any action at this time.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Being no further action to be taken, Councilmember Tran moved to adjourn the
meeting at 11:04 pm.
The.next regular meeting will be held on February 14, 2006, at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
A 11 1~, _
City Clerk
CC MIN: I-24-06
Page 12 of 12
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF ROSEMEAD )
I, Nina Castruita, City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the
minutes from January 24, 2006 were duly and regularly approved and adopted by the
Rosemead City Council on the 10th of October 2006, by the following vote to wit:
Yes: CLARK, IMPERIAL, NUNEZ, TAYLOR, TRAN
No: NONE
Absent: NONE
Abstain: NONE
iYlrt C~
Nina Castruita
City Clerk