Loading...
CC - Minutes - 06-23-20MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL AND CITY COUNCIL, SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REGULAR JOINT MEETING JUNE 23, 2020 The special meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Low at 5:40 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PRESENT: Mayor Armenta (arrived at 5:55 p.m.), Mayor Pro Tem Low, Council Members Clark, Dang, and Ly (teleconferenced) ABSENT: None 1. WORKSHOP A. Workshop Presentation and Discussion of Potential Development of 8001 Garvey Avenue Randal Lewis, Owner, Lewis Group of Companies, stated the Company emphasizes community engagement and developing long-term value. Adam Collier, Project Manager, Lewis Management Corp, shared a PowerPoint; noted the Auto Auction site is designated as Garvey Avenue Specific Plan, Incentivized Mixed Use, and an "Opportunity Project and Site" and was also analyzed as a Project Level component of the overall Garvey Avenue SP Final EIR. Shared the following site and Specific Plan constraints: Site lacks freeway access and visibility; GSP-Mixed Use Zone requires a 65% residential and 35% non-residential floor -area land use mix, and based on today's market conditions/ economics, this would significantly reduce the development capacity of the site; A portion of the site is surrounded by single-family detached homes and out parcels. Indicated the vision and project scope is to make it a catalyst project for the revitalization of the Garvey Ave corridor and to bring new residents who will bring money to spend and invest in the community and serve existing residents in the community while creating a unique place. Council Member Dang asked if there was a color -coded legend to explain what the color patters mean on the conceptual site plan. Project Manager Collier responded there is not a legend, explained we are proposing three different product types, which will a mix of three-story buildings, and are all four cell condominiums. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 1 of 20 Mayor Armenta inquired what type of retail or restaurants would be coming in; asked who is going to maintain ownership of this property — is it the current owner or is it being sold to someone else? Mr. Collier replied that is something we are working on with this concept, however, we need general direction from the city before we can take it to market; stated we are in escrow trying to purchase the property and will be looking for entitlements; indicated in order to proceed with the proposed project, a Specific Plan Amendment will be required as the adopted Specific Plan includes overly prescriptive development standards and concepts for the site that discourage creative design flexibility often required to respond to market demand. Council Member Clark inquired how would you protect the single-family residence behind the three-story condominiums in the salmon colored. Project Manager Collier responded we address the privacy issues by adjusting the minimum setback to 15' including an 8' minimum landscape buffer and not allowing 3rd floor balconies within a 40' setback. Fast growing hedges that creates a nice green edge for residents to look at and set Mayor Armenta expressed concern for parking, which is one of the difficulties we have when it comes to development. Mr. Collier asserted that we are cognizant of that, which is why we are proposing more parking than the Specific Plan requires; stated we are providing two parking spaces per unit instead of the one required parking space per unit. In terms of CEQA, the LA Auto Auction site was analyzed at the Project Level in the Final EIR based on the concept in the Specific Plan. While the proposed project is different than the concept analyzed in the Specific Plan and Final EIR, overall development intensity is less than what was analyzed in the maximum building scenario in the Traffic Study for the project area. Additional technical studies or memorandums will be required to validate, but the proposed project should be able to tier from the certified Final EIR. Council Member Clark asked how many residential components are being proposed; inquired if we are required to have any of these units available for low-income in response to Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Project Manager Collier responded our site plan shows conceptually about 360 units; stated we are not in the conceptual plan, however, the Specific Plan does allow for incentives if you do propose low-income. Mayor Pro Tem Low inquired what does the city need to do to accommodate the process with the Specific Plan amendment. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 2 of 20 Assistant City Manager Kim replied the Specific Plan was prepared by the city and the EIR was prepared for a cap of 892 new units within the corridor area and 1.1 million square feet; explained should the project deviate from the guidelines set in the Specific Plan such as a height setback, then the developer would submit a modification to the Specific Plan, which would have to come back to the Council for approval. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed support for the city to help move the process along. Council Member Dang asked what the percentage of the commercial building in the corner from the GSP-Mixed Use Zone is requires a 65% residential and 35% non- residential floor -area land use mix. Project Manager Collier 1.2 acres out of 15.9 acres, so it comes out to 7% of acreage, not floor area. Council Member Clark inquired who owns the parcel across the street on Garvey Avenue and Falling Leaf Avenue, if it was the same owner from the auto auction site; suggested development there could add more appeal. Assistant City Manager Kim stated there is a mixed-use project being proposed at that location. Council Member Dang asked if we are able to go four -stories on this project. Mr. Collier stated you can go taller than four -stories if you really wanted to push it. Council Member Clark expressed concern if we go four -stories or more, then you must think of the line of sight for the people that live behind there and how underground parking would work. Mayor Armenta asked what the next steps are. Project Manager Collier stated we will conduct site investigations consisting of fault assessment and sewer capacity analysis; continue to refine the retail component and uses; coordinate with staff on revisions and prepare entitlement package; Lewis will engage with a Guest Builder to continue through the approval and ' development process; we will keep the city informed. Mayor Armenta adjourned the special meeting at 6:49 p.m. 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Armenta at 7:18 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 3 of 20 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Clark INVOCATION was led by Mayor Armenta STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Molleda, Assistant City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman, Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo, Director of Public Works Daste, Director of Parks and Recreation Boecking, and City Clerk Hernandez 2. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Armenta opened the Public Comment period. Mayor Armenta read the Public Comment received via email from an anonymous resident. Dear Mayor Armenta, First, thank you for your service to our city. I write this memo in an effort to improve our city. There are three issues. First, we are seeing more than ever, at least in my neighborhood, a big increase in debris left in front of residences. People are leaving mattresses, unwanted furniture, etc. at curbside without calling in for the free pickup services that are provided. I'm aware that residents are notified in the publications that we get, that pickup is free but must be called for. Further, on this same subject, the city's response for pickup when I do call in for the city to help, has been very, very slow in the pickups. One comment; a couple of years ago I was at a Rosemead City council meeting and asked for help with this issue. I was told at that time that this debris issue happens mostly by renters and therefore not much could be done. Please note that the owners of any property can be found very quickly with just the click of a computer mouse. Property owners, I believe, should be held responsible for the detrimental and disrespectful actions of their residents. I suggest that, perhaps, our city should consider an "official" warning to the offenders for first time offense and a fine if repeats occur. I believe that this would probably resolve this matter effectively, if not quickly. Next, there is an enormous amount of debris adjacent to our northernmost border, specifically between the railroad tracks and the city boundary. There is a huge storage container inside this area, and at the very end of our Muscatel Ave. that has been there for a long time, and it is terribly plastered with graffiti. It's a terrible sight. I implore you to drive to the end of Muscatel and look at it. I have repeatedly called, and written to Union Pacific for help, but have had no reply. I also wrote to Congresswoman Judy Chu, as well as Our County Supervisor for help in resolving this but have no help. I do know the aforementioned areas are not Rosemead, but they are our neighbors, and their properties are filthy. The area is littered with old sofas, shopping carts, etc. Finally, the property at 8932 Grand Ave. is always littered, with trash cans in the front yard and much more. Cars are being parked on the front yard, etc., etc. The above are certainly "quality of living" issues. I seek your help, please. Please feel free to call if you would like my further input, or if I can be of any help in resolving the issues. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 4 of 20 Mayor Armenta read the Public Comment received from Frances Chavez. I have lived in my home for about 20 years. My parents have lived in their home on Grand for about 70 years. So, we have seen many changes in Rosemead. There have been many times I have had to address the Rosemead City Council for various situations. Here is a situation that should have been addressed at least a decade earlier. This year has been outrageous. Every night since the beginning of June there has been a consistent use of illegal fireworks on the La Presa cul de sac behind my house. The sounds seem to be coming from behind my back wall and one of the houses at the end of the street. All the houses around have to put up with an endless bombardment every night until the Fourth of July. The people perpetrating these crimes seem to have quite a supply of illegal fireworks. I thought that in itself was a crime. When the 4th finally arrives, it is like a war zone. Well, it's time for this to STOP!! I went out of town to do some research. My cousin housesat and took care of my dog. She relayed that there were explosions every night. My dog was panicked and agitated. She would sit with him on the porch. His crate is on the porch. There was one night that they were particularly loud and my dog was so traumatized that he broke into closed French doors. Since I have gotten home my dog does not want to leave his crate. I called the Sheriffs and let them know. They said they would patrol the street. I called City Hall on Monday. The secretary let me know I could send an email for Public Comment. She let me know I should contact the Safety Center. I spoke with them, and they said they would patrol as well. They also let me know the fine for illegal fireworks is $1,000. I repeated that loudly so maybe the perpetrators would get the message. Can you imagine all the money that could have been collected over 20 years. Please consider putting a sign on La Presa Avenue alerting them about illegal fireworks and the fine. It might need to be translated, some people might claim ignorance because they do not read or write in English. After 20 years, I have heard enough! City Manager Molleda stated we do post on the City's website and social media imploring people not to let off illegal fireworks and advising of the fine for illegal fireworks. Chief of Police Duong asserted the Sheriff Station, along with the Code Enforcement do patrol and respond to calls regarding illegal fireworks to the best of their ability. There being no further speakers, Mayor Armenta closed the Public Comment period. 3. PRESENTATIONS — None 4. PUBLIC HEARING — None Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 5 of 20 5. CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Low and seconded by Council Member Ly to approve Consent Calendar Items A, and C through G. Council Member Dang pulled Item B for separate discussion. Motion was carried out by the following vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low, Ly ABSENT: None A. Claims and Demands • Resolution No. 2020-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,236,451.01 NUMBERED 106590 THROUGH NUMBER 106705 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-24. • Resolution No. 2020-11 SA A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $3,953.00 NUMBERED 10294 THROUGH NUMBER 10295 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-11 SA. C. Authorized Signers on Bank/Credit Card Accounts for the City and the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation The City of Rosemead (City) and the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation (RHDC) require several different bank/credit card accounts to efficiently operate financial matters. Staffing has changed for these accounts and there is only one authorized signer left employed under these current accounts. As with our other Bank Accounts, staff is requesting that the City Council and the RHDC's Board authorize the City Manager (Board Executive Officer), the Assistant City Manager (Assistant Executive Officer), the Director of Finance and the Finance Manager to be added by Resolution of the City Council and RCDC Board to be the authorized signatories of the Bank of America credit card accounts. In addition, when new individuals replace incumbents, bank/credit card signature cards must be completed with authority given to the City Manager (Executive Director) and the Finance Director for any additions or deletions of signers due to staff replacements. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 6 of 20 Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2020-26, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND THE FINANCE MANAGER AS AUTHORIZED SIGNERS FOR CITY BANK/CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS WITH BANK OF AMERICA OR ANY FUTURE SUCCESSOR BANK/CREDIT CARD ISSUER; and 2. Adopt Housing Development Corporation Resolution No. 2020-06, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE ROSEMEAD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DESIGNATING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND THE FINANCE MANAGER AS AUTHORIZED SIGNERS FOR THE COMMISSION'S BANK/CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS WITH BANK OF AMERICA OR ANY FUTURE SUCCESSOR BANK D. Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Grant Program Resolution The LEAP Grant provides funding to jurisdictions for the preparation and adoption of planning documents, including process improvements that accelerate housing production and facilitate compliance in implementing the 6th Cycle Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA). The estimated award amount for Rosemead is up $150,000 (small localities with a population of 20,000-59,999 people). The Planning Division is currently in the process of completing the grant application. As part of the LEAP Planning Grant Application, the City Council must fully execute a resolution authorizing application for, and receipt of, Local Government Planning Support Grant Program funds. Similar to the Senate Bill 2 Planning Grant, the LEAP grant funds, if awarded, will be reimbursable through the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The Planning Division will utilize the funds to hire a consultant to assist staff in updating the Housing Element of the Rosemead General Plan. This includes facilitating compliance with the 6�' Cycle RHNA, which covers the planning period of October 2021 through October 2029. The final RHNA allocation will be adopted in October 2020. After the adoption of the final RHNA allocation, each City is required to update their Housing Element by October 2021. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 7 of 20 Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2020-25, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLANNING SUPPORT GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS E. 2020-2021 School Resource Officer Program Funding The City of Rosemead contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for a Special Assignment Deputy that is assigned to Rosemead High School as a School Resource Officer (SRO). Under an annual Agreement, the El Monte Union High School District currently shares the cost of the SRO with the City for the hours that the SRO is assigned to Rosemead High School. The proposed Agreement between the City and the District is the SRO Service Agreement for the 2020-2021 school calendar year. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the cost sharing agreement with the El Monte Union High School District to fund the SRO position in the amount of $134,842. This would amount to the one-half cost of the SRO Deputy for 1,648 hours. F. Consideration to Cancel the July 28, and August 1, 2020 City Council Meetings On December 10, 2019, the City Council approved the 2020 Meetings Schedule and cancelled the second meeting in August for summer break. At this time, the City Council will consider the cancellation of the July 28, and August 11, 2020, City Council meeting due to a lack of quorum. The City Council maintains the ability to adjust other meeting dates and will schedule a regular City Council meeting on August 25, 2020. Recommendation: That the City Council cancel the July 28, and August 11, 2020, City Council meeting due to lack of quorum. G. Crossing Guard Services and Annual Crossing Guard Cost Sharing Agreement with the School Districts The proposed Agreement with All City Management Services, Inc. (ACMS) is for the annual crossing guard services near local public schools, and the proposed Agreements with the Rosemead School District and the Garvey School District are for cost sharing (one-half between the City and each District) for the said crossing guard services. The total cost for providing crossing guard services for both school districts is approximately $186,449, of which Rosemead School District's portion Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 8 of 20 is approximately $43,504 and Garvey School District's portion is approximately $49.719. The City's portion of funds are included in the City's Fiscal Year 20-21 Budget. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions, contingent upon the execution of the School Districts Board's formal approval of the cost sharing agreements: 1. Execute the Agreement with All City Management Services, Inc. for crossing guard services for Fiscal Year 20-21; and 2. Execute the cost sharing Agreements with Rosemead and Garvey School Districts for funding the crossing guard services for the Fiscal Year 20-21. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION B. Annual Fiscal Year 20-21 Comprehensive Fee Resolution The City provides various "individualized" services (i.e., inspections, permits, variances, etc.) that are not of general benefit. Historically, many of these services have been provided at a city cost greater than the price being charged for them thus, resulting in the subsidies of the remaining costs of service from the general taxpayers. As a matter of routine fee maintenance, to keep pace with increasing costs of individualized services, and to keep the City's Schedule within current State Law, the fees charged to users' needs to be reviewed on a yearly basis per City Council policy. In the interest of being responsive to the service needs of Rosemead residents and businesses, not all fees need to be adjusted and some are controlled by statute. Consequently, very few fees are being recommended for an adjustment this year. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2020-21, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES Council Member Dang pulled Consent Calendar Item 5B, referenced page 12 of the Comprehensive Fee Resolution, "Item C. BUILDING PERMIT FEES Based on L.A. County fee schedule and adjusted per Rosemead Municipal Code." Asked who keeps this fee — is a portion or all of it recharged to the City's General Fund or does it go to a consultant? Interim Finance Director Dr. Scott Miller responded it goes to the General Fund as a revenue, but from there it is distributed to specific things that it must pay for required by the law. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 9 of 20 Assistant City Manager Kim clarified the current contract with Interwest to provide our building services for plan check and permit fees is set at 47%; so, the consultant receives 47% and we collect 53% of the fees. Council Member Dang inquired if we will need to relook at these fees. Dr. Miller concurred, stating staff is recommending that next fiscal year we have an independent person conduct a fee consultation, to review our fees and compare to the fees of surrounding cities, while determining if our costs to provide those services to residents are within current State Law. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Dang and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Low to adopt Resolution No. 2020-21, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES Motion was carried out by the following vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low, Ly ABSENT: None 6. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Professional Services Agreement to Provide MS4 NPDES Permit Services for Fiscal Year 2020-21 On May 8, 2018, after an extensive Request for Proposal process the City of Rosemead selected CWE to provide their expertise to the City of Rosemead for the management of stormwater-related issues in the amount of $179,979. Additionally, the City of Rosemead amended the contract on December 17, 2019, to have CWE continue their services through June 30, 2020. The City of Rosemead received a proposal from CWE to continue their services for 12 months through June 30, 2021, for permit compliance and annual reporting services provided through December 31, 2021, for $89,947. Recommendation: That the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with CWE to provide MS4 NPDES Permit Services for a period of eighteen months that begins on July 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021, for an amount not -to -exceed $89,947. Mayor Armenta noted the City Council received a letter from Council Member Clark, regarding Item 6A. Council Member Clark read the letter out loud for the record. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 10 of 20 Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members, I am respectfully asking for your consideration on Item 6A stormwater contract that we consider alternatives. As you are aware, we are in an EWMP (Enhanced Watershed Management Plan) that is projected to cost us $110 million. As you also know, I am freaking out over the fact that we have dipped into our reserves $7 million and who knows if we will have to dip in further. There is NO WAY we can afford $110 million costs for stormwater projects that have no guarantee that we would be in compliance, that they get the pollution out, and that they avoid lawsuits from environmental groups who have already sued. The resolution that we passed in April calling on the Governor' and state elected to urge the Regional Board to ease the MS4 permit requirements states that we have been incorrectly assigned to the Upper Los Angeles River EWMP group and that we are not subject to the TMDL's for the pollutants that we are being required to clean up. I have serious concerns with the current Staff Report that puts the steps in the contract that state continuing with the ULAR EWMP. Thus part of the exorbitant costs are cleaning up other city's pollutants. I want to point out the history of our desire to leave the ULAR due to these reasons: Exhibit A: 1/7/2016 Council Memo states "Anthony La is working hard on exploring ways for the City to avoid these future capital costs. Most engineers (including Anthony), recognize the cost estimates in the EWMP are very rough, and they are identified for projects that may not be the most cost-effective as we progress with further analysis for individual cities (rather than analysis at a regional level). Rosemead's estimated costs includes $88.99 million for private regional projects; meaning construction of infiltration basins on private properties that require land acquisition. This land acquisition and capital facility construction does not make sense from a staff standpoint as we can work with school districts, parks (including Whittier Narrows) and SCE to find other means to better capture stormwater." 2. Exhibit B: On 8/14/18 I actually made the motion to sign the contract with CWE because then City Engineer Rafael Fajardo stated, "CWE is willing to work with staff on new alternatives to minimize cost for the MS4 implementation. The minutes show "Mayor Pro Tem Clark concurred with Mr. Fajardo; explained it would be beneficial to explore the city's options to create its own EWMP/WMP or joining another group." This was my intent for many years. 3. On 4/23/20 our own Consultant from Transtech, Michael Ackerman, stated similar reasoning in response to questions brought up by the Council meeting when we approved the resolution concerning our not being subject to some of the TMDLs. He said the resolution is a good message to send. These are unfunded mandates and we have other options. We could be in a different Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 11 of 20 Watershed Management Plan (WMP). We are currently part of the Upper LA EWMP (ULAR) and there may be fees if we leave the ULAR, but we don't have to be with our current plan. 4. The consultants, who may have financial interests in keeping the status quo, have often said that we would jeopardize ourselves if we left the ULAR EWMP. As pointed out by our own Engineer, this is not the case: A. Exhibit C. I have several times stated to the Regional Board that we may exit the ULAR and they have said that we can. On May 8, 2018 Mayor Ly signed a letter expressing our potential intent to exit the ULAR. B. Several events have taken place since we reluctantly joined the ULAR (I will not burden you with copies of these but feel free to call me about them if you so desire. 1. The State Unfunded Mandates commission stated that the EWMPs go beyond the EPA's requirements for stormwater projects and therefore are unfunded mandates. 2. The State of California, at the request of Assemblymembers Al Maratsuchi and Blanca Rubio, performed an audit on the EWMP programs and came back with a scathing ruling that the Regional Board had gone way beyond their authority. 3. The Court under Judge Glenda Sanders ruled just late last year that the TMDL's are invalid. While the Regional Board is appealing that, it still points out serious issues with the permit. 4. The Regional Board itself has had a change of Board members and just recently at the request of Board Member Larry Yee and seconded by Board Member Jim Stahl (former CEO of the LA County Sanitation Districts) is having a special Board meeting on July 2nd to consider delaying the permit by a year due to: a) Need to adjust to the pandemic crisis. b) Need more time to address/resolve major issues and concerns raised by the public (this may be in response to the resolution from our city). For these reasons I am extremely disturbed by the quote in the CWE proposed contract that states we will continue in the ULAR. Therefore, I am asking that we go out to bid with the request that consultants applying give their suggestions on potential alternatives to the ULAR EWMP. In the meantime, we can continue to pay CWE for necessary processes. Council Member Clark stated that concluded her letter and welcomed any questions the Council may have. Director of Public Works Daste stated in November 2012, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region adopted the Coastal Los Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 12 of 20 Angeles County MS4 NPDES Permit with Los Angeles County, the County Flood Control District, and 84 incorporated cities as Permittees. In 2013, the City of Rosemead had a choice to do an expensive reporting and monitoring, which costs about $200,000 a year, to demonstrate compliance with the expanding list of objectives, and either pay fines or face nongovernmental organizations (NGO) litigation about not meeting those mandates or the city could join a Water Management Plan (WMP) group. By joining a WMP group, permittees were allowed to fail interim objectives while planning to achieve the final WMP group objectives with various deadlines. In August 2018, following an extensive Request for Proposal Process, the city hired OWE to help steer us through all these different processes. Due to the fact that CWE is intimately aware of the unique challenges the City of Rosemead faces regarding compliance, staff recommends entering into a Professional Services Agreement with CWE to steer the City of Rosemead through its compliance issues with the MS4 Permit through June 30, 2021, and with annual reporting through December 31, 2021. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked staff to clarify if they are recommending Council considers to enter into another contract with CWE; acknowledged Council Member Clark's concern expressed in letter regarding the cost; opined it is a separate discussion whether the City should leave the EWMP as it is a big project for the City to take on all by ourselves; stated we want to save as much money as possible, but it will cost us money to go out to RFP, rather than continuing a contract with CWE who has already been providing these services. Council Member Clark emphasized the issue is not with the company, but rather that we may not have to do an Enhanced Watershed Management Plan as the State Unfunded Mandates Commission stated the EWMPs go beyond the EPA's requirements for stormwater projects and therefore are unfunded mandates. She suggested continuing with CWE for the current tasks, but still go out to bid, to see if other consultants can come up with a better plan. Director of Public Works Daste stated the Water Board said here are the numbers you must meet, but does not care how we meet compliancy and that is why the EWMP consultants came up with these $110,000,000 plans; explained the City of Bell Gardens took a different route by building a cistern at one of their parks, underneath the parking lot, which takes the stormwater from surrounding cities of Bell Gardens, then the water will go in this massive cleaning system and be released back in the river; indicated the surrounding cities all put money to pay for this expensive route; asserted the question is can you get there with big projects that cost a lot of money or can you get there with smaller projects that are not as involved. Council Member Clark clarified the consultant that is running the current EWMP that is cast in stone; the EWMPs were designed during the drought; stated distributed capture can be much more expensive as it could cost up to $14,000. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 13 of 20 Gerald Green, Director of Stormwater, CWE, stated the $90,000 in the contract is mostly covering compliance; reiterated we are going through a permit reissuance process and many things will change over the next year, which will be the most appropriate time to come up with a better plan that is not as costly. Council Member Dang asked how will this roughly drop the price down? Mr. Green responded it will depend on if there are grants involved, but it could be at least a 1/3 less than the City's current plan; indicated CWE is amenable to helping the City customize a EWMP plan more suitable to their desire; asserted it is most cost effective to plan your strategy and continue with the Upper LA EWMP while getting ready for the next permit and strategize how to implement it. Mayor Armenta expressed concern that CWE's contract indicated they are going to have Rosemead continue with the Upper LA EWMP, even though Council Member Clark has expressed opposition to continuing with the EWMP. Mr. Green responded he does not object moving out of the Upper LA EWMP, emphasizing as long as it is done at the right time, which is not this year; reiterated he will be happy to strategize with City staff once the time is right. Mayor Armenta referenced in the scope of work, it states CWE is also here to capture and treat water; asked what have we been doing here in Rosemead to capture and treat water in the past two years? Mr. Green replied that was not part of my contract; clarified 80% of my last and current contract is purely focused on the compliance issues the city needs to meet each year, not the long-term plan; noted CWE has provided industrial and commercial inspections that were required by the permit and other services that will help align the City with their end goal; acknowledged unfortunately we missed out on safe cleaning water programs as we were not ready and did not have a lot of votes. Mayor Armenta stated Mr. Green keeps saying it is not the right time to move out of the Upper LA, then when is the right time? Mr. Green asserted there are different pieces of the puzzle to consider such as when the city can definitively say this is a place, we are ready to tear up for a year to put in something or there could be grants coming in to go after or when the new permit is available, and we know what we're doing. Mayor Armenta stressed this has nothing to do with CWE's work ethics but feels that we could have much more if we possibly went out to bid. Council Member Ly stated prior to hiring CWT, no one talked or dealt with these issues; opined OWE has proven itself within the last two years of helping us address Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 14 of 20 these issues by engaging with the Water Board and changing course now could be dangerous; emphasized it is important that we are protecting our priorities while meeting their regulations as well. Council Member Clark asked if it is safe to say that the EWMPs would potentially not be in the new permit. Mr. Green affirmed the draft does not mention EWMPs. City Attorney Richman emphasized the contract is for monitoring compliance, not moving out of the EW -MP group; suggested asking staff to agendize a request for an additional scope of work to perhaps leave the current EWMP. There being no comments, Mayor Armenta opened and closed the public comment period. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Low to table this item for further discussion at the August 25, 2020 meeting for Council to consider an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with CWE to provide MS4 NPDES Permit Services. Motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low, and Ly NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None B. COVID-19 Update This is a recurring item that will be on the agenda to update the City Council on items related to COVID-19. Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide further direction. City Manager Molleda stated effective June 19, 2020, select locations and businesses have been open with capacity limitations, physical distancing requirements, and infection control guidelines. While we are making good progress, it is important to follow the Safer at Home Order as the COVID-19 pandemic is still active. As of today, there have been 202 confirmed COVID cases and 18 deaths in Rosemead. Unfortunately, despite city's efforts, we will have to cancel the rest of the Parks and Recreation summer programs. Noted City Hall is open to the public Monday through Thursday, from 7 a.m. to 12 p.m., and from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. The hours of operation will remain until July lst and will be reevaluated at that time. Shared that the food bank event is this Saturday, June 27th, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., at Garvey Center. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 15 of 20 Mayor Armenta expressed condolences to the families that have lost loved ones to COVID; inquired if we have an update on offering a testing site in the city. City Manager Molleda responded we have not been contacted but staff can reach out to the County; asserted that we have posted on the City's website and social media the LA County test sites available. 7. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. Soils Report Requirements in Liquefaction Zones This item is presented to the City Council at the request of Council Member Sean Dang. He would like to discuss the City's soils report requirements in liquefaction zones. Attached, for your convenience, is the current policy. Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide further direction. Council Member Dang indicated at the last Council meeting, he asked staff to look into adopting the LA County's Memo "Policy on Soil Investigation in Designated Liquefaction Zones"; discussed the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) which identifies map areas prone to earthquake hazards of liquefaction (failure of water -saturated soil), earthquake -induced landslides and amplified ground shaking. The purpose of the SHMA is to reduce the threat to public safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating these seismic hazards. Stated the State exempts the soils report, so by adopting a memo in place by LA County, we would be saving residents $3,000 on every soil report, so on average $200,000 - $250,000. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo stated we do follow some of the LA County's Building Codes, however, the overarching laws we follow are the California Building Codes and Residential Codes, which state that the Building Official does have some discretion. Clarified we do not require a soils report for all ADUs such as if an ADU is attached to an existing structure. Explained we cannot compare ourselves to neighboring cities because the liquefying zones vary and some of our neighboring cities do not have liquefaction zones, so they automatically exempt them. Proposed allowing property owners who are building a detached ADU to exempt them as we are in the process of updating our Code to reduce the size of ADU to 1,000 square feet. Some cities with liquefying zones do have exemptions for ADUs with 1,000 or less, which is something we can look into if Council desires. Council Member Clark expressed concern that we would not want to be responsible for someone dying because of a structure not being built properly or as safely as it should, and only to save some money. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked for clarification as to what code the city follows. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 16 of 20 Building Official Fliehmann responded we adopted the California Residential Code with LA County amendments, however, if LA County has not amended a certain section of the code, then we refer back to the State code; explained the soils report process further — the Soils Engineer will determine what specific analysis and test will be required in order to make the necessary recommendations for grading requirements and foundation design. City Attorney Richman added that you can have a general provision but if there is a more specific law that is more applicable, then you would focus on that specific law. Council Member Dang referred to page 2 of 3 of Rosemead Building and Safety Division's Policy Memo on Residential Soils Report Guidelines: "The Building Official will consider `soils opinion letters' in lieu of a site-specific soils report on a case-by-case basis under the following general conditions". Opined the "in lieu of means instead of, which there is an exemption to requiring a soils report. Building Official Fliehmann said his role as the Building Official is to make interpretations of the Code to determine what it actually says; explained the "in lieu of says if I found questionable soil and am going to require a soils report, but advise the Building Official to not require a soils report, then the in lieu of default 1500 -pound value would kick in. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo stated that the City of El Monte only requires a soil report for a two-story structure, while South El Monte and Temple City does provide the exemption. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked which surrounding cities that is in the liquefaction zones requires a soils report for single-family dwellings, like we do. Mrs. Frausto-Lupo replied that the City of Baldwin Park requires a soils report for new construction; noted the City of San Gabriel does as well, however they have a small liquefaction zone and do look at situations on a case-by-case basis. City Engineer Ackerman clarified what is under the City Building Official's purview is requiring a soils report if you have known expansive, shifting, or questionable soils. Building Official Fliehmann emphasized the Building Official reserves the option to require a soils report if additional specific information regarding the subject site reveals a cause for soil concerns; indicated we can look for ways to make the Code less restrictive if Council so desires. Council Member Dang asked staff to bring this item to the next Council meeting to consider adopting LA County's Memo "Policy on Soil Investigation in Designated Liquefaction Zones". Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of dune 23, 2020 Page 17 of 20 Council Member Ly inquired if we are continuing this item as a discussion item or if a motion to be drafted and voted on is being asked; opined if it is a motion to vote on, then we cannot just adopt a memo, rather an amendment to the Municipal Code would need to be made. City Attorney Richman reiterated the Building Official already stated he is not comfortable with adopting the County's Memo; emphasizing we cannot direct the Building Official to not require a soils report if it is not his professional opinion. Concurred with Building Official Fliehmann that we can review our Code to determine if it can be amended to be less restrictive within our authority; asserted she will look into it to make a determination whether or not exempting these projects is less protective than the State's.Code; indicated this is a legal question but also extremely technical. Mayor Pro Tem Low opined we should keep our normal process following either the County or State Code; noting she does not want to start adopting memos as they appeal to certain matters; indicated support to leave it up to the Building Official's professional opinion. Mayor Armenta suggested Council Member Dang discuss with the City Manager what direction he would like to recommend after the City Attorney is able to review this matter further, then bring it back to Council at a future meeting. B. Letter of Support for VMT Implementation Delay This item is presented to the City Council at the request of Council Member Margaret Clark. She would like to discuss the City Council supporting the delay of the implementation of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) from July 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021. Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide further direction. Council Member Clark stated she is asking that we send a letter to Governor Newsom requesting to delay the implementation of the vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Rosemead recognizes that some cities, particularly cities with significant land to build new housing, may be more impacted by VMT than a built -out city like Rosemead where the construction of new housing or large commercial centers may be more limited. The City of Rosemead understands that some cities may have difficulty in establishing thresholds of significance for purposes of analyzing transportation impacts and adopting a resolution regarding VMT for various reasons such as limited staffing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, due to COVID-19, there have been dramatic changes in transportation patterns because of the expansion of working from home and learning from home, as well as a decrease in public transit ridership because of social distancing and related health orders. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 18 of 20 Delaying the implementation may provide some insight whether these are temporary shifts in transportation patterns or not. The requested extension would also allow for the informed consideration of. VMT and other potential changes to CEQA as it affects the homebuilding industry and local municipalities alike. The City's request should not affect those cities that have already began their VMT process. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed confusion as to what is being asked since Council previously approved a resolution adopting the VMT Thresholds of Significance. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo clarified Council Member Clark is asking for a one-year delay of implementation from July 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021. Mayor Armenta asked how this letter impacts the City of Rosemead. City Manager Molleda responded it does not. Council Member Clark opined this could affect Rosemead with future projects. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo stated the Building Industry is hoping that if the implementation is delayed, the State will change the law. Mayor Armenta emphasized she does not feel comfortable signing a letter that does not impact the City of Rosemead; however, suggested any Council Member that would like to sign their name to this letter supporting the request for delay, then they can do so. Mayor Pro Tem Low concurred with Mayor Armenta. Council Member Clark asked if staff could just have the letter be sent on her behalf. City Manager Molleda clarified that the letter will not be placed on City letterhead. City Attorney Richman responded it can be placed on City letterhead, noting the narrative would simply be changed from on behalf of the City of Rosemead to Council Member Clark. C. Council Comments Council Member Clark asked to adjourn tonight's meeting in memory of Mary Slemp, a longtime Rosemead resident; noted she had a resident contact her that he is willing to walk through his neighborhood to hand out flyers and get the message out there regarding bulky item pickups. Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 19 of 20 Mayor Armenta stated there is a unity appreciation lunch for the Sheriff's Station on June 25th, from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m.; thanked Chief of Police Duong who has been instrumental in helping coordinate this. 8. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Armenta adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m., in memory of Eddie Mendez and Mary Slemp, both longtime Rosemead residents. The next regular scheduled City Council meeting will take place on July 14, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber. Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk APPROVED: Polly Lbw . aydr Rosemead City Council, Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, and Housing Development Corporation Special and Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2020 Page 20 of 20