Loading...
CC - Minutes - 08-25-20MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR JOINT MEETING AUGUST 25, 2020 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Armenta at 7:00 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PRESENT: Mayor Armenta, Mayor Pro Tem Low, Council Members Clark (teleconferenced), Dang and Ly ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Molleda, Assistant City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman, Chief of Police Lieutenant Duong, Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo, Interim Director of Finance Miller, Director of Parks and Recreation Boecking, Director of Public Works Daste, and City Clerk Hernandez PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Dang INVOCATION was led by Council Member Ly 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. PRESENTATION A. Los Angeles County Sheriffs Temple Station Department Annual Report Caption David Flores introduced the newest members of the Rosemead Special Assignment Team: Deputy Jackie Morales, Deputy Mario Garcia, Deputy Ryan Douglas, and Deputy Luis Rojas. He then turned to Lieutenant Tony Duong to present the Annual Report. In his presentation, Chief Duong provided a summary from January 1 st through June 30th, 2020, of the crime statistics, overview of noteworthy incidents, operations/ongoing missions, different crime strategies, and explained challenges moving forward in Rosemead. Mayor Armenta commended and thanked Lieutenant Duong and the Rosemead Team for keeping the City safe. Although there are a lot more activities going on during COVID, it appears that some of the percentages have gone down in Rosemead. Council Member Clark expressed that was a great presentation and appreciates Chief Duong and the Rosemead Team's efforts. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page l of 28 Council Member Ly thanked Chief Duong and the Rosemead Team for all that they do during this difficult time, fighting for the communities and ensuring that its safe. He inquired about the response time. He noted that his predecessor, Chief Kusayanagi, had previously discussed the concerns of response times north of the freeway versus south of the freeway; asked if they are still seeing response times increased dramatically because of the traffic that crosses the 10 -freeway intersection. Chief Duong stated that with the stay-at-home order, traffic has been light the past four months and has not noticed a change in response time. Council Member Ly expressed that he would like to see that get evaluated quarterly. He added, as people slowly get back to the new normal routine, it would be interesting to see if there are increased response times south of the freeway. Council Member Ly brought up a previous discussion to in house our full team — the Chief, Sergeant, the Special Assignment Team and even our Patrol Team at the Public Safety Center to make it a true substation or even a mini station. He inquired when it would be available for Council review. City Manager Molleda responded that this item is going on the next agenda, noting the designs are ready and feedback from Chief Duong was also included. Chief Duong confirmed that the blueprint design has been submitted and approved, and the architect is currently waiting for bids. Council Member Ly noted that previously there was concern about the Sherriff's intranet network at the facility and asked if that issue has been resolved. Chief Duong responded yes that the equipment has been purchased and is stored at City Hall, which will be installed by personnel from the Sheriffs Department. Council Member Ly emphasized that setting up a mini station in Rosemead itself would complement the ability to have the overall size of force protection of the Temple Station, which would improve response time and do wonders for our community. He noted that if he hears any complaints about the deputies, it's usually regarding the response time. He believes the Rosemead Team does a great job and a lot of credit goes to Chief Duong as he engages with the public. For example, there has been a lot of feel -good work such as the drive-by birthdays and other celebrations that the Rosemead Team have been a part of, stated that those are the type of community policing we want to see. Council Member Ly strongly believes that having the mini station at the Public Safety Center would improve the response time dramatically and more importantly, it will bring the Special Assignment Team to Rosemead. He inquired why not much of the actual team works at the Public Safety Center when there is a place for the deputies to work out of. Chief Duong stated the main reason was the intemet situation. For example, it would take 20 minutes to send two emails out. He added, he stopped working out of the Rosemead Substation due to the volume of emails that caused delayed responses and did not help for efficient working. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 2 of 28 Council Member Ly stated that was an eye opener and always thought the Chief of Police works out in Rosemead. However, he was shocked that the Rosemead Team had to work out of the Temple Station due to the current setup at the Public Safety Center. If that is the case, the Deputy Team cannot properly serve the community if they are not in the community itself. Council Member Ly thanked Chief Duong for working with the team to get the Public Safety Center upgraded so we can have our full team centralized here in Rosemead. He added, there are two fire stations in the City, and does not see why we can't have a substation or mini station for Police services in our community. Chief Duong noted that when the internet issue was brought up, City Manager Molleda immediately addressed and took care of it. In response to Council Member Ly's concerns about deputies being somewhat permanently stationed out of the substation, his initial intent was to conserve and attempt to save as much money as possible for the city when he approved the architectural plans and was not thinking at that time to have deputy personnel permanently stationed out of there. He asserted that type of update would have been a huge added cost and required much more space. Council Member Ly asked how much of the team would be at the mini station. Chief Duong replied that the current plan would still have all the deputy personnel change out of Temple Station then respond to the Public Safety Center. He added that we can talk about that again later and revise the architectural plan. Council Member Ly expressed it is his belief that if we want to reduce patrol and response times, making the Public Safety Center a true substation and having the team there would be the best course of action. Council Member Dang thanked Captain Flores for the introduction and shared that he was unaware that we had that many Rosemead Special Deputies dedicated to our City; commended Chief Duong for the excellent presentation and appreciates the in-depth review and analysis of the numbers. He further recognized Captain Flores, Chief Duong, and the Rosemead Team for always thinking about the city and deploying deputies, stretching out resources and chaperoning our Mayor at the recent protests. He opined they are doing a fantastic job, and to keep up the good work. Mayor Pro Tem Low commended the Chief for leading his team in taking care of the city, especially dealing with the riots and carrying out a lot of preventive measures. She expressed she was happy to see that some of the response times have decreased and would like to see the team continue to improve on that. Mayor Pro Tem Low was very pleased with the report and noted that the city has done more in terms of safety; indicated support for Chief Duong having more police presence in the city — by doing so, there was a period where there was no crime in the city and hopes we can continue to do that. She inquired if the total number of collisions have gone down in the city due to less traffic on the streets. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 3 of 28 Chief Duong responded that could be a major factor. He added that he worked in Rosemead a few years ago, and it would take about fifteen minutes on a regular afternoon shift driving from Temple Station to the Rosemead substation, now it would take approximately five minutes. Mayor Pro Tem Low referred to page 3 of the statistics report and noticed the numbers have gone up; asked what we can do to help with robbery and assaults. Chief Duong expressed that regarding assaults, most of the domestic violence were family related, neighbor related, or acquaintance related. He believes that it has a lot to do with the COVID-19 pandemic where people are stressed financially and emotionally, and now they must stay home, so the propensity for violence within the home or around the home goes up. He added, it is not okay to assault anybody but it's part of the issue. Regarding robbery, they would continue to analyze when these robberies occur. For instance, if most of them occur on a Thursday afternoon, they would redeploy both our team and the reserve deputies during that time to hopefully prevent any robberies from happening at that time. He voiced that any robberies are not good, but it is just 6% of our total part one crimes. Mayor Pro Tem Low noted that more people are working from home during this pandemic and questioned if robbery or burglary has increased. Chief Duong stated that most people are home now, which limits the suspect's potential target. If residents are home, it is less likely for people to break into the homes or steal cars. To a certain extent, he believes this pandemic has helped reduce crime in that aspect. Mayor Armenta expressed that research has shown that when family life is stressful, many times their own loved one's act against themselves, or others and that aggravated assaults go up as well. Mayor Armenta praised the Rosemead team for their diligent work, especially their efforts to address looting and rioting concerns. She shared that she received text messages from residents informing her of a potential target at the Montebello Mall, noting that businesses such as Macy's, Olive Garden and Lucille's fall within Rosemead. Mayor Armenta then informed the City Manager, who immediately shared this information with our Chief of Police, so the Rosemead Team was present, ready to protect every single business that was targeted for looting. She added, she truly appreciates the Rosemead Team, for working so hard and putting their life in danger to protect our city and residents during these difficult times. Mayor Armenta refers to slide seven and shared briefly of the ongoing investigation of an illegal activity going on at a storefront selling cannabis, which has been present for some time. Chief Duong was very informative of their approach and provided details of their sting operation. Mrs. Armenta was ecstatic when she received the email that they collected enough evidence to close the business; emphasized that Chief Duong has shown strong leadership to ensure everything is being looked at and nothing falls through the cracks. Mayor Armenta stated that Chief Duong, Captain Flores and all the Rosemead Team were very instrumental in ensuring that illegal activity was not happening at that store front. She also Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 4 of 28 acknowledged their hard work to ensure that our city is safe and expressed gratitude for protecting our residents and businesses. Chief Duong expressed thanks to Sergeant Carbajal and members of the Rosemead Team for their hard work. He stated that these group of deputies work late without notice, come in early with very late notice and they are extremely hardworking and very dedicated to the city. Mayor Armenta further thanked Sergeant Carbajal for ensuring her father safety when her street was blocked off due to an incident. Captain Flores added a note regarding the statistics. He appreciated the comments recognizing how they classify a number of crimes. In other words, if you have numerous victims, it just adds stacks up to the numbers. Back in 2019, Temple Station led the County in reducing crime by reducing it 19.6% which is more than any other station in the County. So going into 2020, even a decrease from there, although it's less than 2%, Temple Station was at historic lows and is Number 91 in the County at reducing crime, mostly due to the work of our field deputies. He added, the deputies are motivated, and continue to protect the residents and business community. Captain Flores further shared how COVID has affected residential burglaries. He stated it has gone down, but in other areas of Temple Station jurisdiction, it has caused commercial burglaries to go up because no one was working. There were more cars on the street because people weren't driving as much which caused auto thefts to go up. He also emphasized that we have very talented deputies who received multiple awards for catching thieves who have stolen vehicles, and he is very proud of his team. Council Member Dang recognized that those were very difficult statistics to beat in 2019 and noted that they beat those stats even more this year. He expressed thanks to Captain Flores, Chief Duong, and the Rosemead Team for doing a fantastic job, especially during these difficult times. Mayor Armenta echoed that we appreciate all that they all do for the City of Rosemead, our residents, and our businesses. 3. PUBLIC HEARING 4. CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Low and seconded by Council Member Dang to approve Consent Calendar Items A, B, and D through G. Mayor Pro Tem Low pulled Item C 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. 2020-30 Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 5 of 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $554,777.09 NUMBERED 106977 THROUGH NUMBER 107017 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-30. • Resolution No. 2020-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,561,485.73 NUMBERED 107050 THROUGH NUMBER 107190 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-31. • Resolution No. 2020-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,251,234.60 NUMBERED 107191 THROUGH NUMBER 107285 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-32. • Resolution No. 2020-13 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 $3,278.00 NUMBERED 10299 THROUGH NUMBER 10300 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-13 SA. B. Approval of Minutes Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the regular meeting minutes of February 11, 2020, regular meeting minutes of July 14, 2020, and Special meeting minutes of July 14, 2020. D. Submittal of Amended ROPS 20-21 The Successor Agency's Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for FY 20-21 Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 6 of 28 ("ROPS FY 20-21") has been approved by the State Department of Finance ("DOF") and the First District Countywide Oversight Board ("COB"). An amendment to the Agency's ROPS 20-21 is necessary to cover all expenditures related to its contractual obligation to reimburse the Rosemead Housing Development Corp. ("RHDC") for any shortfall in net operating revenues, and to receive the full amount of the Administrative Cost Allowance for Agency administrative expenses. Recommendation: That the City Council approve Successor Agency Resolution 2020-14 SA, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION APPROVING AN AMENDED RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021 E. Rosemead Park Walking Trail Replacement Project No. 49007 — Award of Contract The Rosemead Park Walking Trail Replacement Project was approved by the City Council as part of the FY 2019-20 adopted budget and included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The Notice Inviting Bids (NIB) for this project were published on May 14, 2020, and May 21, 2020, with a June 2, 2020, submission deadline. Two bids were received. After review of received bids, it was determined that the apparent low bid submitted by Access Pacific, Inc. in the amount of $376,181.25, had a mathematical error on the bid document. Staff recommends that the mathematical error be waived as a minor discrepancy, and the corrected bid by Access Pacific, Inc. in the amount of $374,242.03 be determined to be lowest responsive bid. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: Waive minor discrepancy on Access Pacific, Inc.'s submitted bid; and 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Access Pacific, Inc., for the bid amount of $374,242.03. In addition, authorize an amount of $37,424.20 (10%) as a contingency to cover the cost of unforeseen construction expenses, for a total contract amount of $411,666.23. F. Approve Resolution No. 2020-33 to Authorize the Execution of the Safe, Clean Water Program Municipal Transfer Agreement No. 202OMP66 In November 2018, Los Angeles County voters passed Measure W, a special parcel tax of 2.5 cents per square foot of impermeable area to fund local water quality projects and programs. Measure W created the Safe, Clean Water (SCW) Program which will provide local, dedicated funding for stormwater and urban runoff programs and projects that intend to increase the local water supply, improve water quality, and protect public health. Forty percent (40%) of the parcel tax revenues are allocated to the Municipal Program. Under the Municipal Program, cities will Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 1020 Page 7 of 28 receive direct funding that is proportional to the revenues that are generated within its boundaries. Pursuant to Los Angeles County Flood Control District Code Section 16.05.A.1. prior to the receipt of SCW Program funds, municipalities must enter into an agreement with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (District) to transfer funds. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the Transfer Agreement between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the City of Rosemead for a term that shall expire at the end of Fiscal Year 2023-24, approve Resolution No. 2020-33, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE LOS ANGELES REGION SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM, MUNICIPAL TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT G. City Council Designation and Appointment of Interim Finance Director/Treasure as a Retired Annuitant Position The City has been trying to recruit a permanent Finance Director for several months. However, with the current COVID-19 issues and other factors, the City has been unable to fill the position. Until the City can fill the position, staff requests the City Council appoint a Retired Annuitant to the position of Interim Finance Director/Treasurer as authorized per California Government Code Sections 7522.56 and 21221(h) and to ensure adequate staffing during this state of emergency. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: Approve the position of Interim Finance Director/Treasurer and authorize the position as a Retired Annuitant Position per California Government Code Sections 7522.56 and 21221(h), and, 2. Approve the appointment and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement on behalf of the City with Scott G. Miller as the Interim Finance Director/Treasurer. ITEMS PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 995 and Adoption for the Approval of MCA 20- 01, Amending Title 17 (zoning) of the Rosemead Municipal Code to Comply with New State Provisions for Accessory Dwelling Units On July 14, 2020, the City Council introduced for first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 995, by amending Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rosemead Municipal Code to Comply with new state provisions for accessory dwelling units (ADU's). Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 8 of 28 Recommendation: That the City Council approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 995 by title only, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 20-01, AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY WITH NEW STATE PROVISIONS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUs) Mayor Pro Tem Low pulled this item for separate discussion Mayor Pro Tem Low voiced that she would like to further discuss the 1,000 square feet versus the 1,200 square feet difference for Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) and a few comments from Council Member Dang. Council Member Dang stated that the State allowed 1,200 square feet and the Director proposed 1,000 square feet limitation as one of the items. The second item was more clarification on page five. The narrative language says, "A one detached new construction of 800 square feet ADU." However, the table references 1,000 square feet and felt it still needs to be reworded. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed that we could begin by clarifying the table. Council Member Dang describes the narrative which says a new construction of 800 square feet, then in that same continuing sentence, it asks you to follow the standards on table 17.30.190, which roughly talks about maximum floor area where it says it allows 1,000 square feet for the ADU. He states that the narrative does not match the table and suggested to strike off the 800 square feet and reference the table by itself. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that it was added to the ordinance in that section. Council Member Dang stated that the sentence, "ADU shall conform to the standard on the table" was added however, but the original language with the 800 square feet was left out and expressed that would help with clarification. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that can be omitted. Mayor Pro Tem Low inquired if the whole sentence would be struck out. Council Member Dang clarified and asked staff to strike out "one detached new construction of 800 square feet ADU" and leave the second sentence to reference back to the table. Council Member Dang would also like to discuss item 8C where it indicates "exterior stairways shall be proposed in the location that limits visibility from Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 9 of 28 public right-of-way". He stated that he does not recall reading that in State code and inquired if it was introduced by staff and presented before the Planning Commission. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela replied it is not in the State code, but it was introduced by staff. She added, it was first introduced to the Planning Commission, and in the draft ordinance, then brought to the City Council at the last meeting. Council Member Dang questioned if the language was only embedded in the text or was it highlighted in the PowerPoint before the Planning Commission, and that these are the things staff introduced which is not a State code. Mrs. Valenzuela stated that staff did not specifically present that item Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned what happens if someone were to propose that. She added, the way it reads, if they must have external stairways, then it cannot be seen from the street. Mrs. Valenzuela indicated if that's the only option for a corner lot, staff would work with the applicant to screen it with landscaping or some sort of method. Council Member Dang expressed that he is confident that staff will produce a good- looking product, however, for people that do not use Code very often, the zoning code is technically a contract between the city and the developer. If you follow these design standards, there should not be a maybe when you introduce it. For example, it could be a one-story house in the front, and the applicant requests to put a second story over the garage, however, the garage may have zero setback or four feet from the back. He added, you are not going to be able to put a stairway on these two sides, and as for the remaining open sides, it will be visible from the street once you put in the stairway. Council Member Dang noted that these Code provisions may cause alarm for designers/architects, and they do not know how to design it. There will be some back and forth between designer/architect, and we are trying to minimize the guessing work. He added, if these things were introduced by staff, it should have been highlighted where the Planning Commissioners can see and deliberate, it should not be just embedded in the Code. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that it was a Code section that was from the prior ADU ordinance which staff transferred over. Council Member Dang stated he understands and he's not trying to give staff a difficult time. When the State provided the new ADU regulations in January 2020, anything before gets tossed out; you may follow these or develop your own. He noted that staff elected to copy fragments or bulk of it from the prior text and transferred it in. He advised staff to analyze what was transferred versus January 2020, and if there's differences like this one, it needs to be brought up before the Planning Commission so they can make their decision. He added, if we don't do this, it wouldn't be a public forum and it would be something that's embedded. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 10 of28 Mayor Pro Tem Low recapped Council Member Dang's analysis — First this is not required by State law and second, by having this in there, the designer will interpret this ordinance as something they're supposed to do, and they should not assume that they can come in and alter things that's written in here. She added, we as a city should discuss whether we really want to have this requirement there. Mayor Armenta questioned if it was a common practice to not highlight things that's different from the State code. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that the intent of the stairs being disguised is because this is an accessory use, and not the main dwelling. Staff took that from the prior Code and transferred it. Also, staff sent it to the State just to see if that aligns, which it did. She added, if the Council wishes to remove it, staff is okay with that as well. Mayor Armenta understands where Council Member Dang is coming from and echoed that the Planning Commission may not necessarily know unless you are in that line of work. She added, this can be discussed later to see how Council would like staff to present items to Commissioners. If that has been the common practice for staff, we would be going into more of micromanaging of how we are going to have staff present. She would like to discuss with the City Attorney and see what the parameters for that are. City Attorney Richman noted that this would be a tricky one for staff because if it was currently in the Code, she questions why they would consider highlighting something that was already there. Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned if we want to leave this as is in the Code, take it out or add something that gives the designer/architect an understanding that they can come and discuss to avoid any misinterpretation. Mayor Armenta noted that we had discussion about interpretations and whoever the director is, it's up to their interpretation but when everything is written down then it's pretty much a guideline versus more of an interpretation. City Attorney Richman expressed that if the Council wishes to make changes, it just turns back into a first reading, then it goes to the next meeting for the adoption. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed that she took a step back and wanted to discuss this matter with the rest of the Council because there will be a lot of people doing ADUs and wanted to ensure we are doing it right. Mayor Armenta echoed support for Mayor Pro Tem Low's opinion; stated we want to make sure that guidelines are being followed and prevent any misinterpretation of the ordinances. Council Member Clark stated that staff has done a great job and would like to leave this part in because if there's a situation where the person cannot do it, unless they have the stairs visible, then they could come to the city and either apply for a variance or work it out with staff. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 11 of 28 Mayor Armenta explained that we are going to see if anyone wants to make a motion and vote on that. She referred back to City Attorney Richman's note that it would have to come back as first reading and then do the whole process. She inquired if the majority of Council felt comfortable proceeding forward, and how the language should be. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed that she would be okay leaving it in there if we can add verbiage to clarify that they could discuss it further with staff. Mayor Armenta questioned if there is a way to add Mayor Pro Tem Low's comments to ensure developers and architects are aware there's leeway and options to discuss with staff. City Attorney Richman suggested that you could change it to say, "if there is no design possible without having the stairs be visible, then staff will consider allowing that". She added, she is uncomfortable drafting it right now and inquired if anyone else has other thoughts. Council Member Ly expressed that any changes would require a second reading, and this becomes the new first reading. He added, he has a statement from a resident he would like to share when time is available. Mayor Pro Tem Low brought up previous discussion of the 1,200 square feet versus the 1,000 square foot size; noted at the last meeting, she was supportive of the 1,000 square feet, however, she has second thoughts about it. She would like to ensure that the ADU is not bigger than the main house. People want to build an ADU for a family, and having 1,200 square feet would be more comfortable, and believes square footage would be used if residents are going through the trouble of building it. She believes the 1,200 square feet is reasonable and noted that is the max of the State Law. If it's not bigger than the primary residence, then we should allow people to do that. She added, it does not mean that everyone is going to build 1,200 square feet, however, it would be allowed. People can still build whatever they need, but we have that flexibility for family. Mayor Armenta agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Low that the ADU should not be bigger than the main house. She questioned how the ratio is calculated. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that for attached garage, it is limited to 50%, but they can build up to 800 square feet. For detached, it's either 150-850 square feet or 1,000 square feet. Council Member Dang expressed that there are some hidden bells and whistles to that because the ADU would have to be in the back of the house, and it cannot be in front. For example, if the front building is 800 square feet, you would not be able to build the ADU because it would be bigger than the front. In rare instances, where the house is set way back, almost in the rear, has two driveways. In those instances, the architect would build a brand new big main house in the front, and the existing one would get converted into the ADU. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 12 of 28 Council Member Dang opined that the 1,200 square feet is important because when you build a three-bedroom house, that's the borderline threshold to make it comfortable. If you do a 1,000 square feet home with three -bedrooms, the rooms would be very small and would not be comfortable to fit a king-sized bed or queen size bed with a nightstand. He then references a conversation he had with John Reskin from the Olson Company. Mr. Reskin expressed that the going rate for new homes he's building is between 1,200 to 2,000 square feet, and if you want a three-bedroom house, the smallest his company will ever do is 1,150 square feet, because anything smaller becomes uncomfortable and no one will buy it. So that's why 1,200 square feet is sort of a magic number if you want to build a three- bedroom house. Mayor Armenta expressed that we are going away from the intent of an ADU and what she is hearing being described as a second home and not so much as an additional unit, and that may be why the Olson Company would not build anything smaller than 1,150 square feet because they are selling individual homes. She added, she is not saying that it's not accurate, but should take into consideration about ADU, not as a separate home because then they could just subdivide the property and build two different homes. Council Member Dang indicated back in 2016, they developed this ordinance very similar to this and they use the term a "second dwelling unit", but because they use that official title, a lot of the local jurisdictions were imposing full side yard and rear yard of 50 feet setback and the State found that was not helping in creating these dwelling units that California really needs, so they changed the official title to Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) so local jurisdiction can't impose big rear yard requirements. The fact that it's an ADU, we are putting the side yard at 4 feet. The intent is to create a second unit, but the term ADU was really used as a zoning mechanism to allow those setbacks. He added, it is not written to be bigger than the main dwelling or subdivided, and in our ordinance, it says we cannot subdivide either. He believes it would be a lot easier to follow the State's language, and if there are things that do not need to be included, we should not embed it in to create more problems. A lot of architects follow the State language for other cities, and we do not want them to see Rosemead get caught on this particular provision. Mayor Pro Tem Low noted that whether it is called an ADU, she sees this home for a family so providing a little more room can provide a more comfortable place to live. Council Member Dang expressed that 1,200 square feet ADU attached to a garage would appear as a big mass and may be a concern. He recommended to say "1,200 square feet detached ADU and not connected to a garage." This way, it would not create that big massing effect when you join it with a two -car garage. Mayor Armenta believes that would be reasonable and asked Council Member Ly to read the public comment he received. Council Member Ly reads Public Comment from Barbara Murphy. Rosemead resident: Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 15, 2020 Page 13 of 28 Council Member Ly, unfortunately you were not present at the July 14th City Council meeting. I'm emailing you regarding the Amendment 20-01 limiting ADUs to 1,000 square feet. Reasons why I think an ADU should be allowed up to 1,200 square feet: 1. Increases revenue of City's public tax, planning and building permits, and school tax. 2. Today's residences are different, most small houses are 800 to 1,000 square feet on large lots that were built in the 40s, 50s and 60s. Houses had no laundry rooms, perhaps room for a small washing machine. Clothes were dried on clotheslines in the backyard, houses have one TV set in the living room, bedrooms were small, only a bed, a dresser and nightstand. Today's families are different. Kids' bedrooms need space for a desk, computers, PlayStation, and TV. In house laundry rooms are a must. Homes today are multi -generational. An ADU of 1,200 square feet would help families with grandparents in the original house, their son, wife and two children in the ADU. 3. A difference of 200 square feet is indistinguishable from the street. There are two 1,200 square foot ADU's on my street and you can barely see them. 4. When residents find out that they cannot build a 1,200 square foot ADU, they will decide not to build at all. I personally know this for a fact. I'm sending you this in hopes that you can make the Council revisit this issue at the August 25th City Council meeting. At the July 14, 2020, Council meeting, the Mayor said that she wanted the 1,000 square feet limit to keep the continuity of the community. What does that mean? Drive any street in the city and you will see small houses mixed with mega mansions, small houses painted white, blue, green, even pink. Some are cladder and others have stucco. Fencing, lots of chain links, lots of wrought iron painted different colors. Front yard with so many fruit trees you cannot see the house, edges across the front, six to eight feet tall. Where's the continuity? I have lived in Rosemead forty years, I've seen a lot of changes, most of them good. We are an immigrant community, and they bring new ways and ideas, which is a good thing. Regards, Barbara Murphy. Mayor Armenta thanked Council Member Ly and noted that her comments at that Council meeting were very clear. She expressed that there were a ton of mini mansions before she was elected, and Council decided to stop that. However, she cannot go back and have these homes torn down. She asked what is the wish of the Council? Mayor Pro Tem Low made a motion, second by Council Member Dang, to amend the ordinance to allow a 1,200 square feet ADU that are detached. Mayor Armenta noted that there is a motion on the floor to have a detached ADU up to 1,200 feet of square feet. Council Member Dang clarified that it should read, "detached from the main house/detached from any garage". Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela suggested the term freestanding. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 14 of 28 City Attorney Richman questioned if the changes would only reflect on the chart where it stated 1,000 square feet. She clarified that it would update to "1,200 square foot detached, freestanding, and not attached to a garage". Council Member Dang responded that it should be fine if you update the table. Mayor Pro Tem Low added that she's okay with that and expressed that the 200 square feet difference may appear as numbers to us, but this would provide more space for families. Council Member Ly recommended combining all the changes into one unless there is no consensus on it. If there is consensus on it, then it makes sense for the Council to get polled, and if there are three votes, then we update the ordinance. He added, we would have to vote the ordinance all as one document and at this point, vote on it as first reading. He then suggested going through each point to see if there are at least three votes for each of the items. City Attorney Richman clarified that "1,200 square feet for a detached freestanding (not attached to any accessory use) ADU that provides more than one bedroom" would be added. Council Member Clark inquired if the term "garage" can be included. Council Member Dang explained that the reason for the word "accessory use" is because they could add it to a rec room, laundry room, exterior laundry room, workshop, or rumpus room. That's why the word "accessory" is used, it broadens the definition. Council Member Clark questioned if the accessory use includes a garage Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated yes, it is included Council Member Ly expressed that if you are just using the word "garage" in there, everyone is going to find a loophole. He recommended letting staff and the City Attorney figure out the correct language we should use. City Attorney Richman states we are doing that because for this to be a first reading she would have to read the changes in, otherwise we have to come back for the first reading. She prefers to get those words to read them into the changes and then Council can adopt it as first reading and come back at the next meeting for the second reading. Council Member Ly noted the City Attorney knows the intent of what Council wants and asked that she come up with a language that makes sense legally, then run it by the rest of the Council for the official motion to amend. City Attorney Richman reads the first item which will show on the chart that says, "1,200 square feet for a detached freestanding unit (not attached to any accessory use) ADU that provides more than one bedroom". Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 15 of 28 Mayor Pro Tem Low goes over the second item 4A, which removes the first sentence that reads "one detached new construction 800 square feet ADU." Seeing no objection for item one and two, Mayor Armenta moved onto the third item. Mayor Pro Tem Low discussed the second sentence of item 8C that reads "if an ADU is located on the second floor of the primary dwelling unit, or accessory structure, the external stairs shall be proposed in a location that limits visibility from the public right-of-way". Council Member Clark expressed that she would not like to see that deleted as it is clear enough that they can work with staff. Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned if we could add language that indicates that the architect or designer can come work with the City if needed. City Attorney Richman discussed the language with the Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela and read that there would be a "comma at the end of the right-of-way from the private public right-of-way, unless a design so warrants." Council Member Dang inquired if we hypothetically strike off this section, an architect can bring their proposed plan to staff for further discussion. At that time, staff could provide their input. Council Member Clark voiced that would take away the leverage. Council Member Dang expressed that there should not be leverage because the whole point of this ADU ordinance from the State is not to empower the local ordinance or put leverage on people. The whole point of this ADU is supposed to be a by right document and we should not be imposing. Council Member Clark disagrees and believes the State is mandating a lot of things that aren't good and does not believe that's a good argument. If we can put as much wiggle room in it, we should, especially if we can make it more compatible to our City. She believes the way the language reads, people can say I can't do it this way, but can ask staff to help them work it out, however if you don't have it in there, you just took away any leverage. Mayor Armenta noted that would be any other guidelines and ordinances that we have. She questioned if Council Member Clark was saying that anybody has an ability to go back and challenge our ordinances. Council Member Clark responded no, this was obviously put in by staff to make it more aesthetically pleasing and believes we should leave it in there. If someone says they can't do this and they can ask for help, and maybe apply for a variance. She emphasized that this should not be taken out and believes its good thing to have. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 16 of 28 Council Member Ly inquired about the cost for a variance. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated that with ADUs, you cannot require any discretionary approval, so that would not be okay. Council Member Dang questioned if that is a State ordinance. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela answered yes, it is a State ordinance. Council Member Ly noted that since there is no variance, then they do not have the ability to work with staff to fix these things. Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela states yes, if you want to add that statement, and if warranted, that would help staff. Council Member Dang suggested to delete it and trust staff to make things pleasing. Council Member Clark explained that this is brand new and not something we are used to. She added that she would be okay with adding the "unless the design so warrants" to give some wiggle room but believes it should be left in there. Council Member Dang stated that this is a house and we've been building houses, so this product is not new. Mayor Armenta advised to revisit the language and questioned what should be included. Council Member Clark suggested adding "unless a design so warrants" Council Member Ly informed Council Member Clark that the question was directed for the staff to sort out. City Attorney Richman read the verbiage options, "It would be limited visibility from the public right-of-way, unless the design so warrants." Or the second option, "Shall be proposed in a location that limits visibility to the greatest extent feasible from the public right-of-way" because that gives more of a directive to the architect and gives some authority to staff. Council Member Clark stated that she likes that instead. Mayor Armenta thanked Council Member Clark for her comment and asked what the will of Council is. Council Member Dang clarified that we can't move exterior staircase wherever we want because it changes the floor plan. For example, shifting it 5 feet may change the entrance to come through the kitchen. It is a difficult process, and if you ask someone to move the staircase, it might flip the whole design inside out. He trusts staff to make things aesthetically pleasing and does not see a reason why we.should Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust25, 2020 Page 17 of 28 have this in here because it will cause confusion to the designers and homeowners. He added, the term "limit visibility" is such a gray area. Because there are so many variations, so it's very hard to design like this. If you want something aesthetically pleasing, rely on the Planning staff to do so. Council Member Clark noted the "greatest extent feasible" and inquired what's the wiggle room for that? She added that she likes that language and believes it should be kept. Mayor Armenta agreed with Council Member Dang because this says limits, it does not say "should not be seen from the public right-of-way," it says, "limits visibility" and that's a very gray area, because it does not specifically say 80% or 20%. She added, we want to make sure that the language is interpreted and ensures a cohesiveness moving forward. Mayor Pro Tem Low voiced that she was okay removing it because it's not clear and may cause confusion to the architect/designer. Council Member Clark expressed that the addition of "to the greatest extent feasible" is what gives us wiggle room. If someone states that they can't do this, they will have to move the waterline then we don't require it. She added, she would like to have this as a possibility, and they can figure it out if they can or not. She expressed that if this isn't added in there, she may not vote for the ordinance. Mayor Armenta inquired if there is a motion on the floor. Mayor Pro Tem Low made a motion to remove the second sentence for 8C. Council Member Dang supports deleting the second sentence of 8C. Council Member Ly agrees that the Code should be as clear as possible if the intent was to design an ordinance where we give ADUs more by -right use in the City, then it needs to be very clear so that we're saving the residents as much money as possible. The people that are building these are not developers, just mom and pop homeowners, whose family members and/or a second family are living in the back. He added, if there is a belief by the majority Council that the second sentence of 8C is unclear, then he supports that removal as well. He requested for further clarification regarding the exterior stairs on the second floor ADU. Mayor Pro Tem Low stated yes, the exterior stairway should not be seen from the public street. Mayor Armenta used an analogy such as trash cans. Trash cans are not supposed to be visible from the street, but there are people that don't quite have the area to hide the trash cans because it's not allowed, but we make provisions for that. Council Member Ly questioned if staff would have any type of flexibility or some sort of leverage in their approval process of the project if this language is removed. He added, he is not bothered if the staircase is showing, however, he would like to ensure its aesthetically pleasing. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 18 of 28 Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela responded that if the language is removed and staff has a case where someone is proposing it and it's visible, we can only make a recommendation and it's up to the property owner/designer to either mitigate that issue or say it's not in your code. Council Member Ly inquired what power does staff have to ensure the house looks nice. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated it would be through the plan check process and staff would look at the design too. For ADUs however, the State does not give staff as much design power. Mayor Armenta asked staff for recommendations and questioned how staff would change item 8C to ensure that staff has more leeway and design powers. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela expressed that staff would prefer that the language is added in because it gives us something to go back to and point out to a designer or an architect. Staff can work with you, but try to hide the staircase, and design the staircase so it's not visible from the street. She added, that would give us more of an option. Mayor Armenta questioned if she would change anything from 8C. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela expressed that she would add the sentence at the end that City Attorney Richman proposed. Mayor Armenta expressed that she also wants to take staff into consideration and see it through their perspective. Although Council is the one voting on the policies, staff is the one who ensures that it comes to fruition, so she would like to find the middle ground. Council Member Ly reiterated that he is not bothered if the staircase shows if it looks aesthetically pleasing. He understands Council Member Dang's perspective and thinks he's right, that forms are important, and we must allow for the creation of ADUs because we have multi -generational families in this community, and we would be doing a disservice to our community if we don't provide that ability for multicultural families to stay in place. People who grew up in Rosemead want to stay so we should allow for that. He read 8A," For the construction of a new ADU, the ADU shall match or compliment the primary residence in architectural design color and materials." If that line is in there, and it applies to second story exterior structures as well, he believes that would give staff teeth in. He understands staff s concern to hide the stairs, however, he does not think it's our mission or responsibility to hide the stairs. He added, it may be within our jurisdiction as Council and subsequent entities to make the stairs aesthetically pleasing. He expressed that he would be comfortable moving the language if 8A's intent ensures the aesthetic component. Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned if he meant to include the stairways as part of the architectural design. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 19 of 28 Council Member Ly answered that is correct Council Member Dang agreed that would give staff enough teeth in. For example, if the front house is Spanish the back house must be Spanish style as well. He added, you would make it nice and make it match. Mayor Pro Tem Low noted that would give staff a lot more tools and leeway of looking at the design overall, not just the stairs. Council Member Dang noted that the last sentence is not needed and explained that the "public way" does not only mean street, but also alley. For reference, if a residence backside is an alley, and they want to build an ADU on top of the garage, they would not be able to hide it from the street or alley. He added, he does not want the resident to go through a variance process and realize they would not be able to do so. Instead, he prefers that the resident comes in to discuss with staff and ensure that it's done in an architecturally pleasing manner. Council Member Ly agreed with Council Member Dang's comment. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed that we would stick with striking this second sentence of 8C. City Attorney Richman explained that since Council has discussed what the changes would be, now a full motion on the ordinance with the changes would be appropriate. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked to read all the changes. City Attorney Richman read the changes that received consensus. On 4A, the first sentence as being struck and 8C, the last sentence is being struck. On page seven, the table for maximums floor area for detached ADUs, the second bullet is now going to state, "1,200 square feet for a detached freestanding structure (not attached to any accessory use) ADU that provides more than one bedroom." Mayor Pro Tem Low made a motion with all changes. She questioned if this would be the new first reading. City Attorney Richman answered that's correct, since she read them in the record, this will be for the new first reading. Mayor Armenta stated that a motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Low with the changes read by our City Attorney Richman as first reading, and second by Council Member Dang. ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Low and seconded by Council Member Dang to introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 995, with the changes read by City Attorney Richman, entitled: Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 20 of 28 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 20-01, AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY WITH NEW STATE PROVISIONS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUs) The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Dang, Low, and Ly; NOES: Clark 5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Coronavirus Relief Fund Summary Report The City of Rosemead has been allocated $671,227 in Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) as part of the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. This report provides a summary and status of the CRF programming, guidelines, and funding allocation. Recommendation: That the City Council received and file the report. City Manager Molleda stated on March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law providing over $2 trillion economic relief package to respond to the public health and economic impacts of COVID-19. In part, the CARES Act allocated $150 billion for the Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) to assist the state, local and tribal governments to navigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Jurisdictions with a population over 500,000 received direct CRF payments from the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury). The remaining California cities are to receive CRF funding through the State Department of Finance (DOF). Ms. Molleda asserted that the total CRF allocation to Rosemead is $671,227, and to -date Rosemead has received the first of six scheduled installments in the amount of $111,871 on July 30; noted additional installments are anticipated in the forthcoming months. The CRF is intended to provide ready funding to address unforeseen financial needs and risks created by the COVID-19 public health emergency, subject to the Treasury's guidance and in compliance with the State's public health requirements. The funds must be used for necessary expenditures incurred due to the COVID-19 public health emergency and cannot be used for ineligible expenses, such as to backfill lost revenues or capital infrastructure. The funds must also be used for expenses incurred between March 1, 2020, and December 30, 2020, and any unspent funds must be returned. According and pursuant to Treasury's CRF expenditure eligibility guidelines, the following initial allocations for the $671,227 CRF monies have been prepared: Medical Expenses - Testing $110,000 Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 21 of 28 Public Health Expenses - Communication/enforcement-public health orders $40,000 - Protective supplies (PPE/cleaning) $15,000 - Disinfection of public areas $20,000 - Technical assistance on mitigation (legal) $80,000 Substantially Dedicated Payroll Expenses - Public safety (LA County Sheriff's Dept.) $200,000 - Part-time employees COVID-19 activities $10,000 - Contract employees COVID-19 activities $46,227 Comply w/ Public Health Measures & Mitigate Effects - Senior food delivery $20,000 - Telework computers/scanners $30,000 Economic Support - Small business grants $100,000 Total $671,227 It is noted that DOF is requiring that by September 1", the CRF recipients submit an expenditure report and a plan on how the funds will be spent. At the time of writing this report, DOF has not yet released the reporting guidelines; however, staff will monitor and submit the report as appropriate. DOF has also stated that any recipient funds not spent by October 30`h may be reallocated to other jurisdictions or to the State. Staff will pursue the potential opportunity to secure any unspent funds by other recipient(s) should it be available. Lastly, the second phase HEROES / HEALS Act is making its way through congress and staff will monitor for any additional funding opportunities. Mayor Pro Tem Low inquired if Rosemead can expect to receive funding from the second phase HEROES / HEALS ACT. City Manager Molleda replied nothing is certain at this time. Mayor Armenta noted Congress is on recess and until they come back to session, they will not be able to vote on the HEROES Act. City Attorney Richman clarified that the House is there, but the Senate is on recess. Mayor Armenta asked if we know what the remaining five installations of funding will be allocated for? City Manager Molleda responded we do not because we scrambled to put this together since the funding needed to be spent in such a short amount of time; indicated we are already starting to look at other possible allocations such as additional testing, more part-time and contract employees, as well as Public Safety contracts. Mayor Armenia inquired if these funds could also be used for rental assistance programs. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 22 of 28 Ms. Molleda stated I believe the funds can be used for rental assistance programs. Mrs. Armenta was happy to hear there are a lot of opportunities for this funding. 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 informed Council that we closed applications for business assistance and rental assistance; noted we received a total of 21 business assistance applications and 26 rental/utilities applications. Ms. Molleda stated as of yesterday, we have a total of 728 COVID-19 cases in the City of Rosemead; shared that staff has been very helpful in providing temporary outdoor dining permits as requested by Council Member Dang. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked if the city is being strict when a business requests outdoor dining. Ms. Molleda replied that the business must submit a design that meets certain criteria such as safety. Mayor Armenta stated ADA accessibility still must be adhered to, so sidewalks cannot be blocked with tables and chairs. Mayor Pro Tem Low inquired how the criteria was determined, if the city followed state guidelines, etc. City Manager Molleda responded that it depends on the city, noting we reviewed surrounding cities protocols to help determine what would work best for Rosemead; stated the Director of Community Development can send the Rosemead criteria to Council for their reference. Mayor Armenta asked when it comes to a shopping center for example, Rosemead Place, which has pockets of parking lots — is it possible to section off the parking lot for restaurants that do not have indoor seating? Also, if it is possible, has staff reached out to the plaza property owners to advise them of this opportunity? Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo stated it is possible to section off the parking lot and that temporary outdoor dining permits have been shared with the property owners via mass emails; emphasized staff is working hard to not only walk them through the process but to expedite it as well; indicated Lucille's and Olive Garden's outdoor dining is in their parking lot areas. Mayor Armenta inquired if the city is asking for a higher insurance Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 15, 2020 Page 23 of 28 Mrs. Frausto-Lupo explained from what she understood that it is not expensive for a business to request a Certificate of Insurance as it is about $100; stated we do request that restaurants name the city as an additional insured. Mayor Pro Tem Low expressed she would appreciate if staff would continue to be proactive in reaching out to more businesses to take advantage of the temporary outdoor dining permits. Mrs. Armenta opined some businesses such as mom and pops, are less inclined to participate because they cannot afford the extra costs of equipment needed. Council Member Dang indicated he informed the owner of the Vietnamese restaurant across the street about the outdoor dining and helped them with the drawing to submit; attested to Planning staff expediting the process as this restaurant's outdoor dining was implemented within a week of submittal; gave kudos to Planning staff, especially Lily Valenzuela, for going above and beyond. Mayor Armenta stated she knows the Governor is looking at removing counties from the monitoring watch list, noting Orange County was recently taken off that list. Explained whether schools are removed from the monitoring list is determined on a different calculation in the span of 14 days (an average not consecutively). Mrs. Armenta shared she learned there are different factors that are taken into consideration such as — How many positive cases and deaths in the County? How many people are an in ICU and how many beds are available? She inquired if LA County is removed from that list, what is the plan to reopen City Hall? City Manager Molleda replied we have already tried opening, so we already have a plan in place while we follow County guidelines. Mayor Armenta noted she requested City Clerk Hernandez to survey surrounding cities to determine which ones are open and which are working remotely; stated she will share the results during her Council comments. 6. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. Discussion on Pool Maintenance Ordinance This item is presented to the City Council at the request of Mayor Armenta. She would like to discuss a pool maintenance ordinance. Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide further direction. Mayor Armenta noted she requested this item as she sits on the San Gabriel Valley Mosquito and Vector Control; stated it came to her attention that Rosemead tested positive for the West Nile Virus as there are a lot of pools not being maintained; the Mosquito and Vector Control are asking cities to consider adopting a pool maintenance ordinance. Council Member Clark stated former Los Angeles County Board of Supervisor Zev Yaroslaysky's wife passed away from the West Nile Virus in 2018; opined we Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 24 of 28 often think it won't happen to me, but you never know; indicated support and moved to adopt this ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Low indicated that this ordinance seems to primarily address swimming pools; that being said, I don't know how many swimming pools in Rosemead are not taken care of; what caused the problem are the smaller puddles of water that people don't pay attention to because they don't realize it's an issue; focus on how do we educate residents to take care of these small puddles and pools. Mayor Armenta stated we could have the Vector Control come out and educate residents; uses a droid that takes pictures of all the unkept pools, you'd be surprised at how many there are; could ask the Board to send that data for Council's reference. Mayor Pro Tem Low posed the question, let's say we adopt the ordinance, how do we monitor this and know when residents' pools are not maintained? Mayor Armenta that is the beauty of being part of the SGV Mosquito and Vector Control, they monitor, send out letters, and take pictures. Council Member Dang referenced page 3 of the proposed ordinance, stating Administrative citations and fines associated with it. First one - $500, Second one - $1,000, Third one - $1,500; indicated support for having a mosquito ordinance; expressed concern that the fine for the first citation is pretty high — he does not want to burden the City Manager with processing residents' appeals. Mayor Armenta noted the City Manager may issue an Administrative citation. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked if the vector control expects every city to have the same ordinance? Mayor Armenta responded this is a draft template, and the city can make any desired changes. Mayor Pro Tem Low opined the ordinance should address those puddles of water and not just pools. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Low, Council Member Clark referenced page 1 of the proposed ordinance, which defined "Pool" as any swimming pool, whether above -ground or in -ground. For purposes of this chapter, "pool" also includes any above -ground or in -ground hot tub or spa, ornamental pond, fountain, bird bath, or any other man-made structure or fixture capable of collecting water. In effort to address Council Member Dang's concern, Mrs. Clark pointed out that "City manager means the City Manager and/or his or her authorized designee(s). Suggested we could have Code Enforcement go out if needed, it doesn't have to be the City Manager. Mayor Armenta also suggested our Assistant City Manager could also be a designee. Council Member Clark said if Council wishes it could be $250 instead of $500. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 25 of 28 City Attorney Richman interested to know how these amounts were determined; clarified as a General Law city, we have some restrictions on our citation amounts; we cannot just pick anything because it could be turned over as an excessive fine; opined our highest citation amount is $500, but she will have to verify. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked if the money collected from the fines goes to the city? Mayor Armenta opined if the City Manager is issuing the citations, then the fine would go to the city. City Attorney Richman stated we have to get an order to establish protocol. Council Member Ly stated the intent makes sense; direct the City Attorney to draft an ordinance that fits Rosemead's needs and that will be enforceable by the city. City Attorney Richman responded she would appreciate if she could look at the ordinance to compare what may already be in our Municipal Code, then bring it back to Council at a future meeting. Council Member Dang asked if we are taking the fines and keeping it, then why is the Vector Control offering their services such as flying drones throughout the city for free? Inquired once a report is compiled, what happens if we are short staff and cannot facilitate inspections during a specific time — is the city on the hook, are there any repercussions? Council Member Ly responded no; years back when we were going through the drought, all the water companies are under the authority of the Municipal Water District, however the water companies themselves did not have the power to enforce drought fines and they had to rely on the cities to do so. A report is just a report, but it is whatever each city can address. Mayor Armenia added that the SGV Mosquito and Vector Control is a special district, which means they get paid through property tax money, so we are paying into it. Council Member Dang expressed concern for having drones flying into people's backyards. Mayor Armenta stated she would be happy to reach out the Vector Control's Executive Director for more information to assist the City Attorney. B. Council Comments Council Member Clark stated since Council has already expressed support for the revisions to AB 109 (Cooper), which is on the ballot; requested an item be added on the next agenda to support Proposition 20 "Keep California Safe", which is the revisions of those laws. City Manager Molleda affirmed we will bring that item back on the next agenda. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 26 of 28 Council Member Ly opined based off of the Chief s report, it is a stressful time for all of us — residents and employees; thanked staff for taking care of our residents and business community's needs; expressed he was happy to be back home from training. Council Member Dang thanked staff and said to keep up the good work. Mayor Pro Tem Low thanked staff for all their efforts; thanked the Chief and his team for protecting the city. Shared she went to cat at a restaurant for the first time in awhile and enjoyed being out of her house. Mayor Armenta noted that a lot of the weeds are coming up out of the curb; when you exit Temple City Boulevard on the off ramp, the middle part that prevents you from making a left onto Olney Street is full of weeds. We are asking residents to do their part in beautifying the city by maintaining their curbs and weeds, but we the city need to ensure we are practicing what we preach by upkeeping the city's rights-of-way as well. Mayor Pro Tem Low asked if staff simply relies on people calling in to report overgrown weeds or graffiti? Assuming we do not have the manpower to monitor those things on a daily. City Manager Molleda responded you're correct we do not have the manpower; however, staff has been instructed that these are things they need to look at as they are driving around doing their daily duties. Mayor Armenta noted she asked City Clerk Hernandez to survey surrounding cities such as Alhambra, San Gabriel, Temple City, El Monte, South El Monte, and Montebello, to determine which ones are open and which are working remotely; opined this information will be useful to determine once we are ready to reopen. Noted the following: 1) Alhambra has regular business hours and no staff working remotely; 2) The cities of El Monte, South El Monte and Montebello's Department Heads are not working remotely; and 3) The cities of San Gabriel, Temple City and Monterey Park are working remotely. Mayor Pro Tem Low inquired if the Mayor's concern is the city continuing to provide services efficiently. Mayor Armenta clarified my concern is more so what if there is a decision that cannot be made my mid-level management — that responsibility should not fall on that employee, rather the director. Mayor Pro Tem Low shared with her company the communication between the engineer and the manager is very open and Nothing to do with our staff being capable to work remotely; just information to help us compare and look to the future. Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 27 of 28 Council Member Ly emphasized staff is overseen by the City Manager; suggested the City Manager provide a report via the Council Weekly Update to explain each Department's schedules and how it impacts the city. Mayor Armenta shared someone suggested we do the same concept of the Little Free Library where you can take a book, but instead it can be veggies and we can place it in our community garden to help those who might need it. Commended Parks staff for hosting a fun and successful drive-thru movie event. 7. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Armenta adjourned the meeting at 10:38 p.m., in memory of Howard O'Neil and James "Jimmy" O'Neil, a father and son that passed away within a week of each other. The next regular scheduled meeting will take place on September 8, 2020, at 7:00 pm. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber. Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk APPROVED: L - Polfy-LowIN Jayor Rosemead City Council and Successor Agency Regular Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 28 q(28