Loading...
CC - Item 5B - Minutes of April 26, 2022MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING APRIL 26, 2022 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Low at 7:00 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PRESENT: Mayor Low, Mayor Pro Tem Dang, Council Members Armenta, Clark and Tang ABSENT: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Mayor Low INVOCATION was led by Council Member Clark STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman, Interim Director of Finance Chamberlain, Director of Parks and Recreation Boecking, Director of Public Works Chung, and City Clerk Hernandez 1. PUBLIC COMMENT Barbara Williams expressed concern with a Rosemead Explorer Driver regarding issues she experienced when requesting to use the lift to aid her with her wheelchair. Secondly, she expressed concerns with a beacon crossing light on the street of Ivar and Muscatel Avenue and Scott Street. Lastly, she spoke about increased issues with transients and asked for more police presence. Council Member Armenta asked for clarification if the transit company changed ownership and asked City staff to follow up with Ms. William's concerns about the proper usage for elderly riders. Mayor Low also directed staff to look into the crossing lights are working properly and asked Sergeant Marquez to assist with Ms. William's concerns about the transient issue. Velia Navarro spoke about excessive speed on her street and requested speed bumps or other ways to mitigate speed. City Manager Kim stated staff would look into the speed issue 2. PRESENTATIONS - None 3. PUBLIC HEARING A. Public Hearing on Modification 21-01 Friendly Inn Motel — 2146 San Gabriel Boulevard AGENDA ITEM 5.13 On July 27, 2021, the City Council approved Modification 21-01 and adopted Resolution No. 2021-37, which revised the conditions of approval to thereby amend Conditional Use Permit 88-447 for the Friendly Inn, located at 2146 San Gabriel Boulevard. Per Condition of Approval No. 10, "If requested in writing by the applicant, at a date shortly after 5 months from the effective date of City Council Resolution 2021-37, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on Modification 21-01 to determine whether to add, revise, or remove conditions of approval based upon the operations of the facility during the period since the effective date of Council Resolution 2021-37, and whether the conditions stated in Resolution 2021-37 will continue to be appropriate to mitigate the impacts of the subject property on a going - forward basis." On March 9, 2022, the City Clerk's Office received a letter from the Law Offices of Frank A. Weiser, representing the business and property owners of the Friendly Inn, requesting the City Council conduct a public hearing on Modification 21-01. As a result, the public hearing was scheduled for April 12, 2022, to be heard by the City Council. At the request of the applicant's representative, on April 12, 2022, the City Council continued the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled City Council Meeting of April 26, 2022. Recommendation: That the City Council conduct a public hearing and direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings for adoption at its May 10, 2022, City Council Meeting. City Attorney Richman explained the following legal counsels were present Attorney Scott Porter was present to advise the City Council on the matter. On behalf of City staff, Attorney Ariel Byrne, and on behalf of the Friendly Inn clients, was Attorney Frank Weiser. Additionally, explained the procedures to the City Council and noted that Mr. Weiser submitted documents to the City Clerk and City Council right before the meeting. Attorney Scott Porter stated the City Council previously authorized and amended Conditional Use Permit. One of the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit essentially allowed the applicant to request a revised Conditional Use Permit. The Public Hearing held was concerning the Condition of Approval and its Condition No. 21, which relates to the amount of security on site. Explained the City and Friendly Inn owners were present, and the City Council would then determine how they wish to proceed. Attorney Frank Weiser stated that at the previous public hearing meeting, there was an agreement between the City and the Friendly Inn property owners of a Tolling Agreement. Mr. Weiser requested to continue with the tolling agreement between the two parties. He stated his clients agreed to return before the City Council for a review of the conditions and expressed his clients have met all conditions. Noted he submitted a binder with documents for the record before the meeting to show that each condition was met. They have two security guards, as imposed by the City Council at the last hearing. Indicated the security guard contract is very costly and monthly payments were approximately $35,000. The Friendly Inn was making at Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 2 of 27 most 50,000 a month. They stated that they were in the red on top of the expenses to run the motel. Mr. Weiser stated that the Chief of Police had recommended at least one security guard. However, his clients felt that a security patrol would be sufficient. He noted that video cameras were installed and connected to the police department. Therefore, an unarmed security guard could provide the same security function. He stated that the Chief of Police indicated that service calls were not severe, therefore a security patrol would have been just as good. There should be an alternative way to reduce the costs of security. Attorney Ariel Byrne stated that although guards were brought to the property under the modification, evidence still indicated the number of calls was still high compared to other properties in the jurisdiction of the Sheriffs Department. The Chief of Police recommended reducing the number to one armed guard instead of keeping two because of the costs. Based on the number of calls that are still coming out of the property, the Chief of Police would prefer to keep two armed guards. While the severity of calls had reduced, the number of calls still indicates a need for assistance and security on the property. City staff was recommending another review in six months to allow the property owners to keep working with the City and to eventually see if keeping an armed guard will continue to have the severity and the number of calls reduced. Andrew Chen the property owner of Friendly Inn, stated their security cost was very high and that an armed security guard would be an additional $18,000 a month. State it's been difficult keeping up with expenses. The current security company increased their costs since they are making a call and handling some of the issues at the property. Mr. Chen noted that security does call the police more than necessary sometimes. Sometimes, the dispatch will ask if deputies are needed to come out. He indicated their security is not able to handle the domestic issues. Mr. Chen reiterated guests are not afraid of security since they know they do not have the power to arrest them. In addition, with armed security, some guests are more willing to challenge security. He stated the security company had recommended security with tasers and pepper spray to be sufficient until cops arrived. He pleaded with the City Council to reconsider security requirements to help them with costs since they have ongoing expenses and repairs. He clarified that some calls were medical -related, but there has been an improvement in the number of calls. Attorney Weiser stated the Tolling Agreement worked well before and requested to enter into a tolling agreement again to give both parties time to resolve the issues. Council Member Tang asked for clarification of the Tolling Agreement. Attorney Porter explained that Mr. Weiser was requesting a new Tolling Agreement and noted that the City Council was acceptable to the recommendation. The Tolling Agreement meant the City would not sue, while the applicant, the Friendly Inn, preserved their right to sue the City in the future. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 3 of 27 Attorney Byrne called on Chief of Police Lieutenant Shigo and asked if he was familiar with the Friendly Inn property and the data from the property in the last six months, beginning on September 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied he was familiar with the property and the data involving the property. Attorney Byrne asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo what he could tell from reviewing the data collected the type of calls. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo stated that during that period, there were approximately 33 calls for service or responses from the Sheriff s Department to that property. He noted the calls ranged from assault with a deadly weapon all the way to a heroin overdose. Attorney Byrne asked if the calls were higher or lower before the six months. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied that prior to the six months, the calls were higher. Attorney Byrne asked what the severity of the calls was in the last six months. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo stated the severity of the calls was not as severe as the ones before the six months calls. He opined that the security guards on the property made a difference. However, the cost of the service calls was still more than before. Attorney Byrne asked if there were other hotels or motels in the jurisdiction that compared to the Friendly Inn. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo stated he compared three other motels in the general area with service calls. For that period, the Fairfield Inn had 13 calls. The Motel VIP had I 1 calls, and the Del Mar Inn had 16 calls. The Friendly Inn still had twice as many calls for services as the other motels. Attorney Byrne inquired if any other calls after February 28, 2022, were not included in the current report. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied there were 11 additional calls for service after February 28, 2022, until up to the last week. Attorney Byrne asked what the property's current conditions were, as it relates to the armed security guards and the calls still coming in. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo stated the severity of the calls had reduced because the security officers were on site. Expressed that if the security guards are removed, the severity of the calls and situations could come back. Attorney Byrne asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo what he thought about the security at the property. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 4 of 27 Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied ideally keeping two -armed security guards 24/7 was ideal. However, he understood that the cost was a burden on the property owner and could recommend reducing it to one armed security and revisiting the review in six months. He also added that Deputies went to the property to speak to the clerk and were told that since the end of March, there had not been security guards 24/7 on the property but from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. Attorney Weiser referred to page four from the documents he provided right before the meeting to the City Council. He referenced all the calls made from September 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022. Mr. Weiser asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo if any of those calls were crime -related or police reports taken. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo responded that many of the service calls from September 1, 2021, to February 2022, were not crime -related calls. Calls included domestic issue calls, Suspicious activity calls, probationary -related calls, and medical -related calls. Attorney Weiser asked if Chief of Police Lt. Shigo had the report of the 11 calls he previously mentioned. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied he did not have the report at that moment. Attorney Weiser reiterated that Chief of Police Lt. Shigo had now recommended one security guard instead of two. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo responded affirmatively. However, he suggested the City have another review in six months to review the number of calls and crimes during the next six months. Attorney Weiser asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo to confirm there had been a drop in crime calls at the property. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo confirmed a drop in crime calls at the property. Attorney Weiser asked Lt. Shigo where the other motels he mentioned were located. Although they may have lower calls, did they have more crime calls compared to his client. Asked if he had a report on those calls. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied that Motel VIP is located at 2619 San Gabriel and Fairfield Inn is located at 705 South San Gabriel. He stated he was not sure what the distance from each motel was to the Friendly Inn, and he did not have a printed report for the calls of other motels. Attorney Byrne asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo to explain how a Deputy decides, when responding to a call, how to determine whether to create a report or not. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo explained if a Deputy decides to create a crime report and incident report, they have determined there has been an actual crime. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes ofApri126, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 5 of 27 Attorney Byrne asked what does it tell you about the number of calls still coming in at the motel. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied that although there are two security guards at the property, it has not stopped the volume of calls. Attorney Byrne asked what he could tell by looking at the number of calls from the other motels. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied that the number of calls at the other motels is generally half the number of calls they get from the Friendly Inn. Attorney Weiser asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo why he chose the two motels he previously mentioned to get call data on and not citywide. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo responded that the motels he had data on were in the vicinity; there was no other specific reason why he chose those motels. Attorney Weiser clarified that crimes have gone down at the Friendly Inn. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo confirmed that crime had gone down at the Friendly Inn. There being no further cross-examination by either Counsel, Mayor Low requested closing remarks. Attorney Weiser stated the evidence demonstrated that the crime had gone down, and the calls for service were not properly reflective of what was really happening at the motel. There has been a substantial decrease in crime. He asked the City Council to reconsider a security patrol, with the video linked and allowing the police to verify the information, that would be in lieu of having full-time security. He noted that his client believes an unarmed security guard would have the same effect as an armed security guard. He asked the City Council if they would reconsider the modification and allow his client to hire a security patrol. Attorney Byrne stated the main importance here is the safety of the tenants, the guests, and the City at large. Even though the calls are higher, the City is happy to see that the severity is reducing. The fact is that the calls are still more than double those of other hotels in the area. Just looking at the number of the calls, there is cause for concern as to why this property is producing calls higher than other hotels in the vicinity. The City is aware of the financial strain. It's recommended in the staff report that a reduction of the current conditions, the City is okay with recommending the one armed guard for 24/7 patrol to see how that goes over the next six months. Then come back and allow this property to show that with the condition, if the City Council decides that reducing it to one armed guard is appropriate, then move towards reducing the number and severity of calls even further. Mayor Low opened the floor for City Council questions. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2021 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 6 of 27 Council Member Armenta asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo about the 24-hour security he mentioned was not present at the property. She noted that she had received complaints from residents stating that they did not see the security guard at the property. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo stated when he spoke to motel staff, indicated that they had not had security there for the past month, only from 9 pm to 5 am, and it was unclear whether it was two or one. Council Member Armenta stated it was very concerning because this was stipulated and put on record that this is what was going to be required from the property owners. Mr. Weiser explained that the property owner was transitioning to another security service. They had their issues with the security service, but they have been paying for two security guards. He noted the documents he submitted to the City Council had evidence in the package of cash checks that showed they were paying for two security guards. Council Member Armenta stated the motel owner is supposed to have two 24-hour armed guards. Mr. Weiser stated that his client agreed and still had the right to appeal the decision. Suggested Mr. Chen explain for the record what was happening with the security service. Mr. Chen explained that they asked for security service for five months or so in their initial contract. They needed to hire at least eight guards to cover all the shifts. They started having issues supplying enough guards at the end of February or the beginning of March. Mr. Chen stated they decided they wanted to change companies and were hoping to have this meeting as soon as possible to figure out what the City wants and if any changes could be made before they sign a new contract. Council Member Armenia thanked Mr. Chen for the clarification. Knowing there was a lapse in 24-hour security, asked Mr. Chen how come they had not reached out to the City before. Council Member Tang asked Chief of Police Lt. Shigo to elaborate on how the business violated the 24-hour term of the condition. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied he asked Mr. Chen if there had been a 24/7 security and was told no. Council Member Tang noted that it contradicted their counsel's statement that indicated that the motel was supplying a 24-hour security throughout the entire time. Also asked that no matter what type of service call is made, Deputies still go on-site to inspect. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 7 of 27 Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied yes. If you call the sheriffs station with a complaint, they go no matter what it is and determine what's happening. Council Member Tang stated that initially, the City Attorney had presented and said providing on-site security with one or two on-site armed security guards would be preferred. He asked for the Chief of Police's opinion in recommending one armed security guard. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo responded with at least with one or two armed security guards. Council Member Tang wanted the record to show that the Chief of Police Lt. Shigo was recommending at least one armed security guard and notjust one armed security guard. Mayor Pro Tem Dang indicated to Chief of Police Lt. Shigo that Mr. Weiser asked about specific service call incidents which did not result in crime reports. He asked for clarification if the operator taking the calls is trained to determine if there is a crime committed before sending out a Deputy. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo replied the operator could not determine if the call was a crime or not. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked, upon arriving at the site, whether deputies approached the hotel office and talked to the hotel operator or manager on site. Chief of Police Lt Shigo replied yes, and it also depends on the call. Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated that a call was placed, and it originated from somewhere on the premise that the hotel operator would at least notify their private security first, and if their private security cannot handle the situation, then they would at least attempt to reach out to Temple Sheriff Station. He stated what is the point of having security if they're not going to help with the situation. Council Member Clark asked for clarification of the conditions to have two armed security guards 24/7, and those conditions were not met full-time. Chief of Police Lt. Shigo affirmed it was correct. Council Member Clark expressed concern that the City Council wants to ensure things are safe and help the business thrive. However, if they do not comply with the conditions, it's difficult to move forward. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked for clarification on the condition of the two armed security guards. After looking at the package the motel counsel submitted before the meeting, the invoices seemed sporadic because there were invoices for armed security and unarmed security. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 8 of 27 Mayor Low opened the Public Hearing for Public Comments. Velia Navarro, a resident, expressed concerns with the Friendly Inn motel. She stated seeing the frequency of Temple Sheriff Station at the motel did not make people safe in her neighborhood. Children walk by the motel to go to school, and she had not seen any new businesses around the area. Questioned if Mr. Rex Johnson lived near the motel if he stated that he felt safe walking in the area. City Clerk Hernandez read Rex Johnson's comment received via email expressing support for the improvements on the motel. He reiterated that he felt safe walking in the area and the motel would bring in more business. Council Member Tang requested the record include the public comments received at the initial meetings with the Planning Commission and City Council also be entered into the record because the comments from neighbors specified concerns with the business. Attorney Porter affirmed the public comments previously made at other meetings were already part of the record. Mayor Low asked the City Council to deliberate on the matter. Understood the business owner is asking to reduce the requirement for the two guards because there is a cost factor. However, heard from residents that having two armed guards at the site has helped the environment there. Reiterated that the City also wants the business to be successful. Council Member Tang stated that when the item first went to the Planning Commission, the service calls were about 237 over the course of three years. In those three years, 36 months, that comes out to about 6.6 calls for service per month. The staff report indicates 33 calls over six months, although admittedly, the severity is lower or not as severe. The average of those calls was about 5.5 calls per month. Looking at the average, it has gone down, but not significantly. It could be the increase in calls for law enforcement as a result of having that on-site security. Encourage the City Council to make their decision based on the data provided. He also noted that the motel operator violated their conditions. One out of six months, they needed to comply with all the conditions, particularly the one requiring security guards, which is probably the most important one in addition to installing cameras. At that time, previous Chief of Police Lieutenant Duong informed the City Council that the motel was confirmed to be a haven for local gang members and criminals. And when criminals want to hide from law enforcement, there is no better place than the Friendly Inn motel. If this is the reputation of the Friendly Inn motel, not just in the Rosemead community but outside of Rosemead, six months is hard to reverse an establishment's reputation. Mr. Tang reiterated his comments about the Chief of Police suggesting at least one armed security guard; he was concerned with suggesting one security guard and the rise in crime. He felt two security guards addressed the level of crime that the motel Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 9 of 27 was generating. Given the number of calls, he recommended continuing to keep the two security guards for further review. In addition, he stated that he wanted the record to indicate the Public Comments the neighbors previously made in case they did not have the opportunity to submit comments to express their concerns. Council Member Armenta expressed concerns about the motel operator not complying with the code violations that Building and Safety Division investigated. Stated the City was there to help and work with the motel operator. Stated the City council would not help them if they were unwilling to help themselves. Questioned how the motel operator is renting their rooms and vetting their guests. Concluded that the motel operator needs to work with the City to improve the motel's operations and reevaluate in six months. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked for clarification if the original request was for eight security guards. Attorney Byrne responded the request was four security guards. Mayor Pro Tem Dang reiterated the request was for four security guards, and after deliberations from the City Council, they required only two security guards. Attorney Porter explained the Planning Commission recommended four security guards, and when the item went before the City Council, it was reduced to two security guards. Mayor Pro Tem Dang reiterated that although the business operator has made significant improvements to the property by adding cameras and handicap ramps, there still needs to progress in the number of service calls placed and needs to decrease. He noted that he would like to continue to keep the two security guards as part of the conditions. Mayor Low stated that she recognizes the motel operator is trying to improve the quality of their business. Having two armed security guards has improved the area, but not enough to reduce the number of security guards at the site. She noted that based on the comments from the City Council, continuing to keep the two security guards and revisit the matter in another six months. Council Member Tang reiterated that the business was not meeting the threshold. When the item first came to the city's attention, there had been 237 calls over a period of three years. The City Council was asked to make an assessment based on six months of data versus the three years of data that prompted this item to come before the Council. Having two armed guards as a condition and then evaluating it over an additional six months will give us a better mirror of the three years of the issues that had preexisted before implementing the conditions. Attorney Porter reiterated that the City Council had two recommendations. First, that staff return with a future resolution at the subsequent meeting, a resolution of denial of the request, but with the understanding that the applicant would be able to return Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 53 Page 10 of 27 in six months for a subsequent hearing to see whether conditions will be changed. Secondly, would be to authorize the City Attorney to enter into a Tolling Agreement saying the City agrees not to sue. Council Member Armenta suggested to the business operator that if something happens to the security company, the motel operator should notify the city in order to work together. Council Member Clark agreed with Council Member Armenta and encouraged the motel operator to communicate with the City if there are problems in order to meet the conditions. Mayor Low called for a motion. ACTION: Moved by Council member Tang, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang to direct City staff to return with a resolution denying the request of the Friendly Inn Motel, but with the understanding that the applicant would be able to return in six months for a subsequent hearing to see whether conditions will be changed. Also, authorize the City Attorney to enter into a Tolling Agreement with the Friendly Inn Motel. Motion was carried out by the following roll call vote: AYES: ARMENTA, CLARK, DANG, LOW AND TANG; NOES: NONE B. Continued Public Hearing on Municipal Code Amendment 21-03 (Emergency Shelters Ordinance) As part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element update process, the City was required to amend the objective standards for emergency shelters, as regulated in Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) Section 17.30.120 (Emergency Shelters) to comply with Government Code Section 65583. On January 11, 2022, the City Council conducted a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Municipal Code Amendment (MCA) 21-03. During the public hearing, the City Council raised several concerns and directed staff to work with the City Attorney's Office to incorporate additional parameters in the proposed ordinance. As a result, the public hearing was continued to a future City Council Meeting. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: 1. Conduct the continued public hearing and receive public testimony; and 2. Introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1002, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 21-03, AMENDING ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.30.120 OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) TO COMPLY WITH OBJECTIVE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 11 of 27 Associate Planner/Economic Development Specialist Lao reported as part of the 611 Cycle Housing Element update process, the City was required to amend the objective standards for emergency shelters as regulated in Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.30.120 Emergency Shelters, to comply with Government Code Section 65583. On January 11, 2022, the City Council conducted a duly notice and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Municipal Code Amendment 21-03. During the public hearing, the City Council raised several concerns and directed staff to work with the city attorney's office to incorporate additional parameters in the proposed ordinance. The concerns that were raised included, restriction on the location of emergency shelters to comply with Assembly Bill 139. The City cannot restrict emergency shelters from being developed on lots that abuts the RI Zone or being located within one quarter mile of a bus stop. Longevity of emergency shelters or permanent uses and once established can remain until the operator senses operation. On March 18, 2022. The Department of Housing and Community Development provided comments on the City's adopted Housing Element. One of the comments dealt with maximizing the number of beds to at least 30 beds for emergency shelters. Failure to raise the bed number could result in each City not approving the City's Housing Element. For this reason, the number of beds proposed in Ordinance No. 1002, has been increased from 7 to 30. A City can enforce per Government Code Section 65583. Based on the concerns raised by the City Council staff has revised Ordinance No. 1002, staff recommends that the City Council conduct the continued public hearing and receive public testimony and to introduce the first reading by title only Ordinance No. 1002, approving MCA 21-03. Council Member Tang inquired about the objective standards that the city can impose. Per Government Code Section 65583 that the City can impose local government or objective standards that include the following, the maximum number of beds or persons permitted to serve by the facility. How does that align with the ordinance increasing the maximum number of beds from 7 to 30. Associate Planner/Economic Development Specialist Lao stated on March, the City actually received a comment letter from Housing and Community Development (HCD) stating, "the City should consider a more appropriate bed limits such as 30 to 50 beds. A 10 -bed limit is considered a constraint on the development of emergency shelters." Therefore, the City has revised the number of beds from 7 to 30. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela added that the reason the City is increasing the number of beds from 10 to 30 was because we need our adopted Housing Elements certified by the state. There is a deadline, if we don't increase it to 30 beds, they may not approve the Housing Element. Council Member Tang reiterated the stipulation is that the City can impose some objective standards on the maximum number of beds, but no less than 30. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela replied yes. The number of beds depends on the number of homeless people in our last homeless count. We counted approximately 11 sites within the M-1 Zone that can accommodate an emergency shelter. Each shelter, we were maximizing each shelter by 10 beds, but Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 12 oj27 after getting comments from the state, we had to increase the number from 10 to 30, in order to get that certification. Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated the City can impose a number but no less than 30. Council Member Clark stated the City's current ordinance requires emergency shelter providers to screen for and refuse service to registered sex offenders as part of their client intake process. Asked in order to comply with state law, that ordinance will be amended to remove that language. City Attorney Richman responded many of the residency restrictions that cities have placed or attempted to place on registered sex offenders have recently been struck down. Many of them because what they found was basically, we are making them de facto homeless, because of all of the laws that we have. An untracked sex offender is much more dangerous than a housed sex offender and that, at a certain point, city regulations are making it impossible for them to be housed anywhere. Now when providers come in with their plan, we want to make sure that they can still ask the information, they can find out, if they are but they're not going to be able to say you cannot stay here unless they're parole, or something specifically says that they cannot be housed. But we will allow them to ask if they have that status so the organization will be able to properly screen them. She did not want to directly have in the code something that said no, could be challenged in a court. Mayor Low opened the public hearing. There were no comments received. Mayor Pro Tem expressed the state was trying to bypass zoning laws by using the words emergency shelter. He initially thought it was a temporary emergency shelter, not permanent. Associate Planner/Economic Development Specialist Lao clarified emergency shelters are not emergency. We don't have emergency shelters specifically listed in our code. Mayor Low asked how many emergency shelter can be in the City. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela replied with approximately 11 sites in the M-1 zone. Interim City Manager Kim clarified that it also there is a distance requirement for each shelter. Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated the state will use the word emergency to circumvent a building code requirements. Ask for the record that this is a permanent building and permanent use. We should not be giving any of the fire life safety standards away, it's going to go through a change of occupancy, it may trigger sprinkler building, access requirements, Green code requirement, fire code requirement, all those bells and whistles need to be in place. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes ofApril26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.6 Page 13 of27 In addition, stated that the sex offender language should not be removed from the City's code when there is a non -emergency shelter. It should be amended to say that if it is an emergency shelter, then they won't go through that sex offender screening. City Attorney Richman stated that the sex offender language in only in the emergency shelter section and the change is only in the denying emergency shelters. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela clarified the ordinance itself only reflects emergency shelters in chapter 17.30.01, it's not touching any other section. Mayor Pro Tem Dang reiterated that if it's not specifically in the zoning code, then it's prohibited because the zoning code is written as permissible code. City Attorney Richman explained that section 17.30.1200 already had the emergency shelter section that the HCD indicated needs to be updated and therefore staff was cleaning up the language. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela explained that section was incorporated in 2014 when the Comprehensive Zoning Code was updated. Based on those standards, they don't meet the state requirement and therefore need to be updated to meet state law. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked if the city could require an assessment of the environmental impact as part of the application process. However, the assessment will not be a basis to deny the use but to assist staff and applicant to address concerns in the security plan. Could it state, "to assist staff and applicant to address concerns in the building plan" instead of security plan. City Attorney Richman stated that the HCD may say the City is impeding the housing itself and that is why its states security to address health and safety. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked if they would need a building permit. Interim City Manager Kim replied yes. There is a planning approval phase and a building plan check process. Council Member Tang asked for clarification about the required minimum of the 30 beds versus proposing to HCD 15 beds. Asked if that will have any effect. Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela explained that if City staff sends to HCD a proposal of less than 30 beds, they take 60 days to review the document. They will send a comment letter in which they will ask the City to increase to 30 beds. Once that change is made, it has to go before the City Council and then resubmit to HCD and take another 60 -day review. That will affect the rezoning requirements that need to be met by October. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.6 Page 14 of27 Interim City Manager Kim stated that if the City has an invalid Housing Element, there will be obstacles in order to approve other projects. City Attorney Richman agreed, adding the City Council would not be able to approve any improvements because you would be out of compliance, or penalties or denial of grants. Council Member Tang asked if the security does not align with the City's security plan. Is that a basis for denial. City Attorney Richman explained that we would have to think whether or not we would say this security plan does not meet our objective standards, and we're not going to issue a permit; and then be ready to see if we'd be sued. If there were true security issues that we did not feel are right, the City could indicate the security plan does not meet the objective standards. Council Member Clark expressed concern that environmental impacts and toxin pollutants did not need to address CEQA impacts. Those are things that can affect low-income minority people that might have to go to a shelters and you're putting them in a place that could cause cancer. Express she objected to the environmental impacts not being required to be met. Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated that you cannot have a permanent residence in an M-1 zone for manufacturing industry, and therefore if an emergency shelter comes in, they don't the have ability to make quality of life demands. ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Dang, seconded by Council Member Tang to introduce for first reading of Ordinance No. 1002 by title only: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 21-03, AMENDING ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.30.120 OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) TO COMPLY WITH OBJECTIVE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS. The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Tang and Low; NOES: None; ABSENT: None 4. CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION: Motion by Council Member Armenta seconded by Council Member Clark to approve Consent Calendar items. The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Tang and Low; NOES: None; ABSENT: None Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.6 Page 15 of27 City Attorney Richman stated for the record that Council Member Clark's vote would indicate an abstention on Agenda Item 4C, due to the proximity of her property. ACTION: Motion by Council Member Armenia seconded by Council Member Clark to approve the Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 1008 - Approving Zone Change 21-01 and Specific Plan Amendment 21-01 to Amend the Zoning Map for 7539 and 7545 Garvey Avenue and Adoption of Ordinance No. 1009 - Amending Sections 17.28.030(C)(4) and 17.30.040(E) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rosemead Municipal Code. The motion was carried out the following roll call vote: AYES Armenta, Dang, Tang, and Low; ABSTAIN: Clark A. Claims and Demands • Resolution No. 2022-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,025,779.90 CHECKS NUMBERED 111037 THROUGH NUMBER 111101, DRAFTS NUMBERED 5688 THROUGH NUMBER 5708 AND EFT NUMBERED 51025 THROUGH NUMBER 51040 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-26. B. NALEO 39`h Annual Conference — June 23`d — 25' — Chicago, IL The City Council will consider authorizing the attendance of any Council Member who wishes to attend the NALEO 39`h Annual Conference in Chicago, Illinois, on June 23 — June 25, 2022. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the attendance and finance of any Council Member that wishes to attend the NALEO 39th Annual Conference in Chicago, Illinois, on June 23 — June 25, 2022. C. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 1008 - Approving Zone Change 21-01 and Specific Plan Amendment 21-01 to Amend the Zoning Map for 7539 and 7545 Garvey Avenue and Adoption of Ordinance No. 1009 - Amending Sections 17.28.030(C)(4) and 17.30.040(E) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rosemead Municipal Code Recommendation: That the City Council approve the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1008 by title only, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 21-01 AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 21-01 TO AMEND THE Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.6 Page 16 of 27 ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE OF 7539 & 7545 GARVEY AVENUE (APN NOS. 5286-022-009 AND 5286-022- 010) FROM GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN (GSP) TO GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN, INCENTIVIZED MIXED- USE (GSP-MU) ZONE, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN PERMITTING SIT-DOWN RESTAURANTS WITH A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET TO OBTAIN AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT (AUP) FOR BEER/WINE SALES IN THE GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN (GSP) AND GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN, INCENTIVIZED MIXED-USE (GSP-MU) ZONES D. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 1010 - Establishment of a Public Safety Commission Recommendation: That the City Council approve the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1010 by title only, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 2.35 TO TITLE 2 OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE AND PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD E. El Monte Union High School District 2021-2022 School Resource Deputy Funding Request In March 2020, with the COVID-19 outbreak, Rosemead High School closed and transitioned to distance learning and the on -campus School Resource Deputy (SRD), under the City's contract, was reassigned to the City's Sheriffs Deputy duties. In August of 2021, Rosemead High School reopened for in -class learning, and the District entered into its own SRD Agreement with the Sheriff's Department for the remainder of the 2021-2022 school year (57 -days). Subsequently, the City received a cost-sharing funding request from the El Monte Union High School District's Superintended, Mr. Edward Zuniga, requesting assistance to partially fund the SRD at Rosemead High School for the remainder of the 2021-2022 school year. Recommendation: That the City Council approve and authorize the Acting City Manager to execute the cost-sharing Agreement with EI Monte Union High School District to fund the SRD position in the amount of $34,563.16. This would amount to the one-half cost of the SRD's total amount of $69,126.33 for 57 days remaining in the school year. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.6 Page 17 of 27 F. Approval of the Traffic Commission Recommendations for Traffic Improvements at the Intersection of Mission Drive and Bartlett Avenue At the March 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented recommendations to improve the existing roadway conditions at the intersection of Mission Drive and Bartlett Avenue. After discussion and presentation of the item, the Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendation for appropriate curb markings at the intersection of Bartlett Avenue (north of Mission Drive) and Mission Drive to increase visibility for drivers turning from Bartlett Avenue (north of Mission Drive) onto Mission Drive. The installation of a red curb along the northside of Mission Drive, just east of Bartlett Avenue, would deter vehicles from parking up to the curb return and provide a clearer line of sight for vehicles exiting Bartlett Avenue to see oncoming and approaching traffic on Mission Drive at this location. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval to install approximately 35' of red curb on the north side of Mission Drive, east of Bartlett Avenue. G. Approval of Driveway Red Tipping at 3247 Jackson Avenue At the March 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented a recommendation to install red curb, often referred to as driveway red tipping, at 3247 Jackson Avenue. The Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendation to install red tipping to deter vehicles from blocking the driveway. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval for the installation of red curb "driveway red tipping" in front of the address of 3247 Jackson Avenue. H. Approval of Red Curb Located on the West Side of Muscatel Avenue North of Lawrence Avenue Near 4301 Muscatel Avenue At the March 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented recommendations to improve the existing roadway conditions at the entrance of the cul-de-sac on the west side of Muscatel Avenue. The Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendations to install red curb at the end of the curb returns on the north and south comers at the entrance of the cul-de-sac onto Muscatel Avenue. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval for the 20' of red curb to be installed starting at the end of the curb returns on the north and south corners at the entrance of the cul-de-sac on the west side of Muscatel Avenue. I. Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) RFP No. 2022-04 - Award of Professional Services Agreement for Planning & Engineering Services As part of the City's FY 2021-22 mid -year amendments, the City Council authorized the execution of grant agreements and approval of funding for the development of Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 18 of 27 the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP). The LRSP will identify and analyze roadway safety concerns, resulting in recommendations for potential roadway safety improvements to reduce or eliminate safety issues in the City. Furthermore, future Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding opportunities will require agencies to have completed an LRSP to apply for funding. The LRSP will be prepared in conformance with Federal and State standards. The project is funded with Caltrans grant funds in the amount of $48,000, which requires a local match of $5,334, for a total budget of $53,334. On February 17, 2022, staff advertised the Request for Proposals (RFP) for Planning & Engineering Services for the preparation of the LRSP and received five (5) proposals. After review of the proposals, staff determined that Kimley-Horn submitted the most qualified proposal to provide Planning & Engineering Services for the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan, in the amount of $48,619.94. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Kimley-Horn for Planning & Engineering Services for the preparation of the Local Roadway Safety Plan, in the amount of $48,619.94. 5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Approval of Fourth Amendment to City Clerk Employment Agreement and Approval of Salary Schedule Resolution No. 2022-28 The City and the City Clerk entered into an Employment Agreement ("Agreement") on April 10, 2018. Section 3 of the Agreement permits the City Council to conduct performance evaluations and grant increases in salary. Pursuant to Section 3(A)(2) of the Agreement, the City Council conducted the City Clerk's performance evaluation on April 12, 2022. The City Clerk received a "substantially exceeds expectations" review with a 5 rating. A substantially exceeds expectations review entitles the City Clerk to a 5% salary increase. Prior to this review, on December 14, 2021, the City Council approved two I % increases to the City Clerk's salary. The first increase was effective December 14, 2021, and a second 1 % increase to be effective June 27, 2022. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: Ratify Council's prior approval of a 1% increase effective December 14, 2021, and 1% increase to be effective June 27, 2022, and approve the granting a 5% salary merit increase for a "substantially exceeds expectations" performance evaluation and authorize the Mayor to execute the Fourth Amendment on behalf of the City Council to reflect the increase. 2. Approve Resolution No. 2022-28, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 19 of 27 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-61 ESTABLISHING THE COMPREHENSIVE SALARY SCHEDULE FOR ALL FULL- TIME CLASSIFICATIONS IN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ACTION: Motion by Council Member Armenta and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang to approve the ratification of Council's approval of a 1% increase effective December 14, 2021, and 1% increase to be effective June 27, 2022, and approve the granting a 5% salary merit increase for a "substantially exceeds expectations" performance evaluation and authorize the Mayor to execute the Fourth Amendment on behalf of the City Council to reflect the increase; and adopt Resolution No. 2022- 28. The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Tang and Low. NOES: None City Attorney announced the salary for the City Clerk was for $120,842 and an addition 1% increase on June 27,2022 to $122,050. B. Discussion on Use of American Rescue Plan Act State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) The City of Rosemead was awarded $17.878.653 in American Rescue Plan Act State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF). The funds must be obligated by December 2024 and fully expended by December 2026. On February 22, 2022, the City Council authorized the partial use of these funds for the addition of a City Engineer and the conversion of the 3/4 Accountant position to full time. On March 8, 2022, the City Council authorized the acceptance of the standard allowance of $10 million in revenue loss due to the pandemic. This report is intended to continue the discussion, provide additional information regarding possible uses of the remaining SLFRF funds, and gain City Council direction. Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction on the use of the remaining American Rescue Plan Act State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. Interim Finance Paula Chamberlain reported that the City was awarded $17,878.653 in American Rescue Act funds. Funds must be fully expended by December 2026. Council authorized acceptance of $10 million standard allowance for revenue loss to use toward the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 budget. $7.88 million was allocated and subject to Final Rule Uses. Previously the City Council discussed operational uses for consideration of the $10 million ARPA Funds. City staff proposed a list of projects that included renovations to the Public Safety Center and City Hall Interior, City Hall Elevator and ADA Improvements, City Facility Master Key Lock Replacement, Parks and Facilities Master Plan, parks resurfacing, irrigation system upgrades, and anticipated budget deficits for FY 21-22. The $7 million allocated funds are being obligated to fund COVID sick leave mandate, testing/supplies and related to the pandemic. Permit system Replacement, utility infrastructure and facilities mapping and record database management plan, public safety flock system, and back fill positions in Human Resources, and an Admin Assistant in the City Clerk's Office and a one-time premium pay to all general employees. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 20 of 27 Council Member Armenia asked about the City Hall interior renovation and stated the Finance area was fairly new and renovated. Interim Finance Director Chamberlain explained the Finance Department areas are newer; however, the Public Works Department area has exposed conduits and vents. Council Member Armenta stated there are some areas that may need some renovation. Indicated that the Code Enforcement office and Human Resources had been renovated. Director of Public Works Chung explained that the needed renovations are in the Public Works area. However, the renovation project would have to look at all the offices spaces as a whole because there are staff members sitting in hallways. Council Member Armenia asked for the record to show that her concerns were not to renovate the updated offices for Finance, Human Resources and Code Enforcement. Council Member Tang agreed with City staff about looking into what can be done as an overall project. This is a limited fund, and we don't want to do a patch work. If a contractor comes in and says they can make all the departments conducive in working better together, in a physical environment, he will support that. Director of Public Works Chung explained that staff would return with the scope of work for approval for Council approval as well. Council Member Clark inquired about the size of the Garvey Park parking lot project. Director of Public Works Chung stated that the project consists of reconstruction of the entire parking lot. Mayor Pro Tem Dang noted that the renovation of the Public Works area may also include electrical, plumbing and tearing down walls which may make sense to look at other areas to improve. It's a lot quicker and faster to rebuild than patching specific areas. Also, agreed with Council Member Armenta, that if we can avoid spending money, we should. Council Member Tang asked about the Parks and Facilities Master Plan scope of work. Director of Public Works Chung replied the project is an analysis. Based on that analyst, projects may result from that planning document. Council Member Armenia asked about one-time premium pay for full time employees, what about the 3/4 employees. Interim Finance Director Chamberlain replied that those employees would get a'/4 payment. There are three or two employees in that group. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 21 of 27 Mayor Pro Tem Dang inquired about the Rosemead Park Walking Trail. The Committee is still evaluating the options. Mayor Low clarified that the list of projects is proposed projects and not for approval and can be changed. Suggested adding more funding under public safety matters. Interim City Managers Kim stated that the funding will last until 2026, we have 15 flocking cameras installed and the City Council approved ten additional flock cameras. The annual cost is $60,000 to support the twenty-five flock cameras. If we install more, we would have to support that after 2026. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked about the storm drain pump station replacement of $3 million. Director of Public Works Chung replied that on Walnut Grove Avenue and the I-10 freeway, there is a pump station that pumps water on that low point. The City owns the pump station, and in the last 10 years the City has been paying the County to repair the pump. The pump station is near its end of service life. Mayor Low asked if funds could be used to refresh the paint on the freeway underpass. Interim Finance Director Chamberlain replied the $10 million dollars could be used for anything, there are no restrictions. Further explained that after 2026, the City's general fund would have to pick up the cost. Council Member Armenta asked to look into anti -graffiti paint. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked about Rosemead Boulevard sidewalk. Asked if there were any plans to improve sidewalks on Rosemead Boulevard. Director of Public Works Chung stated that Caltrans has a project plan to implement ADA infrastructure along Rosemead Boulevard. The project construction could take two years to start. Mayor Low asked staff to communicate with Caltrans about the difficulty the public has walking on Rosemead Boulevard may help in speeding the process. Council Member Tang stated that Garvey Avenue feels like a ghost town and asked if the City can put Christmas lights and decorations all along the avenue. Asked if there is some funding to help that area to bring in some vibrancy. Council Member Armenta suggested a fagade improvement program to help businesses. Interim City Manager Kim stated the City does have a fagade improvement program they are trying to implement. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes ofApri126, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 22 of 27 Interim Finance Director Chamberlain reiterated that the anticipated budget deficit is $4.5 million that would be reviewed each year and money would be released each year as we balance the budgets. The last couple of years we've balanced and adopted budgets that were deficit, but at the end of the year, came out positive, and that's going to happen again this year. That automatically will go down to just $3 million. The $10 million dollars the City has already taken it and placed in the general fund to be used. City Manager Kim suggested that staff could report back on a quarterly basis and the City Council could amend the list of projects. C. 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. Interim City Manager Kim reported effective April 21, 2021, The Department of Public Health order was revised to require mask on all four forms of public transportation. Additionally, mass continued to be required in health care settings, state and local correctional facilities and any other locations where it is the policy of the business or venue. COVID-19 confirmed cases for Rosemead are 10,883 Positive COVID-19 cases and a total of 186 deaths. The City of Rosemead in participation with Chinatown services will provide COVID-19 vaccination clinic at our RCRC on the on the following Wednesdays April 27, May 11, and May 25. Employees and public are no longer required to wear a mask. However, they are highly recommended. City staff continues to closely monitor all health and safety protocols recommended by the County of LA Department of Health and continues to prevent the spread of COVID-19. 6. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. Approval of City Manager Contract with Ben Kim The City Council has offered to current Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director, Ben Kim, the position of City Manager of the City of Rosemead subject to approval of an agreement acceptable to both parties. Recommendation: That the City Council approve a contract with Ben Kim for the position of City Manager. City Attorney Richman reported the item was before the City Council for the approval for City Manager with terms and salary of $218,000. Council Member Armenta stated she spoke to Mr. Kim and expressed some concerns and Mr. Kim assured her he is looking at the best interests of the City. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 23 of27 ACTION: Motion by Council Member Armenta, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang to approve a contract with Ben Kim for the position of City Manager. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Tang and Low; NOES: None B. Resolution to Oppose State Ballot Measure Restricting Voters' Input and Local Taxing Authority The City Council will consider adopting a resolution in opposition to the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, a statewide ballot initiative that has been cleared for circulation to gather the required number of signatures to qualify for placement on the November 8, 2022, general election. The measure, if approved, would, among other things, redefine what a tax is and would require the affirmative vote of 2/3 of the members of the Legislature's or local legislative bodies for adoption of new taxes and fees. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-27, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, IN OPPOSITION TO INITIATIVE 21- 0042A1, THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT Senior Management Analyst Guerrero report the California Business Roundtable has sponsored a proposed Constitution initiative known as the Taxpayer Protection Government Accountability Act, which would restrict voters input and local taxing authority. If the required number of signatures are gathered and certified, the initiative would appear on the November 8, 2022, General Election ballot. This initiative would amend the California Constitution to restrict the ability of the state counties and other local agencies to approve or collect taxes, fees and other revenues. The City of Rosemead adopts an annual budget every year that consists of expenditures of revenues collected via fees and a variety of taxes derived from local sales taxes, property taxes and other taxes. The city imposes fees and approves new taxes following the laws of state of California. If some of these fees including the annual fee resolution were to be challenged, the courts would then find that certain fees should be treated as taxes pursuant to this exact initiative. Therefore, the League of California Cities is strongly requesting cities to adopt a resolution to demonstrate how harmful this initiative could be to local communities and the people in California. Council Member Clark expressed concern with the initiative and stated that she had concerns with the fee schedule. If someone challenged the fee to rent the Rosemead Community Center, it would have to go to a vote of the people which could be burdensome. Suggested to wait before formulating a position, to see if the initiative passed with the required signatures. Stated only five cities out of thirty-three cities in the San Gabriel Valley have taken a position. She expressed concerns the initiative almost looks as though the City is in favor of being able to tax residents. The average person would look at the initiative and ask, why the Council opposed a bill that would Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes ofApril26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 24 of 27 require voting on taxes. Opined that the Council formulate a position if the initiative passes. Council Member Armenta agreed with Council Member Clark that it was premature to take a position if the initiative may not pass or language may change. Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated he did not support the initiative as it currently reads. He expressed that any fee challenge would have to go to a vote and would take away the authority of the City Council to change fees such as a recreation rental fee. Mayor Low stated the fees are set up to recoup the cost for staff time. City Manager Kim explained that the City has a variety recovering ratio for fees. Interim Finance Director Chamberlain explained that the City would be able to place fees to recoup cost, however if the initiative passed, any resident could then challenge a fee and go through a process where a court could determine a fee as a tax that would be subject to go on a ballot for any increases. Late fees and fines would be subject to the initiative and be determined as taxes. Mayor Low expressed that this would affect the City's operation. Stated that this is not a good initiative and hopes other cities take a position early on. Council Member Armenta asked how much it would cost to raise a tax on a ballot. Interim Finance Director Chamberlain replied that it usually takes cities about $90,000 to place a tax measure on a ballot. Council Member Clark asked if anybody has research if the initiative is passed will it hold up in court. City Attorney Richman replied that the initiative has not passed and if it's not constitutional, it may go in to litigation. Council Member Tang opined the intent of the initiative was to hinder certain jurisdictions from imposing fees disguised as taxes, calling them fees to circumvent the two thirds threshold. Also agreed that more information is needed before taking a premature position. Council Member Clark made a motion to wait on a position once the initiative passes. Council Member Armenta seconded Council Member Clark's motion to wait on a position and hopes to see if there will be any changes in the language. ACTION: Motion by Council Member Clark, seconded by Council Member Armenta for the City to wait on a position regarding the Initiative - Taxpayer Protection Government Accountability Act. Motion was carried by the following votes: AYES: Armenta and Clark; NOES: Dang and Low; ABSTAIN: Tang Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.B Page 25 of 27 Motion died on the floor. Mayor Pro Tem Dang and Mayor Low agreed to sign a letter of opposition individually and directed staff to bring back this item if the initiative passes to be on the ballot. City Attorney Richman requested to amend Agenda Item 5A (2) Resolution No. 2022-28 to include the City Manager's salary in the schedule of $218,000. ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Dang, seconded by Council Member Armenta to amend Resolution No. 2022-28 to include the City Manager's salary of $218,000 to the Comprehensive Salary Schedule for all Full -Time Classifications. Motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low and Tang; NOES: None C. Council Comments Mayor Pro Tem Dang commended Wealth by Health hosted a health clinic for residents and provided a wide variety of services from dental, medica, and eye exams. Council Member Clark commended the renovations of the Garvey Park Restrooms. Council Member Armenta asked about what can be done about the excessive speed on Mrs. Navarro's residential street. Inquired if temporary speed bumps are an option. Director of Public Works Chung replied there have been many recommendations on Mrs. Navarro's street. Staff is looking into other creative ideas to help mitigate the traffic and speed. Council Member Armenta commended Republic Services on a successful earth day event and gave away mulch and composed. Asked staff to provide an update on the status of the Splash Zone. Commended Director of Parks and Recreation Boecking and staff for the Eggstravangaza event. Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked Council Member Armenta for assistance in getting Caltrans to abate graffiti on westbound exit on Del Mar. Council Member Armenta asked to adjourn the meeting in memory of Fred Cruz, longtime resident, father of three sons, and neighbor. Mayor Low asked to adjourn the meeting in memory of her neighbor, Emerita Gaguana, longtime resident, commended her kindness throughout the years. Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 53 Page 26 of 27 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Low adjourned the meeting in memory of Fred Cruz and Emerita "Emma" Gaguana at 10:45 p.m. The next City Council meeting will take place on May 10, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber. Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk APPROVED: Sean Dang, Mayor Rosemead City Regular Meeting Minutes ofApri126, 2022 AGENDA ITEM 5.13 Page 27 of27