CC - Item 5B - Minutes of July 27, 2021MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
JULY 27, 2021
The special meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Low at 6:06 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 Armenia and Clark
ABSENT: Council Member Ly
STAFF PRESENT: City Attorney Richman and City Clerk Hernandez
1. WORKSHOP
A. Federal Public Affairs Advocacy Update by David Turch and Associates
David Turch and Associates will present an update on federal public affairs and
discuss new legislation and grant funding opportunities for the City.
David Turch, Legislative Advocate, stated the Congress took a vote to not debate
on a bill that does not exist; indicated a controversy issue of transit funding which
you would think falls under the Public Works Committee falls under the Banking
Committee. Mr. Turch shared as far as an infrastructure bill, there isn't one and
there really hasn't been one, and if there is one, it is at least three separate bills.
There are about four to eight bills circulating with amounts of $300 billion to $1.2
trillion and beyond; asserted we now have distilled those down to three bills.
The Houses passed a bill called Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and
Surface Transportation in America Act (The Invest Act) has a bill with a five-year
life for $759 billion. The Senate passed an Environmental and Public Works bill
with a five-year life for $311 billion. Asserted that after we get the text of a
Bipartisan Bill together in the Senate, it would be a five-year $974 billion bill or an
eight-year $1.2 trillion bill. The Fast Act expired last September 30`h at midnight
and was extended for one year; noting we should be able to pass this legislation by
that time otherwise we will have no national transportation policy and
appropriations will also end. Emphasized time is of the essence as the House plans
to adjourn beginning this Friday, July 30`h, for an August recess. Mr. Turch
promised they would continue working hard on the city's behalf, and encouraged
Council to be there to have these real discussions that can influence the city's future.
Council Member Clark inquired if there is anything in the bills pending for cities?
Mr. Turch responded yes as it comes down to the COVID money which has not
all been allocated or spent; explained it is program money for the objectives you
want to achieve.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting AGENDA ITEM $.B
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 1 of 13
Council Member Armenta asked if you foresee any money allocated to states for
more COVID relief since unemployment rates have fallen under the threshold
of 8%.
Mr. Turch stated we could probably get away with another infrastructure bill, but
frankly I don't see another COVID relief on the horizon.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang thanked Mr. Turch for doing his due diligence to present
these updates in person; inquired if there will be any type of relief for students
who are paying full tuition but not receiving the regular full college experience due
to classrooms being closed, etc.
Mr. Turch responded that the Biden Administration is in favor of a reconciliation
package for student loans, however we don't know what that entails yet.
Mayor Low thanked Mr. Turch for traveling to Rosemead to provide these updates
Mayor Low adjourned the special meeting at 6:40 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Housing Development Corporation was
called to order by Mayor Low at 7:05 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Low, Mayor Pro Tem Dang, Council Members Armenta and Clark
ABSENT: Council Member Ly
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Armenia
INVOCATION was led by Mayor Pro Tem Dang
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Molleda, Assistant City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman,
Chief of Police Lt. Duong, Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo, Director of Parks and
Recreation Boecking, Acting Director of Public Works Ansari, and City Clerk Hernandez
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
There being no speakers, Mayor Low opened and closed the Public Comment period.
3. PRESENTATIONS - NONE
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Public Hearing on Municipal Code Amendment 21-02 — Ordinance No. 1000
Municipal Code Amendment 21-02 (MCA 21-02) is a City initiated amendment to
Title 17 ("Zoning") of the Rosemead Municipal Code by defining and establishing
specific standards for live/work units in the residential/commercial mixed-use
overlay zones. A live/work unit provides opportunities to integrate live and work
in one space that is designed to combine residential occupancy and commercial
activity such as artist studios, professional offices, software/media offices, or small -
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 2 of 13
scale retail sales of art and crafts. In addition, MCA 21-02 will modify the approval
requirement for an outdoor dining area in the residential/commercial mixed-use
development overlay zones from a Conditional Use Permit to an Administrative
Use Permit.
Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing and receive public testimony; and
2. Introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1000, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF
MCA 21-02, AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE
ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING
DEFINITIONS TO SECTION 17.04.050 DEFINITIONS -
GENERAL OF CHAPTER 17.04, ADDING LIVE/WORK
AS A PERMITTED USE IN ALL MIXED-USE LAND
USE DESIGNATIONS IN THE CITY, ADDING
LIVE/WORK AS A PERMITTED USE TO SECTION
17.28.030.C.1 PERMITTED USES, ADDING SECTION
17.30.210 LIVE/WORK TO CHAPTER 17.30
STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES WHICH
ESTABLISHES DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
LIVE/WORK UNITS, AND MODIFYING THE
APPROVAL REQUIREMENT FOR OUTDOOR DINING
IN THE RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONES FROM A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AN
ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT
Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela stated MCA 21-02 is
a City initiated amendment to Title 17 ("Zoning") of the Rosemead Municipal
Code by defining and establishing specific standards for live/work units in the
residential/commercial mixed-use overlay zones. In January 2021, the City Council
approved the live/work interpretation for Artist Live/Work in the Garvey Avenue
Specific Plan and discussed allowing live/work units in residential/commercial
mixed-use developments citywide. On February 17, 2021, staff met with the
Commercial Task Force Subcommittee to discuss the implementation of a citywide
code amendment to incorporate live/work units in the residential/commercial
mixed-use overlay zones. Based on the shift to remote work during the COVID-19
pandemic, the Commercial Task Force Subcommittee agreed that an amendment to
the Zoning Code would prepare the City for future changes to the post -pandemic
workforce. Separate from live/work, MCA 21-02 is also proposing an amendment
to the approval requirement for outdoor dining and residential/commercial mixed-
use development overlay zone. Since the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly
impacted the restaurant business community, amending the permitting requirement
to streamline the outdoor dining approval from a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP")
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 3 of 13
to an Administrative Use Permit ("AUP") in the Residential/Commercial Mixed -
Use Overlay zones. On July 19, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a
noticed public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 21-07 recommending that the
City Council adopt Ordinance No. 1000 approving MCA 21-02. The Planning
Commission concluded that the Code amendments are the right direction to support
the small business community.
Mrs. Valenzuela noted for the record that staff has one amendment to Attachment
A, page 6, Section 4, No. 10.0 — incorporate off-street parking requirements
for live/work units in the freeway corridor mixed-use overlay. The public hearing
for the freeway corridor mixed-use overlay is scheduled for the Planning
Commission's August 2°d meeting, would require the amendment to this section
being presented tonight.
There being no speakers, Mayor Low opened and closed Public Comment.
Council Member Clark asked how do you provide half of a guest parking space?
Planning and Economic Development Manager Valenzuela responded parking is
calculated in its entirety based off the floorplan submitted for a project; provided
the example, if the total is 20.5 parking spaces, they would have to round up to
21 parking spaces.
Council Member Armenta expressed concern for the safety of the restaurants'
patrons. Are we looking into the bollards to protect guests dining outdoors?
Mayor Low opined it is a fair request, but I heard the bollards are very expensive.
Council Member Armenta stated it would be great to give the option to the owners
of these businesses to include bollards, not necessarily make it a requirement.
Council Member Clark suggested incorporating planters; noting we had a tragic
loss of a friend from the League of California Cities from a similar situation.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang expressed this live/work is a wonderful idea and praised staff
for providing this tool for the business community.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Armenta and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Dang to introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1000, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 21-02,
AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROSEMEAD
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING DEFINITIONS TO
SECTION 17.04.050 DEFINITIONS -GENERAL OF
CHAPTER 17.04, ADDING LIVE/WORK AS A
PERMITTED USE IN ALL MIXED-USE LAND USE
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 4of13
DESIGNATIONS IN THE CITY, ADDING LIVE/WORK AS
A PERMITTED USE TO SECTION 17.28.030.C.1
PERMITTED USES, ADDING SECTION 17.30.210
LIVE/WORK TO CHAPTER 17.30 STANDARDS FOR
SPECIFIC LAND USES WHICH ESTABLISHES
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR LIVE/WORK UNITS,
AND MODIFYING THE APPROVAL REQUIREMENT
FOR OUTDOOR DINING IN THE RESIDENTIAL/
COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
ZONES FROM A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AN
ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT
The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark,
Dang, Low NOES: None ABSENT: Ly
City Attorney Richman read the title of Ordinance No. 1000 for the record.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Armenta and seconded by Council Member Clark
to approve Consent Calendar Items A through C. The motion was carried out by the
following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low NOES: None ABSENT: Ly
A. Claims and Demands
• Resolution No. 2021-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF
$2,120,816.66 CHECKS NUMBERED 109360 THROUGH
NUMBER 109465, DRAFTS NUMBERED 5164
THROUGH NUMBER 5199, AND EFT NUMBERED
50647 THROUGH NUMBER 50678 INCLUSIVELY
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2021-36.
B. Approval of Minutes
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the meeting minutes of the special
meeting of July 12, 2021.
C. Consideration of Cancellation of the August 10, 2021, City Council Meeting
On December 8, 2020, the City Council approved the 2021 Meetings Schedule and
cancelled the second meeting in August for summer break. At this time, the
City Council will consider the cancellation of the August 10, 2021, City Council
meeting. The City Council maintains the ability to adjust other meeting dates
if needed.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 5 of 13
Recommendation: That the City Council cancel the August 10, 2021, City Council
meeting.
6. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF
A. Resolution No. 2021-37 of Modification 21-01 — Friendly Inn Appeal Public
Hearing at 2146 San Gabriel Boulevard
On July 13, 2021, the City Council conducted the continued public hearing on the
appeal of Modification 21-01, a City initiated modification to amend the conditions
of approval of Conditional Use Permit 88-447 for a motel at 2146 San Gabriel
Boulevard ("Friendly Inn"). After hearing all public testimony, the City Council
directed its legal counsel to bring back a resolution with the amended conditions of
approval with findings at the next City Council meeting.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2021-37, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE MODIFICATION 21-01
WITH REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO
THEREBY AMEND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-447
FOR THE MOTEL AT 2146 SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD
("THE FRIENDLY INN")
Mayor Low asked Mr. Porter to explain the process and recommendations to the
City Council.
Mr. Porter, Law Firm of Jones & Mayer, serving as Special Legal Counsel to the
City Council, requested a minor amendment to the proposed resolution. He
suggested to delete two words in Resolution No. 2021-37, in the Condition of
Approval No. 4, third line currently states "he, she is aware of and accepts the
recommendation", asked to delete the words "and accepts". In addition, in
speaking with the applicant's counsel, Mr. Weiser would accept the conditions of
approval, provided certain revisions are made.
Frank Weiser, Counsel to Applicant owner for motel at 2146 San Gabriel
Boulevard ("Friendly Inn"), stated he delivered a fourteen -page letter to the
City Clerk for Council's review. He clarified there was a typo on page 12, where
he referred to the operation of the hotel for 20 years, should state for 33 years.
Mr. Weiser stated that his client would like to propose to the City a rehearing in
three months and a tolling agreement in order to avoid any litigation in court. If
after three months, the City Council felt that the conditions have to be in place
again, for the time period, his client would not waive their legal rights. He
reiterated his client is not contemplating or intending to go to court. They would
agree to put two security guards, request a rehearing in three months, and see what
happens after that point. Mr. Weiser suggested that his client still include a security
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes ofJuly 27, 2021
Page 6 of 13
patrol on their own, not as a condition, and try to get the matter resolved. Noted
the amendment to the resolution is the three months instead of twelve months for
a rehearing, and that his client was tolling any statute of limitation for purposes of
having to appeal or litigate. Mr. Weiser noted that under 42 United States Code
Section 93, that's a two-year statute of limitations. His concerns were under Code
of Civil Procedure 1094.5 and 1094.6 which indicates an appeal of an
administrative decision by the City or local bodies is 90 -days.
Mayor Low agreed that the city would prefer not to go to court and wants to work
with his clients in resolving the matter; asked how the Council would decide after
three months.
Mr. Weiser stated the City Council would have their independent right to exercise
their discretion and the discussions within legal bounds; however, the Council
would have the right to see the evidence and assess if there is any improvement.
The Council could say two security guards is not needed and one is sufficient.
Maybe have another tolling until the alleged problem is resolved to the city's
satisfaction and see where there can be a permanent solution.
Mayor Low expressed concern with the request for a rehearing in three -months as
she felt it was too short of a time to see any significant improvements.
Mr. Weiser affirmed its up to the City Council's discretion, as long as his client
was not waiving their rights, and there's a tolling on the right to appeal the
resolution itself within the 90 -day period. Clarified for the record that his client,
Mrs. Chen and her son Andrew Chen gave Mr. Weiser authority to make an
offer on their behalf. He noted he did not want any misconstrues between his client
and the City.
Andrew Chen, son of motel owner Mrs. Chen, stated that on behalf of his mother
Mrs. Chen and himself, gave Mr. Weiser full authority to act on their behalf
regarding this matter.
Mayor Low recited the resolution stated there will be two guards 24/7 and instead
of a rehearing at twelve months, it will be at three months.
Council Member Armenta asked Mr. Weiser to clarify what he meant in his opening
statement about the three months.
Mr. Weiser explained he did not mean to limit the City's authority, he was stating
that after three months, when the rehearing occurs, the City Council could
determine if there has been improvements based on the evidence shown or decide
on other actions. Mr. Weiser clarified his concern was not to waive his clients' legal
rights to an appeal or the resolution.
Council Member Armenta asked what criteria is going to be used in measuring
whether or not the motel conditions have improved or not.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 7 of 13
Mr. Porter explained that in Condition of Approval No. 10, Mr. Weiser had
informed him that he was comfortable with the language as drafted. Reiterated,
that the twelve months, and dependent on Mr. Weiser's proposal, the number "12"
would be changed to three months. Also asked if the City Council preferred to have
the rehearing directly with the City Council instead of the Planning Commission
as currently stated in the resolution, it was an appropriate change. The resolution
currently stated that in three months, the Planning Commission 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, and whether the conditions
stated in Resolution No. 2021-37, will continue to be appropriate to mitigate the
impacts of substance of the subject property on an ongoing basis. Such decision
may be appealed to the City Council consistent with procedures of Chapter 17.160,
as it may be amended from time to time.
Council Member Armenta clarified that the amendment to the resolution was to
be from twelve to three months. She explained she wanted to make sure it was on
the record to ensure there is no switching on either side.
City Attorney Richman asked if there was city staff perspective on how they
envision the tolling agreement.
Mr. Porter suggested to the City Council that if they agreed to the tolling
agreement, that they direct the City Attorney to enter into a tolling agreement that
the City Attorney would find acceptable.
Mayor Low asked for clarification about the tolling agreement
Mr. Porter explained a tolling agreement is an agreement that says the other party
agrees not to sue the City for 90 -days, and the City agrees that the motel owners do
not lose their rights to sue the City once the 90 -day period is over. Normally,
they would only have 90 -days to sue the City, where the clock is ticking. Under the
tolling agreement the timing is not ticking for the motel owner.
City Attorney Richman inquired if the rehearing would be before the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Porter replied the current resolution was drafted to go before the Planning
Commission, but that is up to the City Council if they want it to go to the Planning
Commission directly or to the City Council.
Mayor Low stated she was okay with it going to the Planning Commission.
Council Member Clark interjected that the rehearing should come before the City
Council instead of the Planning Commission; acknowledged that although the
Planning Commission came up with the conditions, the City Council is the body
making the decisions such as whether to enter into litigation.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 202/
Page 8 of 13
Council Member Armenta asked Mr. Porter if there were any liability concerns
if the rehearing was to first go to the Planning Commission rather than the City
Council. She expressed if a delay may be of concern for the City.
Mr. Porter explained the resolution did not specify 30 days or 90 days, only that
it will take place shortly after; stated essentially the next meeting, or in a month,
or at a reasonable time frame.
Council Member Armenta inquired if there was an appeal by the motel owner, then
would the item have to come back to the City Council?
Mr. Porter affirmed the current resolution as drafted can be changed so the matter
goes to the City Council and not the Planning Commission. If the City Council
prefers to skip the middleman, in case there is an appeal in any event, it would
be appropriate.
Council Member Armenta asked if there is an appeal, which was highly probable,
usually it goes to the Planning Commission that serves at the advisory board to
the City Council; expressed it was better to have the matter go directly to the City
Council.
Mr. Weiser stated his client's preference was to have the City Council do the
hearing because of the information already discussed. The Planning Commission
had not been part of the discussions. He noted that his client was agreeable to 180
days which would provide the City with time to prepare for the hearings.
Mayor Low agreed with Council Member Clark that the matter should continue
with the City Council because of the decisions being made. Asked Mr. Porter
to reiterate the amendments to the Conditions of Approval and Resolution.
Mr. Porter also suggested that in the second line of Condition of Approval No. 10,
to strike the word "Planning Commission" and replace that with "City Council".
Also, the final sentence would be deleted, because the City Council would not have
the ability to appeal the decision. So, you delete, "such decision may be appealed
to the City Council consistent with procedures of Chapter 17.1 60 as it may be
omitted from time to time". Additionally, the revision from "twelve -months" to
"three -months".
Council Member Armenta asked where the 180 days would be added
Mr. Porter replied that a separate motion would be appropriate to authorize the
City Attorney to enter into a tolling agreement for a period not -to -exceed 180 days.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang suggested Condition of Approval No. 10 to be six -months
instead of twelve -months, which was about 180 days, which would line up with the
tolling agreement.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes ofJuly 27, 2021
Page 9 of 13
Mr. Porter replied that was acceptable. However, the applicant had indicated they
were willing to agree to this on the condition that it only be a three month and the
tolling agreement.
Mr. Weiser stated the tolling agreement is only to prevent litigation during that
period and proposed a four month as a compromise to the six months proposal.
Council Member Armenia agreed that six months was a better option to allow the
motel owner to show any improvements. The City wants to be good partners with
them but both sides have to agree and each entity has to also make sure that
whatever is being said is happening.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang explained to Mr. Weiser, the reason he mentioned six months
was because Mr. Callahan stated during his testimony that there was going to be
a lot of police activity in the first few months while in the process of kicking people
out and cleaning the neighborhood. If that data was brought to the City Council,
then it would not be to the motel owner's advantage.
Mr. Weiser consulted with his client and compromised for five months.
Mayor Low stated that Council wants to give the motel owner enough time to make
progress.
Andrew Chen replied the five months would work.
Mayor Low asked Mr. Porter to reiterate the amendments to the Condition of
Approval and Resolution No. 2021-37 for the record.
Mr. Porter asked Mr. Weiser to confirm his clients agreed to the changes.
Mr. Weiser stated his clients did accept the change to the five-month period,
and they will keep the conditions of the resolution. Reiterated that if eventually
the matter is not resolved, it was understood that his clients have their full rights to
appeal the initial resolution.
Mr. Porter reiterated the Council's motion to revise and approve the resolution on
Condition No. 4 and Condition No. 10. To be a five-month period and delete the
last sentence. The second portion of that motion would be to direct the City
Attorney to enter into the tolling agreement not -to -exceed 180 days.
Council Member Armenia asked if everything else in the resolution and conditions
would remain the same.
Mr. Porter affirmed the resolution and conditions would not be revised in any other
manner. Mr. Porter clarified Condition of Approval No. 4, would be revised slightly
to delete the words "and accepts". Otherwise, the condition would remain the same.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 10 of 13
Also, Condition of Approval No. 10, the first sentence would be revised to instead,
"provide if requested in writing by the applicant at a date shortly after five months
from the effective date of Council Resolution No. 2021-37. The City Council shall
conduct a public hearing" everything else would continue to be the same, except
that the last sentence would be struck. In that last sentence and states, "such
decision may be appealed to the City Council consistent with the procedures in
Chapter 17.160 as it may be amended from time to time".
ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dang and seconded by Council Member
Armenta to approve Resolution No. 2021-37, as amended to a five-month period,
and amend Condition No. 4, "provide if requested in writing by the applicant
at a date shortly after five months from the effective date of Council Resolution
No. 2021-37. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing; and delete the
sentence in Condition No. 10, "such decision may be appealed to the City Council
consistent with the procedures in Chapter 17.160 as it may be amended from time
to time". Motion was carried out by the following vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark,
Dang, Low NOES: None ABSENT: Ly
Mayor Low asked for a motion on the tolling agreement.
ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dang and seconded by Council Member
Clark to authorize the City Attorney to enter into a tolling agreement with
the motel owner for a period not -to -exceed 180 days. Motion was carried out by
the following vote: AYES: Armenta, Clark, Dang, Low NOES: None
ABSENT: Ly
B. Proposed 2021 State and Federal Legislative Platform
In recent years, a City Legislative Platform was developed to provide a streamlined
process for responding to legislative proposals that may impact the City. The
proposed Platform identifies the fundamental legislative issues deemed critical to
the City, and upon Council approval, would allow staff to respond to legislative
items efficiently.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the proposed 2021 State and Federal
Legislative Platform.
By consensus, the City Council tabled Item 6B since it was requested by Council
Member Ly who is absent tonight.
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.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 11 of 13
City Manager Molleda reported effective 11:59 p.m. on July 17`h LA County
Health Officers modified orders to require face masks to be worn by all persons
regardless of vaccination status while indoor public settings and business,
specifically on 1) public transit such as airplanes, ships, ferries, trains, subways,
and buses; 2) public transportation hubs such as airports, bus terminals and trans
stations; 3) indoor k-12, childcare and other youth settings; 4) healthcare settings
including long-term care facilities; 5) state and local correctional facilities and
detention centers; 6) homeless shelters; emergency shelters including cooling
shelters; and 7) all indoor public settings, venues, gatherings and businesses.
Ms. Molleda shared that as of today, Rosemead has 5,056 confirmed cases and 150
deaths; also the number of persons who have been vaccinated is 36,294 and that
is a percentage of 78.9%, which includes people who have received at least one
vaccination.
7. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
A. Council Comments
Mayor Pro Tem Dang expressed he is happy to see we are moving back to normal
with the return of more events such as Movie in the Park. He congratulated the
Rosemead Rapid Swimmers for heading into the big 3 Championship Meet —
the Southern California Swimming Jr. Olympic Championship, the Nevada Speedo
Sectional Championship, and the USA Swimming Future Championships; stated
he hopes to see those swimmers at future Olympics.
Council Member Arnenta stated at the last Council meeting we talked about
SB 1383, noting since then we received a list of cities that obtained a consultant to
oversee SB 1383; pointed out that none of the cities were in the San Gabriel Valley,
even though it was supposedly stipulated in the San Gabriel Valley; reiterated
her concern about having to always obtain consultants for things that should be
in-house when we are hiring experienced people that can carry out these jobs;
emphasized not everything warrants a consultant. Council Member Armenta
indicated she has not received a report on the Rosemead Park Walking Trail;
requested an update on where we are at, how we are moving forward and what
efforts have been made.
8. CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS - Pursuant to Government
Code Section 54957.6:
AGENCY DESIGNATED ORGANIZATION: City Manager Molleda and
Acting Finance Director Chamberlain; and Katy Suttorp from Burke, Williams
and Sorensen, LLP
EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION: Rosemead Employee Association
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 12 of 13
City Attorney Richman stated for the record that tonight's Closed Session was
cancelled; rather there will be a special meeting tomorrow night, and Council will
have the option to conduct the meeting via Zoom.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Low adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m. The next regular scheduled meeting will
take place on August 10, 2021, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber.
Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk
APPROVED:
Sean Dang, Mayor
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of July 27, 2021
Page 13 of 13