[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:23]
>> TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER.
>> PRESENT. DO WE HAVING ANNOUNCEMENT OF UPCOMING EVENTS OR ANYTHING, MR. RUSSI?
>> I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST REMIND, I KNOW COUNCIL IS AWARE BUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE AUDIENCE, WE ARE NOW ACCEPTING E-MAILS WITH PHONE NUMBERS TO CALL PEOPLE BACK SO I WOULD JUST WILL SLOW THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT, JUST TO SEE IF WE DO GET ANYTHING.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING BEFORE THE START OF THE MEETING.
SO I'LL ASK JR IF HE SEES OR RECEIVES ANYTHING BECAUSE HE'LL BE MONITORING THOSE E-MAILS.
[5. CONSENT CALENDAR]
WE SHOULD MOVE TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR.DO WE HAVE ANY REMOVALS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR?
>> WE DO NOT. WE DID HAVE A QUESTION.
I WILL, AGAIN, PAUSE AND SEE IF JR HAS RECEIVED ANYTHING.
WHILE HE'S DOING THAT, I WILL DELAY.
WE DID HAVE AT LEAST A COMMENT ASKED, AND I CAN CLARIFY IT BEFORE APPROVAL, AND THAT'S REGARDING RESOLUTION 2060.
THERE SEEMED TO BE A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WAS A NEW TAX, THAT'S CFD 11-1.
THAT IS ACTUALLY A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT THAT HAD BEEN IN PLACE FOR ALMOST 10 YEARS NOW.
IT'S FOR BUILDINGS THAT ARE LARGE BUILDINGS, AND IT'S A WAY TO PROVIDE A FEE TO ASSIST WITH THE ADDITIONAL FIRE SERVICES THAT WOULD GO ALONG WITH THAT.
THIS IS NOT NEW AND IT'S ONLY TO SPECIFIC PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND WISH TO PARTICIPATE IN IT.
OTHER THAN THAT, AND I'LL SEE IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANYBODY ELSE ASKED TO HAVE AN ITEM PULLED, JR?
>> NO REQUEST FOR ITEMS BEING PULLED.
>> SHOULD WE WAIT ANY LONGER OR SHOULD WE MOVE?
>> I THINK WE'RE REALLY DELAYED.
>> OKAY. THEN WE NEED ANY DISCUSSION? NO, I DON'T SEE ANY.
SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE?
SECOND, COUNCIL MEMBER CROSBY.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE.
>> ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
HEY, IS MY FEED SLOW OR IS OKAY? BECAUSE I'M ON A PHONE.
>> IT'S OKAY. IT SEEMS LIKE IT LAGS A TINY BIT, BUT I THINK IT'S HANGING WITH US.
>> OKAY. THEN WE MOVE NOW TO PAGE 189.
[6.a. Citywide Landscaping and Lighting District No. 6, 7, 8 and Assessment District 84-1M Public Hearings and Resolutions Providing for the Annual Levy.]
WE GO TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS, CORRECT, MR. RUSSI?
>> YES, MR. MAYOR. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, IF THE COUNCIL WOULD ALLOW IT, IS THE FIRST THREE ITEMS, ONE, TWO, AND THREE, CAN BE TAKEN AS ONE ACTION.
THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE OTHER TWO FROM THERE BECAUSE COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER AND MAYOR PRO TEM CARTER, SHE HAS TO RECUSE HERSELF BECAUSE SHE IS IN ONE OF THOSE DISTRICTS.
>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION BY ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC, MR. RUSSI?
>> WE HAVE TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
>> LET ME DO A STAFF REPORT, THEN WE CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IF THERE'S ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AT THIS POINT THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING ON THOSE ITEMS, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO E-MAIL IN YOUR PHONE NUMBER NOW.
>> NOW, WE'LL GO TO THE REPORT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] THESE THREE ITEMS ARE YOUR LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPES DISTRICTS.
THIS IS THE ANNUAL HEARING THAT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE BY LAW FOR THESE DISTRICTS.
THESE DISTRICTS WERE ESTABLISHED, THEY'RE BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS FOR SPECIFIC PROPERTIES THAT ARE CONNECTED OR DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE DEVELOPED WITH LANDSCAPING AROUND THEM.
ESPERANZA HAS ONE OF THEM, THERE ARE SMALLER ONES, THERE'S ONE THAT'S OVER BY FRUIT AND AMHERST, THE NEWER PROPERTY THERE.
WHAT IT IS IS THE PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE LANDSCAPING THAT FALLS AROUND THOSE DEVELOPMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THROUGH PROPERTY TAX THAT CHARGE.
[00:05:04]
THOSE CHARGES ARE MAINTAINED, THOSE COSTS ARE MAINTAINED, AND OPERATION ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY, AND THEN THEY ARE PUT ON THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER'S PROPERTY TAXES.THIS YEAR, AND WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO THIS HEARING EVERY YEAR, THERE IS ONLY ONE DISTRICT IN ZONE THAT'S IN DISTRICT 6 AND ITS ZONE 6 THAT WILL BE SEEING AN INCREASE AND THAT'S A CPI INCREASE OF 1.8 PERCENT.
OTHERWISE, ALL THE OTHER DISTRICTS THAT YOU'RE BEING CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT ARE REMAINING THE SAME ASSESSMENT.
>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? JR?
>> I DIDN'T HEAR THAT, JR. I'M SORRY.
>> OKAY, WE'LL GIVE IT A COUPLE OF SECONDS HERE.
I THINK WE COULD MOVE ON TO COMMENTS BY COUNCIL.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON COUNCIL? NO? NONE? SEEING NONE.
JR, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER LAU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. AYE.
>> THOSE WERE THE THREE AGENDA ITEMS?
>> YES, THERE'S THREE AGENDA ITEMS.
>> [INAUDIBLE] ONE, TWO, THREE.
>> NOW, WE MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM WHICH COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER HAS A CONFLICT AND SHE NEEDS TO REMOVE HERSELF, I GUESS, FROM THE MEETING, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> JR WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT, WE WILL MOVE HER TO THE WAITING ROOM.
>> BYE, ROBIN. BYE, MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> [LAUGHTER] SEE HOW QUICKLY YOU COULD BE REMOVED? LOOK AT THAT.
>> SHE IS GONE, THAT'S IT. SHE'S GONE.
>> WE CAN GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT BUT WE CAN HOLD UP PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE REPORT BY STAFF?
>> YEAH, WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THIS ITEM SIMILARLY, THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS HERE BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO THE WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES THAT SHE HAS A CONFLICT ON AS WELL.
LET'S TAKE A MINUTE TO DISTRICT 84-1 WHICH IS [INAUDIBLE] DISTRICT IS NOT FOR LANDSCAPE, I THINK IT'S FOR MAINTAINING OF THE WEED, FEW MODIFICATION WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES AROUND HER HOUSE.
SO THIS IS ALSO A ASSESSMENT DISTRICT THAT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED.
THERE IS NO INCREASE BEING REQUESTED IN THIS ONE AS WELL.
>> IT'S A HEALTHY EIGHT DOLLARS A YEAR.
>> SO WE COVERED THAT RESOLUTIONS 2060 AND 2061, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> NO, THIS IS 2065 THAT YOU WOULD BE APPROVING.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS, JR?
>> WE DO NOT, SIR. I'M SORRY IF I'M DELAYED, I'M PUTTING PEOPLE ON HOLD AND AMIDST LOOKING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. [LAUGHTER]
WE'RE FINE. DO WE HAVE ANY COUNCIL COMMENTS?
>> SAYING NO, LET'S MOVE BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> NOTHING FOR THESE ITEMS, SIR.
>> THEN I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE GO TO A MOTION.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE TWO? [OVERLAPPING] JUST ONE.
>> WHICH ONE WE ARE DOING, THE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT OR THE [OVERLAPPING].
>> MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FIRST.
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NUMBER 84-1M, THE ESPERANZA SLOPES.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND, AYE.
[6.b. Weed Abatement Charges]
WE MOVE NOW TO THE WEED ABATEMENT.DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR STAFF COMMENT, MR. RUSSI?
>> I DO. NO, ROBIN NEEDS TO BE UP FOR THIS ITEM TOO.
>> YOU'RE GONE, ROBIN. GET OUT OF HERE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] CARTER HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM BECAUSE SHE IS PART OF THE ASSOCIATION THAT THEN PAYS.
IT HAS PROPERTY THAT IS CHARGED OUT OF THIS DISTRICT, OR THE WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES.
SO THE WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES, THIS IS YOUR THIRD ACTION THAT IS TAKEN ON THIS ITEM.
[00:10:01]
THE OTHERS WERE TO IDENTIFY THE PROPERTIES, WERE TO THEN ESTABLISH WHAT CHARGES COULD HAVE BEEN, AND THEN TO NOTICE THAT, THAT WORK WAS OTHERWISE BEING DONE FOR EACH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES.THERE ARE 85 PROPERTIES AND WE'LL LEARN THAT HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED EITHER BY COUNTY AG WHO ADMINISTERS THE WEED ABATEMENT, OR OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AS UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES THAT SHOULD BE EVALUATED FOR WEED ABATEMENT THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.
OF THOSE 85, 82 ONLY GOT THE INSPECTION CHARGE, AND THREE OF THEM NEEDED THE NECESSARY WORK TO BE DONE.
SO THE OTHERS EITHER DID THE WORK THEIR SELF OR THERE WASN'T WORKED AT THE COUNTY NEEDED TO DO.
SO THAT BASE CHARGE IS ABOUT $40, [INAUDIBLE] DEPENDENT ON THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE.
THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST THOSE CHARGES IF AN INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS IDENTIFIED, THEY'VE ALL BEEN NOTICED OF THIS MEETING TONIGHT.
SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> WE NEED AN ENT TO FIX OUR EAR DRUMS WHICH JUST BLEW UP FROM YOUR LITTLE BLAST THERE.
>> THAT'S OKAY, I'M JUST BLEEDING FROM MY EARS.
IT'S FINE, NO PROBLEM, [LAUGHTER] HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
VERY GOOD. JR, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> WE'LL MOVE BACK TO COUNCIL COUNSELING COMMENTS ON THE WEED ABATEMENT.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC ON THIS.
ANY COMMENTS, JR, AS WITH THAT?
>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND MOVE TO I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE AND WE'LL SELECT MAKE THE MOTION.
>> MOST QUOTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER LAU, AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COUNCIL MEMBER CROSBY. THANK YOU A SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND, AYE.
MOTION CARRIES. SO WE CAN BRING COUNCIL MOORE CARTER BACK INTO THE ROOM.
>> NOW, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE WHEN SHE COMES IN.
[6.c. Appeal Hearing for an Application to allow the operation of an Amazon Retail, LLC grocery store with off-site sale of alcoholic beverages (Case Nos. 05-20CUP and 06- 20CUP) and modifications to the existing parking lot (Case No. 31-20PPR) at 2229 Foothill Blvd., Ste. 200 -]
NOW, WE'RE GOING MOVE TO APPEAL HEARING FOR APPLICATION FOR ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF AN AMAZON RETAIL LLC GROCERY STORE.LET'S ALL SAY SELL ALCOHOL BEVERAGES, CASE NUMBERS 5-20 CUP AND 0620 CUP AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING PARKING LOT, CASE NUMBER 31-20 PPR AT 2229 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SUITE, 200.
>> WITH THE BENEFIT OF THE AUDIENCE, AT LEAST SAY APOLOGIZED FOR THE NUMBER OF PANELS THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING UP.
BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD NEED TO APPROPRIATELY BE PART OF THIS DISCUSSION.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT SMALLER SCREENS THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
>> NOW, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE WHEN SHE COMES IN.
NOW, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO APPEAL HEARINGS FOR APPLICATION FOR ALLOWING OPERATION FOR AN AMAZON RETAIL LLC GROCERY STORE.
>> NOBODY HAS ON THEIR YOUTUBE.
>> THESE CASE NUMBERS 5-20 CUP AND 0620 CUP AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING [OVERLAPPING] PARKING LOT CASE.
>> THIS COULD GO ON FOREVER, MAYOR, IF THEY DIDN'T TURN IT OFF.
>> ARE WE DONE? [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOU PROBABLY HAVE YOUR YOUTUBE ON, THEIR LIVE STREAM.
>> YEAH, WHOEVER HAS GOT YOUTUBE, THEY NEED TO SHUT THAT OFF BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BACKUP AND CROSS OVER US.
>> YEAH. SO THIS IS AN APPEAL HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CASES YOU STATED, MR. MAYOR, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MAYA WHO WILL DO A BRIEF INTRODUCTION, AND THEN WE HAVE VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS FROM THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY, AS WELL AS THE APPELLANT REPRESENTATIVE, AND THEN A CONSULTANT.
I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE OF THE TWO DOWN THERE, ERIC AND TALL FALL INTO THOSE WHO CARRIES WITH OLD STATEMENT.
SO I WILL LET MAYA DO THOSE INTRODUCTIONS AND THEN TAKE IT FROM THERE. SO MAYA.
>> GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
SO I'LL BE PRESENTING ON THE STAFF REPORT OF THE APPEAL.
WE DO ALSO HAVE LISA KRENITS, THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
SHE WILL FOLLOW AFTER ME TO PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON A COUPLE OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE REPORT.
WE ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, STEPHEN JAMESON; AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE APPELLANT REPRESENTATIVE, [INAUDIBLE] , WHO WILL BE SPEAKING.
I SHOULD ALSO MENTION ERICK LOU, WHO WILL BE ASSISTING DISTANCE CITY ATTORNEY, LISA KRENITS, WITH HER PRESENTATION.
SO JUST AS A BIT OF BACKGROUND, IN JANUARY 2020, PERMANENT ADVISORS AND KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES ON BEHALF OF AMAZON RETAIL LLC SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A GROCERY STORE AND FOR THE OFFSITE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT 2229 FOOTHILLS BOULEVARD, SUITE 200.
[00:15:02]
THIS REQUEST WAS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PRECISE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION WHICH WAS FILED IN MARCH 2020 TO MODIFY THE EXISTING PARKING LOT AT THE PROJECT SITE IN ORDER TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED NEW GROCERY STORE.THE THREE APPLICATIONS WERE PROCESSED CONCURRENTLY, AS IN THERE WAS ONE REPORT COVERING ALL THREE OF THOSE APPLICATIONS THAT WAS PROVIDED TO BOTH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE APPROVALS.
AT THEIR MAY 5TH, 2020 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, THE DRC VOTED 3-0 TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVED CASE NUMBER 31-20 PPR, WHICH IS FOR THE PARKING LOT MODIFICATIONS.
THAT APPROVAL WAS CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE TWO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, WHICH IS CASE NUMBER 05-20 CUP AND 06-20 CUP.
AT THEIR MAY 13TH, 2020 MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED 4-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 1262, APPROVING THOSE TWO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO ALLOW BOTH THE OPERATION OF AN AMAZON GROCERY STORE AND THE OFFSITE SALE OF ALCOHOL.
AN APPEAL OF BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVALS AND THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE'S APPROVALS OF BOTH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND THE PRECISE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION WERE FILED ON MAY 26TH, 2020.
THAT APPEAL REQUESTED THAT THE APPROVALS BE SET ASIDE AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL REVIEW THOSE APPLICATIONS.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE SCOPE OF THIS APPEAL IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO THOSE THREE APPLICATIONS: CASE NUMBERS 05-20 CUP, 06-20 CUP, AND 31-20 PPR.
THE FILINGS OF THESE APPLICATIONS WERE NECESSITATED BY THE FACT THAT THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICT OR THE FOOTHILLS BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH REQUIRES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SUPERMARKETS, REQUIRES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OFFSITE SALE OF ALCOHOL, AND REQUIRES A PRECISE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR ANY TYPE OF EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS THAT OCCUR AT COMMERCIAL FACILITIES.
SO THAT'S WHY THOSE THREE APPLICATIONS WERE FILED.
THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED GROCERY STORE AND THE ACTUAL INTERIOR SEPARATION OF THE EXISTING COALS RETAIL BUILDING INTO TWO SWEETS, THAT WAS COVERED UNDER A SEPARATE PRECISE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION THAT WAS FILED IN OCTOBER OF 2019, THAT'S CASE NUMBER 102-19 PPR.
SO THAT APPLICATION WAS REVIEWED BY THE REVIEW COMMITTEE AT THEIR FEBRUARY 4TH 2020 MEETING, AND WAS APPROVED, AND NO APPEALS WERE EVER TAKEN FROM THAT.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS APPEAL IS ABOUT BECAUSE THE ACTUAL ARCHITECTURAL MODIFICATIONS AND DIVIDING OF THE BUILDING WAS PROVED SEPARATELY UNDER ANOTHER PPR.
IT'S BEEN APPROVED AND NO APPEAL WAS FILED FOR THAT ONE, AND THE TIME TO HAVE FILED AN APPEAL FOR THAT HAS PASSED.
SO I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF EACH OF THE THREE APPLICATIONS THAT ARE UNDER APPEAL.
SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE GROCERY STORE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
THE PROPOSED AMAZON GROCERY STORES, PART OF A NEW NATIONAL FULL-SERVICE GROCERY STORE CHAIN.
AMAZON HAS INDICATED THEIR INTENT FOR THIS TO OPERATE ESSENTIALLY AS A TRADITIONAL GROCERY STORE WITH SEPARATE BRANDING FROM EXISTING AMAZON OWNED GROCERY CHAINS SUCH AS WHOLE FOODS.THE INCORPORATION OF ANCILLARY SERVICES SUCH AS THE PICKUP OR RETURN OF AMAZON PACKAGES HAS NOT YET BEEN DETERMINED,BUT THEY HAVE BEEN STEADFAST IN EMPHASIZING THAT THEY REALLY HOPE FOR THIS TO BE A TRADITIONAL GROCERY STORE SIMILAR TO OTHER STORES IN THE CITIES SUCH AS SWANS OR SPROUTS OR STATER BROTHERS.
THE NARRATIVE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE GROCERY STORE APPLICATION BASICALLY SAID THEY WOULD HAVE ALL THE TYPICAL THINGS YOU MIGHT FIND IN A GROCERY STORE, INCLUDING ORGANIC OPTIONS, FRESH PRODUCE, PRE-PACKAGED MEATS, DAIRY PRODUCTS, ETC.
THEY GENERALLY EXPECT TO HAVE 35-40 EMPLOYEES ON SITE AT ANY GIVEN TIME WITH A MAXIMUM OF UP TO 50 PEOPLE IF IT'S A PEAK HOUR.
THIS IS A CORRECTION FROM WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY INDICATED TO STAFF AND WHAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE INITIAL PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT.
THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATIONS ARE 6:00 AM TO 11:00 PM DAILY AND DELIVERY HOURS ARE ANTICIPATED TO OCCUR BETWEEN 7:00 AM TO 10:00 PM WITH DELIVERY TRUCKS UTILIZING THE EXISTING LOADING DOCK BAY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING.
THE FLOOR PLAN OF THE APPROXIMATELY 38,000 SQUARE FOOT GROCERY STORE IS SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD FIND WITH ANY OTHER GROCERY STORE IN THAT THEY HAVE AISLES OF PRODUCTS AT THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING, COUNTERS FOR VARIOUS PRODUCTS AND FOOD SERVICES ALONG THE PERIMETER AND THEN THE CHECKOUT STANDS ADJACENT TO THE ENTRANCE.
THE STORE ALSO FEATURES AN APPROXIMATELY 240 SQUARE FOOT CUSTOMER DINING AREA AT THE FRONT, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU MIGHT FIND AT THE SPROUTS HERE IN THE CITY.
THE SECOND CASE FILE IS FOR THE ALCOHOL SALES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GROCERY STORE.
THIS IS STANDARD FOR GROCERY STORES.
ALL OF THE EXISTING GROCERY STORES WITHIN THE CITY CURRENTLY HAVE OFF-SITE SALE OF ALCOHOL, INCLUDING BONDS, SPROUTS, [INAUDIBLE] TARGET, STATER BROTHERS.
AMAZON IS NO DIFFERENT AND THAT THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO SELL A BROAD SELECTION OF ALCOHOL, WINE, AND SPIRITS.
ALCOHOL SALES WILL COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET OF CHILLED AISLE SPACE AND
[00:20:03]
52 FEET OF AMBIENT ALCOHOL SALES WITH ADDITIONAL BACK OF HOUSE, AMBIENT ALCOHOL STORAGE TAKING UP APPROXIMATELY 33 FEET OF STORAGE SPACE.CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WILL ENSURE THAT THE ALCOHOL SALES REMAIN INCIDENTAL TO THE OVERALL GROCERY STORE OPERATIONS AND THAT THEY'LL BE LIMITED TO HOW MUCH THEY CAN DISPLAY OF THEIR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PRODUCTS IN THE STORE.
THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN DOES HAVE LIMITATIONS ON THE NUMBER OF ALCOHOL PERMITS THAT CAN BE ISSUED PER COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER AND THAT'S BASED ON THE TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE CENTER.
IN THE COLE CENTER TODAY, THERE ARE NO ALCOHOL PERMITS ISSUED SINCE COLE IS THE ONLY TENANT, AND THEY DON'T SELL ALCOHOL BASED ON THE OVERALL FLOOR AREA OF THE CENTER, UP TO TWO GENERAL PERMITS AND TWO BEER, WINE PERMITS CAN BE ISSUED IN THE CENTER.
ISSUING THE OFF-SITE SALE PERMIT FOR THE GROCERY STORE WOULD BE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN.
THE THIRD AND FINAL CASE IS FOR THE MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE PARKING LOT TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROCERY STORE.
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CHANGE WOULD BE THE ADDITION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 26 FEET WIDE BY 11 FEET DEEP TRASH ENCLOSURE AND IT WOULD HAVE A SIX FOOT TALL MASONRY WALL WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOOTHILLS BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN.
THE NEW TRASH ENCLOSURE WOULD REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF FOUR PARKING SPACES.
I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE PREVIOUS DRC AND PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS, THE STAFF REPORT STATED THAT THE TRASH ENCLOSURE WOULD REQUIRE PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF THE SCREENING WALL THAT SEPARATES THE LOADING DOCK AREA FROM THE PARKING SPACES TODAY.
THAT WAS A MISTAKE, THERE'S NO PARTIAL DEMOLITION.
THAT WAS JUST AN ERROR IN THE WAY THAT STAFF WAS READING THE PLANS.
THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO THE PARKING LOT WOULD INCLUDE TWO TANDEM SHOPPING CART CORRALS, FOUR NEW ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STALLS, THREE NEW ADA ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, AND 10 DESIGNATED PICKUP-ONLY PARKING STALLS.
THE PICKUP-ONLY PARKING STALLS WOULD INCLUDE NEW PICKUP ONLY SIGNAGE THAT WOULD BE PAINTED ONTO THE ASPHALT, AS WELL AS SOME POLES THAT WOULD BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH PICKUP ONLY ON PARKING SPACE.
DUE TO THE COMBINATION OF THESE PARKING LOT MODIFICATIONS, 15 EXISTING PARKING STALLS WILL BE REMOVED AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF AVAILABLE PARKING STALLS THAT ARE SHARED BETWEEN THE COLES SHOPPING CENTER AND THE MCDONALD'S SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH ARE TWO SEPARATE PARCELS THAT ARE UNDER SEPARATE OWNERSHIP, WOULD BE REDUCED FROM ITS CURRENT TOTAL OF 428 TO 413.
BASED ON THE PROVIDED SQUARE FOOTAGES OF BOTH HE PROPOSED AND EXISTING USES, AS WELL AS THE REQUIRED PARKING RATIOS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE, A TOTAL OF 447 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED AT THE PROJECT SITE.
THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN DOES ALLOW FOR A 10 PERCENT REDUCTION IN THE OVERALL AMOUNT OF PARKING WHEN THERE ARE COMPLIMENTARY USES, WHICH ARE DEFINED AS USES LOCATED ON THE SAME PARCEL OF LAND THAT ARE DIFFERENT IN CHARACTER BUT MAY SHARE CLIENTELE.
THE PROPOSED GROCERY STORE AND COLES WILL BE LOCATED ON THE SAME PARCEL OF LAND AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT IN CHARACTER, BUT ARE LIKELY TO SHARE THE SAME CLIENTELE.
BASED ON THAT, STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE USE OF THE 10 PERCENT REDUCTION IS APPLICABLE IN THIS INSTANCE.
WHAT THAT MEANS ESSENTIALLY IS THAT A TOTAL OF 409 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED OVERALL AT THE SITE AND SINCE THEY HAVE 413 PARKING SPACES UNDER THEIR CURRENT PROPOSED PLAN, THEY'RE COMPLIANT WITH THE CITIES PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE OVERALL PROJECTS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING USES, THE PROJECT SITE HAS A GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESS PARK AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICT OF THE FOOTHILL'S BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.
IT'S BOUNDED BY THE MOBILE HOME PARKS ZONE, WHICH IS FOOTHILL TOURISTS MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE NORTH AND THEN COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICT OF THE FOOTHILLS BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN TO THE EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DID REVIEW THE REQUEST FOR BOTH THE OPERATION OF A GROCERY STORE AND THE OFF-SITE SALE OF ALCOHOL, AND THEY DID NOT EXPRESS ANY CONCERNS WITH EITHER REQUEST.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WILL REQUIRE THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS ANY POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT MAY ARISE AS A RESULT OF THE SALE OF ALCOHOL.
NOTICE THAT PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED FOR THE MAY 13TH, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IN THE INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN ON MAY 1ST, 2020, AND NOTICES WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE ON APRIL 29TH.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING TOOK PLACE ON MAY 13TH, 2020 AT 6:30 PM VIA LIVE STREAM DUE TO THE CURRENT PANDEMIC.
PRIOR TO THAT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, STAFF DID RECEIVE THREE E-MAILS.
[00:25:01]
ONE WAS FROM A RESIDENT CHARLES HILL, REQUESTING THE APPLICANT TO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO THE DESIGN OF THE FACILITIES AND THE RESTROOMS IN THE PROJECT.A SECOND WAS FROM ANOTHER RESIDENT, MARK RAMOS, WHO IS ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS LOCAL 1428 AND HE SUBMITTED QUESTIONS RELATING TO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT.
LASTLY, WE RECEIVED A COMMENT OR A LETTER FROM THE LAW FIRM FINNEY ARNOLD LLP, WHO FILED THE APPEAL ON BEHALF OF THE UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION OF RESIDENTS.
THE COMMENTS THAT THEY SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THE COMMENTS THAT THEY SUBMITTED AS PART OF THEIR APPEAL.
ASIDE FROM THOSE THREE COMMENTS, THERE WERE NO THERE ARE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
I NOTICED THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN ON JULY 10TH, AND NOTICES WERE MAILED ON JULY 7TH FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THE APPEAL.
WE DID RECEIVE SOME COMMENTS THAT CAME IN FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY IN TERMS OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE REPORT THAT WAS RECEIVED FROM THE APPELLANT.
THEN WE ALSO RECEIVED A COMMENT LETTER FROM THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT, MR. JAMESON.
THOSE WERE BOTH FORWARDED ONTO CITY COUNCIL EARLIER TODAY.
I WILL NOTE THAT JUST MAYBE FIVE MINUTES OR SO AGO, I DID RECEIVE ANOTHER LETTER FROM THE APPELLANT.
WHICH I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW, BUT I'M SURE THE APPELLANT MR. FINNEY CAN FURTHER EXPLAIN WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THAT LETTER.
[NOISE] IN TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, STAFF MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSIDERED CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ANY FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AS ALLOWED BY CEQA OR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT QUALIFIES AS CATEGORICAL EXEMPT PER CLASS 1, CLASS 3, AND CLASS 11.
THE PROPOSAL FOR THE GROCERY STORE WAS ESSENTIALLY AND REMAINS TO LEASE AND OCCUPY A PORTION OF AN EXISTING PERMITTED COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE AND TO UNDERTAKE MINOR PARKING LOT MODIFICATIONS THAT WILL REMAIN ACCESSORY TO THAT EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES.
BASED ON THIS, STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE PROJECT QUALIFIES FOR THE ABOVE NOTED CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS.
WHEN A PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA THERE ARE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS THAT MAY REMOVE THE EXEMPTION.
HOWEVER, NONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTION ARE APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE.
THERE ARE NO CUMULATIVE PROJECTS IN THE VICINITY WHICH WOULD TRIGGER CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.
THERE ARE NO SCENIC RESOURCES WHICH WILL BE IMPACTED.
THE SITE IS NOT A HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE, AND THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT TO HISTORICAL RESOURCES.
CONDITIONALLY, THERE ARE NO UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH WOULD CREATE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, AND THE BURDEN IS UPON THE APPELLANT TO PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE LAW FIRM FINNEY ARNOLD LLP, THEY EXPRESS CONCERNS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT WAS CONDUCTED FOR THE PROJECT AND SPECIFICALLY THE NEED TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT'S ALLEGED SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND INCORPORATE MITIGATION MEASURES TO ADDRESS THOSE ALLEGED SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
THERE WAS NO DETAIL OR EVIDENCE IN THE APPEAL THAT SUBSTANTIATED ANY OF THESE CONCERNS.
BUT ON JULY 10TH, 2020, FINNEY ARNOLD SUBMITTED AND ADDITIONAL LETTER ALONG WITH A REPORT FROM SWEEP ENVIRONMENTAL FIRM RELATING TO THE PROJECT'S AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND HEALTH RISKS IMPACTS.
THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE SWEEP REPORT WAS ANALYZED BY RAMBOLL CONSULTING FIRM WITH EXPERTISE ON AIR QUALITY, GHG, AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT ISSUES.
SO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND RAMBOLL WENT THROUGH THAT ANALYSIS AND ULTIMATELY DETERMINED THAT THE SWEEP REPORT TO NOT PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE ARE ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS RESULTING FROM THE PROJECT, WHICH WOULD NEGATE THE USE OF THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS.
SO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ERIC LU FROM RAMBOLL, THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DETAIL ON BOTH THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL, AND SWEEP AND RAMBOLL ANALYSES.
ONCE I CONCLUDE MY REPORT, BUT IN SUMMATION, THEY FOUND THAT THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT STAFF'S USE OF THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS TO EXEMPT THE PROPOSED PROJECT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF CEQA.
SO FURTHER MUNICIPAL CODE, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THREE OPTIONS WHEN MAKING A DECISION ON APPEAL.
THEY CAN REVERSE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION AND DEVELOP REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION.
THEY CAN MODIFY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISIONS BY CHANGING THE FINDINGS OR ADDING, ALTERING OR MOVING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
OR THEY CAN AFFIRM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DEVELOPMENT VIEW COMMITTEE'S DECISION.
[00:30:03]
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AFFIRM BOTH THE DRC'S APPROVAL OF CASE NUMBER 31-20 PPR, AND PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF CASE NUMBER 0520 CUP, AND 0620 CUP.THEN WE'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT YOU DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT AND BRING FORTH RESOLUTION APPROVING THESE CASES FOR THE NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
WITH THAT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO LISA AND ERIC.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAIA AND THAT WAS AN EXCELLENT SUMMATION AND YOU'VE ACTUALLY COVERED A LOT OF WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.
I FIRST WANT TO SAY, ERIC IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF THEY'RE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE EMISSIONS ANALYSIS OR THE HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT.
BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS, THEN I THINK HIS REPORT SPEAKS FOR HIMSELF.
HE MAY HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD DEPENDING WHAT THE CONTENTS ARE OF THAT LETTER, AND WHAT THE APPELLANT HAS TO SAY.
AS MAIA INDICATED, STAFF DETERMINED THERE WERE THREE BASIC EXEMPTIONS, THE CLASS 1 FOR EXISTING FACILITIES WHICH WOULD APPLY TO THE MARKET USE, THE COP FOR MARKET IN ALCOHOL, AND THEN THE CLASS 3 AND CLASS 11 EXEMPTIONS.
CLASS 3 IS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES, WHICH CAN INCLUDE UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL [NOISE] SPACE.
CLASS 11 IS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, AGAIN, SMALL ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS, AND THAT COVERS THE PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE TRASH ENCLOSURE.
THE LAW CEQA PROVIDES THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT A PROJECT, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT AS A WHOLE, THE CITY CAN COMBINE THE EXEMPTIONS.
IN THIS CASE, WE'RE USING THE CLASS 1 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CLASS 3 AND CLASS 11 TO COVER ALL OF THE ITEMS ON APPEAL.
ONCE IT'S DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO AN EXEMPTION, IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO UNDERGO THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION THAT THE FINNEY ARNOLD [NOISE] LETTER INDICATED [NOISE] HAD TO BE DONE.
THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION, IS YOU DON'T DO A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ON IT, IF A PROJECT IS EXEMPT.
AS MAIA INDICATED EXEMPTIONS OR SUBJECT TO EXCEPTIONS, THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS EVEN REMOTELY APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE IS THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE EXEMPTION.
THE BURDENS ON THE APPELLANT TO PROVIDE THAT THERE'S AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE, AND THE SUPREME COURT HAS DETERMINED THERE ARE TWO METHODS BY WHICH THIS CAN BE DONE.
THE FIRST WAY IS TO SHOW THAT THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
NOT JUST THE POSSIBILITY OF A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, BUT THAT THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
THE SECOND METHOD IS TO SHOW THAT THERE IS AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE AND THAT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT DUE TO THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
IN THAT CASE, THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT HAS TO ACTUALLY BE ATTRIBUTED TO WHAT MAKES THE CIRCUMSTANCE UNUSUAL, NOT JUST THAT THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT THAT WOULD HAVE AIR IMPACTS, BUT WHAT IS UNUSUAL ABOUT THIS PROJECT? THE FINNEY ARNOLD LETTER AND THE SWEEP ANALYSIS PROVIDES A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS WHICH I'M BRIEFLY GOING TO GO THROUGH, AND WHY THE ANALYSIS ON THEIR PART IS IN CORRECT.
FIRST, THEY'VE ARGUED THAT THIS IS AN UNTRIED NEW CONCEPT GROCERY STORE OWNED BY THE WEALTHIEST COMPANY IN THE WORLD, AND IT'S A REVOLUTIONARY BUSINESS MODEL.
THERE'S NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER IN THE RECORD REGARDING THIS.
THE MARKET, AS MAIA, INDICATED THE REPRESENTATIVES HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID THAT THIS IS GOING TO [NOISE] ESSENTIALLY BE A TRADITIONAL GROCERY STORE.
GROCERY STORES ALREADY HAVE SELF-SERVE CHECKOUT AND EVEN SCAN AS YOU GO SERVICES.
[NOISE] IT'S NOT UNUSUAL BECAUSE IT'S JUST A GROCERY STORE.
IF YOU LOOK AT RALPH'S, I KNOW RALPH'S ALREADY HAS A SYSTEM WHERE YOU CAN EVEN SCAN AS YOU GO AND NOT EVEN GO THROUGH THE SELF-SERVE CHECKOUT.
[00:35:02]
THE WEALTH OF AMAZON IS ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS ARE NOT STUDIED UNDER SEQUOIA.THEY'RE JUST ARGUING THE PROJECT MUST UNDERGO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AND AS I'VE INDICATED, THIS TURNS THE NATURE OF AN EXEMPTION ON ITS HEAD.
YOU DON'T DO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WHEN IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EXEMPTION.
THEY'VE ARGUED THAT THE PROJECT IS NOT QUALIFY FOR CLASS 1 EXEMPTION BECAUSE BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT, IT MUST SURELY CREATE IMPACTS TO TRAFFIC, AIR QUALITY, GROUNDWATER QUALITY, SOIL QUALITY, NOISE, A CAR, AND MEET ANOTHER ASPECTS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND YOU JUST CAN'T SAY IT'S A NEGLIGIBLE CHANGE IN USE.
AGAIN, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF THIS.
THEY ARE NOT BUILDING A NEW 38,244 SQUARE FOOT MARKET THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE THE TYPE OF GRADING THAT YOU'RE USED TO WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THEY'RE SIMPLY REPURPOSING AN EXISTING MARKET.
THE PROJECT DOES INVOLVE APPROXIMATELY 55 SQUARE FEET OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT THAT WAS APPROVED UNDER THE PREVIOUS PRECISE PLAN OF REVIEW, AND IS NOT A SUBJECT OF THIS APPEAL.
IT'S ALSO NOTED THAT IS COMMON LAVERNE AND ELSEWHERE, TO USE THE CLASS 1 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION WHEN ONE RETAIL SPACE REPLACES ANOTHER RETAIL SPACE.
UNDER A PELLETS LOGIC, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET OUT OF THE ECONOMIC DISASTER WE'RE IN IF EVERY SINGLE BIG BOX SPACE THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HAS TO GO THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT USE THAN WHAT MAY HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN IN THERE.
THAT'S JUST NOT WHAT SEQUOIA REQUIRES.
THEY'VE ARGUED THAT THE PROJECT DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR A CLASS 3 EXCEPTION BECAUSE THE FOOTPRINT OF EACH STORE IS MORE THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET.
CLASS 3 ACTUALLY ALLOWS UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW FLOOR AREA.
THERE'S NO NEW FLOOR AREA BEING ADDED BY THIS PRECISE PLAN OR BY THE CUPS.
[NOISE] THE CLASS 3, AS I SAID BEFORE, WAS NOT MEANT TO COVER THE MARKET USE.
IT WAS MEANT TO COVER THE PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS AND TRASH ENCLOSURE.
THE CLASS 11 EXEMPTION IS NOT BEING USED FOR THE MARKET USE THAT WILL ALSO COVER AS THE PARKING LOT CHANGES AND TRASH ENCLOSURE.
THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT THAT THE PROJECT INCORRECTLY RELIES ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES [NOISE] BECAUSE THOSE WEREN'T ATTACHED.
[NOISE] THE CITY'S GUIDELINES BASICALLY INCORPORATE THE STATE SEQUOIA GUIDELINES THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND MAIA INCLUDED THOSE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE CITY SEQUOIA GUIDELINES INTO THE RECORD FOR THAT.
THEN, THE SWEP REPORT GETS INTO THREE SPECIFIC THINGS: ONE, THEY ARGUE THAT THERE'LL BE SIGNIFICANT AIR EMISSIONS.
WHAT THEY'VE TRIED TO DO IS SAY, THERE'S A REALLY BIG NUMBER BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO INCREASE BY OVER 100 PERCENT.
BUT WHAT SWEP FAILED TO TELL YOU IS, IF THEIR NUMBERS ARE CORRECT AND WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE CORRECT, AND EVEN IF THE INCREASE IS WHAT THEY SAY, THAT INCREASE IS STILL WAY BELOW THE SCAQMD'S THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
SIMILARLY, FOR THE GHG EMISSIONS, EVEN BY SWEP'S ANALYSIS FOR WHICH WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE NUMBERS THEY'VE USED, THERE'S STILL NOT A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE THE THRESHOLDS, EVEN BY THEIR OWN NUMBERS, STILL BRING YOU BELOW THE 3,000 EQUIVALENT METRIC TONS.
THAT'S THE ANALYSIS AND THRESHOLD THAT IS USED THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN MOST CITIES, AND BY THE CITY OF LAVERNE, AS WE NOTED IN THE COUPLE OF MNDS THAT WERE CITED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
THE LAST SWEP ARGUMENT IS THAT THE PROJECT REQUIRES A HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT.
THE SCAQMD GUIDANCE DOCUMENT RECOMMENDS THAT THESE HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS BE CONDUCTED ON SUBSTANTIAL SOURCES OF DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER OR DPM PROJECTS WHERE FACILITIES ARE GOING TO GENERATE
[00:40:03]
100 TRUCK TRIPS PER DAY OR 40 TRIPS PER DAY WHEN THERE'S REFRIGERATION UNITS BECAUSE THAT EMITS MORE DIESEL.THIS PROJECT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
THERE'S ONLY LIMITED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, LIMITED TRUCK DELIVERIES, AND NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY SWEP FOR ITS SCREENING LEVEL ASSESSMENTS.
THEREFORE, NEITHER SWEP NOR FINNEY ARNOLD HAS PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
THEY HAVE NOT PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT THIS PROJECT IS UNUSUAL AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION SHOULD STAND.
THANK YOU. AS I SAID, ERIC LU IS ALSO ON THE PHONE, IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC, MORE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE SWEP ANALYSIS.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS MCCURLEY OR MISS KRANITZ AT THIS POINT, COUNCIL, OR SHOULD WE CONTINUE ON WITH REPORTS BY THE ATTORNEYS? [NOISE] CONTINUE ON.
>> WE WILL CONTINUE. WHO'S UP NEXT? MISS KRANITZ, IS IT-.
>> I BELIEVE THAT UNDER THE CITY'S PROCEDURES, THE APPLICANT.
>> YES, MR. JAMIESON SHOULD BE SPEAKING NOW ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, AMAZON.
[OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU, MR JAMESON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
MAY I PLEASE ASK THAT MY COMPUTER ACCESS BE GRANTED ADMISSION FOR SOME REASON, WHILE I WAS WATCHING ON MY COMPUTER IT STOPPED.
I WENT TO MY IPAD AND NOW IT'S BACK UP WITH THE COMPUTER, WHICH AFTER YOU ADMIT ME TO THE ROOM, MIGHT THAT BE POSSIBLE?
>> THERE YOU GO. [NOISE] CAN JR ADMIT HIM, MR. RUSSI?
>> I DID. I'M SORRY, I HAD TO MOVE FROM MY COMPUTER TO MY IPAD AND NOW I NEED TO GET RID OF THAT.
>> YOU JUST HAVE TO SHUT THAT ONE OFF. WE CAN SEE YOU NOW.
>> I THINK I HAVE TWO WINDOWS UP.
I APOLOGIZE. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING MR. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
I'M A LAWYER WITH THE LAW FIRM OF SOLOMON SALTSMAN AND JAMIESON IN LOS ANGELES.
I HAVE THE HONOR OF REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT HERE, AMAZON AND THE GROCERY, THE MARKET THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO LA VERNE.
I DID APPEAR BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE MADE A PRESENTATION THERE AS YOU KNOW THAT WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT, AND WE DO APPRECIATE THAT.
I ALSO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT AND EXPRESS OUR APPRECIATION TO MAYA AND TO ERIC AND TO EVERYONE ON STAFF THAT HAS BEEN SO HELPFUL IN PROVIDING ALL THE WORK AND EFFORT THAT THEY'VE DONE TO DEVELOP THIS APPLICATION AND HELP US BRING IT TO YOU TODAY.
THE REASON IT'S HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS SORELY BECAUSE THE APPEAL THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED THAT IS SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF CEQA, AND THE CEQA EXEMPTIONS THAT STAFF HAS INDICATED TO YOU AND WAS VERY NICELY EXPLAINED TO YOU BY BOTH MISS KRANITZ AND MISS MCCURLEY.
I DON'T NEED TO REPEAT ANYTHING THERE.
CERTAINLY, WE DO BELIEVE THAT THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS DO APPLY HERE.
THERE ARE NO OTHER BASIS STATED IN THE APPEAL.
ALL OF THE FINDINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY UNDER THE CITY OF LA VERNE MUNICIPAL CODE WERE FOUND BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ARE PROVIDED BY STAFF.
THE STAFF REPORT PROVIDES THAT TO YOU, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY MEET AND SATISFY AND HAVE DONE ALL OF THOSE FINDINGS NECESSARY FOR THE GROCERY AND FOR THE ALCOHOL USE.
THE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED ARE CONDITIONS THAT ARE ALL ACCEPTABLE TO AMAZON.
THE REMAINING APPROVAL, WHICH IS THE PRECISE PLAN REVIEW, IS FOR VERY MINOR MODIFICATIONS THAT ARE COMMON TO ALL GROCERY MARKETS.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AS INDICATED, AND I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE, IS THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING KOHL'S AND OTHER RETAIL SPACE.
AMAZON WILL TAKE OVER 38,000 SQUARE [NOISE] FEET OF THE FOOTPRINT, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 88,000 SQUARE FEET.
THAT FOOTPRINT REMAINS INTACT.
THE ONLY REQUIREMENT TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE
[00:45:04]
THIS GROCERY TO THE CITY OF LA VERNE WITH RESPECT TO THIS PRECISE PLAN REVIEW, IS TO PROVIDE THE TRASH ENCLOSURE THAT IS NECESSARY.THAT TRASH ENCLOSURE IS MINOR IN NATURE.
IT'S ABOUT SIX FEET TALL, IT'S ABOUT 25 FEET WIDE BY 11 FEET DEEP.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PAINTING THE PARKING LOT TO PROVIDE THE ABA REQUIRED STALLS, PUTTING IN SOME EV CHARGERS, WHICH QUITE FRANKLY I WAS SURPRISED THAT WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO DIG UP THE PARKING LOT FOR THAT.
THERE'S ACTUALLY TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE THAT ALLOWS FOR BORING UNDERNEATH THE EXISTING PARKING LOT TO BRING THE ELECTRICITY THERE.
THE LOCATION IS ONE THAT AMAZON IS EXCITED TO BRING TO LA VERNE.
IT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF THE FIRST FEW THAT ARE GOING TO BE IN PLACE IN THE COUNTRY.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN ALREADY APPROVED IN CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CITY OF IRVINE.
IN CITY OF LA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WOODLAND HILLS AS WELL AS NORTHRIDGE AND NORTH HOLLYWOOD.
THOSE ARE NOT OPEN YET TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY ARE TRADITIONAL GROCERY STORES IN NATURE.
THERE ARE MARKETS YOU'D EXPECT TO GO INTO, IN RALPHS OR BONDS OR IN THE CITY OF LA VERNE, THE ALDIS, THE SPROUTS.
THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION AT 38,000 SQUARE FEET AND WITH THE HOURS THAT WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY ARE SIMILAR TO THE HOURS NOT ONLY THE KOHL'S HAS BEEN OPERATING OVER THE YEARS, BUT ALSO THE HOURS AND THE SIZE OF THE BONDS AND THE SPROUTS AND THE ALDI.
THERE WAS ONE OF THEM THAT I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER AS WELL.
SOME ARE SMALLER AND SOME ARE LARGER THAN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION WILL BE.
THE ISSUE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S AN ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACT AT ALL.
WE WOULD POSE TO YOU THAT THERE IS NO ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACT.
THERE'S A NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT AT ALL ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
IT'S AN EXISTING BUILDING, EXISTING FOOTPRINT, EXISTING RETAIL OPERATION WITH ANOTHER RETAIL OPERATION THAT WOULD BE PLEASED TO DO BUSINESS WITHIN THE CITY OF LA VERNE.
WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE VARIOUS SWPPP REPORT.
WE LOOKED AT THE REPORTS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE STAFF REPORT, AND WE DO BELIEVE THAT THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS DO APPLY.
THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO TAKE AWAY FROM THOSE EXEMPTIONS.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT I ALSO, IN ADDITION TO HAVING THE PLEASURE TO REPRESENT AMAZON HERE AND IN OTHER LOCATIONS, I ALSO REPRESENT A NUMBER OF OTHER GROCERIES AND MARKETS, INCLUDING WHOLE FOODS, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, AS WELL AS OTHER LOCATIONS.
I CAN'T REMEMBER AN EXCEPTION TO ACTUALLY GETTING A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FOR CEQA ON ANY OF THOSE OTHER LOCATIONS, ANY OF THE ONES I MENTIONED, OR ANY OF THE OTHERS THAT I'VE DONE OVER THE LAST 30 PLUS YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN PRACTICING LAW.
IF WE WERE BUILDING A NEW OPERATION FROM THE GROUND UP WITH GRADING AND PAVING AND ALL THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT GOES INTO IT, THEN THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY.
BUT WE'RE NOT, WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING HERE OR WHAT WE'D LIKE TO PROVIDE HERE IS A MARKET TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY OF LA VERNE.
I BECAUSE OF THE ZOOM NATURE OF THE CALL AND THE PANDEMIC AND THE NECESSITY TO APPEAR THIS WAY, WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I HAVE AVAILABLE TO ME ON A TEXT CHAT IN CASE I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL THAT I'M NOT ABLE TO ANSWER MYSELF I CAN TRY AND FIND THE ANSWER TO THAT AND OTHER THAN THAT, WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR EFFORT AND LOOKING INTO THIS AS CAREFULLY AS I KNOW THAT YOU WILL AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST TIME AT THE END, IF NECESSARY TO READ.
BUT ANYTHING THAT YOU MIGHT FEEL IMPORTANT FOR US TO SAY OR TO RESPOND TO, OR IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
OTHER THAN THAT, I WILL SAY THANK YOU AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR DECISION.
>> MISS MCCURLEY DO WE HAVE SOMEONE UP NEXT?
>> YES. THE APPELLATE OR THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPELLATE MR. TAL FINNEY
>> YEAH. CAN YOU GUYS SEE ME OKAY?
>> GREAT. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?
>> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.
MEMBERS OF THE SEAT COUNCIL, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU LIKE MY OTHER COUNCIL THERE.
THIS IS DIFFERENT FOR US TO BE DOING THESE ZOOM MEETINGS [LAUGHTER], BUT WILL BEAR WITH IT HERE.
I'M TAL FINNEY OF FINNEY ARNOLD.
I'M A FORMER OPR DIRECTOR OF THE STATE, SO I USED TO ADMINISTER THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND CEQA FOR THE STATE, AND DRAFTED THE CEQA GUIDELINES FOR THE STATE, AS WELL AS PRIVATE PRACTICE IN CEQA AS WELL.
I'M WRITING HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF AN UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION OF RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF LA VERNE TO APPEAL THE MAY 13TH,
[00:50:01]
2020 DECISION OF THE LA VERNE PLANNING COMMISSION.OUR ASSOCIATION INCLUDES INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE POTENTIAL TRAFFIC AND THE AIR QUALITY, GROUNDWATER QUALITY, SOIL QUALITY, NOISE, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CAUSED BY THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE UNDERLYING CONSTRUCTION TO BE DONE WITHIN THE STORE AND OUTSIDE THE ACCESSORIES.
BASED UPON OUR REVIEW OF THE CPS AND THE PPR UNDERLYING THE APPROVALS, WE FEEL THE APPROVALS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH CEQA, WHICH IS BASICALLY DESIGNED TO INFORM DECISION MAKERS AND THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND EFFECTS OF A PROJECT.
CEQA REQUIRES THAT AN AGENCY ANALYZE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN AN EIR TYPICALLY, AND SPECIFICALLY THAT THE EIR SHOULD RESULT FROM EXTENSIVE RESEARCH AND INFORMATION GATHERING, INCLUDING CONSULTATION WITH STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES, LOCAL OFFICIALS, AND THE INTERESTED PUBLIC.
CEQA ALSO DIRECTS PUBLIC AGENCIES TO AVOID OR REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE WHEN POSSIBLE BY REQUIRING ALTERNATIVES OR MITIGATION MEASURES.
THE EIR SERVES TO PROVIDE PUBLIC AGENCIES AND THE PUBLIC IN GENERAL WITH INFORMATION ABOUT THE EFFECT THAT PROPOSED PROJECT IS LIKELY TO HAVE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, [NOISE] AND TO IDENTIFY WAYS THAT ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE CAN BE AVOIDED OR SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED.
IF A PROJECT HAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THE AGENCY MAY APPROVE THE PROJECT ONLY UPON A FINDING THAT IT HAS ELIMINATED OR SUBSTANTIALLY LESSENED ALL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT WHERE FEASIBLE, AND THAT ANY UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT ARE ACCEPTABLE DUE TO OVERRIDING CONCERNS.
THE NOTICE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 13TH, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT, "ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION, NOTICE IS HERE BY GIVEN THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, PURSUANT TO THE CLASS 1 EXEMPTION AND THE CLASS 3 EXEMPTION." BOTH OF THESE REQUIRE THAT THERE'S NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRED AT THE TIME.
WE BELIEVE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE EXISTS TO SUPPORT THE ASSERTION THAT THE FINDINGS NOTED ABOVE WERE INCORRECTLY REACHED.
THAT THE PLANT USES WILL HAVE CONSIDERABLE CUMULATIVE LONG-TERM ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THE LOCAL ECONOMY, AND NEARBY RESIDENCE, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, AND THAT WE FILL THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT WITHOUT A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AMOUNTED TO ACHIEVING A SHORT-TERM GOAL TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC GOALS. CLASS 1.
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 15301 CONSISTS OF THE OPERATION, REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, PERMITTING, LEASING, LICENSING, OR MINOR ALTERATION OF EXISTING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STRUCTURES, FACILITIES, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, OR TOPOGRAPHICAL FEATURES, INVOLVING NEGLIGIBLE, OR NO EXPANSION OF EXISTING, OR FORMER USE.
THE TYPES OF EXISTING FACILITIES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE ALL INCLUSIVE OF THE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT MIGHT FALL WITHIN THE CLASS 1.
THE KEY HERE IS CONSIDERATION AS TO WHETHER THE PROJECT INVOLVES A NEGLIGIBLE OR NO EXPANSION OF USE.
THEN THAT SECTION OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE PROCEEDS TO LIST A NUMBER OF TYPES OF EXISTING PROJECTS THAT CAN BE ALTERED OR SUCH ALTERATIONS ARE SO MINIMAL IN SCOPE AND CHARACTER THAT THE ENVIRONMENT IS NOT IMPACTED.
THE PROJECT IS GRANTED TO CLASS 1 EXEMPTION FROM CONDUCTING AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AT THE EIR LEVEL.
WHILE ADDING ADA COMPLIANT PARKING SPACES, ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS, CORRALS FOR SHOPPING CARTS TO AN EXISTING PARKING LOT FITS WITHIN THE LANGUAGE OF SUCH PROJECTS, THAT THEY REPRESENT MINIMAL CHANGES TO AN EXISTING PARKING LOT.
THESE CHANGES MUST BE CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNDERLYING NEW CONCEPT GROCERY STORE WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER THE PROJECT SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA REQUIREMENTS.
OUR UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION SUGGESTS THAT WHEN THE APPROVALS ARE CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GROCERY STORE, THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN WHICH WAS APPROVED AS PART OF CASE NUMBER 10219 PPR, THE CLASS 1 EXEMPTION MUST FAIL.
THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED IN A PIECEMEAL FASHION THAT ALLOWED FOR THE IMPROPER APPLICATION OF CLASS 1 EXEMPTION.
AS NOTED FOR HERE, THE KEY CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE PROJECT INVOLVES NEGLIGIBLE OR NO EXPANSION OF USE.
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MAJOR NEW CONCEPT GROCERY STORE, LARGE ENOUGH TO HOUSE OVER 100 EMPLOYEES AT A GIVEN TIME WITH ROTATING SHIFTS THAT WILL SEEK TO TAKE DELIVERIES FROM 7:00 AM TO 11:00 PM MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, ALONG WITH A FULL LIQUOR DEPARTMENT THAT SELLS BEER, WINE, AND DISTILLED SPIRITS, WHICH HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED THROUGH STUDIES TO BRING POTENTIAL CRIMINAL ELEMENTS INTO A COMMUNITY AND EFFECT PROPERTY VALUES.
IT IS NOT THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NEGLIGIBLE.
THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC INCREASES ASSOCIATED WITH GROCERY STORES IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE BY MANY, MANY STUDIES WHEN COMPARED TO STORES LIKE KOHL'S, OTHER RETAIL TYPE STORES, EVEN DRUG STORES, AND PHARMACIES.
A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE AND SCOPE MUST SURELY CREATE SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS ON THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, THESE IMPACTS TO THE TRAFFIC, AIR QUALITY, GROUNDWATER QUALITY, SOIL QUALITY, NOISE, ECONOMY, AND OTHER ASPECTS OF THE COMMUNITY MUST BE PROPERLY DETERMINED AND STUDIED.
[00:55:04]
THE CLASS 3 EXEMPTION AND SIX OF CONSTRUCTION AND LOCATION OF LIMITED NUMBERS OF NEW SMALL FACILITIES, RESTRUCTURES, INSTALLATION OF SMALL NEW EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES AND SMALL STRUCTURES, AND THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING SMALL STRUCTURES FROM ONE USE TO ANOTHER, WHERE ONLY MINOR MODIFICATIONS ARE MADE IN THE EXTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE.THE NUMBERS OF STRUCTURES DESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION ARE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ON ANY LEGAL PARCEL.
THEY GIVE EXAMPLES, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO A STORE, MOTEL, OFFICE, RESTAURANT, OR SIMILAR STRUCTURE, NOT INVOLVING THE USE OF SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND NOT EXCEEDING 2,500 SQUARE FEET IN FLOOR AREA.
IN URBANIZED AREAS, THE EXEMPTION ALSO APPLIES TO UP TO FOUR SUCH COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS NOT EXCEEDING 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN FLOOR AREA ON SITES ZONE FOR SUCH USE, IF NOT INVOLVING THE USE OF SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES WHERE ALL NECESSARY PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE, AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IS NOT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE.
THE PROPOSED AMAZON RETAIL GROCERY STORE IS PLANNED TO BE 38,244 SQUARE FEET AND WILL SHARE SPACE WITH THE EXISTING KOHL'S STORE, WHICH WILL OCCUPY THE OTHER 58,262 SUITE FEET OF THE 87,000-88,000 SQUARE FOOT SPACE IN WHOLE.
FIRSTLY, THIS STRUCTURE IS TOO LARGE TO BE GRANTED A CLASS 3 EXEMPTION.
IN FACT, THE FOOTPRINT OF EITHER STORE BY ITSELF EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OF FLOOR AREA PROVIDED IN THE STATUTE, THUS THE USE OF THE CLASS 3 EXEMPTION IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
WE HAD A LOS ANGELES TIMES ARTICLE DATED NOVEMBER 11TH, 2019 IN WHICH AMAZON HAS DATED THEIR PLANS TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE SUPERMARKET INDUSTRY.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO FATHOM HOW THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS GOAL OF BUILDING A STORE THAT IS TOO LARGE TO BE GRANTED A CLASS 3 EXEMPTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SMALL STORES, AND WITHOUT CREATING A FOOTPRINT AND BUSINESS CONCEPT THAT WILL IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT.
CERTAINLY WITH THE INCREASED TRAFFIC ASSOCIATED WITH GROCERY STORES OF ANY SIZE, COMPARED TO THE EXISTING USE THAT WAS THERE BEFORE, IS MORE THAN A NEGLIGIBLE CHANGE IN THE USE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES AIRING AND GRANTING THE APPROVALS BECAUSE FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE AVAILABLE THAT WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY LESSEN ONE OR MORE OF THE PROJECT SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
FOR EXAMPLE, MORNING, AFTERNOON, OR OTHER PEAK HOUR COMMUTE TIMES WILL BE PERMANENTLY INCREASED THROUGHOUT THE AREA, IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
ADEQUATE MITIGATION MEASURES MUST BE EMPLOYED TO LESSEN THESE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AIR QUALITY NOISE, AND OTHER NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE LOCAL COMMUNITY WILL ALSO OCCUR AND MUST BE ADEQUATELY STUDIED.
THE ASSOCIATION HAS COMMISSIONED THE TRAFFIC REPORT, WHICH WE PROVIDED TO YOU THE APPROVALS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE CEQA REQUIREMENTS, AND WE REQUEST THAT THEY BE PUT ASIDE.
I NOW WANTED TO QUICKLY FOLLOW UP HERE.
WE RECEIVED A FOLLOW-UP LETTER FROM SWEEP, WHO IS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT, WHO WORKS ON THESE SEPARATE PROJECTS ALL THE TIME.
I WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME PART FROM THAT.
THEY HAVE REVIEWED BECAUSE WE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE OTHER TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT IN RESPONSE TO OUR SWEEP REPORT AND THE LETTER THAT THE C CLERK MENTIONED, WE HAD PROVIDED TO YOU VERY SOON AFTER THE MEETING BEGAN WAS A RESPONSE TO THE LETTER WE RECEIVED JUST EARLIER TODAY.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED, BUT WE OF COURSE, HAVE SUBMITTED IT PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL TAKING VOTE SO THAT IT CAN BE IN THE RECORD.
OUR SWEEP LETTER SAYS WE'VE REVIEWED THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, AND FOR THEIR AMAZON RETAIL LLC GROCERY STORE PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND THE RAMBOLL RESPONSE.
IT'S THE RAMBOLL FIRM THAT YOU WILL BE HEARING INFORMATION FROM THAT COUNTERED OUR SWEEP REPORT.
AFTER A REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION [NOISE] AND THE RAMBOLL RESPONSE, WE FIND THAT BOTH DOCUMENTS ARE INSUFFICIENT IN ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROJECT'S AIR QUALITY, HEALTH RISKS, AND GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACTS.
AS WE ASSERTED IN OUR JUNE 18TH COMMENT LETTER, AN UPDATED CEQA ANALYSIS SHOULD BE PREPARED TO ADEQUATELY EVALUATE THE PROJECT'S POTENTIAL IMPACTS.
IN OUR JUNE 18TH COMMENT LETTER, WE PREPARED A CALEEMOD MODEL, NOTING THAT THE PROJECT'S EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION WERE NOT INCLUDED AS WE WERE NOT PROVIDED WITH THE SUFFICIENT PROJECT'S SPECIFIC INFORMATION IN THIS REGARD, SUCH AS A CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE, CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LIST, AND TRIPS, AND VMT AS VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED.
DESPITE THE LACK OF PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION WHEN THE EXISTING LAND USE AND PROPOSED PROJECT ARE MODELED IN A CALEEMOD.
THE PROPOSED PROJECTS NET INCREASE IN OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ARE FAR FROM NEGLIGIBLE.
AGAIN, CLASS 1 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION REQUIRES NEGLIGIBLE.
CONTRARY TO WHAT THE MAY 2020 AGENDA REPORT CONCLUDED WITHOUT ANY ATTEMPT TO QUANTIFY EMISSIONS.
THUS AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED IN OUR JUNE 18TH COMMENT LETTER, THE PROJECT CANNOT CLAIM EXEMPTIONS PURSUING TO THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
IN RESPONSE, HOWEVER, THE RTC SIMPLY STATES THE OTHER REPORT THAT
[01:00:03]
SWEEP'S CALEEMOD DOES NOT INDICATE CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS THAT WOULD EXCEED SCAQMD THRESHOLD, SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT THRESHOLDS, FAILING TO ADDRESS OUR COMMENT THAT THE PROJECT DID NOT CLAIM EXEMPTIONS PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES.FURTHERMORE, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDES A COMPARISON OF THE PROPOSED PROJECTS, THE DAMIEN HIGH SCHOOL MASTER PLAN.
THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CLAIMS THAT IF THE DAMIEN HIGH SCHOOL MASTER PLAN DID NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AIR QUALITY IMPACT, THEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT PORTFOLIO IMPACT.
HOWEVER, THESE TWO PROJECTS CANNOT BE COMPARED AS THEY HAVE DIFFERENT SIZES, USES, OPERATIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS, AND COLD STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, AMONG MANY OTHER FACTORS.
AS A RESULT, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CLAIM THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD HAVE A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT AIR QUALITY IMPACT AS A RESULT OF A COMPARISON TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROJECT, IS UNSUPPORTED AND INCORRECT.
IN RESPONSE TO OUR JUNE 18TH COMMENT LETTER WHICH INCLUDED AN OPERATIONAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT BASED ON SWEEP'S CALEEMOD, THE REPORT YOU RECEIVED EARLIER TODAY STATES THAT THE SWEEP ANALYSIS INCORRECTLY SUGGESTS THAT THE PROJECT WILL HAVE HEALTH RISK IMPACTS, THIS ANALYSIS IS BASED ON AN OVERLY CONSERVATIVE ASSESSMENT IN TERM OF BOTH EMISSION ESTIMATES AND DISPERSING MODELING APPROACH, WHICH CAN LEAD TO SUBSTANTIAL OVERESTIMATION, MODELED IMPACTS, AND ESTIMATED HEALTH RISKS.
WHILE THE RTC IS CORRECT IN STATING THAT SWEEP'S CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL HRAS UTILIZE A SCREENING LEVEL MODEL, AS ACKNOWLEDGED IN OUR LETTER THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE RESULTS OF OUR HRA CAN BE IGNORED.
AS STATED IN OUR JUNE 18TH COMMENT LETTER, IF AN UNACCEPTABLE AIR QUALITY HAZARD IS DETERMINED TO BE POSSIBLE USING AIR SCREEN, A MORE REFINED MODELING APPROACH IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT.
THUS SO FAR, SCREENING LEVEL HRA INDICATES A POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT HEALTH RISK IMPACT.
THEN FURTHER ANALYSIS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO IDENTIFY THE HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT AND MITIGATION SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, IF NECESSARY.
HERE HOWEVER, THE RTC, WHICH IS THE RAMBOLL REPORT, ELECTS TO IGNORE OUR SCREENING LEVEL HRA, AND FAILS TO CONDUCT A MORE SPECIFIC ANALYSIS, INCLUDING THE PROJECTS OPERATION.
AS A RESULT, WE FIND THE RTC TO BE INSUFFICIENT TO ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS.
WE MAINTAIN THAT THE PROJECT'S POTENTIAL HEALTH RISK IMPACT IS INADEQUATELY EVALUATED AND POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT.
IN RESPONSE TO OUR COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT'S POTENTIAL TO GENERATE GREENHOUSE GASES, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STATES THAT SWEEP ESTIMATED AN INCREASE OF 1,960.3 METRIC TONS PER YEAR FOR THE OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS.
EVEN IF THE TOTAL AMORTIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS FROM DAMIEN HIGH SCHOOL OF 347 METRIC TONS PER YEAR WAS ADDED IN, THE TOTAL WOULD STILL BE BELOW SC AQMD THRESHOLD OF 3,000 METRIC TONS PER YEAR.
HERE, HOWEVER, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FAILS TO PREPARE THE ESTIMATED EMISSIONS TO THE SC AQMD BRIGHT LINE THRESHOLD OF 1,400 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENTS PER YEAR.
WHEN COMPARED TO THE SEA AQMD BRIGHT LINE THRESHOLD OF 1,400 MT C_O2 PER YEAR FOR A COMMERCIAL PROJECT, SUCH AS THE PROPOSED PROJECT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TODAY, WE FIND A POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT, THAT AN UPDATED CEQA ANALYSIS SHOULD BE PREPARED TO INCLUDE AN UPDATED AIR POLLUTION MODEL TO ADEQUATELY ESTIMATE THE PROJECT'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND INCORPORATE MITIGATION TO REDUCE THESE EMISSIONS TO THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT FEASIBLE PURSUANT TO THE SC AQMD GUIDANCE.
SWEEP HAS RECEIVED LIMITED DISCOVERY REGARDING THIS PROJECT, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BECOME AVAILABLE IN THE FUTURE.
THUS WE RETAIN THE RIGHT TO REVISE OR AMEND THIS REPORT WHEN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE.
OUR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HAD BEEN PERFORMED USING THAT DEGREE OF CARE AND SKILL, ORDINARILY EXERCISE UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES BY REPUTABLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, PRACTICING IN THIS OR SIMILAR LOCALITIES TIME OF SERVICE.
THIS REPORT REFLECTS WHICH WERE REMEMBERED TO INFORMATION THAT WAS RECENTLY ACCESSIBLE AT THE TIME OF THE WORK AND MAY CONTAIN SOME INFORMATIONAL GAPS OR INCONSISTENCIES.
EITHER WAY, [NOISE] WE'VE ESTABLISHED OUR POSITION AND WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS PROJECT GOES WELL BEYOND A NEGLIGIBLE [NOISE] CHANGE IN USE.
AGAIN, GETTING INTO THE CUP AND THE SALE OF LIQUOR ON THE SITE, FRESH PRODUCE BEING AVAILABLE VERSUS CLOTHING AND SHOES, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC TRIPS THAT PEOPLE MAKE TO SUPERMARKETS AND GROCERIES, OPPOSED TO DISCOUNT CLOTHING STORES, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, AND WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS PROJECT SHOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS.
WITH THAT I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING ME THE TIME TO SPEAK. IS THERE A DELAY?
[01:05:01]
>> YEAH, THERE IS, NO IT'S ME.
>>MY OWN VOICE WAS DRIVING ME CRAZY.
>> AT THIS POINT COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF THE ATTORNEYS AND MISS KRANITZ WOULD YOU LIKE TO TALK.
>> MR. MAYOR, I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO SAY THAT ERIC LU FROM RAMBLE WAS ABLE TO READ THAT LETTER WHICH MAIA FORWARDED TO US.
TH AT COUNCIL JUST READ AND I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO HIM TO SPEAK TO THAT LETTER.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN YOU SEE ME OKAY?
>>GREAT. THANKS. SO I WAS ABLE TO SKIM THROUGH THIS LETTER AS LISA JUST REFERENCED AND TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE JUST MADE AS WELL.
THE INITIAL COMMENTS REGARDING THEIR QUALITY IN COMPARISON TO THE SCHOOL, THE ANALYSIS THEY DID, AND OUR RESPONSE WAS NOT RELYING UPON A SPECIFIC ANALYSIS AT THE SCHOOL.
I BELIEVE THAT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY STAFF.
THE STAFF REGARDING TO GIVE PERSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF ANALYSIS.
SO THERE ISN'T AN ODD CALCULATIONAL COMPARISON TO THE DAMIAN HIGH SCHOOL ISSUE THERE.
IN REGARDS TO HIS COMMENTS ON THE HRA IN THIS LETTER, WE DID NOT IGNORE IT.
WE CERTAINLY TOOK THEIR FINDINGS SERIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY WERE SUGGESTING THERE MAY BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
SO WE LOOK CLOSELY AT THAT AND IN OUR ANALYSIS OF THEIR HRA, WE FOUND THAT THEY WERE OVERLY CONSERVATIVE IN THEIR MISSION ESTIMATES.
IT WASN'T JUST THE AIR SCREEN MODEL USAGE, AND THAT WE ANALYZED THAT DATA AND ASSESSED IT IN TERMS OF WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATELY DONE AND WHEN YOU MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS, THE RISKS WAS FAR BELOW THE SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD.
IN REGARDS TO THEIR COMMENTS ON THE CHEAT SHEET THRESHOLDS, IT IS TRUE THAT THE AQMD HAD PROPOSED POTENTIALLY OTHER SCREENING THRESHOLDS THAT WERE AS LOW AS 1400 METRIC TONS.
HOWEVER, THEY LEFT IT TO CITIES AND LEAD AGENCIES TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WOULD EMPLOY.
NONE OF THEIR PROPOSED THRESHOLDS WHERE EVER ADOPTED AND CLEARLY WITHIN THE AQMD DISCUSSIONS, THERE WAS AN OPTION TWO WHICH WAS TO USE A SINGULAR 3,000 METRIC TONS PER YEAR THRESHOLD FOR ALL NON-INDUSTRIAL TYPE PROJECTS, AND SO BASED ON THE PRECEDENT THAT THE CITY HAS DONE AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, USING 3,000 IS WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE ESTABLISHED APPROACH, AND THUS BELIEVE THE COMPARISON THAT WE REPORTED BACK WITHIN YOUR STAFF REPORT IS APPROPRIATE.
SO IN THAT CONTEXT, IN MY OPINION, THERE'S NOT TECHNICAL INFORMATION WITHIN THIS NEW SWIPE LETTER THAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT CHANGES THE FINDINGS THAT WE PROVIDED BEFORE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. LU. I'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL NOTICE, ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANY ATTORNEYS, OR STAFF, OR REGARDING THIS ISSUE?
>> ALSO, MAY WE RESPOND MR. MAYOR, AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME?
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE MY COUNCIL HAS NO QUESTIONS.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, DOESN'T ACTUALLY IS MORE STAFF.
WHEN ALDI WAS PUT IN NOT TOO LONG AGO, AND IT WAS VERY SIMILAR TO TAKING OVER ANOTHER OCCUPANCY, WERE [INAUDIBLE] EXEMPTIONS ALLOWED FOR THAT?
>>YES. IT'S INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS ATTACHMENT N, N AS IN NANCY.
FOR THE ALDI, IT WAS A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, CLASS 1 FACILITIES, SORRY, CLASS 1 EXISTING FACILITIES, AND SO WE'RE USING THE SAME EXEMPTION FOR THIS PROJECT IN ADDITION TO THE CLASS 3 AND CLASS 11 EXEMPTIONS.
>>THANK YOU MISS MCCURLEY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? NO ONE? MR. JAMIESON?
>>THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I'LL MAKE THIS BRIEF.
JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO RESPOND TO MR. FINERY'S COMMENTS.
FIRST OF ALL, I WAS GOING TO BRING UP THE FACT THAT THE ALDI AND THE OTHER MARKETS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO SOME RESEARCH ON WITHIN THE CITY OF LA VERNE WERE GRANTED CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS.
AS I INDICATED PREVIOUSLY, THERE ARE MANY OTHER GROCERY STORES OF SIMILAR NATURE AND KIND AND OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT ALSO GET THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS COMMONLY, ISSUE HERE IS REALLY NEGLIGIBLE OR NO EXPANSION OF USE.
THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY ISSUE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP, AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COUNCIL TO SHOW THAT THERE IS ANYTHING MORE THAN A NEGLIGIBLE EFFECT, IF AT ALL, FOR THE PHYSICAL IMPACT FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE IDEA HERE THAT AN EXISTING RETAIL STORE, EXISTING RETAIL USE,
[01:10:04]
WITHIN AN EXISTING RETAIL BUILDING THAT NOW HAS A NEW RETAIL COMING INTO THE SAME FOOTPRINT, WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN ENTIRE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW WOULD BE ALMOST UNPRECEDENTED.I CAN'T SAY IT'S TOTALLY UNPRECEDENTED, BUT I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OTHER PLACE WHERE I'VE SEEN THAT OCCUR AND IT'S SIMPLY NOT NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE HERE BY LAW, EVEN IF WE TAKE THE FACTS OR THE CONJECTURE AND SPECULATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU AND THAT'S REALLY ALL IT IS, CONJECTURE AND SPECULATION.
WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE EXPERTS IS THAT THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OF ANY KIND AND IT'S NOT SURPRISING GIVEN THE FACT THAT, AS I SAID, IT'S ONE RETAIL OPERATION COMING IN AND TAKE OVER SOME SPACE FROM AN EXISTING RETAIL OPERATION.
WITH RESPECT TO THE ACTUAL OPERATION ITSELF, THE GROCERY STORE.
JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO POINT OUT AND TO REITERATE.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEWED THIS APPLICATION, POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEWED THIS USE, HAD NO INDICATE, HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH IT.
THE ALCOHOL ASPECT IS INCIDENTAL TO THE OVERALL USE, IT'S A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL FLOOR SPACE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT, AND I HEARD IT AGAIN TODAY IN COUNCIL'S REPRESENTATION, THAT THERE'S AN LA TIMES ARTICLE THAT TALKS ABOUT REVOLUTIONIZING THE SUPERMARKET INDUSTRY.
FIRST OF ALL, THAT'S NOT EVEN RELEVANT TO [INAUDIBLE] ANALYSIS.
IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO WHAT'S BEFORE YOU, BUT IT DID CAUSE ME TO TAKE A LOOK BACK TO SEE WHAT IT WAS THAT WAS BEING REFERENCED, AND I CAN REPRESENT TO YOU THAT I PULLED, AND WE JUST DID A GOOGLE SEARCH, THIS NOVEMBER 2019 ARTICLE, AND IT DOESN'T SAY AMAZON IS CONTENDING THAT IT'S GOING TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE SUPERMARKET INDUSTRY.
OF COURSE, IT'D BE GREAT, WHATEVER AMAZON DOES WILL REALLY BE WONDERFUL TO BRING EFFICIENCIES AND SO FORTH, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.
THAT LA TIMES ARTICLE IN FACT SAYS INSTEAD AS FOLLOWS, "WHEN IT BOUGHT WHOLE FOODS MARKET IN 2017, THERE WAS SPECULATION, AMAZON WOULD REVOLUTIONIZE THE SUPERMARKET INDUSTRY." THAT'S A NEWSPAPER REPORTER TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT THE NEWSPAPER REPORTER HEARD AND THEN GOES ON TO SAY, "BUT CHANGE HASN'T BEEN SO QUICK AND THAT THIS IS A TRADITIONAL GROCERY MARKET." SO JUST TO UTILIZE THAT STATEMENT EVEN IN AN AREA WHERE IT'S NOT EVEN RELEVANT TO THIS APPEAL, I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING AT BEST.
SO WITH THOSE COMMENTS, I WOULD AGAIN RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THIS COUNCIL VOTE TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AFFIRM THE FINDINGS OF YOUR VERY FINE PROFESSIONALS CITY STAFF AT ALL LEVELS, DETERMINE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT FOR WHAT'S BEFORE YOU, WHICH IS THE GROCERY, THE SMALL AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL, AND THE SMALL AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S BEING DONE OR WOULD BE DONE IN TO ALLOW THIS GROCERY STORE, WHICH IS THAT TRASH ENCLOSURE, THE PAINTING OF THE STRIPES, THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGERS AND AS INDICATED THERE.
THAT'S REALLY WHAT IS BEFORE YOU NOW.
AMAZON IS EXCITED TO COME TO LA VERNE.
WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT YOU'LL VOTE TO APPROVE TO ALLOW AMAZON TO COME TO LA VERNE AND LET AMAZON SHOW THE CITY EXACTLY THE TYPE OF GROCERY STORE THAT IT IS AND WHAT IT CAN DO, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU MR. JAMIESON, COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR LEGAL COUNSEL OR STAFF AT THIS POINT? NO ONE?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. LU.
I JUST WANTED A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
WERE YOU CRITICAL OF THE METHODOLOGY THAT WAS EMPLOYED BY SWEP, AS WELL AS THE RESULTS?
>> [NOISE] THE BIG PROBLEM WITH SWEP'S SUBMITTAL, BOTH THE EARLIER ONE AND THE ONE THAT CAME FIVE MINUTES AGO, WAS THEY DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THEIR TECHNICAL BACKUP.
NORMALLY WITH THESE ANALYSES, IF THEY SHOW UP IN A ND, MND, OR EIR, THEY WILL BE THE ACTUAL CALIMA OUTPUT FILES.
IN WHICH CASE YOU CAN LOOK AT WHAT ALL THEIR INPUTS WERE TO VALIDATE, AND IDENTIFY THAT THEY'VE REPRESENTED THE PROJECT FAIRLY. THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT.
SO THAT'S NUMBER 1, A BIG FLAW IN MY POINT OF VIEW, IN TERMS OF SEEING AND BELIEVING EVERYTHING THAT THEY'RE REPORTING.
NOW THAT BEING SAID, WE EVALUATED IT, LET'S CALL IT IN GOOD FAITH TO ASSUME THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TOO FISHY.
IN THAT BASIC CONTEXT, THE APPROACH THEY DESCRIBE TO USE CALIMA, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IN TERMS OF THAT APPROACH.
WHAT WE SAY ABOUT OUR MODELS THOUGH,
[01:15:01]
IS THAT IT'S GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT.SO YOU CAN MAKE THE MODEL, DO WHATEVER YOU WANT, AND IF YOU DON'T PUT IN THE CORRECT INFORMATION, IT WON'T GIVE YOU CREDIBLE RESULTS.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR COUNSEL OR STAFF? THANK YOU, MS. MCCURLEY, MS. KRANITZ, MR. LU, MR. FINNEY, AND MR. JAMIESON, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO GO PUBLIC COMMENT.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? JR WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION TO THIS.
>> SIR, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE EMAILED THAT THEY WANTED TO CALL THROUGH.
I BELIEVE IF THERE WERE EMAILED COMMENTS PREVIOUSLY THAT THOSE WOULD HAVE BEEN SENT OUT AND WILL BE INCLUDED WITH THE RECORD.
I WILL MENTION THAT WE DID RECEIVE ONE EMAIL NOT ASKING FOR A CALL, BUT THE RESIDENT HAD CONCERNS THAT THERE WERE TOO MANY GROCERY STORES ALREADY IN LA VERNE.
>> OKAY. AT THIS POINT, LET'S GO BACK TO COUNCIL TO SEE, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AT THIS POINT, COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL RIGHT NOW? SEEING NONE.
YES, COUNCILMEMBER CARDER. YOU'RE MUTED.
YOU'RE STILL MUTED. [LAUGHTER]
>> THERE WE GO. OKAY, [LAUGHTER] COMPUTERS.
FIRST, MAIA, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR STAFF REPORT FROM THE CITY.
THAT WAS VERY EFFICIENT AND DETAILED AND ALL THE ATTORNEYS FOR YOUR SPEAKING.
PERSONALLY, I HAVE SPENT TIME WITH THIS SUBJECT SINCE WE FIRST RECEIVED ANY ITEMS ON IT AND FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON.
I JUST REALLY WANT TO SAY THAT FOR LA VERNE, I FEEL WE WERE CHOSEN AS ONE OF THE FIRST CITIES TO PARTICIPATE WITH AMAZON COMING IN.
TO BE COMPARED TO WOODLAND HILLS AND IRVINE AND TO BE ABLE TO BE CHOSEN THAT WAY, I FIND THAT A GREAT HONOR FOR OUR CITY.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO GROCERY STORES, I THINK EVERYONE HAS TO LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE SAID IN THE PAST. IT'S CHOICE.
WE ARE GIVING CHOICES TO OUR RESIDENTS OF PLACES THEY CAN SHOP.
WE'VE ALL KNOWN THAT KOHL'S HAS BEEN WANTING TO DOWNSIZE.
ONLINE SHOPPING HAS BEEN HUGE WITH THE INDUSTRY, AND NO MATTER WHAT, THEY WANT TO DOWNSIZE.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY A COUPLE OF THOSE NOTES FOR CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CARDER.
COUNCILMEMBER CROSBY, COMMENTS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS, COMMENTS?
>> WELL, I GUESS I'LL JUST JOIN MAYOR PRO TEM CARDER IN SAYING THAT IT'S NICE TO SEE THE PROCESS WHEN IT'S RUN WELL AND VIGOROUSLY ON ALL SIDES.
I THINK WHAT'S BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US IS A COMPLETE RECORD, VERY COMPREHENSIVE RECORD TO CONSIDER THIS DECISION.
FURTHERMORE, I WOULD SAY THAT I'M IN CONCURRENCE WITH MAYOR PRO TEM CARDER IN EXCLAIMING EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE AND PROFESSIONALISM BY MAIA AND HER STAFF. JOB WELL DONE.
COUNCILMEMBER LAU, ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
>> I'M GOING TO CONCUR WITH MY OTHER TWO COUNCILMEMBERS, ALSO.
MY ONLY THING ABOUT AMAZON IS THE ONE THING I THINK, THE BIGGEST THING IS MAKING SURE THAT THEY GIVE A LIVING WAGE.
I THINK THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR ANY BUSINESS IN LA VERNE, TO HAVE A LIVING WAGE FOR EMPLOYEES TO BE ABLE TO DO THE THINGS WE ALL WANT TO DO.
HAVE A HOME AND HAVE A FAMILY, AND AS FAR AS THE AMAZON RETAIL STORE, I THINK IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO HAVE ANOTHER OPTION, ESPECIALLY WITH AMAZON BEING SUCH A LARGE PROVIDER.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S NOT ONE OF US THAT DOES NOT USE AMAZON.
I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY THAT DOESN'T USE AMAZON.
THIS IS GOING TO BE HOPEFULLY A SPOT WHERE WE CAN UTILIZE THAT ALSO.
THANKS STAFF, THANK YOU, MS. MCCURLEY.
I THINK YOU GUYS DID A GREAT JOB.
THE POINT AND COUNTERPOINT, I THINK IT'S OVERWHELMING THAT WE HAVE FOLLOWED ALL THE RULES PROPERLY AND THAT THIS CENTER SHOULD MOVE FORWARD AS STATED.
WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT, JR?
>> OKAY. THEN WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. YES, SIR, MR. KRESS.
>> HI [INAUDIBLE] CLOSE THE PUBLIC?
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE GO BACK TO COUNCIL.
NOW, WE HAVE THREE OPTIONS HERE, IS THAT CORRECT? MS. MCCURLEY, WE HAVE OPTION ONE, WHICH IS REMOVE OPTION TWO TO MODIFY,
[01:20:03]
OUR OPTION THREE, TO ACCEPT PLANNING COMMISSION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT, IS THAT CORRECT, MS. MCCURLEY?>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. WHATEVER CHOICE YOU DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT RESOLUTION TO BRING BACK TO THE NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
>> OKAY. WE NEED A MOTION FOR OPTION ONE, TWO, OR THREE.
COULD WE HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MR. DAVIS. COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS.
>> MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AFFIRM THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO AFFIRM THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CASE NUMBER 31-20 PPR, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF CASE NUMBERS 0520 CUP AND 06-20 CUP, BASED ON THIS STAFF REPORT AND DIRECT STAFF TO BRING FORTH, AT THE NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING A RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL AND APPROVING CASE NUMBER 05- 20 CUP, 06-20 CUP, AND 31-20 PPR.
>> THAT'S A MOUTHFUL. THANK YOU, SIR.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT MOTION?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LAU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND, I?
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NONE? MOTION CARRIES.
[NOISE] I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ALL YOUR EFFORT.
[7.a. Agreement for Temporary Employment (Dan Keesey)]
WHICH IS OTHER MATTERS, AGREEMENTS, OR TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT WITH MR. RUSSI, I'M SORRY.>> YEAH. JR, DID YOU WANT TO HANDLE THIS OR DO YOU WANT ME TO? YOU GOT IT? YOU'VE GOT A JACKET AND YOUR TIE ON, OF COURSE, HE WANTS TO DO IT, LOOK AT THIS. [LAUGHTER]
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, SYSTEM CITY MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK, DAN KEESEY HAS SUBMITTED PAPERWORK TO RETIRE AT THE END OF THIS MONTH AFTER SERVING THE CITY FOR MORE THAN 34 YEARS.
STAFF DESIRES TO PROVIDE AN ARRANGEMENT WHERE YOU CAN CONTINUE TO WORK FOR THE CITY AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS AND NO MORE THAN 960 HOURS.
THIS WILL ALLOW FOR THE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION OF CRITICAL PROJECTS, AS WELL AS PROPER SELECTION AND TRAINING OF HIS REPLACEMENT.
AS PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION, TONIGHT IS CERTIFICATION THAT THE NATURE OF THE APPOINTMENT IS NECESSARY TO FILL A CRITICAL NEED, THEREFORE, REMOVING A 180-DAY WAITING PERIOD.
ALSO OF NOTE, IS THAT THE AGREEMENTS EXPIRATION DATE IS IN JUNE OF 2021.
HOWEVER, IT'S EXPECTED THAT MR. KEESEY WILL REACH THE 960-HOUR THRESHOLD MUCH SOONER THAN THAT, PROBABLY SOME TIME TOWARD THE END OF JANUARY.
THE BENEFIT OF DOING THAT IS IT GIVES US SOME ADDED FLEXIBILITY, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
SINCE WE CAN EXTEND IT OUT THAT FAR, WE FEEL THAT IT'S BEST TO DO THAT EVEN THOUGH HE PROBABLY WON'T BE UNDER THAT 960 MUCH PAST JANUARY.
THE CITY IS CONFIRMED WITH KYLE PERZ THAT THE REASONS FOR RETAINING MR. KEESEY, SATISFY THE REQUIRED STANDARDS SINCE HE WILL CONTINUE TO OVERSEE THE OPERATIONS OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND COORDINATE THE REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT OF THE GOLD LINE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ON A FISCAL PERSPECTIVE, THE ARRANGEMENT PROVIDES A SAVINGS OF APPROXIMATELY $60,000.
WHY THAT'S OCCURRING IS MR. KEESEY WILL HAVE HIS HOURLY RATE REDUCED TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND WILL RECEIVE NO OTHER MONETARY BENEFITS.
SO NO MEDICAL INSURANCE OR OTHER BENEFITS TOWARDS RETIREMENT.
THE REDUCTION IS NECESSARY TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF PEPRA, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PENSION REFORM ACT SINCE THE CITY WILL BE RECRUITING FOR A DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND WILL NOT BE FILLING THE SAME CLASSIFICATION MR. KEESEY IS VACATING.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, HE'S THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
WE'RE GOING TO BE FILLING THAT VACANCY WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION, AUTHORIZING THE STATE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH DAN KEESEY, TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT, AND OF COURSE, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY.
I THINK DAN [NOISE] IS IN THE WAITING-ROOM, IF WE NEED TO BRING HIM IN FOR ANYTHING.
>> THANK YOU, JR. APPRECIATE THAT.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JR? COUNCILMEMBER CROSBY. YES, SIR.
>> IF WE SAY NO, DOES THAT MEAN HE CAN'T RETIRE? [LAUGHTER]
>> [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU, JR. NO, THIS IS A VERY COMMON PRACTICE AND WE LIKE TO JUST KEEP THE EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE AS LONG AS WE CAN.
AT A REDUCED RATE, IT'S A WIN-WIN BOTH FOR THE CITY AND FOR MR. KEESEY AS WELL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CROSBY. COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER, YOU GOT A COMMENT OR A QUESTION OR NO?
[01:25:01]
>> COUNCIL MEMBER LAU. SORRY. GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I WAS JUST GOING TO REITERATE WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER CROSBY INDICATED.
I THINK THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF SUCCESSION PLANNING AND ENSURING THAT WE HAVE CONTINUITY AND PERPETUITY IN OUR SERVICES AND THAT WE DON'T MISS A BEAT.
I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE SAVINGS THAT THE CITY WILL GARNER FROM THIS ACTION.
SO THANK YOU STAFF FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND THANK YOU, MR. KEESEY, FOR YOUR SERVICE AND YOUR CONTINUED SERVICE, HOPEFULLY, WITH THE PASSAGE OF THIS ITEM.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS?
>> WELL, IT LOOK LIKE OUR CITY MANAGER HAS HIS PEN UP, SO I'LL DEFER TO HIM FIRST, BUT THEN I WOULD LIKE TO SAY [OVERLAPPING]
>> GO RIGHT AHEAD. I'LL WAIT UNTIL YOU'RE DONE.
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, DAN HAD THOUGHT ABOUT RETIRING A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND OUT OF ASK, HE STUCK AROUND FOR ME FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS, AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO RETAIN HIM FOR AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS IS CERTAINLY INVALUABLE TO THIS ORGANIZATION AND I APPRECIATE HIS CONSIDERATION AND WILLINGNESS TO STICK AROUND TO SUPPORT US AS WE GO THROUGH SOME VERY DIFFERENT TIMES, AND CERTAINLY, HIS GUIDANCE WILL BE USED THROUGH THAT ENTIRE TIME.
I THANK COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION AND THE SUPPORT AS WELL, AND DAN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. RUSSI. MR. DAVIS.
>> I CONCUR WITH MY COUNCIL MATES THAT THIS IS A REGULARLY USED PROCESS AS SENIOR LEADERS DETERMINE WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO VACATE THEIR POSITION AND RETIRE.
I THINK IT HELPS US TO HAVE A DEFINED PERIOD OF TIME TO KNOW HOW MUCH TIME WE HAVE TO ADJUST TO END.
I THINK WE WILL MISS A BEAT OR TWO, BUT HOPEFULLY, WE WON'T LOSE THE BAND AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO KEEP ON KEEPING ON.
BUT, 34 YEARS OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND WISDOM, MR. KEESEY, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.
>> I'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER, ANY COMMENTS?
DAN'S KNOWLEDGE IN THIS CITY HAS BEEN SO TREMENDOUS AND AS LONG AS WE CAN KEEP HIM HERE AND TRAIN OTHERS UNDERNEATH HIM, AND ALL OF US CAN LEARN FROM HIM.
TIM, AS YOU KNOW, YOU AND I ARE WORKING WITH THE YOUTH SPORTS CREW AND DAN IS WORKING ON THIS BIG PROJECT WITH US TO COORDINATE WITH LITTLE LEAGUE, SO WE NEED HIS EXPERTISE.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH HIM.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER.
DAN HAS BEEN AN EXCEPTIONAL ASSET TO THIS CITY.
I KNOW THAT HE'S HELPED MR. RUSSI, ALONG WITH BEING ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER PLUS PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, HAS BEEN JUST AMAZING AS FAR AS WHAT WE'VE [INAUDIBLE] AND IT'S GOING TO BE SOME VERY BIG SHOES TO FILL.
IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH ONE BECAUSE HIS KNOWLEDGE IS SO VAST WITH THE CITY, WITH EVERYTHING HE DOES.
HIS FINGERS TOUCH EVERYTHING WITH EVERY DEPARTMENT ALMOST.
I DO APPRECIATE ALSO FOR THE FIVE, ALMOST GOING ON SIX YEARS, OF BEING ON COUNCIL AND MAYOR NOW.
HIS MENTORING HAS BEEN JUST FANTASTIC.
ANY QUESTIONS, HE'S ALWAYS BEEN EXTREMELY OPEN ANYTIME AND HIS DOOR IS ALWAYS OPEN.
WHETHER YOU WANT TO HEAR WHAT HE HAS TO SAY OR NOT, IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT, AND EVEN CLASH AT TIMES BECAUSE IT'S GOOD TO HAVE A GOOD HOT DIALOGUE SOMETIMES.
AT THE END OF THE CONVERSATION THOUGH, YOU'VE FOUND A RESOLUTION THAT HELPS OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR EMPLOYEES, AND THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
SO HE'S DONE AN UNBELIEVABLE JOB.
WHEN HE'S GONE, IF WE EVER LET HIM GO, IF WE DON'T TIE HIM DOWN TO HIS DESK WITH CONCRETE IN HIS SHOES, IT'S GOING TO BE A SAD DAY.
THOSE ARE SOME BIG SHOES TO FILL, SO THANK YOU, MR. KEESEY.
I WANT TO OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS, MR. RUSSI, MR. JR?
>> WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANYMORE.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ON THE ITEM SINCE.
>> THEN I WOULD GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, BRING IT BACK THE COUNCIL.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER?
>> NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION.
>> GO RIGHT AHEAD. MOTION IS ALWAYS ACCEPTED.
>> OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO EXTEND DAN KEESEY'S CONTRACT AND MOVE ALONG WITH THIS PROGRAM.
>> CAN WE MAKE ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO MAYBE KNOCK IT DOWN 10 OR 15 GRAND.
I'M JUST GOING TO THROW IT OUT THERE. [LAUGHTER]
>> WITH ALL THE KUDOS THAT WE JUST SAID, HE'S GOING TO WANT IT TO GO UP.
>> NO, I GOT TO THROW THAT IN BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T LIKE IT IF I DIDN'T.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT MOTION FREED OF MY AMENDMENT? MR. CROSBY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND, AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAYING NONE.
THAT MOTION IS CARRIED. THANK YOU, MR. KEESEY.
>> THAT WAS CARRIED WITHOUT YOUR AMENDMENT, RIGHT MAYOR?
>> THAT IS WITH NO AMENDMENT, NO.
>> JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S CLEAR ON THAT.
>> NO AMENDMENT. WE MOVE TO ITEM B,
[7.b. Request for Formal Recognition by Committee on Cultural Awareness and Social Inclusion]
REQUEST FOR FORMAL RECOGNITION BY COMMITTEE ON CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION. MR. RUSSI.[01:30:02]
>> MR. MAYOR, I'LL TAKE THIS JUST TO GIVE IT A BRIEF INTRO AND THEN OPEN IT UP TO ANY OF THE COUNCIL THAT WANT TO SPEAK.
THIS WAS A REQUEST THAT CAME UP FROM SEVERAL OF YOU AT THE LAST MEETING TO HAVE SOMETHING BROUGHT FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION.
THERE HAS BEEN A COMMITTEE THAT, OR GROUP, I WOULD SAY, THAT HAS BEEN MEETING INFORMALLY FOR ROUGHLY A YEAR.
INVOLVED SOME STAFF MEMBERS JUST IN SUPPORT OF THE DISCUSSION, AS WELL AS THE FORMER MAYOR, MAYOR DAVIS, JUST TO BEGIN A DISCUSSION ON HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR COMMUNITY.
THAT WAS ANTICIPATED AT SOME POINT TO BEING BROUGHT BACK FOR FORMAL RECOGNITION AND SUPPORT TO SOME EXTENT, WHATEVER THEY LOOK LIKE BY THE CITY.
IN THE WAKE OF THE RECENT EVENTS AND THEN THE DEMONSTRATIONS AND PROTESTS THAT SEEMED TO HAPPEN OVER THE LAST MONTH OR SO, TWO MONTHS NATIONALLY, CALLING MORE FOR ACTION IN REGARDS TO SOME TYPE OF INCLUSION AND CULTURAL AWARENESS, THE COMMITTEE HAS APPROACHED SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL AS IN STAFF FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THAT ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECOGNITION FORWARD NOW.
THIS RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS JUST TO GAIN COUNCIL'S CONCURRENCE WITH THAT REQUEST, AND THEN OVER THE NEXT MONTH, DIRECTING STAFF TO IDENTIFY WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS TO SUPPORT THE GROUP, AS WELL AS THEN COUNCIL TO IDENTIFY REPRESENTATIVES THAT WOULD BE ON IT.
I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THOUGH, IS THIS ISN'T EXPECTED TO BE A CITY-LED COMMITTEE, A CITY ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE.
THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION THAT THE CITY WILL PARTICIPATE IN.
IF COUNCIL CONCURS WITH THIS, I WILL WORK WITH THEIR REPRESENTATIVES AND AT THIS POINT, IT'S GIL IVY AND JULIE WHEELER, TO PUT TOGETHER THEIR BYLAWS THAT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK FOR THE COUNCIL TO AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE AND ADOPT AS PART OF THAT RECOGNITION.
I CAN STOP THERE AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY BIT OF QUESTIONS, BUT ESSENTIALLY, THIS RESOLUTION ALLOWS US TO ADVANCE TO THAT NEXT STEP SHOULD THE COUNCIL SO DESIRE.
>> I THINK I'M GOING TO OPEN UP A PUBLIC COMMENT QUICKLY.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, JR?
>> WE DO, MR. MAYOR. WE HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE THAT ARE CALLING IN.
JUST ONE THING THAT I WOULD ASK, AND I'VE ASKED THIS IN PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE DOING BASICALLY STRICTLY PHONE CALLS.
JUST A REMINDER FOR FOLKS THAT THERE IS A THREE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE'S A CLOCK, WE SEE IT.
>> THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD ASK IS THERE IS GOING TO BE A DELAY, BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE CALLING IN.
I DO HAVE THE FIRST TWO CALLERS QUEUED UP, READY TO GO, BUT THEN AFTER THAT I WILL HAVE TO MUTE AND I WILL HAVE TO CALL THOSE OTHER FOLKS TO GET THEM ONLINE.
SO THERE WILL BE PROBABLY ABOUT A 30-SECOND DELAY IN BETWEEN CALLS, UNFORTUNATELY.
>> OKAY. THAT'S FINE. ARE WE READY TO GO?
>> YEAH. WITH THAT, I WILL INTRODUCE MS. JULIE WHEELER. JULIE, CAN YOU HEAR US?
>> GOOD EVENING, JULIE. HOW ARE YOU?
>> I'M WELL. THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL.
I JUST HAVE A LITTLE THING TO SAY ABOUT THIS COMMITTEE.
I'M PROUD TO BE A SECOND-GENERATION LA VERNITE.
MY PARENTS MET AT LA VERNE COLLEGE AND BUILT A HOME IN 1960, ON 2ND STREET, ALONG WITH MANY FRIENDS WHO HAD RECENTLY GRADUATED.
AS A CHILD AND HEARING ABOUT DR. KING AND CIVIL RIGHTS, I THOUGHT AS A CHILD IS ASKED TO DO, THAT MLK JUNIOR HAD RECTIFIED THE WRONGS IN OUR SOCIETY AND ALL WAS WELL.
THEN I BEGAN DATING AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN COLLEGE MATE [BACKGROUND] AND THAT ILLUSION OF NO RACISM WAS FOREVER WIPED FROM MY MIND.
I HAD FIRSTHAND EXPERIENCE OF THE SUSPICION AND INJUSTICE THAT IS FOISTED ON OUR BLACK BROTHERS AND SISTERS, EVEN IN THIS TOWN.
LIKE MY PARENTS, MY NEW HUSBAND AND I SETTLED IN 1987, IN LA VERNE AND HAD TWO CHILDREN.
MY HUSBAND DIED UNEXPECTEDLY, LEAVING ME TO RAISE TWO AFRICAN- AMERICAN CHILDREN IN THIS CITY.
I DID LIKE MOST MOTHERS OF BLACK CHILDREN DO, TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN ABOUT HOW TO INTERACT WITH THE POLICE.
DON'T KNOW VIOLENCE WOULD BE METED OUT ON THEIR BODIES.
I HAD TO TEACH THEM THAT PEOPLE WHO FLEW A CONFEDERATE FLAG DIDN'T LIKE THEM.
I NEVER COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION, "BUT MAMA, HOW DO THEY NOT LIKE US? THEY'VE NEVER MET US."
[01:35:03]
AS MY MALE CHILDREN, JUST A MOMENT, GREW OLDER THEY BECAME YOUNG AFRICAN-AMERICAN MEN WHO GOT STOPPED SKATEBOARDING TO WORK, WALKING TO THE STORE, DRIVING TO SOCCER PRACTICE FOR NO CAUSE.OFFICERS TELLING THEM TO EMPTY THEIR POCKETS, ASKING ABOUT DRUGS.
THAT WAS INTO THE NEW MILLENNIUM.
I, BECAUSE OF MY POSITION AT THE UNIVERSITY, HAVE HAD THE EAR OF CITY OFFICIALS AND BEGAN RECOUNTING THESE INCIDENCES.
THE POLICE CHIEF, AFTER HAVING THE MAYOR ALERT HIM TO MY COMPLAINT, ASSURED ME THAT THERE IS NO RACIAL PROFILING IN LA VERNE.
THIS STATEMENT GOES DIRECTLY CONTRARY TO THE EXPERIENCE THAT MY HUSBAND, MY BOYS AND MANY UNIVERSITY STUDENTS OF COLOR EXPERIENCE IN LA VERNE.
I AM PROUD TO BE THE VICE CHAIRPERSON OF THE CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION COMMITTEE IN LA VERNE.
WE, LIKE ALL COMMUNITIES HAVE WORK TO DO IN CREATING A CITY OF HOSPITALITY AND HARMONY FOR ALL.
THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES OF CLAREMONT AND POMONA ARE WATCHING THE CITY OF LA VERNE LEAD THE WAY IN FORETHINKING ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE A CITY OF COMPASSION.
I AM PROUD TO BE A PART OF THIS EXEMPLARY ACTION OF THIS CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS MS. WHEELER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JOE ARE YOU READY?
>> YEAH. I'M GOING TO GET THE NEXT CALLER ON THE LINE, PLEASE HOLD.
>> ALL RIGHT, MR. MAYOR, I HAVE MR. GIL IVY ON THE PHONE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
I WANT TO THANK THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE AND THANK JULIE FOR HER CALL-IN, WHICH SET THE TEMPO FOR WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.
WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IS THE FACT THAT THE TIME HAS FINALLY ARRIVED IN THIS COUNTRY AND IN THE CITY TO DEAL WITH ISSUES INVOLVING PEOPLE WITH COLOR AND OTHERS.
>> OH, WE HAVE A FEEDBACK. SORRY MR. IVY
>> [BACKGROUND] MR. IVY, YOU NEED TO TURN OFF YOUR
>>YEAH, I'M DOING IT RIGHT NOW.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
ONE OF THE THINGS I JUST WANT TO SAY IS I WANT TO THANK JULIE FOR HER COMMENTS THAT, CAME FORWARD, AND THE FACT THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS VERY MUCH NEEDED IN THE CITY, AND AT THIS TIME.
WITH THE ISSUES THAT WENT ON IN MINNEAPOLIS AND THE THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED AROUND THE COUNTRY, AND WITH THE FACT THAT IT IS TIME FOR US TO HAVE A DIALOGUE WITH AMERICA, FOR ALL US TO LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND TAKE STOCK IN THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL AMERICANS.
WE ALL COME TOGETHER, WE ALL MAKE THIS COUNTRY WORK.
THE CULTURE COMMITTEE AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IS THE VEHICLE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER, THAT WILL BE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME WITH THEIR ISSUES, FOR UNDERSTANDING AND LEARNING, AND TO BEGIN A DIALOGUE BACK AND FORTH.
AS THE MAYOR MENTIONED, SOMETIMES DIALOGUES GET HEATED AND SOMETIMES THERE'S A LOT OF THRASHING GOING ROUND, BUT AT THE END, WE ALL COME TOGETHER AND WE FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION TO MAKE THE CITY EVEN GREATER AND MORE POWERFUL THAN IT IS NOW.
JOHN LEWIS WHO JUST PASSED AWAY, IS A GREAT MENTOR, A GREAT LEADER.
HE OFTEN SAID THAT WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING, YOU SAY SOMETHING, WHEN SOMETHING IS WRONG, YOU POINT IT OUT AND YOU TAKE CARE OF IT.
I THINK THAT LA VERNE HAS THE CAPACITY WITH OUR COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR AND THE STAFF, THE POLICE, AND ALL OF OUR CITIZENS ARE COMING TOGETHER AND PUTTING FORWARD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE UP AND TO GENERATE ENERGY AND LIVELIHOOD TO ENHANCE THIS CITY AND TO MAKE IT BETTER.
WE ARE ASKING THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OUR EFFORTS, AND TO BE A PART OF THIS EFFORT AS WE GO FORWARD.
WE KNOW THAT TOGETHER WE WILL MAKE
[01:40:03]
THIS A BIG SUCCESS AND A MODEL FOR THE REST OF THE COUNTRY. THANK YOU.>> THANK YOU, MR. IVY. [NOISE]
>> THIS IS WHERE YOU NEED THE MUSIC FOR THE DELAY.
>> YOU DO HAVE YOUR PHONE MR. MAYOR.
>> I'M BEING MAYORAL RIGHT NOW [LAUGHTER] BUT IF IT LASTS LONGER, YOU CAN BET IT'S GOING TO GO ON.
>> MR. MAYOR, I HAVE CATHY [INAUDIBLE] ON.
>> GOOD EVENING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MY QUESTION TO THE CITY MANAGER BOB RUSSI.
WHY THIS COMMITTEE NEEDS TO BE SANCTIONED BY OUR CITY COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? I AM NOT FOR OR AGAINST THE GROUP.
HOWEVER, THEY HAVE BEEN EXISTING THROUGH LVU FOR OVER A YEAR WITH COUNCILMAN MAIR DAVIS AND NOW COUNCILWOMAN WENDY LAU IN ATTENDANCE AT THOSE MEETINGS.
WHY HAVEN'T WE HEARD FROM THIS GROUP UNTIL NOW, WHY HAVEN'T THEY BEEN SPEAKING UP UNDER THE EVENTS PORTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, INVITING US ALL TO COME AND HEAR THEIR THOUGHTS? WHAT WILL BE GAINED FOR THEM TO BE FORMALIZED WITH THE CITY? IT SOUNDS LIKE A GROUP THAT COULD FUNCTION AS A PART OF THE COLLEGE AND SHARE AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS LIKE THE OTHER GROUPS DO.
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.
>> MR. MAYOR, I HAVE BRITTANY ALLISON.
I WANT TO THANK THE FIRST FEW CALLERS AND YOU ALL FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE.
I KNOW AND BELIEVE OUR COMMUNITY'S ECONOMY, PUBLIC SAFETY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL HEALTH, AND FUTURE ARE ALL BETTER OFF WHEN WE'RE GENUINELY MINDFUL OF DIVERSITY AND INCLUSIVITY.
WHEN WE RECOGNIZE WAYS TO IMPROVE AS A COMMUNITY AND THEN ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, AND PUT OUR CITY NAME BEHIND WHAT WE'VE DONE.
AS A WHITE PERSON, I'VE NEVER BEEN MADE TO FEEL UNWELCOME IN LA VERNE, BUT I HAVE SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES AND HEARD STORIES FROM MANY PEOPLE THAT I LOVE DEARLY, INCLUDING MY HUSBAND, THAT SHOWS MY BLACK AND BROWN SISTERS AND BROTHERS DON'T SHARE THE SAME EXPERIENCE.
THESE STORIES DON'T REFLECT WHAT I BELIEVE LA VERNE TO BE.
COMMUNITY MEMBERS MAY DEBATE WHETHER LA VERNE IS OR IS NOT A RACIST CITY, WHETHER PEOPLE ARE OR ARE NOT RACIST, WHETHER THIS IS OR IS NOT WORTH CITY TIME.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT THIS SHOULD BE ABOUT.
THIS SHOULD BE ABOUT US COMING TOGETHER, ACTUALLY LISTENING TO AND BELIEVING EACH OTHER'S EXPERIENCES.
IT'S ABOUT WHAT WE AS A COMMUNITY STAND FOR, AND WHAT WE'RE SHOWING OUR KIDS WE STAND FOR, AND THE WORLD WE HOPE TO LEAVE BEHIND.
I'M A MOTHER OF TWO BIRACIAL CHILDREN, AND I'VE ALREADY SEEN MY CHILD BE EXCLUDED FROM PLAY AT PRESCHOOL AND AT PLAYGROUND BECAUSE OF THE WAY SHE LOOKS.
YET FOUR AND FIVE YEAR OLDS IN LA VERNE ARE ALREADY TELLING KIDS THAT THEY CAN'T PLAY WITH THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO HAIR OR BECAUSE THEIR SKIN IS TOO DARK, AND MY HOPE IS THAT MY CHILDREN WILL GROW UP IN A LA VERNE WHERE THEY WON'T EXPERIENCE THE HARDSHIPS THAT TOO MANY PEOPLE BEFORE THEM HAVE HAD TO EXPERIENCE.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION, AND I URGE THE COUNCIL TO UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORT IT AS WELL. THANK YOU.
>> DO YOU HAVE HER NAME? I DID NOT GET.
>> I DIDN'T GET TO KNOW. I JUST ASKED HIM THE SAME QUESTION, JR. WHAT WAS THE INDIVIDUAL'S NAME, WHAT WAS HER NAME?
[01:45:07]
>> MR. MAYOR, I ALSO HAVE MR. ALLISON ON THE LINE.
>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MAYOR.
I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE REVOLUTION.
FOR A LONG TIME, I'VE HAD MIXED FEELINGS ABOUT THIS CITY.
IN THIS CITY, I HOLD SOME OF MY FONDEST MEMORIES.
I HAVE LIVED IN LA VERNE FOR 17 YEARS, SINCE I WAS 18 YEARS OLD.
I HAVE RECEIVED DEGREES HERE, OPENED A LAW PRACTICE HERE, BEGAN LAW PRACTICE HERE, EACH YEAR, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, MET MY WIFE AND MY BEAUTIFUL FAMILY IN THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY.
HOWEVER, I'VE ALSO EXPERIENCED SOME OF THE WORST RACISM I'VE EVER EXPERIENCED IN MY LIFE IN THIS CITY.
I'VE BEEN CALLED RACIST NAMES SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS CITY.
I'VE HAD MY DAUGHTER CALLED COLORED TO HER FACE.
I'VE BEEN CALLED A NEGRO WHILE WAITING TO HAVE MY SERIAL FIXED ON VIDEO.
I'VE BEEN CALLED A NIGGER SEVERAL TIMES, ONCE IN FRONT OF MY MOTHER.
I HAVE SEVERAL OTHER EXAMPLES OF RACISM I'VE EXPERIENCED IN THIS VERY CITY.
FOR ALL THAT I OWE THIS CITY, I FEEL THIS CITY OWES IT TO ME AND MANY OTHERS ME LIKE TO GET THIS RIGHT.
GETTING THIS RIGHT DOES NOT MEAN TAKING A SIDE.
IT DOES NOT MEAN CONTINUING TO THROW AROUND LABEL.
IT DOES NOT MEAN BLACK VERSUS WHITE, BLACK VERSUS BLUE.
IT MEANS CHOOSING THE SIDE OF COMMUNITY.
THE SIDE THAT SAYS LA VERNE IS THE BEST CITY TO BE BORN IN, BECAUSE WE PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY.
THE SIDE THAT SAYS LA VERNE IS THE BEST CITY TO LIVE IN AND RETIRE IN, BECAUSE THE LEADERSHIP WILL CONTINUE TO PROTECT AND MAINTAIN A COMFORTABLE QUALITY OF LIFE, BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT AND A STRONG ECONOMY.
THE SIDE THAT SAYS ALL ARE WELCOME IN THIS CITY, AND FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT FEEL THEY'RE WELCOME, WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU A STAGE TO BE HEARD.
THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSIVITY GIVES THEM THAT STAGE.
THE COMMITTEE WORKS TO SEND THE MESSAGE THAT ALL ARE SAFE AND WELCOME.
GETTING THIS RIGHT MEANS CELEBRATING CULTURES AND DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN SEEKING TO ERASE THEM.
THE COMMITTEE IS THE CITY'S VENUE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED AND TO GET THIS RIGHT.
WITH THE EXPANSION OF THE METROLINK, WE STAND TO GAIN THE ATTRACTION OF DIVERSE DINERS FOR OUR OWN TOWN RESTAURANTS TO INCREASE ECONOMIC VITALITY.
IT MEANS ATTRACTING PROFESSIONAL MINORITY HOMEOWNERS WHO WILL NOW HAVE EASIER ACCESS TO DOWNTOWN, AND A LESS BUSY CITY TO RAISE A FAMILY IN.
IT MEANS HAVING A COMMUNITY-WIDE PROGRAM THAT PUT WHAT MAKES AMERICA GREAT ON FULL DISPLAY.
THIS ALSO MEANS MORE CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN AND AMONG NEIGHBORS FOR SAFER, HEALTHIER AND CLEANER NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE CAN CELEBRATE AND LOVE EACH OTHER, BUT THAT WILL REQUIRE US TO TAKE A BOLD STEP IN ALLOWING THE TOUGH CONVERSATIONS TO OCCUR.
I URGE YOUR LEADERSHIP. THANK YOU.
>> MR. MAYOR, I HAVE MICHELLE ON THE LINE.
>> I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THAT PERSONS NAME?
>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING MISS PASSOS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PICKING MY CALL.
I AM A RESIDENT OF LA VERNE ALONG WITH MY HUSBAND, AND TOGETHER WE'VE CHOSEN TO RAISE OUR THREE LITTLE ONES IN THIS TOWN.
I OWN A YOGA AND WELLNESS STUDIO IN LA VERNE, AND I'LL BE PICKING FOR THE [INAUDIBLE] DEPARTMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE THIS FALL.
I'M CALLING TONIGHT IN SUPPORT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION.
AS A BROWN GIRL GROWING UP IN [INAUDIBLE] , MY FAMILY AND I EXPERIENCED RACISM NOT ONLY FROM PEERS AND NEIGHBORS, BUT ALSO FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS STILL HAPPENS AND LA VERNE IS NO EXCEPTION.
WHEN YOU READ COMMENTS AND CONVERSATIONS ON FACEBOOK AND THE NEXTDOOR APP, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT OUR COMMUNITY HAS A LONG WAY TO GO.
[01:50:01]
IF YOU OR ANYONE IS ASKING IF THERE'S RACISM IN LA VERNE, THEY ARE ASKING THE WRONG QUESTION.IF YOU OR ANYONE IS SAYING THEY ARE NOT RACIST, THEN THAT IS NOT ENOUGH.
IBRAM X. KENDI, THE AUTHOR OF HOW TO BE AN ANTI-RACIST, SAYS IN HIS BOOK, THAT THERE'S NO NEUTRALITY IN THIS RACISM STRUGGLE.
ONE EITHER ALLOWS THE RACIAL INEQUITIES TO PRESERVE AS A RACIST OR CONFRONT RACIAL INEQUITIES AS AN ANTI-RACIST.
THERE IS NO IN-BETWEEN SAFE SPACE OF NOT RACIST.
THE CLAIM OF NOT RACIST NEUTRALITY IS A KNACK FOR RACISM.
SO COUNCIL MEMBERS, CAN YOU CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT YOU ARE AN ANTI-RACIST, AND DOING YOUR BEST IN CONTROLLING RACIAL INEQUITIES HERE IN LA VERNE? I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT YOU'VE AGREED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS CITY'S MISSION STATEMENT, WHICH INCLUDES RESPONSIVENESS TO THE EVER EVOLVING NEEDS OF A DIVERSE COMMUNITY AND FOUND LEADERSHIP OF TRUSTWORTHINESS, INTEGRITY AND HONESTY REPRESENTATION.
AS OUR INTERACTIVE LEADERS, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO RESPOND WITH OUR REQUEST FOR A VERY OBVIOUS NEED OF A CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION COMMITTEE IN THE CITY OF LA VERNE.
PLEASE SHOW LA VERNE BROWN AND BLACK FAMILY, SHOW OUR BROWN AND BLACK CHILDREN THAT YOU HEAR US THAT AND THAT YOU SEE US. THANK YOU.
>> MR. MAYOR I HAVE MISTY RICHARDSON ON THE PHONE.
>> I'M SORRY I DIDN'T GET THE LAST NAME JR.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS RICHARDSON.
>> HI. THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL.
ME AND MY CHILDREN HAVE BEEN RESIDENTS OF LA VERNE GOING ON TWO YEARS AND WE FEEL WELCOMED BY ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY.
ONE OF OUR INITIAL EXPERIENCES IN THE CITY OF LA VERNE WAS BEING DENIED FOR AN APARTMENT ON THE BASIS THAT MY CREDIT REPORT INDICATED THAT I HAD AN EVICTION.
UPON RECEIVING A COPY OF MY CREDIT REPORT IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THIS INFORMATION WAS BLATANTLY WRONG.
I HAVE NEVER BEEN EVICTED IN THE PAST, NOR HAS THERE EVER BEEN SUCH INDICATIONS OF AN EVICTION REPORT TO ANY CREDIT BUREAU.
I FEEL THIS DECISION THAT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OF [INAUDIBLE] APARTMENTS INFORMED ME TWO WEEKS LATER THAT SHE SIMPLY MISREAD MY CREDIT FINDING.
MY APPEAL WAS APPROVED AND I WAS GRANTED AN APARTMENT HOWEVER [INAUDIBLE] EXPLANATIONS DID NOT FEEL RIGHT WITH ME.
HOW DOES ONE WHO HANDLES SUCH APPLICATIONS AND SCREENING REPORT WHO AT THIS POINT HELD HER JOB TITLE FOR NEARLY THREE YEARS, HOW DID SHE SIMPLY MISREAD MY CREDIT FINDINGS AND DENY MY FAMILY HOUSING.
HOW MANY TIMES DID SHE MAKE THIS MISTAKE? HAS IT COST ANOTHER PERSON OF COLOR A HOUSING OPPORTUNITY? OVER THE LAST TEN MONTHS DUE TO [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY MANAGEMENT MISTAKES WERE DELIBERATE AND SHE INTENDED TO KEEP A BLACK WOMAN AND HER TWO LITTLE BLACK DAUGHTERS OUT OF THE CITY OF LA VERNE.
I HAVE CALLED LA VERNE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR ASSISTANCE IN REGARD TO THE ISSUE [INAUDIBLE] THE HARASSMENT.
I FEEL THE [INAUDIBLE] MY REQUEST HAD BEEN TAKEN SERIOUS BY OFFICERS.
IN ONE OF MY CALLS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT ON MAY, 2020, OFFICERS RESPONDED TO MY REQUEST FOR AN OFFICER BY CALLING MY CELL PHONE AND TELLING ME THAT HE HAD BEEN DISPATCHED FOR SEVERAL OF MY CALLS FOR SERVICE IN THE PAST.
OFFICERS [INAUDIBLE] FURTHER WENT ON TO STATE THAT IS THE BABY MAMA DRAMA AND THAT HE WOULDN'T TAKE A REPORT.
PLEASE NOTE THAT ME AND THE PARTICIPANT I WAS RECORDING DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN TOGETHER.
[INAUDIBLE] RESPONDED LIKE THAT AND MADE THOSE COMMENTS LIKE THAT IF I WAS NOT BLACK.
ALTHOUGH LA VERNE PD WAS NOT ABLE TO ASSIST ME, OR OFFER ME ANY PROTECTION, JUST RECENTLY A JUDGE GRANTED ME A RESTRAINING ORDERED TO PROTECT ME FROM THE SAME PERSON I ATTEMPTED TO REPORT TO LA VERNE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
AS A RESIDENT, I TRIED TO GO TO RESTAURANTS, STORES OR EVENTS WITHIN THE CITY BUT I OFTEN DO NOT FEEL WELCOME.
I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A WHITE CITY AND THEY'RE ONLY PARTIAL ROOM FOR BLACK PEOPLE.
THIS IS EVEN MORE AFRICAN AMERICAN WHO DON'T HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY AND FAMILY STATUS PRIMARY LIKE RESIDENTS OF LA VERNE.
LA VERNE IS A GREAT CITY AND IT'S VERY BEAUTIFUL BUT HATE LIVES HERE, DISCRIMINATION LIVES HERE, IGNORED REPORTS LIVE HERE, LONG STANDING SYSTEMS OF DISCRIMINATION, SYSTEMATIC RACISM, AND OPPRESSION REAR THEIR UGLY FACES THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
[01:55:05]
A POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EVEN A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION NAMED DAVID AND MARGARET YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES.I HAVE BEEN DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, AND I HAVE WATCHED OTHERS WITH THE SAME SKIN COLOR AS ME BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST AND RECEIVE LESS THAN AND EVEN BE REFUSED SERVICES.
I'VE SEEN AND HEARD THE STORIES OF INDIVIDUALS IN THIS CITY HAVING THEIR RIGHTS VIOLATED AND NOT HAVING ACCESS TO PROPER RESOURCES THAT COULD HELP THEM REPORT THESE INCIDENTS AND RECEIVE ADVOCACY AND ALSO PUT THEM WITH THE PROPER TOOLS THAT HANDLE DIVERSITY WE FACE.
JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SEE IT OR DON'T KNOW ANYONE'S PERSONALLY WHO HAS EXPERIENCED IT DOESN'T MEAN ITS NOT HERE.
I'M A BLACK WOMAN WHO HAD BEEN LIVING IN THIS CITY FOR NEARLY TWO YEARS. ITS HERE.
RACISM EXIST IN LA VERNE AND IT MUST BE CONFRONTED SO IT CAN EFFECTIVELY REGRESS AND CHANGE.
THE COMMITTEE OF CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION, THANK YOU.
>> THOSE ARE ALL THE CALLS THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS ITEM, SIR.
>> NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE SO WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD ASK IS THERE WAS A QUESTION [OVERLAPPING].
>> ASKED BY KATHY NEWLAND [OVERLAPPING].
I DON'T KNOW IF TO ADDRESS THAT [OVERLAPPING] THAT I THINK I SHOULD CLARIFY AND THAT IS COUNCIL MEMBER REMEMBER LAU IS NOT A MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE.
TECHNICALLY, THERE ISN'T A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT IS A MEMBER.
I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS PARTICIPATED IN THE INITIAL OF HIS OWN VOLITION AS PRIOR TO THIS IN SUPPORT IN THE INFORMAL GROUP, BUT THERE ISN'T ANY FORMAL REPRESENTATION AT THIS POINT BY ANY COUNCIL MEMBER.
>> I WAS ALSO ON ONE OF THE ZOOM MEETINGS WHICH JULIE WHEELER AND MR. IVY.
I WAS INTRODUCED ABOUT A MONTH AND A HALF OR SO AGO SO JUST TO SAY THAT WAS PART OF IT ALSO.
>> OKAY. THE QUESTION OF WHY IS THE COMMITTEE LOOKING? WHY DOES IT NEED FORMAL RECOGNITION? IT WAS A REQUEST THAT WAS MADE AND WAS MADE AN ADVANCED BY SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BRING IT FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THEY FELT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME TO HAVE THAT CONSIDERATION AND RECOGNITION TO ADVANCE THE DISCUSSIONS AND HAVING THE COUNCIL RECOGNIZE IT, AS WELL AS PARTICIPATING, AS WELL CITY STAFF.
THAT'S THE REASON AND THAT'S WHY IT'S BEEN BROUGHT FORTH IS BECAUSE OF COUNCIL REQUEST.
>> THANK YOU. MR. RUSSI. WE'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL.
I CAN ONLY SEE THREE OF US. COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER.
>> COULD YOU TAKE [NOISE] THE TIMER OFF FOR THE MOMENT?
>> GOING. CAN WE SEE WENDY? CAN'T SEE HER RIGHT NOW.
>> I SEE ZEROS AND BLUE SCREEN [LAUGHTER]
>> YOU CAN ACTUALLY EXPAND [OVERLAPPING]
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. WE ACTUALLY HAVE ONE OTHER CALLER WITH THE ITEM IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT [INAUDIBLE] COUNCIL COMMENTS.
>> OKAY. THIS IS GOING TO BE KATE HAMILTON AND I'LL INTRODUCE HER.
MISS HAMILTON, ARE YOU STILL THERE?
>> OKAY. GREAT. YOU'RE NOW LIVE AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES WITH THE COUNCIL.
>> GOOD EVENING, MISS HAMILTON.
>> OKAY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR HEPBURN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I WAS A RESIDENT OF LA VERNE FOR 25 YEARS.
MY DAD AND BROTHER STILL LIVE THERE AND ALTHOUGH I LIVE IN GLENDORA NOW, I STILL FREQUENT MANY BUSINESSES IN LA VERNE.
I AM IN FAVOR OF THE FORMAL RECOGNITION OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION.
DURING THESE PAST FEW MONTHS, I HAVE BECOME AWARE OF MANY HIDDEN BIASES I DIDN'T KNOW I HAVE.
AS I TALK WITH OTHERS AROUND ME IT IS APPARENT THAT MANY OTHERS ARE FEELING THE SAME WAY.
I BELIEVE THE CREATION OF THIS COMMITTEE WILL GO A LONG WAY TO IMPROVE UNDERSTANDING OF VARIOUS CULTURES AND WORK TO HEAL OUR COMMUNITIES BY GIVING US A PLACE TO DIALOGUE AND SHARE.
I AM IMPRESSED THAT THE CITY OF LA VERNE IS TAKING THIS STEP.
YOU TRULY ARE LIVING UP TO YOUR PLEDGE TO BE A WELCOMING CITY FOR ALL INDIVIDUALS.
I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENT. THAT'S IT.
[02:00:04]
OKAY. WE'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL COMMENTS.I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER, YOU WERE GOING TO START?
>> YEAH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND THEY GET THE TIMER DOWN. THERE YOU GO.
>> OKAY. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
I WORKED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE AND THIS FIRST CAME UP, THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, IT WAS BROUGHT TO US AS EMPLOYEES.
WE COULD SEE THAT THERE WERE SOME TOPICS THAT WERE NEVER ADDRESSED AND SO IT WAS A GROWING EXPERIENCE FOR THE UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES.
THEN DURING THE 2017 ELECTION, WE HAD A PUBLIC FORUM AND WE HAD MANY, IT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE EVER DID THIS, BUT WE OPENED IT UP TO STUDENTS AND FACULTY TO ASK THE CANDIDATES QUESTIONS.
IT WAS SUCH AN EYE-OPENER FOR THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE TO US AND AT THAT TIME AND OUT OF WHAT CAME FROM, THAT WAS THE IDEA OF THIS COMMITTEE.
IT TOOK SOME TIME FOR PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE BEST, BUT AT THAT TIME, OUR MAYOR DON KENDRICK AND DEBORAH LIEBERMAN, STARTED TALKING ABOUT OUR CITY UNIVERSITY COMING TOGETHER TO FORM A COMMITTEE AND GET OTHERS INVOLVED.
I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS COMMITTEE.
I FEEL THAT THIS IS SO NEEDED FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND WELCOMING TO THE COMMUNITY.
WE ALL CAN LEARN, WE CAN ALWAYS DO BETTER, AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US TO LEARN FROM THIS EXPERIENCE AND THIS COMMITTEE.
I FEEL WE ARE THE LEADERS OF THIS COMMUNITY.
WE WERE ELECTED TO LEAD AND THAT'S WHERE I FEEL WE TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RECOGNIZING THIS COMMITTEE AND SUPPORTING IT.
I SUPPORT THIS WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
I FEEL IT'S OVERDUE AND I FEEL WE'RE TAKING A STEP, PROACTIVE STEP TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
SOME GREAT PEOPLE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE ANONYMOUS COMMITTEE AND MOVING FORWARD WITH IT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CARDER.
>> THANK YOU. YES, I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE AND WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
I THINK IT'S ABOUT TIME THAT THEY'RE RECOGNIZED BY THE CITY.
I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE ASKING FOR THIS THE LAST MEETING AND I KNOW ALL OF US WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT, WELL, FOR THAT AS WELL, AND BELIEVE THAT WE CAN BE BETTER.
I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT CITY WE LIVE IN, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS STRIVE TO BE THE BEST PERSON.
IF WE DON'T BRING OUT CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS AND SPEAK ABOUT THEM IN PUBLIC, THEN THEY ALWAYS BE HIDDEN AWAY, AND WE NEED TO ALWAYS PUT THAT FORTH AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE STRIVING TO BE THE BEST CITY AND THE BEST PEOPLE THAT WE CAN BE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CROSBY. MR. DAVIS, COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I, TOO, SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS EVENING.
I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT RESOLUTION THAT WE UPHOLD, AND SUPPORT, AND PROVIDE TO THE WORLD THAT WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION.
I BELIEVE THAT THIS CITY IN PARTICULAR HAS HAD A LONG HISTORY IN INTEGRATION AND INCLUSION.
MR. J. MARION RYAN IN THE MID-'40S INTEGRATED HISPANIC SCHOOLS WITH WHITE SCHOOLS.
IN THE '60S, MY CHURCH WAS INVOLVED IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.
MY DAD CAME BACK TO BE A COLLEGE PROFESSOR AND LA VERNE COLLEGE AT THAT TIME HAD NO BLACK FACULTY, SO HE WAS ASKED TO BE THE FACULTY ADVISOR FOR THE BLACK STUDENT UNION.
IT'S SURPRISING ME TO THINK THAT THAT WAS OVER 50 YEARS AGO THAT HE WAS DOING THAT, AND HERE WE ARE TODAY.
I THINK WE NEED TO STEP UP AND SUPPORT THIS COMMITTEE ON CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION, AS WELL AS DOING WHATEVER WE CAN TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY ARE WELCOME HERE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DAVIS. COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
>> THANK YOU. I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS RESOLUTION AND OF THIS COMMITTEE.
I KNOW THAT SINCE THE JUNE 1ST CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHEN I EXPRESSED SOME OF MY FEELINGS AND REFLECTIONS ON THE STATE OF OUR COUNTRY, I HAVE RECEIVED SOME INTERESTING E-MAILS AND FEEDBACK, SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN EYE OPENING AND REALLY ENFORCE WHY WE NEED THIS RESOLUTION AND THIS COMMITTEE.
SOME OF THEM, I WILL ADMIT, HAD BEEN FRIGHTENING, PERSONALLY, BECAUSE OF THE TENOR AND THE TONE THAT PEOPLE FELT WAS OKAY TO TAKE WITH ANOTHER HUMAN BEING, NAMELY ME.
I ALSO FIND THAT THERE ARE SOME GREAT SUPPORTERS OUT THERE WHO
[02:05:04]
UNDERSTAND THAT WE ALL HAVE ROOM TO GROW AND WE ALL HAVE ROOM TO LEARN.I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT MY FEELINGS EXPRESSED AT THAT MEETING WAS A CALL FOR ALL OF US TO BE WILLING TO GROW AND LEARN WITH EACH OTHER, BECAUSE I TRULY BELIEVE THAT WE ARE BETTER TOGETHER AND NOT APART.
I APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE THAT HAS ALREADY STARTED TO OCCUR BECAUSE OF THE COMMITTEE BEING FORMED, THIS RESOLUTION BEING PUT ON THE AGENDA, AND WHAT NOT.
I COMMEND THE BRAVERY AND THE COURAGE OF THE PEOPLE SHARING THEIR STORIES AND THEIR EXPERIENCES.
I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE HURT AND THE EMOTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN A PART OF YOUR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES.
I'M SORRY THAT YOU HAVEN'T HAD THE BEST EXPERIENCE THAT YOU COULD HAVE HAD IN THIS CITY AND ELSEWHERE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO ENSURE THAT ALL OF OUR CITIZENS HAVE THE BEST EXPERIENCES THAT THEY CAN IN THE CITY, BECAUSE AS I SAID BEFORE, I THINK THAT WE ARE AND THAT WE CAN BE, AND THAT WE SHOULD BE A BEACON FOR OTHER CITIES TO EMULATE AND FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES TO EMULATE.
I CONTINUE TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A CITY OF FRIENDS AND THAT FRIENDS CAN SOMETIMES DISAGREE, BUT THAT WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ABLE TO HAVE OPEN DIALOGUE WITHOUT CENSURE AND WITHOUT RESORTING TO NAME-CALLING OR OTHER UNSAVORY CHARACTERISTICS.
I AM EMBOLDENED AND I AM HEARTENED BY THE AMOUNT OF SUPPORT FOR THIS RESOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN EXPRESSED, BOTH IN TONIGHT'S PUBLIC COMMENTS, AS WELL AS THE E-MAILS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED TO DATE, AS WELL AS THE CALLS, THE BRAND AND PEOPLE THAT HAVE SENT MESSAGES AND LET US KNOW THAT THEY BELIEVE COUNCIL'S MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
I APPRECIATE THAT. TO ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS AND MY FRIENDS, I COMMEND YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO HAVE THE TOUGH DISCUSSIONS AND I LOOK FORWARD TO US BEING ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD AND DO BETTER AND BE BETTER.
AGAIN, IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS RESOLUTION AND OF THIS COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
REALLY, I CONCUR WITH EVERYONE'S THOUGHTS AND COMMENTS, AND I DO ALSO SUPPORT THIS MEASURE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
THE CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME PEOPLE THAT HAD LIVED IN LA VERNE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS AND HEARING WHAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH, EVEN AT A YOUNG AGE, WAS JUST, I WOULD SAY, SHOCKING TO ME.
WE ALWAYS HAVE ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.I REALLY WANT TO CAP IT WITH A CHERYL WHEELER'S, WHICH IS HOSPITALITY, HARMONY FOR ALL.
WE NEED TO BE ALL ONE COMMUNITY AND ALL SUPPORT EACH OTHER AND LISTEN.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS LISTENING AND MAKING ACTION TO STOP THE THINGS THAT AREN'T RIGHT IN OUR COMMUNITY.
ALSO, AGAIN, I DO SUPPORT THIS MEASURE AND WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WE HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR ANYTHING, JR? NOTHING ELSE.
NOW, WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE A MOTION HONESTLY TO APPROVE THIS IN A SECOND.
WHEN DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT, I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TILL AFTER, AS MAYOR OF THE COMMUNITY AND I KNOW MR. DAVIS HAS BEEN ON IT BEFORE.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW. I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE AS MAYOR OF THE COMMUNITY ON THIS AS A LIAISON.
>> THAT WOULD BE THE ACTION THAT WE [OVERLAPPING] BRING IT BACK.
>> THAT'S FINE. OKAY. THEN I WOULD ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS NEW RESOLUTION.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS, WE HAVE A SECOND.
THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND, AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NO OPPOSED, THE MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU-ALL VERY MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE SPEAKERS.
VERY HEARTFELT CONVERSATIONS AND WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
THANK YOU, MR. RUSSI, FOR PUSHING THIS FORWARD.
WE NOW MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS?
>> I DON'T THINK WE DO, BUT WE'LL CHECK AND SEE IF WE GOT ANY. JR?
>> THERE WERE, I BELIEVE, SOME E-MAILS THAT WILL BE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD, BUT WITH THE CHANGE TONIGHT, WE ONLY HAD ONE CALLER, A MR. TIM GATES.
UNFORTUNATELY, I'VE REACHED OUT TO HIM ON THREE DIFFERENT TIMES DURING THE LAST ITEM AND HAVE LEFT VOICEMAILS WITH MY DIRECT LINE HOPING TO MAKE CONTACT WITH HIM, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO SO.
>> OKAY. THEN WE WILL GO TO COUNCIL COMMENTS.
[9. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND CONFERENCE/MEETING REPORTS - Each Council Member may address the Council and public on matters of general information and/or concern. This is also the time for Council Members to report on conferences and/or meetings they have attended.]
I WILL LEAVE THAT OPEN. YES, SIR, MR. RUSSI.>> THERE'S JUST SOMETHING I NOTICED IN SEVERAL OF THE E-MAILS THAT CAME IN FOR COUNCIL WASN'T NECESSARILY EVEN A TOPIC, BUT I THOUGHT IT'D BE WORTH POINTING OUT.
IT HAD TO DO WITH PLAYGROUNDS AND SOME [OVERLAPPING].
>> I WAS GOING TO MENTION THAT.
>> I JUST THOUGHT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY, A LOT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE,
[02:10:02]
BASKETBALL COURTS INCLUDED, AND SPORTS FIELDS, AND PLAYGROUNDS AS WELL, ARE STILL CLOSED AND CLOSED AS A RESULT OF THE COUNTY HEALTH ORDER.I KNOW THERE'S BEEN, AS I COULD TELL BY THE E-MAILS, SOME FRUSTRATION WITH NOT HAVING THAT AMENITY AVAILABLE FOR KIDS THAT ARE OTHERWISE NOT ABLE TO GO OUT.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY ORDER AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT STILL REMAIN FOR THE HEALTH, AND SAFETY, AND PROTECTION OF US ALL TO ELIMINATE THE POTENTIAL FOR THE SPREAD.
I JUST ASK, AGAIN, FOR THE COMMUNITY'S PATIENCE AND TOLERANCE AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS UNPRECEDENTED TIME. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THAT WAS A TOPIC THAT I WAS GOING TO COMMENT BECAUSE I DID TALK TO SANDRA [INAUDIBLE] AND IT'S A NO-GO.
THAT'S STILL CLOSED DOWN AND IT'S PART OF THE CDC GUIDELINES, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THEM, SO THANK YOU, MR. RUSSI.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO START? COUNCIL MEMBER CROSBY.
>> THANK YOU. JUST WAS VERY MOVED BY THE COMMENTS TODAY FOR OUR LAST RESOLUTION AND REALLY APPRECIATE THE CITY COMING AND OUR CONSTITUENTS COMING FORWARD AND SUPPORTING INCLUSIVITY.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE PARKS AND SPORTS, EVEN THE SCHOOLS AND CIF CAME OUT TODAY WITH THERE PUSHING BACK LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS, NOT STARTING THE FALL SEASON UNTIL THE MIDDLE PRACTICE, UNTIL THE MIDDLE OF DECEMBER IN THAT GAMES TILL JANUARY.
EVEN HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS THEY PUSHED BACK, BECAUSE OF THIS PANDEMIC.
MAKE SURE WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT EACH OTHER, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY FOR KIDS.
IT'S NOT EASY FOR ANYONE GOING THROUGH THIS TIMES, THAT WE HAVE NEVER HAD TO ENDURE BEFORE.
THANK YOU LA VERNE FOR BEING GREAT AND APPRECIATE EVERYBODY FOR BEING THERE FOR EACH OTHER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CROSBY. COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IS PARTNERING WITH THE UNIVERSITY'S COLLEGE OF LAW.
THEY ARE PUTTING A COVID-19 FORUM, FOR THE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE CHAMBER.
THAT'S GOING TO BE TAKING PLACE ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 13TH, FROM 2 TO 4.
I BELIEVE LEAH SKINNER, OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE CHAMBER, HAS SENT OUT SOME SAVE THE DATE INFORMATION.
BUT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE COMING OUT.
THERE WILL BE A PANEL OF ATTORNEYS WHO WILL BE SHARING THEIR INSIGHTS INTO THE IMPACTS OF COVID, ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND WHAT BUSINESSES MAY LOOK TO IN ORDER TO HELP PREVENT ADDITIONAL LOSSES AND TO MITIGATE THEIR EXPOSURE AS WE NAVIGATE THROUGH THESE CONTINUED, UNCHARTED WATERS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A PLUG FOR THAT AND SAY THANK YOU TO THE CHAMBER AND TO THE UNIVERSITY FOR PARTNERING.
I THINK THERE ARE SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN OUR CITY FOR DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS AND GROUPS TO TRULY PARTNER TOGETHER, TO BRING FORTH AMAZING SERVICES TO OUR CITIZENS AND OUR BUSINESSES.
I REALLY THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
BUILDING THAT COMMUNITY AND BUILDING THOSE RELATIONSHIPS SO THAT WE CAN HELP EACH OTHER OUT THROUGH THE GOOD TIMES AND THE BAD TIMES.
AGAIN, IT IS AUGUST 13TH, THAT'S A THURSDAY AFTERNOON FROM 2 TO 4.
ALL VIA ZOOM SO THAT IT IS SAFELY, SOCIALLY, PHYSICALLY DISTANCED.
I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT IN CASE ANYONE HAD MISSED OUT INFORMATION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER LAU.
>> YES. HI. I WANTED JUST TO GIVE A QUICK UPDATE ON THE GOLD LINE.
IT'S EXCITING BECAUSE THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION, IN [INAUDIBLE] IT'S RIGHT OUT GLADSTONE, RIGHT OUT IN FRONT OF COSTCO.
THAT STREAM IS CLOSED RIGHT NOW, BUT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD.
THERE ACTUALLY ARE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE.
CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT STOPPED WITH THE COVID GOING ON.
I JUST WANTED TO REMIND EVERYBODY OUT THERE THAT YOU COULD SIGN UP FOR UPDATES WITH GOLD LINE.
IF YOU JUST GO TO FOOTHILLGOLD LINE.ORG, AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE PAGE IS SIGN UP FOR UPDATES.
IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT YET, YOU'LL GET THE UPDATES AND CONSTANTLY KNOWING WHAT'S GOING ON.
ITS VERY INFORMATIVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER ROBIN CARDER, COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO JOIN COUNCIL MEMBER CROSBY IN LIFTING UP THOSE RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO SPOKE THIS EVENING, ABOUT THE CULTURAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL INCLUSION ISSUE.
YOUR STORIES ARE MEANINGFUL, THEY ARE IMPORTANT.
[02:15:03]
PLEASE CONTINUE TO SHARE.THIS WEDNESDAY EVENING AT 06:00 PM PACIFIC TIME.
THE TRI-CITY PUBLIC BANKING STUDY GROUP.
I KNOW IT'S A LONG NAME, IS HAVING A TOWN HALL FROM 06:00 PM TO 08:00 PM TO TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES OF PUBLIC BANKING AND THE BENEFITS THAT WE CAN DERIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
IF YOU HAVE A MIND, PLEASE JOIN US AND SHARE WITH US WHAT FINANCIAL NEEDS YOU HAVE THAT AREN'T CURRENTLY BEING MET, BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF WHAT THIS EFFORT IS ALL ABOUT.
>> I KNOW FOLKS HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, ESSENTIALLY WHAT NOT GOING BACK AND HAVING IN-PERSON SCHOOL AND NOT BEING ABLE TO MAKE THE PLAY STRUCTURES AT THE PARKS AVAILABLE.
IF PEOPLE HAVE MENTAL HEALTH CONCERNS AND OR ISSUES, PLEASE REACH OUT TO TRI-CITY.
PLEASE REACH OUT THE CITY, OUR CITY ITSELF.
LET US HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS WELL AND FIND SOLUTIONS, THAT I THINK ARE AVAILABLE.
WE JUST NEED TO BE A LITTLE CREATIVE ON WHAT WE DO.
THAT DOESN'T VIOLATE THE CDC ORDINANCES OR THE COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH.
WE SHOULD BE PHYSICALLY DISTANCING BUT SOCIALLY ENGAGING.
FINDING THOSE WAYS TO SOCIALLY ENGAGED FOR THOSE OF US WHO NEED MORE ENGAGEMENT THAN WE'RE CURRENTLY GETTING.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVIS, THAT IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE CUES THAT I WAS GOING SAY.
AS THIS KEEPS EXTENDING AND WE CLOSE AND OPEN OUR BUSINESSES, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE, IN SERIOUS TROUBLE.
AS FAR AS EITHER MENTAL OR PHYSICAL OR ISOLATION, YOU NAME IT, ALL OF IT.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO REACH OUT AND DO THE CITY OR TRI-CITY MENTAL HEALTH.
SUICIDE RATES GOING UP, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT STUFF LIKE THIS.
YOU NEED TO WATCH YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOU NEED TO WATCH YOUR FAMILY, YOU NEED TO WATCH EVERYONE AROUND YOU.
IT TAKES AN EXTRA SECOND TO PUT YOUR ARM AROUND SOMEBODY.
SOCIAL DISTANCING FAMILY MEMBER BUT IF SOMEONE'S IN SERIOUS ISSUES, HELP.
REACH OUT. WE ALL HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME.
WE'RE ALL BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN THIS WORLD AND WE NEED TO HELP EACH OTHER.
PLEASE, PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS.
LOOK CLOSELY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS, PLEASE.
ON THAT ONE TOO, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THE CITY.
MR. RUSSI, PUBLIC WORKS, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, D3 HAS BEEN THE CLOSURE OF [INAUDIBLE] HAS BEEN A RESOUNDING SUCCESS.
I WANT TO THANK THE [INAUDIBLE] AND THE CHAMBER.
FINALLY, WE HAD CONVERSATIONS LAST WEEK TO SOME OF THE BUSINESSES ON THE [INAUDIBLE] TAKEN ADVANTAGE, WHILE THEY'RE STARTING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT NOW.
AS FAR AS OPENING UP THE RESTAURANTS, THE CURB DINING, TO GET THEIR ABC LICENSE, GET THEIR PREMISE TO THE CITY.
PLEASE PLEASE, LET'S GET THIS TOWN OPEN AS MUCH AS WE CAN AND IT SEEMS TO BE WORKING MUCH BETTER.
I WILL SAY AGAIN, SHOP LA VERNE, GUYS.
THE OTHER DAY, FOR EVERYONE, I FIRST SHOWED THEM ON [INAUDIBLE] BEFORE I LEFT.
I WENT TO KATIE'S PET DEPOT TO GET SUPPLIES FOR THE DOG.
I WENT TO LESLIE'S POOL SUPPLYING, GOT 3-INCH CHLORINE TABLETS.
THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH YOU DON'T NEED, THAT YOU CAN'T GET AT LA VERNE AND SO PLEASE, YOU GET YOUR MEAL TO GO AT ANYONE IN YOUR FINE DINING PLACES AND TAKE IT HOME. IT WORKS WELL.
LET'S SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY, LETS SUPPORT OUR BUSINESSES.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL FOR THE GREAT RESOLUTION. WE JUST DID IT.
IMPORTANTLY HELP ALL OF OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN THIS COMMUNITY, TO ALL BE TREATED EQUALLY. I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
MR. RUSSI, THANK YOU FOR PUSHING THAT AND I THINK THAT GETTING IT ON THERE, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION.
[10. CLOSED SESSION]
RIGHT, MR. KRESS?>> ABSOLUTELY. YOU GOT THAT RIGHT.
>> WE'RE GOING TO RECESS THE CLOSE SESSION, WHICH IS UNAUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 549571-A1A.
THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MEET IN CLOSED SESSION, THAT CONFER WITH ITS REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS REGARDING PROPERTY AMHERST.
OUR NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULE MEETING IS AUGUST THIRD.
WE WILL RECESS NOW TO CLOSED SESSION.
I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE PROBABLY EACH OF US LIKE A, THREE-MINUTE BREAK.
>> WE WILL HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT AFTERWARDS, WE WILL COME BACK INTO OPEN SESSION.
>> WORK OUT FROM THE DIRECT CLOSE SESSION.
>> OKAY, VERY GOOD. WE ALL TAKE A TWO-MINUTE BREAK, OR SHOULD WE JUST GO THROUGH THIS? I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE TOO LONG.
[02:20:02]
>> OKAY. [OVERLAPPING] WE JUST NEED TO GIVE A MINUTE TO DROP THE LIVE STREAM OFF.
>> WE ARE ON. THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE EXTENSION OF THE [INAUDIBLE] ON THE SALE THE AMHERST PROPERTY FOR [INAUDIBLE] NATIONAL ONE-YEAR.
>> MOTION TO ADJOURN, I AM JUST GOING TO PUT BOYS IN ORDER.
WILL MOTION TO ADJOURN 08:57 PM.
THANKS FOR ALL THE COMMENTS TONIGHT.
WE'LL SEE YOU ON AUGUST THIRD.
THANK YOU ALL AGAIN. GOODNIGHT EVERYONE.
>> YOU ALL TOO.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.