meeting_id
stringlengths 27
37
| source
stringlengths 596
386k
| type
stringlengths 4
42
| reference
stringlengths 75
1.1k
| city
stringclasses 6
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LongBeachCC_05222018_18-0445 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And excited, please.
Speaker 1: 14 Item 14 is a report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to submit a grant application to the California Natural Resources Agency for the 51st Street Greenbelt Project. If awarded an amount up to 2 million for completion of the project District eight.
Speaker 2: Kathryn Austin Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 10: And this is an exciting opportunity for residents in a district in a neighborhood that has been long overlooked. I'd like to thank, first of all, Parks and Rec staff, especially Mayor Meredith Reynolds, for their work on this grant and concept. And on April 21st, we had a awesome Earth Day event at the 51st Street greenbelt, where we had a great turnout of neighbors who gave us input on a conceptual plan. This grant will activate a space that will further transform the green gateway that is taking place along the Los Angeles River, extending from the Dominguez Gap wetlands to Molina Park to the forest wetlands, and now the 51st Street greenbelt. This is a great space for residents of all ages to enjoy, and I ask for my colleagues to support this. This is going to be an awesome, awesome addition to your town.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 9: All good things.
Speaker 0: Any public comment? See. Now, please cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to submit a grant application to the California Natural Resources Agency, through the California Climate Investments Urban Greening Program, for the 51st Street Greenbelt project; accept said grant, if awarded, in an amount up to $2,000,000 for completion of the project; and execute all documents necessary to accept the funds and implement the project. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05222018_18-0447 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: 16.
Speaker 1: I am 16 is report from Public Works recommendation to adopt resolutions to approve 11 repaving resurfacing resurfacing projects proposed to receive road maintenance and we habilitation account act funding totaling approximately eight mil for fiscal year 2018 19 CDI.
Speaker 0: There's a motion in a second. Mr. West, you have any sort of short report on this? Sure. A lot of streets.
Speaker 8: It's a lot of streets. And I'll have Mr. Beck give a quick report.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mayor. Mr.. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council tonight, what you have before you is simply a resolution that would authorize the city to spend future SB one gas tax funding that we anticipate to receive from the state fiscal year starting this July one. So it is the state's 1819 fiscal year. The state is requiring us to essentially identify streets where that money would go. And so this action tonight would allow us to both receive that money and then spend the money on this on the streets listed before you. This is separate and apart from our normal arterial and neighborhood paving program, which in Fy19 is anticipated to be roughly $42 million. That concludes my report. I'm available for questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second baseman.
Speaker 2: Richardson pave baby pave councilmember repairs.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Quick question. I know this is our SB one funding and there is a effort, as we know, to potentially repeal this. How would that impact this? These projects will be these these this project will be just questioning whether or not this project will be able to be finished prior to that or is the money already secured?
Speaker 5: Katherine Ross And answer your question, we're still working through those details with the state. Essentially, this is for money that we would receive in the future that we have yet to receive. So if in fact the repeal did go forward, we would likely not receive the full or any of the $8 million from the information that we have currently. And therefore, the streets listed before, you would not have the funding available to to be repaved and we would have to identify future ore and and other sources of revenue to be able to achieve the items that you have listed before you.
Speaker 2: Thank you for clarifying that.
Speaker 10: And I think that would be tragic.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Supernanny. Thank you.
Speaker 9: I just want to make a clerical adjustment here. The street is gardenia, as in the flower, not Gardena, as in the city.
Speaker 2: And since Councilman Andrews and I share the street, it is important to make that correction.
Speaker 5: My apologies. That is the street we meant to identify.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this? Seeing none. Please cast your vote as that's happening also. Just Mr.. Mr.. Beck, I want to make sure this is this is great. I see a lot of Anaheim on here, which I also think is great, is a major street, but it's also different chunks of Anaheim. And so I just want to just just as a gentle reminder that when we do these major streets, we need to make sure that we maximize the whole street and not have, you know, one a few blocks paved. And then you going to three blocks unpaved and then you go into two blocks paved. It needs to be a clean uniform look all the way. So just as we put together our pots of money into these streets and I think Anaheim to me is the one that's jumping out here as a lot of chunks. Just let's please focus on a straight, clean pave all the way through. Next item, please.
Speaker 1: Council. Council member. Super. Now can you vote? This motion carries.
Speaker 0: Second public comment period.
Speaker 3: Good evening. Diana Logins. I'm not only addressing the mayor and the council, but I'm also addressing the public. I'm talking about Measure M. That's coming up in the next election. It's real simple. Just vote no. I'm very ashamed of the mayor and the council members who have gone out and purposely misled the public, telling him this is | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution to approve eleven repaving/resurfacing projects proposed to receive Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Act funding totaling approximately $8,000,000 for Fiscal Year 2018-19: 15th Street between Lewis Avenue and Alamitos Avenue; 15th Street between Orange Avenue and Obispo Avenue; Anaheim Street between Pacific Avenue and Atlantic Avenue; Temple Avenue between 7th Street and 4th Street; Ximeno Avenue between 4th Street and 7th Street; Anaheim Street between Gardena Avenue and Temple Avenue; Carson Street between Clark Avenue and Bellflower Boulevard; Anaheim Street between Alamitos Avenue and Gardena Avenue; Long Beach Boulevard between 31st Street and Wardlow Avenue; Del Amo Boulevard between Atlantic Avenue to Orange Avenue; and, Artesia Boulevard between Cherry Avenue and Paramount Boulevard. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0404 | Speaker 0: Great. And I want to hang out. We're going to do a photo once we get through all these. So congratulations to that first group. Let's give them a round of applause. Next we have a are other appointments and we are going to be appointing these other appoint appointments to some of our charter commissions. And Madam Court, if we can have the read the item.
Speaker 2: Communication from Councilman Austin Personnel and Civil Service Committee recommendation received Charter Commission Appointments and reappointment approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee.
Speaker 0: Great. And this will also include reappointment that we have. I'm going to read about the appointees and I'm going to turn this over to Councilman Austin, who will give a report from the committee who also had a chance to go over all the folks today. So I'm going to go ahead again and thank all of you that are up for appointment. We first have a lot of folks that are going to join our Citizens Police Complaint Commission and we are happy to appoint some new commissioners tonight. First, we have Diane McNish, Diane McKinney inches a council district, one resident and longtime community leader with a variety of organizations. She's been nominated as Woman of the Year by the California State Assembly and was awarded Woman of Distinction by Fullerton College. Diane was also, as we're aware, a member of the Long Beach Community College Board of Trustees and a former member of the Community Development Commission and is excited again to serve the city as a commissioner, very involved in the community. Diane, we're very happy and excited to have you. We also have Veronica Garcia, a Veronica Garcia is a fifth District resident who serves as the executive director of the American Red Cross, are from the San Gabriel Valley chapter and has more than 20 years of experience in nonprofit administration. She's also the former president and of leadership Long Beach, past board member of the Long Beach nonprofit Partnership and the Rotary Club and was a founding member of the National Latina Alliance and United Latino Fund. As we know, Veronica is has been incredibly involved in the community. She is a resident of the fifth District. And we're very we want to welcome you to our commissions. Thank you, Veronica. We're excited to have you. Four council districts are in Council District seven. From that district, we have Maria Norvell. Maria is here. Thank you, Maria, for being here. Maria has long been engaged with public safety in our community. She served for ten years on the Public Safety Commission and participated in the Police Chiefs Advisory Group for Neighborhood Watch leaders from 1989 to 2010. Maria is very interested in neighborhood policing, community policing and very excited to join this commission as well and serving in this new role to add to the many roles that she served on in the city, particularly when it comes to issues around community policing. So Maria, thank you for joining the commission. We're excited to have you. And also from the ninth District, we have Dr.. Thank you. Yes, from the ninth district, we have Dr. Joanie. Dr. Joanie Ricks out O.D.. Sorry, I forgot the last name there incorrectly. I'm sorry. Okay. I just know you with Joanie, so. But Joanie is a District nine resident. She has a doctor doctorate of epidemiology from UCLA and is a current is currently the director of the Center for Statistical Consulting at the University of California, Irvine, and is actively engaged in the language community as vice president of the DeForest Park Neighborhood Association, executive board member of the L.A. Long Beach Area Sierra Club and Community Lead for the North Long Beach Veterans Day Committee. And Joanie is just really involved in North Miami Beach issues as a community leader. And we're excited to have you. So welcome. And absolutely. And also on the commission, we have Dana Buchanan. Dana is a council district 33 resident and a business owner who has been recognized for active involvement in the Long Beach community. Dana has been a board member for the California Conference of Equality and Justice CCJ, where she works on issues around restorative justice and is involved in a number of local organizations, including Long Beach, Rotary Leadership, Long Beach, Friends of Pathways, among many others. And of course, it's really active but very involved in her business as well and provides incredibly delicious food with your with your other partner over there in your wonderful business. And so, Dana, we welcome you and to the commission as well. Next, we have three appointments to the Civil Service Commission. First, we have Heather Morrison. I know Heather is here. Heather is a resident of District eight. I mean, she actually is a former staff member of Councilmember Al Austin, which you may know her from. But she also is incredibly has an incredible rich history herself. Prior to joining the city, she is currently completing her teaching credential in special education at Long Beach State University and is a volunteer at both Jordan and Cambria High Schools. Heather recently completed six years on the Bond Oversight Committee for the Measure K and Measure E bonds for Long Beach Unified School District. So we're very appreciative of that community work that Heather has been involved with and is also really involved in community and our local schools. A very fair person. And thank you, Heather, for joining us on the Civil Service Commission where we know she's not able to attend. But we're also going to be appointing Suzanna Gonzales, Edmund, who is a District five resident. Two to the Civil Service Commission. She has over 15 years of experience in the public and private sectors, including her time here at Long Beach City Government. She's currently a government relations consultant with ex Duncan Klink and by and Suzanna has served on several boards and has a master's in public policy from Long Beach State University. So congratulations to Suzanna and Lasse. On this commission, we have Megan Kerr. Megan is known to us, of course, as in her other role as president of the Long Beach Unified School District. She's a District eight resident who's actively involved in Long Beach and the community. She also has served on the Commission on Youth and Children in the past, and as they've transition and kind of reformed as an organization. She's interested in helping our community grow and thrive as a graduate of Long Beach City as well as Cal Poly Pomona, and is very interested, of course, in issues to ensure there there is equity also in the hiring process. And so, Megan, we want to thank you for for joining this commission and R and R and her final appointment of the evening is to Mariella Salgado, who is going to be appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. And Mariella Mariella is a first district resident, and she actually owns a district, a business in the fifth District and holds a master's degree in business administration from Pepperdine, is an advocate for Long Beach youth and our entire community through her volunteering with the Willmar City Heritage Association, the Alpert Jewish Community Center, and so many other organizations that she is involved with. Mariella is very interested in ensuring that there's access and for all youth across the city to our parks. And so with that and before I turn this over to Councilman Austin, let's give them all a round of applause for their great work. We also have a series of reappointment to the board which are all on this agenda of any of of re appointments are here. Congratulations to all of them. And let me just say before I turn this over, that if if we read a lot of names of incredibly qualified women, it's because almost all the appointees that were in this group are incredibly qualified, amazing women. And it's been it's been important for me, as I've joined in this seat, to ensure that there is gender parity and that we are representative of the full amazing talents of all our amazing women across the city. And for for far too long, we have not appointed enough women to the seats and. Once this group goes in and one more group that will be in a couple of months, there will be for the first time in the history of the city, there will be more women serving on commissions than men. And I think that'll be that'll be a good change. I think for a Long Beach for the first time. And so the quality of these appointments to all the women that are here, you're all amazing. And of course, to the one gentleman that's being appointed to, he's also amazing. But I wanted to thank all of them for their service. And with that, I want to turn to Councilman Austin, who has some remarks.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And as chair of the personnel, the Civil Service Committee, we met last week and went through and vetted and voted unanimously to approve the mayor's recommendations for committee, charter committee appointments, commission appointments. I want to thank the mayor for his very thoughtful appointed appointments. And I want to thank the the the appointees for their willingness to serve our city. The work that you have before you is very important. And we as a council value the work that and the recommendations and the work that you'll do on your individual commissions in those capacities. I've had the opportunity to work with many of the the nominees and appointees here and know them on a personal level. And I have full confidence that they'll do a great job. And so with that, I would like to just because the mayor spent so much time explaining and going over the bios. I'd like to just move the full approval of the personnel, the Civil Service Committee's recommendations.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. And thank you for leading that committee to to get through all of these as well. There's a lot of vetting that has to go on through this process. And so we appreciate that. It comes from Birmingham.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mayor. I'm also a member of the Civil Service and Human Resources Commission, and we did review all candidates. And I want to thank thank them for stepping up and volunteering because it's going to be is is not always a pleasant thing. And it takes some of your time away from family and friends. But I'm sure that the rewards that you'll get from working with the city to making the city a lot better is going to be invaluable. So I want to congratulate you for stepping up. And I also I thank the mayor as well for making these appointments, bringing them forward for us to consider and for you and for us to for your names as members of the new commission. So congratulations to all of you. Looking forward to working with you when we're in one capacity or another.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think this is probably one of the most qualified cohorts of appointees that I've ever seen come in front of our council. So let me just say congratulations to all of you. This is a very impressive group. And I have to say, yes, I see a lot of women, but I really see the years of commitment and volunteerism that I see here from all the people I see around me. Susan Right in front of me, I see new leaders like like Joni and and I see Ebony and Dana. So many people here. This is a really impressive group, and I think that should be noted. So on behalf of myself, the Ninth Council District, congratulations to all of you. And we look forward to seeing many great things come from this cohort. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I want to make comments to both groups that were voted on or that will be voted on this evening, even though I know we already did the other item, I knew that we would have some residents from the third district, at least in the second group. So I reserved my comments, but I feel like it's a little bit of a ladies night in here because there are so many women here. And I want to echo what the vice mayor said. It's not so much that there are women here. It's that the room is filled with competent, independent, efficient leaders. And that's really what we need. They happen to be women as competent, efficient leaders often are. But I think that having you here and having you willing to serve and continue your commitment to the city in a different scope is really something that is a source of optimism for all of us who are here. So for the third district residents who are going to be serving on charter and non charter commissions, congratulations. Welcome to the policy process, the policymaking process. And please know that we rely on you to serve as the experts for the commissions that you serve on. So when issues of policy come to our attention originating from your commission or a subject matter that's normally discussed in your commission, we will look for your guidance on how we should proceed and the pros and cons of a particular issue, because you will have studied it a lot more and with a lot more depth than we will at the time that it first comes to us. So please know that we rely on you as as a source of information and guidance as we move through our policy decisions. I know that's always how I've worked with the third district commissioners, and I hope to do so with all of you. So congratulations and welcome.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman and Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Yes. Also the same thing, a very incredible group of women. I'm extremely impressed. So many of you have said yes to be being commissioners, but on top of your either a 9 to 5 job, on top of your volunteer work, I see so many of you at so many community meetings that I think to myself, why are you at this community meeting? I know I have to be here, but you're here because you really want to be here and make improvements for our city. So I really appreciate all of your hard work. So many of you do such a great job at that. And on top of that, some of you are mothers. So I appreciate your perspective in that lens as well, because we know that we have a lot of work to do for our families here in Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I'm so excited that the message is out there. We've been talking about more residents.
Speaker 7: Of the fifth District volunteering.
Speaker 1: For commissions. This is the most applicants we've had in this category in a long time. And so I think that for you guys to rise to the top is a real accomplishment. And I look forward to many more opportunities for you to have more fifth District neighbors joining you on some of these commissions. So great work and thank you. And it was a really big candidate pool this time because we've really been pushing commissioners. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 4: Yes. I want to thank also every one of you who stuck in there and decide to accept these appointees, because the fact that when you speak about the young women, that what is so exciting to me is that I hear and listen to your your due diligence for sticking to it. And it's you because most of you individuals have your masters, your doctors. I mean, that's kind of saying something and you want to get on a commission. I mean, that takes time also. So I just want to commend every one of you to keep up the good work. I hope the young kids are looking at this because you guys, this is work. And I hope you know what you're getting into. Congratulations to most of you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And the last thing I'll say, because I think it was mentioned is the amazing part about this last group of of amazing appointees is once we put out that that we really want more amazing women to apply, we've never received so many applications from just qualified, experienced, amazing people. The amount of applications that received we received from women was more than we've ever received because of the strong interest. And sometimes you just seen a need to put it out there and make the ask. And we were just so impressed. And so just thank you. Thank you for serving and we look forward to your leadership. There's a I see no public comment on this issue. We also have the reappointment as part of this. And so, members, please go ahead and cast your vote on this.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Well, congratulations. And we're going to do like we traditionally do is going to do a photo. And so I'm going to we're going to ask all the kind of all the commissioners that are whether you got appointed or reappointed to kind of come on the staircase and we're going to councils and come on the staircase, we're going to take it. So we all get in. So just somewhere on the stairs right there. Thank you.
Speaker 6: That you didn't exercise because. Does he mean, like, right here? Yeah.
Speaker 0: Just get him on this one. More people on the.
Speaker 3: Registry and.
Speaker 6: People I don't know. Great, sir. Thank you to everybody. Good working on it. Good to see you again. Come on in. I'm just going to look at the way you look in here. Everybody, everybody, everybody. Lean out a little. A little bit. Every little guy here. All right? Everybody can see me. Got to get to. She passed away. Thank you, guys. Thank you very much. Internet. Send me your pictures. I trying to have my mental disorder. You know, my life. His name is David. Congratulations. I didn't work out. I. Well. Know, we've talked about this idea and I help to. Guess. I know that.
Speaker 0: Okay. We're going to continue the meeting, so I'm going to ask everyone to please exit quietly. And so we can do our conversations outside so we can continue on with the meeting.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: We had a request to move up item 20, which is from Councilman Al Austin. Madam Clerk. | Appointment | Recommendation to receive Charter Commission appointments and reappointments approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee pursuant to Section 509 of the City Charter and Section 2.03.065 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0431 | Speaker 0: We had a request to move up item 20, which is from Councilman Al Austin. Madam Clerk.
Speaker 2: Communication from Councilman Alston. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilman Price. Recommendation to request city manager to communicate to the city support of AB 2943, which would declare conversion therapy a fraudulent and unlawful business practice in California.
Speaker 0: Councilman Huston.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And during this week of that, we celebrate Pride in Long Beach. And as we recognize this evening, local LGBTQ heroes, it is only right that the City Council go on record in support and strong support of AB 2943 Assembly Bill 2943 by Assemblymember Evan Lowe would declare conversion therapy a fraudulent and unlawful business practice in California. Convergence therapy, also known as a sexual orientation change effort, is defined by state law as practices by mental health providers that seek to change an individual's sexual orientation, including efforts to eliminate or reduce attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex. This practice is opposed by practically every reputable mental health professional organization in the country because it is not evidence based and is potentially harmful to a patient's mental health. In 2012, California became the first state in the nation to prohibit conversion therapy for any patients under age 18, a law that has been upheld in the courts. HB 2943 would extend the provision to all persons, regardless of age, and would make it unlawful business practice under the state's Consumer Legal Remedies Act by supporting this legislation. Long Beach is sending a strong message that this city and the state upholds the values of respect and protecting the dignity of all of our residents. I'd like to thank my colleagues, our council members, Pryce and Gonzales, for joining me in signing on to this item. And I would like to thank the LGBTQ center of Long Beach for providing a letter of support for this item. But also, I ask my colleagues for their support and for our city's lobbyists to work on this bill. Its passage. I move for unanimous support. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 3: I strongly support this agenda item and thank my colleague, Councilman Austin for bringing it forward and I ask my colleagues to support it as well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Yes. Thanks to Councilmember Austin for bringing this forward as well. I think it absolutely it's unfortunate that we are even talking about this, but so many other states have have banned this and we absolutely should do this as well. And so I am full and deep support of this. Thank you very much. And thank you to the center for for being here as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 7: I echo the same, it seems when I saw this item come up, I was like, wait, this, we have to do this. So just thank you to the center for your efforts and thank you to the council for bringing this forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I just want to add, I want to thank Councilman Austin also. This is a barbaric and backwards practice that unfortunately people still talk about like it's some sort of medical wonder for folks. And I think it's unfortunate that this still happens in our country today, and I'm really glad that this is moving forward with that. Any public comment on this item?
Speaker 1: Good evening, everyone. My name is Porter Goldberg on the executive director of the LGBTQ Center of Long Beach. You council members, you should have in front of you the letter of support that the center has provided on this agenda item. Thank you to Councilmember Austin and Council Councilwoman Gonzalez and price for bringing this forth. The City Council as an organization that provides mental health services, we work with people at our organization who have been subject to conversion therapy. We know how psychologically harmful and damaging it is. We know that this is an extension of an earlier area era when LGBTQ people were forced to undergo involuntary institutionalization, lobotomies and other mental health treatments that serve no other purpose than to mistreat people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. So on behalf of everyone at the center, thank you so much for your leadership on this effort. And thank you for for bringing this agenda item forward during Pride Week. It means a lot to me. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much, Mr. Bouchard.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I too agree. That the practice of undue persuasion of an individual, male or female regarding their sexual preference and decision. It's something that is no longer needed. When God who has created men and women, decides by his spirit to start to re influence his people. What we will see across the nation, which includes this city. Is that men and women will buy under the influence of their Creator. God will begin some looking in the mirror. And they're going to say, I no longer want this lifestyle and they're going to do it of their own volition without any physical coercion or mistreatment. Some are going to be in the act. And then God himself is going to speak to them and he's going to say. Is this what you want? Is this who you are? Guys doing it. No one will have to drag anyone out of bed eating wine or pounding one on my head. Their creator is coming after them from the beginning of time until now, when God let us make men in our image. And then he said, That man needs a helpmate. So let's give him a woman. The enemy of our souls. Satan has come after. And he wanted to make a mockery of everything. That God created the institution of marriage. Who would marry? How they would marry. How they engage in sex? Which God instituted. But the procreation of the species. He wanted to make a mockery. And if you like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings and all the trilogies, if you can appreciate that, understand what's happening in between men and women. Is Star Wars in living color? The fight that is going on between God and his created beings. And God's going to turn this thing on its head. And the reason this law needs to be put in place is that when you start seeing and hearing men and women saying, I no longer choose the lifestyle of a lesbian or a homosexual and calling ourselves gay, you will know that no one forced them into it. God himself. We'll revisit them and bring them back to the original intention when he said, Let us make man after our image and let us let them be male and female. He himself would do it. I applaud you when supporting this law so that when you hear of it, you'll know that it was God himself.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Well, I have a lot to say, but in the Spirit of Pride Week, I will just say happy pride to everyone. With that, we will conclude that item. And Members, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to support AB 2943 (Low), which would declare conversion therapy a fraudulent and unlawful business practice in California, and request City Manager to communicate the City's support to the bill's author and our state legislative delegation. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0415 | Speaker 1: This is the sort of a Disney ification of of of reality. I remember somebody saying, I don't need to go to Paris because I went to Las Vegas and I saw the Eiffel Tower. But it's a very sanitized version of of reality. If this developer wants shorter, cuter, younger insects getting through trees, you know, I respect those old trees. And they are and the young ones will not be able to provide nesting sites for many, many years. So if we can get any support, you've all been, you know, sent some information and encourage our city planning department. We do want to thank the city of Public Works for putting us on the agenda. We hope we'll get some letters of support from the council when we are on the agenda in July to try to save these trees. And we do, you know, support with reservations, not unconditional support. I would say we hope that the issue questioning round up will continue to be an issue in the city and that we will stop using Roundup in our parks and in our wetlands. And, you know, we had a lot of young people out there. It was a really they made up a lot of beautiful songs. And we realized it's kind of fun to be a bird. It's more fun to be a bird like it. It's more fun to be a person, though, when you have a home, you know? Thank you.
Speaker 5: Well, thank you for your testimony. Members, please cast your vote on the consent calendar. And I'm a yes.
Speaker 4: Motion carries.
Speaker 5: Thank you. So I know that number 1617, we have been requested to continue. So let's just pull them up so we can make the motion to do that. Please read. I'm 16, please.
Speaker 2: Communication from Councilmember Pierce. Councilwoman Gonzales recommendation to direct City Manager to work with public works and report back in 60 days on current outreach efforts through the Clean Long Beach Initiative and request staff to implement a pilot DeKalb program applying informational decals on locked bins within the East Village. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt Resolution of Intention declaring its intent to grant a limited Natural Gas Franchise with the Southern California Gas Company for the purpose of transmitting and distributing natural gas within the City of Long Beach; and, setting a public hearing for Tuesday, June 12, 2018, at 5:00 p.m., on the proposed extension. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0424 | Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you. Public comment saying no members, please get your vote. I'm yes. Motion carries. Thank you. 17, please.
Speaker 2: Report from police and financial management recommendation to award contracts to two contractors to deliver body worn camera equipment at no cost to the city for a period of one year city wide.
Speaker 5: Okay, we're a bit out of sorry on this list. I have 15 and 16 on the list, so 16, 17. So we'll go back and pick up some 15 after this. So let's take 17 now. Let's go ahead and hear from staff on item 17.
Speaker 8: Mr. Mayor, council members were looking at body worn cameras here. We're looking at a potential to go to a new pilot program with a new company. I'm going to turn this over to our chief of police, Robert Luna, to walk us through the contracts.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. West. Just really quick before I get started. I have Mara Velasco, who's our chief financial officer next to me, and Jason Campbell, our bureau chief over our administration bureau. Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, the body worn camera program was established within the police department to do several things enhance community trust, improve accountability , better document community interactions, believing that the use of body worn cameras would result in a reduction of uses of force and citizen complaints. In January of 2016, the City Council voted to award a contract to Dell Marketing for the purchase of body worn cameras. On November 5th, 2016, the pilot program was officially initiated. The pilot consisted of the deployment of 40 cameras at our West Patrol division. On the afternoon shift, the pilot officially concluded on November the fourth, 2017. West Division personnel continued to deploy body worn technology in the field, given early promising findings and an opportunity to test upgraded second generation technology with the existing vendor. The program was expanded to all sworn personnel at the West Division on February 17th, 2018. After a thorough review, both generation one and two cameras, it was determined that the technology did not meet the needs of our department, believing in the overall value of the body worn camera technology. Another RFP was released on April 3rd, 2018, to test competing technology to find a system that best meets the needs of our department and our city. In total, 5224 potential firms specializing in body worn camera technology were notified. 40 entities downloaded the RFP and five proposals were received. Of those five, the selection committee determined that Axon Enterprises and V view best satisfied city requirements based on established evaluation criteria of the following demonstrated competence, equipment, function, data management and technology support an approach experience with same size police department's expertize and availability of key personnel. Financial stability. Conformance with the terms of the RFP and reasonableness of cost. Originally, the department recommended that both Axon and V view be awarded the contract. However, recent developments have occurred that directly impact the Council decision to award contracts to both Axon and review. On May four, 2018, Axon announced that it agreed to purchase its main competitor V view. As a result, we planned to pursue a contract exclusively with Axon. The Department is prepared to work with our city partners and the vendor on implementation, fill testing and evaluation. Of the new equipment. Every effort will be made to ensure a smooth transition in programs with a planned deployment of approximately 200 cameras cameras covering two geographical divisions. I want to take just a quick second to thank our city attorney's office, financial management and our technology and innovation departments. They worked their tails off to try and get this through in the speed that they did. It was actually pretty amazing in helping us getting it done so quickly. With that, I stand ready to answer any questions or we stand ready to answer any questions that you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I have a motion and a second Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I want to thank the chief and the police department for the great work that you've done on this. You know, I've been pretty vocal on the Public Safety Committee, and throughout the time that we've been discussing this issue that I think we are past due the time to have body cameras in place. I a while I understand what has taken us so long to get to this point. I'm disappointed that it has taken us this long to get to this point. And I really wish there was a way that we could do a shorter pilot. So I'm going to talk I'm going to ask a few questions about that. But before we talk a little bit about that, Chief, can you share with us what some of the issues with the former deployment were and why we think we might be in a better situation now with the technology or otherwise?
Speaker 8: And I might jump in here right now. I'd rather we could meet and discuss in private the reasons why the chief of police and the police department has decided that the former companies did not meet the demands of the Long Beach Police Department and not discuss them in an open session.
Speaker 3: Sure. And let me just rephrase the question. Do we think that from a technology standpoint, the company that we're choosing to enter into a contract with can accommodate the needs that we have and satisfy our needs for a pilot.
Speaker 4: Councilwoman Price, the RFP set that direction out and we are encouraged by what we see and that's why we need this pilot program as we move forward. We made a lot of demands as a police department and as a city, not just for what the police department needed, but we had to be sensitive to the technological needs of the city. So that's the reason for the length of the pilot program. We want to make sure that when we come back to this council that I am recommending to you through the city manager that this is the best option for us as a city to move forward.
Speaker 3: Okay. And I appreciate that answer. So the reason for the length of the. Pilot is for us to look at the operational aspects of it.
Speaker 4: We will be looking at everything. We will be looking at the equipment, the logistics of it, the storage from one end to the other, their staffing considerations that we're looking at. One of the things we learned from the previous pilot program is that, as you know, the men and women of this police department are working their tails off. I have not too much fat even in people. And as we move forward with this pilot program, we hope to introduce more staffing, which is going to be needed and required to effectively run it on our side of the fence. So we'll be looking at that. How smooth is that? And then we'll be working with our partners in the city to make sure the technology works. And that's one thing we're we're asking Axon to do is to come in with a plan on how they're going to operate within the city. As you know, we're geographically spread out and we do have some challenges, some challenges historically in regards to our outdated technology from a city perspective.
Speaker 3: Okay. And I understand that, Chief, and I appreciate that answer. I guess the question I'm asking is. And so some of the reasons why. Let me let me just say that based on my experience, a one year pilot is a very long pilot with Axon. I work in a county where nine out of our ten agencies are using Axon. And we've where we've talked we've had 30 day pilots. We've had several month pilots. A one year pilot is a long time. And so from an operational standpoint, I think one year I would like us to get the police department as online as soon as possible, because I believe body cameras protect not just the individuals who come into contact with the police officers, but also the police officers who are often alleged to have participated in conduct that in fact, upon viewing the body cameras, they did not.
Speaker 1: Do so from.
Speaker 3: A city liability issue. And from a justice standpoint, I think the body cameras, the faster we can roll them out, the better. So what I'm hearing is that in addition to having time to look at the operational aspects, that there may be some staffing needs that might also present a financial challenge for us to get up and running and deploy agency wide. And I'm wondering because looking at the that the proposed contract that we could have, that we can terminate a one year pilot with 30 days notice, is that correct?
Speaker 4: Approximately. Yes, that's.
Speaker 3: Correct. Okay. So because I think that's what the the the staff report says. So we could. If we were to bring this back in six months, we could at that point evaluate the city's available resources to augment perhaps the budget in order to allow staffing and roll out an agency, a department wide. Body camera program as opposed to continuing with the pilot for an additional six months. And during that six months that we've done the pilot, we can have the opportunity to evaluate what our realistic staffing needs might be. Because we might have just looking at this and I don't question anybody's judgment, I understand what we think the staffing is going to be, but it could be that we don't have as many praise requesting body worn camera as we're expecting. We don't have as many redactions as we're expecting. It could be that we don't need the number of positions, the eight positions that we've requested in in a pilot would also reveal that information as well.
Speaker 4: And one of the reasons why we want to do a one year pilot to make sure that we are positive, whether it comes with pre staffing and everything you just mentioned.
Speaker 3: Okay. So you believe that if resources were not an issue, you believe that a one year pilot would be best for our agency?
Speaker 4: When I talk about resources, I am very concerned about our internal resources, but I'm also concerned about the logistics from a technology perspective, from a city perspective, just to make sure that we can do that across the board.
Speaker 3: Okay. I mean, I think there are a lot of cities that are using Axon that are far less sophisticated than we are with technology. So I'm not aware of any technological hurdles.
Speaker 4: And that's exactly why I want to do a one year pilot program. Could it be less? It absolutely could. But when I come back to this council, I think my job is to provide you with every answer that all of you all answer, any questions that any of you may have regarding every box that I need to check to make sure that we're making a very wise investment because this is expensive. I agree with you. I think it's a necessary tool, but it's going to take some significant funding or a significant budget enhancement for us to make this happen.
Speaker 3: And I get that completely and I agree with you completely. I guess what I'm trying to say is. As the chief, putting aside budget constraints, putting aside your concerns about where the money could come from, would you want to see this program deployed agency wide sooner than one year? And I understand that, you know, you don't as a as the director of the department, you have to think about policy decisions in combination with fiscal constraints. I get that. But what I'm what I'm trying to do is figure out if we were to come back in a while, in a few months and six months, and we can look at our financial situation at that point and we were able to roll it out agency wide. Is that something that we could do in less than a year? And if the answer to that is no, then I get it. But I will say a yearlong pilot is a very long pilot for a program that agencies far less sophisticated than ours have rolled out very efficiently with zero problems. I met with liaisons today from multiple police agencies in Orange County, much some smaller than are, some around the same size. And the rollout has honestly been flawless. The discovery process, the use of evidence dot com. There have been very few glitches. And so what I'm saying is, assuming we are entering into a partnership with an organization who has learned lesson for within it, with a provider that has learned lessons and we're the beneficiary of the lessons learned , could we implement this agency wide? Because I'll be as clear and direct as I can be. I think we need to have body cameras for all of Long Beach Police Department as soon as possible. And that's what I'm trying to establish with you, Chief, as if finances were not an issue. Could we do it sooner? And if finances are the issue, could we maybe come back in six months and think about whether or not we want to roll it out for the full agency?
Speaker 4: I can promise you an all out effort in trying to do what we can do, but I would have to reprogram my mind because there's a lot of things I'd like to do that we have money restraints on.
Speaker 3: So I get it. Thank you. Just one final question. Have we determined whether or not the pilot policy is going to have the activation is going to be a discretionary or mandatory policy for the officers?
Speaker 4: Our current draft policy, which has been in existence for over a year, mandates that the officers record enforcement contacts. It's not optional.
Speaker 3: Great. That's very good. A couple of best practice suggestions that I might make is that the policy and of course this would have to go back to. The members to to approve. But one of the things we have found in terms of best practices is there are times when officers will have to deactivate their body camera, whether it's for a restroom break or whether it's because a victim or someone has asked that they be allowed to do so by indicating such by speaking into the body camera before they disengage. And I don't know if we have something like that in our policy, but to allow for that flexibility such that in those situations, the officer can articulate why they're turning off the camera by speaking into the body cam before turning it off. Is that a policy that we have or could look into as part of the pilot?
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 3: Okay. The other thing lessons learned is that we have several agencies who entered into an agreement with Axon not anticipating some of the storage issues that might come up. So I don't know what the terms of our contract will be, but if we can try to get an unlimited storage with Axon, I don't know if that's possible , but I think that would be good because some agencies are finding themselves having to recategorized their body cameras so that the retention they fall into a certain retention policy. So if that's something that we could fold into the contract, I think that would be good for us too. Since we're going to do a pilot, we may as well get the most out of our policy. But those are just my suggestions, just from lessons learned and a few articles that I was able to find online today from experiences other agencies have had.
Speaker 4: Axon has already offered that as part of their proposal.
Speaker 3: Great. Thank you very much, Chief.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilmember Price. I'm sorry, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 7: Two years later, still Price. I want to thank you, Police Chief, for your efforts on this. I know we've had some conversations in the past. I've had other conversations outside of our office as well. And honestly, I think that I was going to ask many of the same questions that Councilmember Price was going to ask and just stress that I know that a lot of costs with data storage and that there are a lot of unknowns. But I would support coming back in six months. You know, if we could come back in six months and evaluate where we're at, I think that that would be great for the council, whether or not we are identifying the cost and how much we need to to really plan for. But as six months return, I think would be appreciated. So I'll just echo my my colleague and leave it there. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is your public comment? Please come forward.
Speaker 6: Maybe my mom to.
Speaker 4: Very good. Hugh Clark is the address. Let me make this suggestion. Let's get a body camera. That will be worn by the mayor. Given the fact a mayor has a salary of $400,000. A pension that goes with that. So he should have no problem. A wearing. A body camera, just like the police do. As well as as well as his staff members. As long as they're in this building or working on city business. If he has nothing to hide. There should be no problem with that. And I think it would benefit this city. We had that long ago he probably would not be going to prison. But for any man, given the size of the salary, the size of the pension. He should have no problem of wearing. And his staff members. Body cameras. Unless. Unless they have something to hide. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Stephanie Dawson So Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach Branch. I just wanted to voice I supported this particular measure. Body worn cameras are a good faith, albeit imperfect, standard operating practice that's made it better for, as the chief said, to the restoring faith within the community and frankly, protecting cities from crippling civil lawsuits. As a criminal defense attorney myself, body worn cameras have made my job eminently harder because it shows that the vast majority of police interactions with people are overwhelmingly positive. And they and they keep to the restrictions, put on the word to them by the Constitution. That said, they are not a panacea. We today just approved a slew of new people for the PCC. Robert, I remember through what, four years ago now when you told me directly that the PCC has no teeth, that has not changed statutorily. We need major charter reform to be able to make it so that we can have actual accountability for when officers do not abide by the high standards that we have set for them. Furthermore, as Councilwoman Pryce alluded to, the issue with a lot of these body cameras is storage and retention. You know, there are many times when I come in my own practice, when I've been looking for discovery matters. And a lot of the necessary records have been lost in the course of a case that's only a year old, which is not that long in the grand scheme of things, with criminal justice issues, we just ought to think it was a month ago ordered the destruction of years of use of force records from the Internal Affairs Division of the police department. Obviously this is an ongoing problem if we are not able to physically keep these records or do so on a permanent basis so that they could be used in discovery for for lawsuits or anything else for that matter. This is a matter of of significant public interest. And I think that it really demands a further look at it. Thank you. Have a good day.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Parkin.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mayor, and members of the council. I just want to clarify the motion that's on the floor as this motion was placed on the agenda prior to the city, knowing that Exxon had purchased view, we'd like some flexibility to be able to enter and enter into the contract with Exxon and then discuss with them the availability of the Veeva, if I'm saying that correctly, camera and operating system and give PD the flexibility if available to test both of those and then come back with their recommendation on which technology meets their needs the best. So it kind of follows the spirit of what the letter and the council recommended action is today. And we would have to have some additional conversations with Axon to make sure that that second technology remains available.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And just before we go on to the I want to just clarify also where I think the motion is at is the motion is presented by the city attorney. I think there's also an interest that while this is a year long pilot that Chief, I know you regularly give updates obviously on it on big projects and that there'll be a formal one. I think it's six months I think is kind of what I'm hearing just to make sure, you know, the council's abreast at that point. That would be I think that'd be a good update for the council to have this a formal six month presentation on the pilot and with that, Councilwoman Gonzales. Seeing no other.
Speaker 3: Just had a couple of questions. Sorry. Our names. Just Scott.
Speaker 0: Oh, sure. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Okay, just thank you so much, Chief, for the update. And I appreciate the questions from my council colleagues. Just one clarifying, clarifying question for the fiscal impact. It states three positions now for the testing efforts and then eight down the line. And that's the are those technical positions that's just overseeing the the back end work for the actual technological aspect? Is that correct?
Speaker 4: Those are estimates at this point. Again, what we learned from the the first pilot program, we try to do it with one person. It just was not working. Okay. There's a lot of work that needs to be done behind the scenes. So we fully implement the program. We're looking at approximately eight positions that can be adjusted down the road depending on workload. I hope it's not that much work. Maybe Axon will do such a great job. We don't need anybody. I doubt it. But we'll see what we that's what the pilot programs for. We want to make sure we're bringing you the best possible scenario that our community expects from us.
Speaker 3: Great. Thank you. And I would just also include in that I know Axon, just from knowing them from my technological job, I know that they're looking to incorporate possibly facial recognition, which I know is something for us to just think about. But it is, you know, very controversial. I know that there's a lot of issues around that. So it's just something I wanted to throw out there. But I will say to that, I know every city is a bit different, every county is a bit different. I will say, you know, we're I'm so glad we have a different direction now. And when it comes to technology, we were on Lotus Notes not too long ago. I just want to remind everybody. So we're a little antiquated on that side. But I know I said it. I didn't even remember we had Lotus Notes, but we did. So I just want to say we're moving ahead and I really appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 8: And I would like to add, mayor and council, that part of the investment that you've made in technology is what makes this possible. So we were running the old system because we did not have a fiber network that we could actually rely on to do this. And so by investing in that fiber that's part of the status update will give you is how are we doing with fiber? Where is it? Because that's going to determine how far we can get for a citywide pilot. So with that investment, that's how we're able to move forward.
Speaker 0: Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: So I have a follow up on that. So it.
Speaker 1: Is our.
Speaker 3: Position that we need to have fiber throughout the city in order to roll out this technology.
Speaker 4: Yes, I understand, especially the accent system.
Speaker 8: It requires a lot of bandwidth and it needs to go back to the station in order to be uploaded as one of the ways to do it. And so we do not have fiber to all of our police stations currently, but Caitlin can give additional info if we need it.
Speaker 0: Get them on.
Speaker 4: There we go. Honorable mayor and members of the city council. The the technology behind Axon does require higher bandwidths, but there's also a intermediate intermediary approach we can take where city council already approved in. On March the 20th, a telecommunication network expansion. And that that expansion provides us the immediate capability to expand bandwidth to each of the substations.
Speaker 3: With through the installation of fiber.
Speaker 1: Or.
Speaker 4: Correct fiber fiber with the telecom providers eventually being sunsetted.
Speaker 0: And moved to city owned fiber.
Speaker 3: I see. So at all the police stations. Correct. So we have that now.
Speaker 4: We have the contractual authority to do that, and we're currently in negotiations with the telecom providers.
Speaker 3: Great. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And there's no other further comments here. So please, members, go ahead and cast your vote. And as we do so, I just want to, you know, just to the chief and to the technology team, I know this is this is an important issue. I know you guys have been working very, very hard on this issue. Just the whole staff. And I think we're obviously the council is as anxious and supportive of moving forward. And so we look forward to all the results. So just thank you and your team chief. And with that, we will move on to the next item, please. That motion carries that go up on the board.
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next item, I believe is.
Speaker 4: Item 15th October 2015. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP PD18-090 and award contracts to Axon Enterprise, Inc., of Scottsdale, AZ, and VIEVU, LLC, of Seattle, WA, to furnish and deliver body worn camera equipment, at no cost to the City, for a period of one year, with the option to renew for three additional six-month periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0430 | Speaker 0: We did that one. That's right. We did. I think the next one is 22. Is that right?
Speaker 2: Report from Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to social buy schools for the purchase of bicycles and associated equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach Bike Share program for a total on contract amount not to exceed 431,250 citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. A short update from public works on this.
Speaker 4: Craig back mayor council members, if you recall, we were before you about a month ago requesting approval to expand our bike share system and council.
Speaker 0: Did grant that.
Speaker 4: Approval. We are in the process of ordering those bikes. What you have before you this evening is a further request to order another 100 bikes and why we had pulled these requests apart. This one before you this evening is from a grant source and we have a short timeline to secure those grant dollars.
Speaker 0: But those grant dollars would allow us to buy an additional hundred bikes and some equipment.
Speaker 4: And we're requesting approval to add that to the other 500 bikes that we plan to.
Speaker 0: Expand. So now we're just correct if I'm wrong, but we had we think we purchased 4 to 500 last time. Is that right, Mr.. Beck? So this is an additional hundred on top of that, right?
Speaker 4: Yeah. So the original bike share rollout was 500 bikes with cycle hop as a vendor cycle hop only delivered 400 of those initial 500 bikes. This 100 before you this evening is finishing up that initial 500. Not to be confusing, but then we came back and council did approve a second 500. So when this is all said and done, we'll have 1000 bike share bikes out.
Speaker 0: In our community. And just to be clear, we have 400 out now, so we have an additional 600 coming. That is correct. Okay, great. And let me go through Councilman Andrew Smith. Yes.
Speaker 4: Yes. You know, I support the recommendation to stand in. It's great to see people riding along the bike path and around town. But since the bike program is now several years along, I'd like to see a progress and a performance report that includes frequent or frequency of the rental locations of the bikes and the renewal and the cost figure. You know, I think a council I think as a council person, we would appreciate to know how the progress the program is doing and if there's any way we can improve it for possible. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pearce here. Councilmember pearce.
Speaker 1: Just make making sure she.
Speaker 7: Didn't want to speak. Councilmember. Okay. I just wanted to take this moment to say, of course, I approve and also congratulate public works on a great effort with the Amgen race this past week. I know that the love of bikes has grown in the city due to the bike share program. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I agree with Councilmember Andrews. I would be interested in some statistics related to utilization. I know that as they expand across the city. One of the things that I'm very interested in is most bike share programs that I've seen as I've traveled are sponsored, whether it's Kaiser or Memorial, Barnes and Noble. I mean, everywhere I go, there's Sunkist. It's the wheels of the bike, our advertising, the company that pays for the entire program and then really donates back into the health of the community. And so and I know we have a sponsorship program that this council approved that is really partnered through Partners of Parks. And I'd really like to see that either that board or US partner in some way to bring that kind of funding to the city to be able to ensure that this program has sustainability through an outside source. I appreciate you getting grant dollars and I look forward to the expansion to Eldorado Park. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Quick question, because I'm unclear, are these the North Long Beach bikes?
Speaker 4: I think Councilmember, we've had had a you and I have had a discussion that our next expansion will go up through Bixby and in the north Long Beach. It's a combination of both these bikes and the previous approved 500.
Speaker 5: So these are going. These bikes are going in North Palm Beach.
Speaker 4: These are the previous ones.
Speaker 5: So these are not. I'm just want a yes or no.
Speaker 4: Okay. Yes. These are very.
Speaker 5: Confusing. All right. These are the North Lambie's bikes where they come in.
Speaker 4: We need to order them through the company. They have roughly a 4 to 6 month delivery time. Okay.
Speaker 5: Six months from now, we'll have bikes and they're fine. He's got it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Ringa.
Speaker 8: Actually, that was my question when it got to the seventh. But I can understand the major corridors, but I think that we still need some buy through for our districts in all in whole city. So I think we need to look at expanding the program into some of the other districts. They do not have any. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Just a quick question, Mr. Beck. How many stations now are at the Olympic? Now you're really testing my memory.
Speaker 4: I believe we have four different stations.
Speaker 0: We have them now on campus. Ray, do you have them on campus? Correct.
Speaker 4: And going to Councilmember Andrews earlier request, we're happy to provide information to you. We have some wonderful heatmap data that really shows the extent of the ridership of our Bikeshare program. So I'll be happy to pull together, report and share.
Speaker 0: That with you. Okay, great. And I know that we have the the, the, the system out in front of the pyramid outside of the university. But there are also the ones that we wanted inside the campus are inside the campus, correct? Correct. I'm looking at a map right now.
Speaker 4: It looks like there's actually five stations on CSU above campus.
Speaker 0: Perfect. And I just want to make sure I know we've said this separately, but just publicly, that I think it's really important that we connect and do the same thing at Long Beach City and that we connect Lombard City to Cal State, Long Beach by bicycle, and that there is a, you know, that clear route and that connection from the university to the college as well as PCC and that campus. I just think those hubs at the colleges, universities are really important. So thank you very much. Any public comment scene and please cast your votes and great job on this on this program. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. ITB PW18-089 and award a contract to Social Bicycles, Inc., of Brooklyn, NY, for the purchase of bicycles and associated equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach Bikeshare Program, in the amount of $345,000, authorize a 25 percent contingency in the amount of $86,250 for a total contract amount not to exceed $431,250; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into a contract, including any necessary amendments, for a period of two years, with the option to renew for three additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05082018_18-0394 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, please, is item number ten.
Speaker 1: Report from Long Beach Airport and Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Swinton Builders for Design and Construction of the Phase two terminal area improvements at Long Beach Airport for a total amount not to exceed 65,259,490. District five.
Speaker 0: Mr. West. Mr. Mayor. Council members. This is phase two of our airport improvements. Some time ago we completed phase one. That was the parking garage and the brand new terminal. Mr. Roemer, our airport director, is going to walk us through the phase two projects and what that entails. And this has been a long time coming, a long time in the making. And we're very, very proud of what these improvements could turn out to be. Just. Thank you, Mr. West. Good evening, Mayor. Vice Mayor, council members. We are going to get into a slide deck here. But before we do that, I want to just do a set up here to get a summary overview of what the project will entail. It is in the staff report. Just a reminder that this is comprised of nine components as part of the phase two best estimated base cost of $58.8 million, with a contingency that takes it up to a possible total of $65.2 million. Key features of this project include a new enclosed ticketing lobby, a new open air consolidated baggage claim area, new relocated in-line TSA checked baggage inspection system and bag maker facility as well. There are six other components that will help enhance both the wayfinding as well as traffic features of the airport, as well as providing a new avenue for rental transactions to occur inside of the historic terminal. The delivery method for this was procured through a design build, meaning there will be more efficiency through integrated coordination and contractor responsibility. This aspect of the project has been achieved through a competitive request for proposal process for proposals were submitted in response to the RFP that was put out on the street after a technical review and interviews . Three of those firms moved on to an interview for analysis of a cost component. So based on the panel's overall review of that, Swinton Builders was unanimously selected to be the best value overall for the city. It is important to note, and it'll be in the slide deck, that the earlier limitation relating to allowable square footage was abided by in the overall net new square footage. And it is within actually it is under the previously approved council limit. From a funding standpoint, this project will be paid for with airport cash and an amount of about $23.3 million passenger facility charges in an amount of about 20 and a half million dollars customer facility charges which are received through rental transactions of $7.6 million. And lastly, a TSA grant amount of $7.3 million. So before we get into the slide deck, I do wish to thank our engineering group that's headed by RB three. They've done a great job. It's been a heavy lift to get it to this point. Stephan Lum, who's the senior civil engineer. I've asked him to come up here with me in the event that there are some questions after the presentation that he may respond to. And Stefanie, going to one presenter is also been integral to this project. Our in or our contract consultant Jacobs Engineering and CG also have helped to get this project to this point. So I'll go ahead and get into the slide deck. So as Mr. West explained, you know, this phase one was completed in 2012 and comprised of improvement and development of a passenger concourse, the TSA screening facility, passenger screening facility, and the construction of a parking structure B, which folks will know from the main parking structures, are entering the airport off of Lakewood Boulevard. Phase two envisions us to really continue that enhancement. In the travel experience, we will be renovating and simplifying the security check in process through the new ticketing lobby. We will also rehabilitate the historic terminals, timeless and beauty, and restore its original functionality. In addition to some mechanical and building upgrades, we will be relocating the car rental transactions into this building. This was this process really involved in required us to engage with the community to make sure that this space was reused appropriately. Again, the what are the main goals for the terminal it's a historic criminal is to revitalize and streamline pedestrian and vehicular access in and around the terminal area. We did consider as paramount importance of the airport priorities. And of course, as we said, we wanted to make sure that this project was within the certified E.R. and then subsequent council approved limit of 89,995 square feet, which this is well within that limit is one of the mayor's eight by 28 projects for the Olympics initiative. This project itself accommodates existing activity, meaning that it's really to help the experience, the customer experience, the passenger experience for those coming to the airport, it's already a great airport. This will just take it to another level. There is no impact to the general fund in terms of expense for this project. And as a matter of fact, we will not be using any debt financing for this. It it'll be fully paid for through cash in fees that are collected at the airport. And really important for the community as well is this will not result in any additional flights as a result of undertaking this project. So this slide here shows an overview of the existing site plan for the terminal area. You can see there on the lower portion that is currently parking structure. And to the left is the rental car rental return, which is where possible. Our customers will pick up a drop off rental vehicles directly above that. Around the middle of the slide is the historic terminal, and immediately above that is the existing screening facility for checked bags. A little bit above that and to the to the left is the passenger screening facility, which was developed in 2012, along with the concourse areas which are at the upper part just below the the aircraft parking positions. The large rectangle to the right is where we will redevelop and have I mean, right now it's the valet storage and aircraft parking that will be redeveloped. It will show you that in the next slide here. So this one here shows in the after condition once this project is completed. So these are some of the big changes of note. As you know, the terminal facility itself will open up into the plaza because we will be relocating and constructing the baggage screening baggage facility that will be off to the west and to the south, along with the new ticketing lobby there as well to the to the south of the terminal, the consolidated baggage facility I'm sorry, consolidated baggage claim, which is now currently three, will be consolidated into one facility there to the to the north of the checked to the security passenger security area and then the new rental car storage, which will be service storage and ready return. So the function that currently takes place in the the parking lot right across from the terminal will move over to the north. And that area, which is currently part of the ready return, will be reprogramed and repurposed into a ground transportation center where we will have the taxicabs, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft, as well as other commercial carriers that they will stage in there in being one location that's convenient to the terminal complex. So the following slides were really show kind of before and after what we're envisioning. And this right here is a shot on the left is the current or the existing historic terminal where people will check in and either get their boarding passes or check their baggage before they go out to be screened in. Going on to the concourse area, you can see that it's a very compressed and tight space during peak times. It's actually much more crowded than this. So what we're envisioning through the new ticketing lobby is a much more open space. There'll be much more opportunity for folks to use the self-check in kiosks, of which we have a few, but we will see many more deployed in the new facility. This is an elevation showing the western side of the historic terminal. So on the left, you can see it at the bottom of the terminal elevation there, the screened area, which actually hides the checked baggage facility building that was put in there, I think 2006. So on the right shows that it's gone. And it shows that open flow from the plaza so that folks are deplaning and heading out toward either to rent a vehicle or going out to be picked up, that they'll be able to go straight into the historic terminal. This is another view here on the left that shows that it's looking southeast and shows a portion of that fence that that that hides the the checked baggage facility. And on the right where it's removed, that that will become seating area. And again, to make the plaza much more inviting for builders and greeters, as well as anybody else who works at the airport and wants to relax and hang out in a nice space. This next one here shows the rendering of where we envision to be the the baggage claim facility. So on the left recurrently, it's just a wall that hides some areas behind that, which are our staging areas for for airlines. And on the right, you can see the left or the left part of that rendering shows the baggage claim carousel and to the right of that, some concession space that we expect to develop. So this is a view again. This is the historic terminal on the left. And part of our plan is to repurpose it and have the rental car companies do their transactions in the space. So this is a view looking to the south. It's the same terminal building. There are that left photo. Again, it's a very tight compressed space. And what we will do is open it up and relocate counters and make it much more friendly so that people who are coming in from flights, they can go directly into this building and transact and with their preferred rental car company . And this is just another view that shows looking to the West again, that this really highlights that opening out into the plaza area, so that one of the features will be that you could actually go from the front of the curb, straight through the doors, main doors in flow, if you want to go straight out into the plaza. And one of the components we talked about here, this is an overview showing on the left is the existing ready return or the car rental operation there where folks will both rent their vehicles as well as return and pick those up that will be relocated to the north. And then this space will be converted into the ground transportation center, which will have basically staging for cabs, shared ride busses and other commercial operators. Project entitlements again, going over that, you know, we went took this through a process. We were very mindful to engage the community. We had outreach sessions so that we could make sure that people understood what it is that we were attempting to achieve, which again, is overall an improvement to the facilities and not an expansion of the airport. On April 5th this year, the Planning Commission approved the addendum to the previous IIR and they also approved Phase two site plan review. On April 9th this year, the Cultural Heritage Commission approved and issued a certificate of appropriateness for the renovation of the historic terminal building. And then the table below really just shows what the council originally approved as part of the IIR 97,400 545 square feet. It was later reduced down to 89,995. So the post phase one square footage resulted in 70,000 square feet or thereabouts. And with phase two, with the reduction of some space and an addition of some space, you could see that results in 89,929 square feet. So that's well within the envelope of what is what is permissible in the air. So tonight, as we said earlier, we're we're requesting council approval. This is a design build contract in an amount of up to $65.2 million, initial funding to support the major three components that we would like to deliver within the next 12 to 18 months. 32 million. 32. 32 and a half million dollars. Those will include the ticketing lobby, consolidated baggage claim and the in-line screening facility. As I said earlier, funding sources for this or airport cash that we have on hand. Passenger facility charges, which are those fees that are attached to tickets for people who are departing the airport, customer facility charges, which are fees that are attached to rental transactions and a TSA grant that we applied for and have been provisionally awarded by the federal government. It stays progression that our overall goal will be to maintain airline passenger operations throughout the term of the construction and control of the contract may be terminated at any point. Should financial conditions or anything else emerge that we would have to take pause and rethink the route, the balance of the project. So with that, that concludes the presentation, and we're here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. And a very impressive presentation from the staff. And you guys did a really, really great job. I know this is a long time coming and an important improvement that the community has been asking for at the airport. Let me first turn this over to Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I only have a couple of questions. This is a it's a very impressive presentation. And and I'm glad to see that it's stays within the parameters of the air that was approved by council before us. That that said, when how long do you foresee this project taking? I'm not sure if I heard that in the press.
Speaker 0: Yes, I'm sorry accounts, but this is a program for a three year period. So from the commencement of doing the work, which we expect, I mean, to commencing the work which we expect to be later this year, probably in the in the beginning of the fourth quarter of it, we would expect it to take three years to complete.
Speaker 2: Because their priority in terms of what projects will go first.
Speaker 0: Yes. As noted on one of the slides, you know, the the the priority projects include the new ticketing lobby, the new TSA bag screening facility and the baggage claim device.
Speaker 2: And this project does fall under the project labor agreement. Is that correct?
Speaker 0: Yes, it does.
Speaker 2: All right. Thank you so much. Looking forward to it.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Mango.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I just want to thank the airport staff and the community for this great opportunity. We've come together and it will be amazing. And so it will continue to be the best airport in America.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I just wanted to congratulate you on a great design, I think. And what I noticed about the new terminal versus the old terminal is how bright it seems when you walk outside. There's like outdoor firepits and it's bright inside the actual was that concourse or whatever it is and the original building seems a little dim , has always seemed dim to me. You walk in at the original building, goes from daylight to dimness, and then a scene here is much brighter. So I guess my question is, what are what are they? What do we did? We did they add more lighting? Did they open the windows or something? The rendering looks very, very bright on the inside. How do we do that?
Speaker 0: Well, I'm going to take a stab at it on a high level. Then I'm not turn to Mr. Lum to give more detail. But, you know, one of the main features is, as we pointed out, is the restoration of the doors leading out on the western side of the building. I think that's going to help quite a bit in the fact that the the existing ticket counter areas, those will all be removed. I think the lighting that that exists beyond behind that through the windows would probably help quite a bit. But Stephan, is there anything else I'm missing?
Speaker 7: Jess You're correct. The back side or the whole west side face of the building, it's actually has a whole bank of windows that are currently blocked by the airline offices and in front of that, the ticketing counter. So when we renovate the first floor, all that will be cleared out and and opened up into a more open environment.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Let me just say two comments. The first is that, of course, I think this is really impressive. I'm very excited about these improvements. We've been talking about them for a while and the second piece gestures to make a note for your team. Two things I've mentioned before I just want to reiterate publicly. One is we need to please look at the possibility of the parking lot for the transportation plaza and or other opportunities that are outdoor for solar. I think what I think, you know, Cal State, Long Beach has set a great model on their parking lots and how they're using solar to power the facility. And so at least we should at least explore that as an opportunity. And then I just want to make sure that part of this improvement that we don't forget, of course, the lighting that I'm talking about to make lighting, just to make sure that as we're that we bring in a expert in night lighting and so that we are appropriately lighting the historic terminal as well as the rest of the facility in a way that is more interesting than what we currently do, which seems a little bit hokey sometimes. So I look forward to that lighting plan. Any public comment? This is certainly a commendable project. Really the lighting. It's a shame, though, that the one drawback is that people come into this city. And I'm sure in time, particularly when in the next year or so, two years or so, they'll realize they're coming into a venue, a city where it has one of the most corrupt mayors in the history of Long Beach and. Excuse me in this state. And all they would have to do is look at the tape of the comments of the mayor less than 10 minutes ago when I referenced the fact that he will be spending time in prison. And he mocked that by saying, well, I have been saying mayors have been corrupt in this city for 24 years. I have lived in the city. I think it's 40 years and never once, never once, never once. Have I ever said we had a mayor that was corrupt? We have some that were dubious in terms of projects and mental capacity, but none were dishonest and corrupt, as is Robert Garcia. And that and even that I haven't been saying it for his full term. That corruption started a little over three and a half years ago with the criminal complicity of raising the Marine Stadium support structure to its period. The tape of this meeting, of course, will go to the U.S. attorney's comments. In fact, I sent you a memo of that just now. An email will go to the U.S. attorney tomorrow morning. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. should here. I'll be happy to send the tape myself. Area of in a second. Please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Excellent. Good work. Next up is item 12. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP AP18-033 and award a contract to Swinerton Builders, of Los Angeles, CA, for the design and construction of the Phase II Terminal Area Improvements at the Long Beach Airport, in the amount of $58,809,490, authorize a 15 percent contingency in the amount of $6,450,000 (based on construction value) for a total contract amount not to exceed $65,259,490; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into a contract, including any necessary amendments; and
Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department by $32,572,824, offset by funds available. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_05012018_18-0258 | Speaker 0: One more time for bike month. Great. Okay, so we have two hearings, so let's go ahead and call up hearing number one.
Speaker 1: Communication from city attorney recommendation received supporting documentation into the record, concluded the public hearing and adopted negative declaration number 04-17 declare ordinance amending various sections of Title 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to the regulation of tattoo parlors. Read for the first time and laid over the next regular meeting for final reading and adopt a resolution directing the Director of Development Services to submit a request to the California Coastal Commission to certify an amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program Citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's no oath required, so we'll hand it over to Mr. Modica.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Staff report be given by Mike Mazer, Assistant City Attorney. Mr. Vice Mayor, members of the City Council. As you recall, this ordinance was before the Council for discussion on March 20th of 2018. At that time, Council voted to send the matter back to staff to slightly amend the draft ordinance to change some proposed language that related to the buffers. The buffers have now been changed from 500 feet to 700 feet between tattoo parlors and from both primary and secondary schools. You will also recall the reason that we brought this ordinance to you in the first place were a couple of ninth Circuit federal court decisions, one directly involving the city of Long Beach. That basically made a determination that tattooing itself is a First Amendment protected activity, as is the art of tattooing or the tattoo artist. So we made the changes to these ordinances after being a receiving recommendation from the Planning Commission. If you have any questions, we're here to respond to them.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So I'll go ahead and open up for public comment. Is there any public comment here? Okay. Saying none. We're going to close the public comment and take it back behind the rail. Councilmember Pearce. Okay. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 1: Just more of a comment and not to disturb the ordinance as it's moving through. We think city staff are doing that in our city attorney. It's been I've talked to a few tattoo parlors in my district who have mentioned that Boston is actually a really great example in terms of paralleling how tattoo parlors, in terms of, say , the health and the health safety standards are similar to salons. And so I think, like I said, Boston has a great example of that, but perhaps we can sort of fold that in and just keep that as we move along in the process. So just a more of a comment on that sent.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Seeing no further council comment members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Hearing number two please. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Section 21.15.2990, Table 32-1 and Table 32-1A of Chapter 21.32, Section 21.52.273; and by adding Section 21.45.166, all related to tattoo parlors, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0343 | Speaker 1: We're going to move up to 25 quickly and take care of it.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Sure.
Speaker 0: The Communication from Councilwoman Price recommendation to refer to the Parks and Recreation Commission to consider naming the pocket park at First Street and Loma Ave in Bluff Park. The John Parkin Pocket Park.
Speaker 3: Thank you, vice mayor and council members.
Speaker 1: Just a moment. Councilwoman Price is going to introduce the item.
Speaker 0: I'm very happy to support this item. I'd love to hear from the public and then I'll give some closing remarks.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Let's go to the public. Go for.
Speaker 3: It. Okay. I'm here representing Jeff Mellon of the Park Neighborhood Association, as well as some of John's friends and neighbors. I'd like to read something prepared by Jeff Mellon. The Bluff Park Neighborhood Association on behalf of residents in the Bluff Park Historic District. Asked the small that the small garden in our neighborhood located at the corner of East First Street and lower to be named in memory of John W Park. And John was an iconic, longtime active resident who led and helped with many projects in the Bluff Park Historic District.
Speaker 0: He lived from 1926 through 2015.
Speaker 3: With many of those years spent serving the city.
Speaker 0: In the neighborhood.
Speaker 3: While living on his first street. According to the Long Beach Press Telegram, he is perhaps best known for being the petroleum.
Speaker 0: Engineer.
Speaker 3: A graduate of Cal Berkeley who helped save Long Beach from sinking as a result from oil drilling and turned oil into a major revenue producer for the city as oil was being pumped out of the underground reserves along the coast. The land began to sink, causing property damage. Structural, structural damage. It was John that proposed the resolution to that. John was an avid supporter of the Bluff Park Neighborhood Association for 33 years and.
Speaker 0: Served.
Speaker 3: On the board of directors.
Speaker 0: In 1998.
Speaker 3: After its former entity became a concerned citizen, was reorganized. In 2004, he helped conceive a project to bring the historic East First Street lampposts to all the neighborhood. Although it did not move beyond a concept at this time, his idea has been reinvigorated today as the association's Black Park Historic Lamppost project announced in 2017. The neighborhood convened a meeting with dozens of residents who strongly believe that John is one of the neighborhood's seminal figures in his history worthy of recognition and accolade by having his name placed in the garden just on a kind of a personal note. John not only served Long Beach, he served his country. He was awarded the Combat Infantry Badge, the European African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, the World War Two Victory Medal, the Army Occupation Medal, and two Bronze Stars. Thank you for inviting me to speak.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Joel Pyne and.
Speaker 8: I support naming this park after John Park and he's a he was a great.
Speaker 1: Guy and a good neighbor. And I think it's important.
Speaker 8: For the council to.
Speaker 1: Understand that the.
Speaker 8: Initiative, to name this small spit of land in the middle of the first.
Speaker 1: Street after John was a.
Speaker 8: Grassroots initiative, it was taken. It wasn't.
Speaker 1: Something that somebody.
Speaker 8: Came to us or the city asked us to do. He really made an impact, the neighbors, the community. And we recognize it. And we hope that the council supports this initiative to name this little spot of land. It doesn't take any city funds to take care of after John Park and my friend. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And one of the reasons I love it is because it was a grassroots effort that really came out of a community that is well known in this city as being a really close community, really engaged community, and a community where the people who live there genuinely love where they live, love the spirit of collegiality, love the friendship that they make with their neighbors. And for you to honor one of your neighbors in this way is truly impressive and inspiring to me. As was already mentioned, John Parkin was a resident of Bluff Park for 33 years and a strong supporter and former board member of the Local Community Association, the Bluff Park Neighborhood Association . Although he is known throughout the city for his role in addressing subsidence and the use of Long Beach oil revenues, it's his impact on his local neighborhood that many residents will most will remember most fondly. His friends and neighbors remember him as a humble and loyal man with great integrity and always willing to lend a helping hand . He was seen as an icon in the neighborhood who was admired by everyone. In honor of this resident and the positive mark he left on his community. Residents of Bluff Park have requested that. This pocket park at First Street and Loma be named in his honor. We would like to move this item forward to our Parks, Recreation and Marine Commission and request that the name of the park actually be the John Park and Green Space or something along those lines to reflect the geography of the park and really the use of this park. I asked my council colleagues to support this item. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. But I like the alliteration of Park and Park. Pocket Park. Park and Pocket Park. I think you make a mistake with the green green space. Members, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve naming the green space/median located between 1st Street and Loma Avenue the John Parkin Green Space. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0320 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Hearing number two, please.
Speaker 0: Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and find that the First Amendment to the development agreement is within the scope of the project. Analyzed under the River Walk Residential Development Project Air. Declare Ordinance approving a First Amendment to the development agreement between the City of Long Beach and River Walk 131 group LLC authorizing city manager to execute it in the same form as attached. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting for Final Reading District eight.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this hearing? Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. We have to go to we have to go to staff comment first. Staff. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We have a short presentation by Linda Tatum, our planning bureau manager.
Speaker 6: Good afternoon, Vice Mayor Richardson, members of the council. I'd like to present to you a brief overview of this request for an amendment to an existing development agreement for the River Dale Development Project. I like to just summarize this. The site location here at the very north of your screen, the the vertical I'm sorry, the horizontal street there is the Alamo Boulevard. To the west is the Los Angeles River. That's the westerly boundary of the project. To the easterly boundary, it's Long Beach Boulevard. Into the south is the Union Pacific Drive. The site there that you see outlined is the Riverdale, the location of the Riverdale Project. And the Oregon Park Project is the site of the formerly named Oregon Park, but it's now been renamed to Molina Park. And those are the two projects that are the subject of this development agreement, which I'll be going into briefly. So just a really brief overview of the Riverdale Development Project. It's a new 131 unit, subdivision project, detached single family homes, and they sit on a 10.5 acre site. It is, as many of you know, it is the former will J. Read Boy Scout camp in the The Riverdale Project. The subdivision was approved by Planning Commission and by the City Council back in 2015, and it was approved in conjunction with the development agreement. And as you may recall, the development agreement is an agreement between a city and a property owner that establishes certain rights and privileges and benefits to the city. The Riverdale Project is now currently under construction. And just as a background information, it's an exciting project for the city because it's the first detached single family subdivision with a fee, simple ownership lots in more than 20 years. So it's a really great achievement for the city to have this kind of development. The next slide is just an overview of the project site. For orientation purposes at the north or the top of the screen, there is the the northerly part of the project that abuts the adjacent neighborhood and to the west there, if you look to the left of your screen, that's the location of of the Los Angeles River. And you can see there the the vertical area going down into the project is the main entry the project has. It's a gated community with private streets and they have on site park area within the project of these 131 units. Okay. So here's a just a an image of the three different product types within the project. So I'll go directly into the development agreement and the request. Essentially, the development agreement that was approved by the city provides an obligation for the developer to construct the Molina Park, formerly Oregon Park, and the construction in addition of of onsite improvements throughout the and on the site itself, but also several of the streets surrounding the park. We know that the approximate cost of the improvements to the Molina Park are approximately $3.4 million, and that is in addition to the costs for the upgraded streets that are in the surrounding area. And there are other infrastructure improvements and I won't go into those in detail. But essentially the terms of the development agreement called for a partnership between the city and the developer for those infrastructure improvements, the construction of the park in exchange for the development approvals on the project and one of the other requirements for annual review of the developers compliance with the terms of the development agreement. And I would just note that they have received a 2016 and 2017 approval of their annual compliance through the Planning Commission. So the subject of the request for tonight's consideration is that essentially the most significant term of this development agreement is the construction of the Molina Park and the associated improvements, the offsite improvements. I would just note that in discussions with the Parks Department staff, they have noted that the the process for the improvement of the park have been moving along generally according to schedule, and they're on track for completion for mid-May. So sometime next month the developer anticipates being completed with the project. Following completion of the project, there would be a 90 day period during which the city makes a determination as to whether or not all of the improvements on the site are acceptable to the city, in which case the the park would then be turned over to the city for long term maintenance programing and operation. So one of the preliminary or one of the provisions of the development agreement, which is intended to provide flexibility for the developer to move forward with the project, yet for the city to get some certainty that the improvements that are called out for improvement in the park are actually conducted. So the way that that was addressed in the development agreement initially was for to require that the developer, prior to issuance of the 33rd certificate of occupancy for the homes that the city have accepted the Molina Park improvements by the city and to accept those improvements prior to the issuance of the 67th certificate of occupancy for the homes that they constructed. The other provision was that, or I should note that to date 48 building permits have been issued for 48 of the homes. 36 permits are pending for the homes, and a total of 20 certificates of occupancy for the homes have been issued. So essentially 84 of the of the total 131 units or somewhere in the building permit process. So specifically, the request of the developer in the way of amending the current development agreement is to change the requirement so that rather than completing the part prior to the issuance of the the 33rd certificate of occupancy, they be allowed to complete the park prior to the issuance of the 49th certificate of occupancy the second. So the cities in negotiating those provisions or that request with the the developer, the city has proposes that they would actually halt building inspections at the rough framing stage. That is prior to the completion of the framing of the project after the 48th certificate of occupancy until the park is complete. Essentially, it assures that the city has complete control of the project and that we can assure that the improvements that are outlined in the development agreement are completed prior to the developer being able to get any building permit. So that's really essentially the city's it's essentially a carrot and a stick. That's the city stick to make sure that those improvements are completed. The other provision is that park acceptance will be required after the issuance of the 117th building permit instead of prior to the 67 permit, as was initially proposed in the development agreement. The other component of this project, aside from those two components which change when the park has to be improved and when they could be issued, their final certificates of occupancy is a strip of land that's immediately to the west of the project site that's currently owned by the County of Los Angeles Flood Control District. And I'd like to show you a brief sketch that shows you this property. This piece of property is immediately adjacent to the river. It is actually owned by the L.A. County Flood Control District. And initially when the development agreement was being crafted, because that that strip of land was immediately adjacent to the park property and it was already landscaped and fairly well maintained, there was some perception that maybe we could just incorporate that as a part of the park. However, the developer just advised the city that since it is owned by the Los Angeles County, it's not really practical for the city to own it and incorporate it as a part of the project or as a part of the park. So the request as a part of the other request for the amendment is to to detach and to remove the requirement for the the park to include this strip of land that the city doesn't own, nor does the city maintain it. Currently, this property, because it is owned by the county, is actually maintained by the Los Angeles County Parks and Recreation Department. And further, the city's Park Department weighed in and indicated that there is no reason or it would just be additional cost for the city's Parks Department to maintain this strip. So they are in full agreement with eliminating or removing this strip from the from the description of the park or the requirement in the development agreement to maintain this as a part of the city's park. So that's essentially the background of this request for the those two amendments to the part inclusive of the strip being removed. Staff supports the requested amendment because these amendments allow continued accountability of the developer and compliance with all of the terms of the development agreements obligations. The developer has to date operated in good faith in terms of over the first two years of the project. They've maintained the improvements that they're currently underway in the park. Generally on schedule, the requested changes, we think at the staff level they provide the developer some flexibility, but they also give the city absolute accountability in terms of assuring that the park improvements will be completed before the developer can take occupancy of a higher number of the units than what was originally proposed in the development agreement. So we feel comfortable that the staff supports this request by the developer. And we would just note that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item back in March, March 20th of 2018, and they recommended that the City Council support and adopt an ordinance amending the development agreement. This is a public hearing. So public notice was required and the notice has been mailed out to property owners within a 1000 foot radius of the park site. And we've also published notifications in the local newspaper. That concludes the staff presentation. I'd like to just acknowledge that the developer here is here tonight to respond to any questions you might have. In addition to staff responding to any questions. And I'd also like to acknowledge Scott Kinsey, who is the project planner on this project, and he is also available. Should you have any questions on this request? That concludes staff's presentation.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Ms.. Tatum, for that presentation. At this point, we're going to go to public comment. So with anyone who would like to speak on this item, please line up now.
Speaker 2: And.
Speaker 1: Okay. I see. One, two, three, four, five people in line. Ma'am, you have the floor. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. My name is Felice Bachrach, and I live on Oregon Avenue directly across from the proposed Malina Park. I do want to say, since the developers are here so far, they've done. It's really astounding. It's beautiful. However, I would urge you to vote against the proposed amendment that to the development agreement delaying the completion of the park until they sell more units.
Speaker 6: And the reason I.
Speaker 3: Feel this is, you know, this is this has been a really kind of difficult time for this neighborhood. The parking situation.
Speaker 6: Has been.
Speaker 3: Impacted. It's a it's a dust bowl, aside from the recent winds that the lot is, you know, just unpaved. It's it's a dirt park. They they removed five mature trees.
Speaker 6: So we're getting.
Speaker 3: A lot of dust. We're getting a lot of traffic from the construction. And also since the the park is they finished the the playground and they finished the the restrooms, but there's no fencing to speak of around the park.
Speaker 6: Other than temporary fencing. If they were to stop.
Speaker 3: Working on it now.
Speaker 6: I shudder to think what would become of that park.
Speaker 3: And so I just feel that, you know, the the the neighborhood's kind of gone through a a difficult process with all of this construction.
Speaker 6: And the sooner that.
Speaker 3: We can complete at least the park, I think the neighborhood would feel a lot better about putting up with the rest of the inconvenience. Thank you very.
Speaker 1: Much. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Okay. My question is, is that I think.
Speaker 1: Let's start with your name for the record.
Speaker 3: Thank you. This way, Marsha. I'm sorry. My question is, is there building a gated community? But they're saying you're going to have access to the park or whatever and it's along the riverbed. What they're not saying is that is homeless people that live in these different areas closer to the riverbed that are being pushed out, being threatened , being harassed, stabbed, being thrown away, you know, and it's like, yeah, regardless of the person is human, is that living inside of the house or outside of the home? You still post the respect the person, treat them with humane, you know, humanity and respect. And it's not being done. A lot of these developers come in and they start building or whatever the case would be. You have officers dispatched like, okay, well these people are a nuisance, are just in our way, so we need to move them by any means necessary. But you guys are telling the developers, okay, we'll give us $3 million, give us the park, and we allow you to do certain things or whatever the case would be. Every time I come here, every meeting I have, I hear about how you guys turn around and say how you want to help the community, the city, the residents or whatever. But you guys continue to have the residents and the community and the developers and the retailers at each other's throats. All the money that these guys put in, you have them attacking each other is never one group that is agreeing with the other. A got to be some kind of mutual agreement for something to get along. But as you guys know that, hey, this is going to mess with these people, oh, we're going to accept it. But they are we're going to turn it over to these people, whatever. I mean, that's just biting at each other. And you guys supposed to be here to, like, eliminate that, but it seems like got more and more fuel to the fire as you go along. Then other people that are, you know, resonates. They're like, well, when did this come into play or when was this at the hearing or why you guys didn't answer this or why you guys didn't answer that? And you are so quick to pass a bill or say, Yeah, let's agree to this, they got to retract it or bring it back or whatever. When you guys already don't take these people money, $3 million or whatever. So if people weren't agreeing, it is you're building gated communities. Why is homeless people where you are getting millions for. I don't see no homeless building is going out. There's 21 stories in the air or seven stories or whatever the case would be which opposed the got all this money to help with homelessness. Okay. And nothing is being done. Guys, have a good night.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi. My name's Abby. I'm a resident of the Dominguez Gap neighborhood, where the Riverdale Riverdale Riverwalk are going to be interchangeable, is being developed. And I'm here to ask you to reject the amendment to the development agreement submitted by Riverdale and Brandywine. When this development was first proposed, there was quite a bit of neighborhood resistance. One of the selling points made by Brandywine at several town hall meetings was their plan to build a park and soccer pitch on the corner of Oregon and Alamo, which would benefit the entire community. Riverdale is now requesting that the city increase the number of certificates of occupancy to 49 homes prior to the park's completion rather than the contractually agreed upon 33, which is an additional 16 homes. And then also to quote, they want to halt the building permit issuance after the 117th home until Molina Park is accepted by the city instead of the original requirement of park acceptance prior to the issuance of the 67th Certificate of Occupancy. If I'm interpreting this quote correctly, this seems to be semantics. Basically requesting permission to delay completion of the park until 67 homes have received certificates of occupancy, which equals a total of 34 more homes than they originally agreed to initially agreed to, which is double the amount, almost with the caveat that they would be punished severely. No more building permits if they fail. I suspect they have locked down plans to finish the park before the 67th certificate of occupancy. I think the important question here is why are they so far ahead with the villa construction and so far behind with a park? I think I know the answer. There's no investment return on the park, but I believe a contract is a contract. And I see no reason for the city to allow delays on the agreed upon completion of the Molina Park. The completed park will benefit countless residents consenting to this amendment will only maximize profits for a private developer. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Our next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi, my name is Gabrielle Weekes. I live in the second district but represent all of South L.A. County for the Sierra Club. This gated development, I feel, is a real lost opportunity for the city. And I know I said this back when all the permits and the project were being allowed. I think this gated development could have had a local hire requirement, maybe some union workers. I know it's a little late, but as we move forward with new development, union electricians and carpenters, union plumbers, this would be a good opportunity for some for to make stronger buildings and with, you know, good jobs locally and there's no affordable units. And this is I understand I'm hoping that going forward, we could do a little better. And maybe even for a city that wants to be green, have some green components required. Next, big development, you all green light, maybe some increased insulation. So we're not using so much HVAC and energy, maybe solar panels on the roof. A friend of mine bought a townhouse in Signal Hill and they made the whole development with a lot of environmental attributes. He's got low flow showerheads, beautiful solar panels. They put down tile in a lot of places because it's easier to upkeep than carpet, and the whole thing is really green and well-insulated. And I asked him if he paid extra for his his unit to be like that. He said, no, they're all like that because it's upscale, because people pay more for it, because it's the way of the future. If Signal Hill can do that, I'd like to think we can do. And his wasn't gated as if the neighbors can't be trusted. So I think that's kind of more of a that's how I sort of feel we might want to go for in the future. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Let's pick be complete. Good evening Vice Mayor Council members. I'm here on behalf of Indigo, who was the original firm that got the entitlements for the River Walk project, now named River Dale. Joan behind me is from Brandywine. He'll be speaking in a minute. I want to point out the positive news. A lot of times we come down here and there's the negatives. Let me point out some positive news for the city to take into account here. Every single phase that was proposed so far is sold out. You think about that for a minute. How many single family homes have been built in Long Beach in the last, say, five, six years? Single family homes, not apartments? Every single phase has been sold out. We're talking up there by Delamar. What, the 710 do you want the value of those homes are the sold out? The minimum is over 600,000. Some of them are 700,000. Now, the fact that there's interest in getting these homes, that's what's amazing. That's what Lambie should be talking about, is you're taking brand new homes in a community, you're improving the surrounding community. I live up in the eighth, you're surrounding the community around there with property tax increment. Their benefit of their homes, their value of their homes is going to go up. Where do you see 600, $700,000 homes being built in Long Beach these days? You don't. I think the developer should be commended for building a project like that. The part will be done shortly. You'll have that finished and you're going to have a terrific community up there. That's a testament to what you guys approved. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next week, a police vice-chair, member of the city council, Alex Hernandez, representing the ownership of the Riverdale development. I want to thank you for taking this opportunity to listen to us on the positive news. A guest update, more on those facts. We have actually moved in 20 new families into Riverdale and we have sold 80 homes to this point. So basically, people are waiting for these homes to be finished at this point for construction. It's been very well received in the community and we've done everything we can to be a good neighbor. With regards to the delays on the park. There was no, you know, strategy or anything of that nature. It's just a matter of thinking about the different agencies and coordinating the different efforts between the city parks departments, building departments , public works departments, Edison, and then even the county. As we were reaching out to them to try to get agreement, agreements on easements and things of that nature took a lot longer than we expected. We're underway. We're moving this thing that this park will be completed probably in the next month or so. Hopefully you've seen some of the progress we've made out there in the community. We will turn that park over when it's accepted to 100% to the city satisfaction. We have already contracted the $3 million worth of work out there and we will can then continue to finish up all of our improvements per the original agreement. So we're satisfying all the original requirements all. Unfortunately, we got hit with an unfortunate delays. And that's all this amendment is addressing is giving us more time to finish those improvements. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Anna Kristensen. Well, I have to disagree with the prior speaker in saying that's all the amendment is asking for is more time. Because what the amendment is also asking for is for the city parks department to be released from the strip of public land. That's the county land. Now, this was not a surprise when the city entered into this agreement or the developer entered into it. It wasn't like they didn't know it was county land. And I think that when you're looking at the tradeoff here, which, of course, is a tremendous sacrifice of public space that we could have had, I mean, as a swimming pool person, you know, that could have been the actual forest public pool in Long Beach. But those that's chance slipped away. So what I would say is, you know, let's look at this strip of county land. If the developer and the city aren't interested in that open space, then let's have some more open space, maybe a couple less houses, a little more park space or some more amenities for the park, but or maybe even contributing. Here's an idea to the upkeep and maintenance of the Dominguez Gap wetlands, which on one minute are beautiful. And the next minute when you take your friend there from San Francisco, are filled with dead fish. So there's there's an issue, even there, of maintenance. So let's get something other than a, you know, more upscale housing in a gated community. Let's let's get something natural. Thank you and thank you for listening and not, you know, being more preoccupied with candy than with public speaking. It's really disheartening. I got to say, I know I'm over it line, but at least I didn't yell it. Please, people, if you don't want to listen, have public comment, don't have it. Let's cut it for one minute. But if you if you agree to for public comment, then at least try to stay off your cell phones. It's like being back a teacher in high school, man. Come on.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Andrew Carroll. I live in the second district. Thank you for listening. I just want to say, I think you all do a good job of listening. I know you're dealing like 12 different things out there at the same time and you're here every Tuesday and we really appreciate it . I appreciate it again. So I'd like to start with that. I don't know why I'm speaking because this has already passed the point of me doing be able to do anything as a citizen. But I feel it would be, I guess, remiss not to express that this city in this state is facing a housing crisis, and we're building a gated community of single family homes in Long Beach. I think that's disappointing. I'm not sure why people who live in a gated community need a park. It doesn't seem like they like the public, seems like they want to live in a gated community, hence the gates. Also, I'm not sure why we need a park for people who up front in backyards, but that's a different question too. There's a lot of privilege in this conversation and not a lot of narrative about some of the other sides of these issues. I think that's a missed opportunity for the city again, to have done something different. I think our priorities on this are just really messed up and I don't know. That's all I have to say. I guess if we wonder why rent control is coming, this is why it's coming. And yeah, it's a it's again, it's as I said three weeks ago, it's unfortunate because rent control is not it is not a perfect policy. But this is why the city is in the hands that it's in. And this is why the people decided to bypass the city completely and just put it to it initiative, because the city continues to approve these single family home projects as the land use element proved with some of the folks who spoke here tonight. We're on the wrong side of that as well. The land use element is going to increase single family homes in the city and pretty much shrink Long Beach. Long Beach is a growing, vibrant city. We want to be green. There's nothing green about single family homes. There's nothing green about suburbs. I encourage everyone to look at the literature into that as well. Thank you for your time. Thank you. That concludes public comment will now take it back behind the rail. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And I want to thank you, thank staff for the great comprehensive report and I want to thank the public commenters as well. I think there are some some some misconstrue, some conceptions, this misinformation that I'd like to just try to clear up on this. Number one, the park in particular, this was a key point of the development agreement. It was, I thought, a win for the neighborhood because the neighborhood had been promised the park for at least ten years prior to that. And the the site that the park now, the future Molina Park will be on was a blighted site that had no possibility or no future because we had run out of redevelopment funds. And so we had to get creative. When this development agreement came forward to to build single family homes, it was actually rejected by many of the residents. As was mentioned, there was a lot of concern that it was too dense. So I don't know that I would have been able to get any other type of development agreement approved in the neighborhood, particularly anything with any more density. And it was a tough, tough trial to to to pass the agreement as as as is, which, in my opinion, is very still very good for the neighborhood. In the biggest gap area that we have, a $3.5 million park being built, developed, but also guarantees for street sidewalk improvements, a new traffic signal and other improvements for the neighborhood, a neighborhood that has been neglected for decades. When I say at least three or four decades had been had been neglected and had no sense of community or public investment in that neighborhood there whatsoever. And so this development agreement came in, provided an opportunity for us to to to make some changes. I was very, very steadfast in and heart with the and was was proud of the development agreement that was negotiated because it held the developers feet to the fire to build homes, but also to develop and deliver a park. But what we did not foresee in for forecast is the construction delays that come with the entitlement process. This was a multi-agency endeavor. They had to deal with the Army Corps of Engineers, L.A. County, several city departments, departments. Development Services, public works, parks and RECs. And there was that strip of land, which I think is a little bit of misunderstood that is owned by the county that was actually came up after the development agreement was actually approved. And that took several weeks to to kind of vet out with L.A. County. I think it's it's prudent for us to and I'm supportive of the amendments to the development agreement, and I'm asking my council colleagues to support it as well. This is a good project. And to the point that this is going to delay anything. I don't see that happening and I don't see that that is in anybody's interest that the park is going to be delayed. I think if anything, it'll be fast tracked. But what what I understand from the changes that that have come forth, this is just an insurance policy to make sure that that that that everything falls together in line. As you can see, the park is close to being complete as is. I'm very impressed with the the progress that has been made on the development, not only the housing development, but the park as well. And I look forward to hopefully cutting a ribbon in the next few weeks with the community. Thank you very much. And I encourage my colleagues to support as well.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I'll just add my strong support for as well as a great project. It figured we figured out through this how to get that park built. When Councilman Orson articulated, redevelopment ended and there was an expectation to build a park there. So when you look at that, you look at, you know, the biggest gap that offers wetlands, the improvements to the river. I think there's going to be become a very, very special place that the whole community can be proud of. So I just want to say good work and my support. Yes. Thank you. And also want.
Speaker 8: To just just point out the Dominguez gap is maintenance by the county of Los Angeles. Good morning. We're doing a lot of park improvements and a lot of wetlands improvements along the L.A. River, just across the Alamo. We'll be kicking off the the the Forest Wetlands Project, which will be maintenance by the city of Long Beach. The lands and the the maintenance agreements and development agreements are pretty complicated. And unless you know specifically who that we're the ownership or the means, it can be very confusing. And so I appreciate all the comments. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Good project members. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving a First Amendment to the Riverwalk Development Agreement in substantially the same form as attached; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute the first amendment with Riverwalk 131 Group, LLC, read and adopted as read. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0321 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Let's have hearing three, please.
Speaker 2: What do you mean?
Speaker 0: Support from financial management? Recommendation to receive supporting documentation under the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution amending the master fee and charges schedule citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. If required. I see. Mr. Modica. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The staff report will be given by John GROSS, our finance director. Good evening, Vice Mayor and members of council. This is a public hearing and an item where we're recommending midyear changes to the master fee and charges schedule the master fee and charges schedule the main one normally comes before does come before council each year at the budget time and that's when almost all of the normal changes are made. We have a mid-year adjustment in. What you're seeing in front of you is a small number of changes for mid-year adjustments so that we don't have to wait until the budget budget time and this never mind this year. Some of the items included include aligning fees to the cost of services, reducing airline fees consistent with the business model for the airport and the increased traffic at the airport and then passing on some fees that are have been added by the state. And that concludes the staff report. And we're ready for any questions. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? See? None. There is a motion. Can we get a second on this?
Speaker 0: It's been seconded.
Speaker 1: It's not showing up here on the second here. Hold on. Actually, madam, quickly, we switch the screen to the.
Speaker 6: We all have it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know. It's not coming up here. Hold on one. Okay. There's a motion in a second. There's no public comment on this item. I'm assuming the staff report was already read. Great. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: I have some comment.
Speaker 1: Please. Councilman Price.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So, on this item, this was a ten page report, the master fee schedule. And I want to specifically acknowledge the great work of my chief of staff, Jack Cunningham. Every Sunday night, we send an email out to our residents of what's coming to council. And he actually did pull out something on page eight that relates to future implementation of parking meters in a commercial area in my district on page eight. So I want to thank him for doing that. There are a couple of changes I'd like to make to the recommendation here. Would this be an appropriate time to do so? Mr. GROSS Oh, actually, if Mr. Beck is available, I have a question about it.
Speaker 3: That would be great.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Mr.. And yes, this would be the appropriate time for changes.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Mr. Beck. I wanted to ask you, what is the justification for a public works recommendation regarding parking meters on Ocean Boulevard between Termino and Bennett?
Speaker 7: So I think you're referring to the feed that's in the masterpiece schedule for $0.75 an hour for the parking meters there. Yes. In connection with another item that's on the agenda tonight. And so like any of our business districts where we see a lot of demand for parking, which also happens frequently in our coastal areas, not only in Long Beach, but in many coastal cities that you provide parking meters in those areas to encourage turnover so that businesses can see their patrons have parking opportunities.
Speaker 0: So in regard to this particular item, if I wanted to make some changes to the proposed fee schedule and the projection revenue projections and use thereof, would this be an appropriate time to do it, or am I going to do that at a fit with another agenda item?
Speaker 7: I think we would focus on the next agenda item that talks about the parking meters and the parking rates and that, of course, and we would make any adjustments there. And depending on how the attorney wants to handle this, we can we can make that adjustment now or we can come back or pull that one item off the masterpiece schedule. Mr. Attorney, if you have some recommendations.
Speaker 1: Mr. May, that I would concur that it'd be great to really have that discussion for the next item. If we're able to do so.
Speaker 3: We can delay that until the next item and we can.
Speaker 1: Conform the.
Speaker 3: Result to the master fee resolution because the Masterpiece Resolution can't exceed or be below what you approve on that.
Speaker 0: Item. That's perfect. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Great. So we'll take that as the motion then. And there is there is a second on that motion as well. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes and let's. Vice Mayor, you wanted to add something? All right, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I think there's a lot of folks here for the power steering items, so I want to do that next. If we get a quick motion for the concern of improperly steering item will be the next item on the agenda. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution amending the Master Fee and Charges Schedule. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0352 | Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. We are hearing Adam 34.
Speaker 0: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.63. Regulating the use of single use food and beverage containers made of expanded polystyrene foam for prepared food distribution in the city of Long Beach Red for the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting for Final Reading Citywide
Speaker 1: . Thank you. There's a motion and a and a second to Councilwoman Gonzalez. Do you want to do a staff reporter? Okay. So, Mr. West, Craig Beck, our director of public works, will walk us through what this was when a previous previously went to the council and what it's turned into tonight.
Speaker 7: So many members, the city council. Thank you for the opportunity. We are here in partnership with the city attorney's office. City Attorney's Office has been working closely to implement the changes and the recommendations that Council adopted when this was before you the first time. What we would like to do is just run through a very quick PowerPoint just to remind everybody what we're talking about this evening. What is part of the ordinance and how we're moving forward? And then staff will be available for comments. I'm going to ask Deacon Mokonyane to run through that for you this evening.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council. I'm going to take just a few minutes to give us a recap of what we're doing and how we're moving forward. So just to refresh everybody's memory, we are looking at banning expanded polystyrene and other non-recyclable plastics for a number of reasons three reasons primarily litter prevention, protecting public health and for waste reduction. So as a result of this and as of discussions at the October meeting where the city council directed us to come back with an ordinance, we have identified the materials that would be banned. As you see up here and again, there are non-recyclable food and beverage containers that are plastic. So here's some examples of some environmentally acceptable alternatives. We listen to stakeholder input. As you may recall, we had a lot of stakeholder workshops and one of the things that came up was don't replace expanded polystyrene with another form of litter. Replace it with something that is definitely recyclable or reusable. And here's some examples of of those types of items right here. There's a number of them out there. And the city council approved an approach on that evening, and they asked us to phase in this this ban. And so I'm going to go very quickly over the different phases of the ban. Phase one would be three months after adoption, and it covers this city departments and city facilities and city sponsored and permitted events. Phase two would be six months after that or nine months after adoption, and it identifies food establishments that sell food and or beverage to go for to go for onsite consumption in restaurants, over 100 seats or franchised grocery stores, food stands, delis, food trucks, coffee shops, etc.. Phase three, which would be nine months later or 18 months after adoption, would capture all of the rest of the small food providers. And they were defined by the city council as being 100 people or less, seating 400 people or less. Also, during phase three, there is a retail sale ban of polystyrene ice chests, polystyrene bean bags and crafts, and also a provision that utensils and straws will be offered at food service locations only upon request for take takeaway items . Along with this, there are opportunities for exemptions if a business can show that they have undue hardship for it. The Director of Public Works has the authority to provide exemptions as needed. So what I did briefly touch on our education plan we have there are two paths for the education plan regarding this plan. One is for businesses who are affected by the ordinance, and one is for residents to support the goals of litter abatement, waste reduction and environmental health. With regard to businesses, we have hired the CAP Agency to assist us with outreach and we are developing a campaign to support businesses in their efforts to comply with the ordinance. Environmental Services Bureau and Department of Public Works is prepared to upload a website as soon as the City Council may approve this ordinance. We're ready to upload the Web site to that offers initial compliance recommendations. And like I said, that's ready to go. We could do that tomorrow if that were the case. With regard to the public, we have hired a marketing group called We the Creative to assist us in developing a bring your own campaign. So not only will this bring your own campaign continue to reduce waste and litter, it will also hopefully result in businesses saving money by not needing as many to go containers. So just to be clear, a bring your own campaign would be encouraging people that go out to eat to bring their own Tupperware and containers so that if they have leftovers, they can just put it in their mature in their containers and take it home. We were also asked to look at economic incentives. We've been working with different departments to develop these, and one being economic development incentives for businesses to purchase compliant products before the required ordinance timeline. So there will be one time reimbursements made available. We're finalizing this and we will also offer opt in kits for businesses to self-promote their participation. So in other words, if you show that you are an early complainer, perhaps you'll get some sort of poster or some sort of decals for your window. You'll get some social media promotion and some promotion by the city for being a good partner. And hopefully that will drive up some interest in your business with a free advertising for you. We also have opportunities for bulk purchasing. There's a cooperative purchasing situation already established by Greentown or Los Altos. It's a free co-op open to all food service providers, and participants receive 25% discounts on our products, and that would be acceptable in this bill. Finally, compliance is an issue. We have integrated enforcement into our current city operations. We will be creating an Environmental Services Bureau Web forum for the public to report violations. We will have an education and compliance integrated into food facility inspections. Our health department, when they do their annual inspections, will be including a part of their inspection as checking to see if appropriate to go materials are being used. The enforcement structure would be based on administrative citation procedure, and there will be a process, again, a procedure for temporary exemptions due to undue hardship. I'd like to take a moment to thank all of the departments involved in the development and upcoming implementation of this program. It was an effort with many different departments and bureaus, including Parks, Recreation and Marine Development Services, the Office of Sustainability, Special Events, the City Attorney, Business Licensing, Economic Development. And I would be remiss if I didn't call out specifically the Health Department, Environmental Health Bureau that was so supportive and will be critical in the implementation of this program down the road. That's the end of my presentation right here for questions. Thank you. Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Yes, actually, if I if we can take it to the public, that would be great.
Speaker 1: Sure. Public comment. Please come forward on the item by Steve Marion and I will make sure you please say your name for for the record before we Steve Marion. I would like to thank you all for for being here. City council members, staff and being here at this hour. Thank you for your time. I guess you can see green. Green, green. Green. Can you imagine which way I feel? But the gray hair comes from worrying about whether will implement these kind of decisions. And Councilwoman Gonzalez, thank you for these. And I love the color of your blouse. Mr. Silver, now, please say hi to the best secretary in the law. Meet Unified School District when you get home this evening. And now on to more serious business. We have a chance to lead in this decision. It sounds like you've already decided, but I'm not very politically savvy, so please bear with me. I think we have a choice and a chance to join in the leadership of 110 other cities out of 482 in California and more nationwide, and nine nine counties out of 58 in leading in this effort polystyrene from articles that I read and I'm not a scientist takes from 500 years to maybe never as far as decompose here it means it's always there it's all over the sand and in the ocean. Fish and birds eat it and feed it to their young. And it's not nutritional. And if the fish die, it's simple. We die. We are at a crossroads. We, as a people need to enact legislation that will decrease production of polystyrene. That's the key to decrease the production. Since the last meeting, I believe that I've seen costs of alternative sources of takeout containers go down because more cities are getting on board and more companies are already changing so that they're producing other containers that are more biodegradable. If we do, they will be. If we do follow this path, there will be less sales, less production, healthier oceans, healthier people, healthier planet. So please vote to help humanity to thrive by enacting this ordinance. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Charles Moore, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson, an ordinance proposer Gonzalez and members of the city council. Plastic pollution is no longer a peripheral issue, and that's visible in the fact that this Earth Day is dedicated to plastic pollution. The issue that I began to raise attention for 21 years ago. At that time, I felt that it was becoming ubiquitous. This material that doesn't degrade, that defeats natural decay. Only we humans make things that nature can't digest. And plastic is the main object that we make that nature can't digest. But there was a lot of pushback back then, the idea that it was ubiquitous, that it was going to be a problem, that there was reasons to worry about plastic. We're pushed aside. That's no longer the case. We now have evidence that it's in our salt and our water, in the food that we eat, in our environment, and that it has serious consequences for the future as much as production is anticipated to double in the near future. Now there are reasons why maybe a guy from Long Beach got into this. In my recent article in the Business Journal, I made the statement that Long Beach may be the most polluted city in the United States. By this material, we have the effluent of the Los Angeles River and the San Gabriel River servicing upwards of 15 million people, delivering their throwaways to our ocean and beaches. And maybe that's why I got into this. Maybe I saw it before other people saw it. I saw it in the middle of the ocean before other people realized what was going on. Now that term ubiquitous is getting no pushback. It's proven it is everywhere. It's in the air we breathe now. So we need to take steps to eliminate this threat. And eliminating Styrofoam is a step in that direction. Now, I collected some plastic from the gyre, sent it to China. They invited me to their first plastic conference at the mouth of the Yangtze River, which is the dirtiest river in China. That's the parallel to Long Beach. So I'm now going to China to do the very same thing or raise that awareness that you now are acting on. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. And thank you for your decades of work to this issue. So thank you very much. Next Speaker Hi. My name's Chef Paul Buchanan. I'm a resident of District three. I am a food service business owner. Thank you all for the hard work on this. It was very comprehensive, the outline and the ordinance, so thank you for reading that. That was excellent. I support the ban wholeheartedly. We need less plastic pollution. Plastic straws should be next, please. And McDonald says billions and billions serve. Now, those are the billions and billions and billions of straws that are out there. More plastic pollution for us to consider getting rid of. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hello. Good evening.
Speaker 0: Mayor Garcia and city council members. I am.
Speaker 3: Certainly one of the co-founders.
Speaker 0: Of the Long Beach Environmental Alliance. And I have John here showing pictures of of litter, especially Styrofoam that we picked up during.
Speaker 3: Our beach cleanups.
Speaker 0: So I want to ask you all, do you value our lives, the lives of those that we love? Are you willing to fight for them? You are all sitting here in.
Speaker 3: A position where.
Speaker 0: You can make a difference.
Speaker 3: I am here.
Speaker 0: Today to use my voice for those who can't. The environment. You all have the voice to vote to ban the polystyrene. My organization, like I said before, we host beach cleanups, Alamitos Beach and Sun. And but that's just a start. Every piece of plastic made on Earth still exists today.
Speaker 3: Most of the plastic in the ocean comes from.
Speaker 0: Items we use every day. Most is single use plastic like Styrofoam.
Speaker 3: Plates, cups, plastic utensils.
Speaker 0: Straws.
Speaker 3: Etc. Plastic particles.
Speaker 0: Are found inside animals and throughout the ocean. The ocean is food chain.
Speaker 3: From shrimp, mussels, fish.
Speaker 0: I have. I may have mentioned some of your favorite food.
Speaker 3: Turtles to.
Speaker 0: Whales. We all. So we respect small businesses here in Long Beach. My solution for them and I forgot what his name over there is, is to.
Speaker 3: Educate their consumers, to bring you reusable items, to enable.
Speaker 0: Businesses to avoid constant purchasing of disposable items that end up in our environment. If pollution does not end up in our environment, will end up in the landfill, which when plastic when plastic mixed with organic matter, it creates methane gas, which is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. So the methane gas stays in our atmosphere a lot longer, and this contributes to climate change. If you decide to keep the polystyrene, you are promoting and accepting a wasteful.
Speaker 3: Bully.
Speaker 0: Culture. Resources are way too valuable to be thrown away, so please make the right decision.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is John Kendrick. I'm one of the co-founders of the Long Beach Farming Alliance. And we have walked from all the way from the L.A. River down to the San Gabriel River. And we see this every day. This is every day. This is not after a storm. When you walk down to a shoreline village on the rocks, look down at the rocks. This is the same trash we see every day. It used to be a time you saw those only after a storm. Now we see this on a daily, you know, 65 days a year. Also to this year, they were down to the deepest part of the ocean with a submersible. And they came back up with samples from every death and every living creature had plastic in a system, which means we have terminated a whole food chain. There is no safe place, no more the ocean where there is no plastic anymore. And then we talk about being a tourism city. What do you think people will say when they see this stuff on the beach? They take pictures and send it back home and their families. This hurts tourism, which hurts jobs. And then to our children, they've got to play in this stuff. What does it do to them? I think it's time we start to practice what we preach and actually clean up our city. Because a captain said won't be harbor in the city is now one big trash can. We are the worst. I've heard it more than once and I see it every day. And I would like to ask you to go down there and walk every day for a whole week and tell you what you see down there and take pictures of it. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Kobe Sky. I'm very proud to chair the Sustainable City Commission and I just wanted to speak in support of this item. First, I wanted to express my appreciation for the Council and Deacon Marconi and and his staff for developing what really is an excellent ordinance. Because of the great discussion that you all had in October, I think there were a lot of improvements made to the original, original proposal, including a phased in approach, education, having exemptions for businesses that might be impacted with an undue burden, having utensils and straws only provided upon request, which is a win win solution that improves the environment but also reduces costs for businesses in going beyond just Styrofoam, looking at the impact of the materials themselves and focusing on products that are recyclable and compostable, which will mean that we're improving the environment and making it easier for the city and for our businesses to comply with state environmental mandates and to improve our environment. I just want to say that I support the ordinance as is with no amendments. I think that as previously discussed, we are in a crisis due to plastics impacting the environment and it is a particular burden on the city of Long Beach. And all the more reason for us to be leaders in developing an ordinance that I think will be a model for other jurisdictions to adopt. Stopping these plastics at the source and reducing that pollution is the most effective way to reduce the impact on our beaches. And so I ask for your support for the ordinance, and I appreciate all the work that's gone into it so far. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Hello, Gabrielle Weekes.
Speaker 3: The chair this year called for the region. So we have members in everybody's district and really not much new. This is the same topic we've had discussed here at the city council by many, many times. I know DEKA has been working very hard looking at other cities ordinances and how they phrased it, and it passed unanimously last time. I'm hoping nothing has changed. We can move forward with this so we can really brag about being a green city. And I thank Diego and his staff. I know that they've been working on this very hard. And I think that, you know, this is not new territory in a lot of other cities have done it, a lot of counties. And so we can do this. And I ask for your yes vote. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Nick.
Speaker 0: Speaker Council members. Honorable Mayor My name is Katie Allen. As you may recall from past meetings, I'm the executive director of Al Goleta. So that organization that Charles Moore founded and our organization has been working to prevent ocean plastic pollution since 1997, after Charles sparked what we call the Great Plastics Awakening. Since inception, we've been working around the world. So we've interacted with so many different people, so many different communities. And what we're seeing is a global movement happening. And we now know that it's ubiquitous. It's throughout all environments. It's not just the marine environment anymore. It's in our tap water, it's in our bottled water, it's in our food, our air. It's in our bodies. Over the past two and a half years, our organization has worked with local high school students to collect plastic pollution samples from our water, seafloor and our shoreline of East San Pedro Bay. Sample after sample expanded polystyrene has been identified as the most common type of microplastics by count since the last time I spoke at this podium. Our team of students have analyzed 60 more peninsula samples. Our data shows an average of 208 pieces of expanded polystyrene per ten liters of sand. We're literally changing the composition of our beaches and our water. In 2028, our waters will be a venue for the Summer Olympics. The world will be swimming and sailing in our plastic mess.
Speaker 3: We have less.
Speaker 0: Than ten years to transition into a plastic, smart city. And if we cannot make it through this transition between.
Speaker 3: Before.
Speaker 0: 2028, the world will have some tough questions for us.
Speaker 3: If we're going to put our.
Speaker 0: City on a global stage, we better make sure it's clean and safe. I believe this ordinance has been identified as one of the most important action items to implement. Immediate. In order to reduce the amount of plastics in our local environment, phasing out polystyrene will be a huge leap forward in our.
Speaker 3: Transition.
Speaker 0: Towards a plastic, smart city. And I wholeheartedly urge you to move this ordinance forward tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Hi. My name is Janine Rodriguez. I'm a marine biologist from Cal State Long Beach. And I just prepared a little something that I'd like to say. So I first became aware of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch while reading an article assigned during a class I took while attending Cal State Long Beach. The article went on to describe the increasing amounts of plastics found in our oceans, specifically the Pacific Ocean, where the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is located, and how the pollution is affecting marine life. This article had such a great impact on me that I cheat, that I changed my course of study from molecular cell biology to marine biology so that I could further enhance my knowledge about marine, about marine life, and how to become more involved and truly do something to prevent plastic pollution such as Styrofoam. One One way I've been able to be involved is by conducting research, specifically hormone and proteomic analysis, all of which was completed in the I Do research lab at Cal State, Long Beach and on lantern fish that were collected from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch during the six week, six week long expedition done by how Goleta in 2014 results in a nutshell, of course, showed that there was indeed disrupted hormone regulation and essential proteins were either over under express compared to organisms that were considered to be from our control groups or control sites. Another experience I was fortunate to be a part of was ugliest experience ship this last fall here as a group, we created a trial that were that we could attach to the back end of kayaks and could collect microplastics at the surface of any body of water. It went across these these, these the. So these, of course, are only a few of the many ways one can get involved involved with. And it is and it is critical that we do become more and more involved in such activities in order to help preserve our oceans, because our oceans have provided and do so much for us, that it's time that we do the same for it. So thank.
Speaker 1: You. Thank you very much. Next speaker, gary mayor and council members. My name was mike murchison. I know i'm not the fan favorite in here tonight on this subject matter, but I want to point out a couple of things that are fact driven. Number one, you don't have Councilman D Andrews is here with us this evening. He's ill. And I know that he's very supportive of small restaurants. Number two, I provided a legal transcript of the October proceedings where the council had a very lengthy discussion on the. It was a very healthy discussion. I do remember very vividly, as I'm sure some of you do, that the very end of that discussion was the discussion having to do with the phase three. That Phase three had to do with our small restaurants in Long Beach, the vibrant community of small restaurants that we all depend upon in our community. And the decision reached that night by this dais was that you would wait, do a study before determining the outcome of moving forward with phase three. You're okay with phase one and phase two. I'm okay with phase one in phase two, but I am concerned that we follow through on what we stated back then in October. That was very clear when we reviewed the transcript that the council was supportive of a friendly motion. In fact, the maker of the motion, the original motion was supportive of that friendly. That said, let's do a study to determine, based on the data provided from phase one to phase two, how do we move forward with phase three on our small restaurants? I think that's very important for you all to recall that that's not something you can just kind of wipe out and just say, let's just move forward. There are small restaurants that are not here tonight because they're running a restaurant. They can't be represented here tonight. I'm here for them to try to have you folks take a step back and say, look, let's look at the data. There's no harm in looking at the data to determine what the impact is from phase one and phase two. I'm hoping that your city attorney will jump in on this conversation. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hello. My name's Schnapp Christensen, community member. And I just want to thank you for all for bringing this proposal forth, and especially Dr. Charles Moore and Gabrielle Weeks and Kirby Skyfire for your endless commitment to banning plastic and protecting our environment. And I guess I haven't heard any other Indigenous people get up, so I guess I'll speak to that perspective that, you know, the earth is sacred. And I have read Dr. Moore's book and I'm big fan of your work, and he also I'm a founder of Protect Beach Wetlands. So we've got a youth group that's really been committed to cleaning up some of the trash on the highways, along the wetlands in Los Cerritos in an effort to get to know the land better. And we go out maybe every every second, Sunday of the month, every second and fourth Sunday. We've been collecting trash in giant ten gallon bags. And there's so much plastic and Styrofoam along the highways, we fill up usually like five or six bags. And so we just really need to get rid of this in in our environment. And from what I know, it's already part becoming part of our molecular structure. So, you know, it's it's like in everything we eat in the fish, in the ocean and the garbage patch is like twice the size of Texas and it's just sitting there waiting to come ashore. So anything you guys do to get rid of plastic, I don't think the small restaurant business is going to suffer that much. There's plenty of alternatives in terms of other materials you can use. I'm very familiar with Kirsten Bowman and she uses bamboo containers or she is this continues to take home that are like cardboard. And, you know, they're pretty durable. Even if you get like a big juicy burger or whatever, it doesn't even leak through. So, you know, we need to get rid of the Styrofoam and the plastic. And thank you very much for your support on that.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Hello, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Elizabeth LAMB and I'm here on behalf of the Low Street as wetlands land trust, as advocates for those Rita's wetlands. We realize that that goal cannot be attained as long as there continues to be an unending stream of these polluting and harmful polystyrene products in our local wetlands. Not only are these products unsightly, but can harm wildlife when they are accidentally ingested, or they can impede the ability of animals to forage. Furthermore, as responsible stewards of not only our local wetlands, but of the global environment, we are concerned about the consequence of polystyrene products circulating around the planet, never completely breaking down and making their way into the oceans and the food chain. It is unfair to risk the well-being of our children and our children's children and future generations by allowing this to continue. We wholeheartedly support the ban on polystyrene products, and I did want to mention the Speaker before talking about the hardship on small businesses. I remember that meeting as well.
Speaker 6: And I thought that the council very.
Speaker 0: Thoughtfully stretched out the implementation phase, which I thought made a lot of sense. And the other thing that really struck me was you querying.
Speaker 6: Your staff about other.
Speaker 0: Municipalities that had done this and the topic of San Francisco coming up. And from their unbiased perspective, there hadn't been any big problems because.
Speaker 6: This is a pretty.
Speaker 0: Easy issue to get your head around and to implement. It's merely swapping out a polluting and toxic product for something that's more sustainable. And I really do think about what this ocean will look.
Speaker 6: Like and what this world will.
Speaker 0: Look like five, ten, 2000 years. And the oceans.
Speaker 6: Full of.
Speaker 3: Plastic.
Speaker 0: Just seems so terrible to me. And this seems like, quite honestly, a small step to make things better. So thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 6: And your attention.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker Dave.
Speaker 9: Shukla. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Mayor Garcia, thank you for your leadership on this issue. As someone who grew up at the mouth of the San Gabriel River, this is something that would be very welcome, very much support the measure. As you know, toxicity is an issue across many different forms of product and attribution. Some of the other issues associated with it are going to be issues for us.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. All right. Hello. My name is Seamus Ennis. I'm with the Long Beach chapter of the Surfrider Foundation. Hey, guys. Thanks for having us. Good job. City council and staff, we really appreciate the effort and the time that you put into this. When I joined the Surfrider Foundation in 1999, it was kind of on the radar. But by 26, we started sending residents along. We started sending thousands of postcards to you, the mayor and the city council. And so you've been aware of this position from lots of our residents for many, many years. And so we then the city itself has been working on it for about 13 years, and now we're looking at the implementation schedule of about 18 months. So we think that's pretty modest. You know, we think 18 months isn't too fast because we already been working on it for 13 years. So the Long Beach chapter, Surfrider Foundation fully supports this ordinance as written, and we think you should just go ahead, go forward with it. And the final point is, we think it's pretty business friendly as well, because we've looked at a lot of restaurants that have already transitioned over from Styrofoam to other products. And it's been modest changes from a few percentage points up to about equal. And we have 40, at least 40 ocean friendly restaurants that we've already awarded and given them attaboys. And it has been no big deal for them and their customers actually appreciate it. So we think you can do it with the 18 month schedule as written is fine and it's not it doesn't hurt businesses at all. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, everybody. Mayor, city council members. My name is Michael Doshi. Thank you so much for having me here this evening. Over the years, I've been a volunteer with five Gyres Institute, a member of Heal the Bay Speakers Bureau up in Santa monica, the rise of plastics manager for Los Angeles's Surfrider chapter. And right now I am a staff member with Al Goleta, Marine Research and Education as their education coordinator and project manager, also on the global plastic pollution movement. I am known as the Gnarly Beach Cleaner and my mission is to spread awareness of plastic pollution through fun and positivity. So what I'm really here to do tonight is to let you guys know that you're the best looking group of council members I've ever seen at any council meeting I've ever spoken to. And that's not much just talking about how good you look. I can just see the intelligence radiating out of your bodies. All right? And I can see your intelligence when it comes to dealing with plastic pollution. And I can see that you're smart enough to know that even if you're not down at the beach or in the ocean seeing what's going on, you know it's happening. You know that it's an issue. I like to look at single use plastic pollution as this big tree, this big rotting tree that's decimating the local population by dropping the single use plastic fruit all over the place, US activists, US organizations that are working to fight plastic pollution. We're that small ax that is trying to chop that tree down. What we need you to be is that sharpening stone to help our ax chop it down. And that's what we're trying to do on a global movement here. So with that said, I think it's a smart decision to be the change makers, to be that stone that can help inspire the youth, inspire people to continue to want to make changes here in the state of California, and hopefully translate that to other places in the country and around the world. You have an opportunity right now that might not be presented to you again, so why not take it and be leaders in regards to the small businesses? That's exactly why your hardship clause exists. And I read through the draft of previous ordinances and I saw that. And there's organizations such as Surfrider that has the Ocean Friendly Restaurants program, and they have done the work and they have done the research to work with small businesses to make sure that they don't even need to apply for that hardship clause. So utilize the research and the tools that are already out there and exist. Thank you so much for your time. I hope I can make you stoked. I hope I can make you smile and I hope to see you soon. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of the council. My name is Rob Northup and I'm the director of the Don't Waste Long Beach Coalition. And first of all, I'd just like to say thank you to Councilwoman Gonzales for bringing this forward. We've all heard the debates. You guys all know the facts behind this stuff. We've been talking about this for almost ten years now within this city in terms of trying to push forward with constant revisits and studies and delays and the like. So we know the facts. We've already heard from everybody here. We've heard from a restaurant owner who said, let's move forward with this thing. So what I'm here to do is just ask you all to please move forward with this stuff. Because I do recall also at that last October hearing where another excuse that came forward was if we you know, we need to study this stuff. And if we did this here, it still won't have any impact because other cities are going to continue to have this and haven't banned it. So we'll still see Styrofoam on our beaches. And while that may be true, that's not an excuse to not move forward with this. Particular thing, right? I think things change when individuals are in this case, cities and councils like you are. Move forward with courage and leadership to actually move this thing and changing, doing what we can to change our little corner of the universe and making sure that we're making life a little bit easier and a little more environmentally free for everybody else that's here. Right. So again, I ask that you all move forward with this tonight, as is there's also, again, extending the 12 month phase in 18 months for businesses in a hardship clause. So we've done the study, we've done the analysis. And let's move forward tonight. Thank you very much. Thank you, Max Baker.
Speaker 6: Good evening, city mayor and council members.
Speaker 3: My name's Jennifer Granholm. I actually migrated down from Los.
Speaker 6: Angeles just for this meeting. I came down because I considered.
Speaker 3: Long Beach as a pinnacle of.
Speaker 6: Progress with a green room and sustainability. And just as this previous speaker said, I'm not.
Speaker 0: Going to harp on that actual.
Speaker 3: Notion too much at this point in time, because I think it's been abundantly.
Speaker 6: Clear how everybody feels more. So it's regardless of where you started.
Speaker 3: The reason I'm coming up to the podium is to ask you a question about what brought you.
Speaker 0: Here to the city council. What made you want to be a leader?
Speaker 6: What brought you to want to.
Speaker 3: Make a change in.
Speaker 0: The world? I think we all actually have.
Speaker 6: More in common.
Speaker 0: Than we think.
Speaker 6: That we do. If we take a look, regardless of what your status is, you.
Speaker 3: Have a desire to protect your loved ones or protect your family to provide to progress. I think it's all about a balance. And regardless of this one or any of.
Speaker 6: The other policies that come up on the floor, just take that into consideration.
Speaker 3: Whenever you have another environmental thing that's coming up on the floor, particularly about small cells or whatever it is, that's it.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much. And we have a last four speakers and then we're close. We're close. Okay. We have we're going to last five speakers and closing the speakers list next speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening, mayor and council. I am Melissa Bean Hyson and I'm here last minute on prepared remarks on behalf of my sister Julie Darrell, who is a small business owner in Long Beach. She has been working for about a year trying to promote awareness about single, single use plastics and how to avoid them. And I've just seen the first Sunday of every month at the Alamitos Bay Farmers Market. The community has really responded positively. They are. They laugh about, you know, taking your own containers to restaurants, but they do it. And it's every straw that isn't used or every piece of Styrofoam that isn't used is just one way that we are moving forward to the community to keep Long Beach Green or to move it towards being green. My five year old nephew is having a hard time not picking up trash. So we're working on that.
Speaker 3: But if we can get him in the right direction and kind.
Speaker 0: Of real bad in a little bit, then I think a.
Speaker 6: Yes vote in this area would also help the city move.
Speaker 0: Forward. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker Evening there. Members of the city council. My name is Mark Coleman. I live in the peninsula. I'm here tonight on behalf of the Peninsula Neighborhood Group Association. So for many of us neighborhood associations, this is a huge issue. And I think I'm the only neighborhood association here. I'm not sure, but certainly in Belmont Heights, Belmont Shore and the Peninsula and our board six months ago notified Council Woman Price that we wanted her to support this ordinance. The beach. Those of you who have independence, the beach know it's ground zero for plastics, pollution and the documentation by our Goleta Marine Research has documented the depth of pollution. It's extensive. When and if the city really wants to use that beach for any purpose other than as something to pass by on the boardwalk, it will take major efforts just to clean up the plastic out of the sand. We cannot go any further like this. Every day that beach is inundated with plastics from the L.A. River and the San Gabriel Channel. We need your help. The city needs your help to pass this ordinance. Let's be at the forefront. We thank you for your support. Excellent report from staff that really is going to move this forward. Not just this issue, but the whole issue of bringing containers, eliminating any containers whatsoever. So we eliminate trash, which is a major problem. Thank you all so much. Please pass the ordinance. Thank you, Mark. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Anna Christensen, protect the Long Beach. Slow, serious wetlands, obviously in support of this ordinance. I do want to direct everybody's attention to the screen behind you. However, council apparently regulating the use of sin.
Speaker 1: If you look at the board here.
Speaker 3: So that's a real challenge. And and speaking of which, since plastic comes from oil, I think one of the great benefits of this project will be to ah to maybe be forgiven for the sin of continuing to drill for oil which Long Beach does. So we can regulate our own sinning by not producing more plastic or using more plastic. Styrofoam made from oil means that if we use less Styrofoam, if we consume less Styrofoam as a city and as a community, then we will not be making more in our oil refineries to the west. So it's a it's a step. And it's also really kind of surreal to have everyone on the same page as environmentalists in Long Beach, which we all were before. Beach Oil Mineral Partners Divided US. So sad, but still on a positive note. Let's regulate that use of sin.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. And our last two speakers control.
Speaker 3: And Cantrell. Good evening, counsel and honorable mayor. I have gotten used to bringing my own flask for water and kicking the plastic bottle habit. I take my own reusable bags to the grocery store instead of using plastic or paper bags, and I am sure that I and many other people can get used to bringing our own reusable takeout utensils to a restaurant. Habits are hard to change, but we can do it. And I don't think that this is going to cause the small restaurants to lose any business if they don't provide a Styrofoam takeout container. I've trained all my family now to say no straws when we go into a restaurant. And I think I can train them to take, take, take out. And I hope that you will pass this tonight as is and not extend it any further. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. My name is Sona Coffey and I'm a resident of the fourth District and also serve as your vice chair on the Sustainable City Commission. Pardon my grand.
Speaker 3: Entrance on the thing, but thank you for.
Speaker 0: Letting me speak here tonight. I will add my voice in support of adoption of this ordinance. I know there's a lot of supporters tonight, and there was also some concern about protecting small business. And I do want to.
Speaker 3: Help the public.
Speaker 0: Relies on the groups realize I know our Surfrider member mentioned we have 40 businesses and small businesses that are certified under our ocean friendly restaurant program. The city has a green business certification program. Small businesses are doing this already. They're making that switch voluntarily. I think what this ordinance will do is really help solidify the city's stance on this issue and really help us become take that next step in becoming stewards of our environment here. I know many of you believe that we have that responsibility and I do as well. So thank you for bringing this forward. And I encourage your vote and support tonight.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Thank you, everyone that spoke. I'm going to turn this over to Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Yes. So I want to thank you just for being so patient with tonight, but also for the incredible showing of support for this item. I've only been on this item for two years, and I want to thank my chief of staff, Corey, for being very involved in this and my office. We had a ton of interns who also were at Cal State Long Beach and really turned to more environmentally or environmental majors because of this, because they were so fascinated. So I want to thank you all again. We should give you a big round of applause. You've been at it for so long. And we have a representation of, of course, community advocates, people in the food industry. Captain Moore, who's here, who's been doing this for many decades, academic institutions who've been a part of this. So let's give all of you a big round of applause, because I really appreciate the support of that. And I'd like to thank my co-sponsors on here, Councilwoman Pierce and Councilmember Urunga, who joined me on this item. And I appreciate their support in this as well. And I want to thank everybody for coming out tonight. I know these nights are never easy, but I really appreciate it. And as many of you know, this material is one of the most prolific materials found on our beaches. I think we haven't said it enough. Right. Our beaches, waterways and our streets. I'm now a member of the Master Plan Committee for the L.A. River. And that was the one thing that all of the 710 cities talked about. The very first thing was pollution. And it absolutely was brought to my attention multiple times that Styrofoam was one of those main polluters, not just here in the city of Long Beach, but along the 710 corridor, which we know is a is a big deal for many people. And because we know it's nearly impossible to recycle, it ends up spending over 500 years in our streets. So unfortunately, long before any of us will, we'll see that biodegrade. The ordinance before us is actually very generous, and I want to thank my council colleagues from last meeting back in December of 2016, actually, when we proposed a few things, we talked about moving the phase plan from 12 months to 18 months, and that was proposed by Councilman Price. And I appreciate that the polystyrene ice chests as proposed by Councilwoman Mongeau and I appreciate that. And then the recommendation to include as a voluntary option for straws by Council Member Pier. So I really appreciate those as we implemented those in the ordinance. My team and I, as many of you know, we've been working on this for nearly two years, but the city of Long Beach has been working on this for nearly 13 years. We have studied this, I would say, ad nauseum, and I hate to say that, but we absolutely have been studying this quite some time. In addition to the great work that our city staff did, obviously there was a categorical exemption report, and that includes a technical documentation of an environmental analysis, which in essence is another study. And it also includes a lot of information about Long Beach specifically and the impacts that we're seeing because of single use. It also validates a lot of the questions that we've had here about what it's actually doing to our waterways and what it's doing to our streets and litter and pollution. But I also would like to thank there's a ton of people, but our public works department, Environmental Services, DeKoe and Craig Beck. We really appreciate your work in this. I know we went through this similarly with the plastic bag ban, although this is a bit different, you all did a tremendous job of going to our business community . You talked to many of our community advocates that you've already known. So we appreciate that. And Amy Weber from the city attorney's office, thank you for your support and help in this and getting the language just right. And Mike Mays as well. And what I'll say is we have a lot of groups here, as I mentioned, a lot of good knowledge here from very many decades that have provided good information. And I think this is very fair. Three months for city facilities and city sponsored events, nine months for large businesses and 18 months for small businesses. Less than 100 employees. My office personally reached out to every single business improvement district district. We talked to the Business Journal as well and talked about that everyone from Naples to Coba, which is an assortment of many business improvement districts, to include downtown and Bixby Knolls. If I wasn't personally there, my chief of staff was there talking to them about the specifics of this ordinance. So they understood and I would say that, you know, a lot of them will welcome this. A lot of them, as we've mentioned, and I am one that does not cook, if you can believe that I have two jobs and my three kids. So I eat out a lot. And so I'm noticing and I'm seeing a lot of the businesses that I would have seen have Styrofoam maybe two years ago that don't have Styrofoam anymore. And I'm really proud of these businesses for taking the leap to do that. And we want to make sure that they're recognized. So in that, I will say I hope we do not delay this. We don't, I believe, need another study. We've studied this quite some time, quite a bit. We have a lot of great people that we've been working with that have ventured, you know, on this great item with us. And I think delaying this would just be a disservice to our community. We know many of our communities, we've invested in the Long Beach Clean team, we've invested in the Aquarium for Wildlife Restoration and expansion. MLB must program. A lot of these initiatives are what are the truly the values of Long Beach, and I hope we can continue that by solidifying this ordinance tonight. And then lastly, a few other people I must thank as well, Sierra Club, Surfrider Foundation, don't waste Long Beach with the Teamsters 396 as well. I'll Goleta Marine Research heal the bay Long Beach and Bar. A mental alliance. And so many of you that have been by our side to help us in the Long Beach Area Peace Network as well. So thank you. I will leave it there. And I really ask for my colleagues support. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Catherine Pierce.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 3: I think my colleague, Councilmember Gonzales kind of said.
Speaker 0: The majority of what we need to hear tonight, that we've been here for 13 years with a lot of hours, a lot of sweat equity and a lot of process. Sometimes local government and bureaucracy, we get called out for not doing enough process, for not having everybody at the table, for not hearing all the voices. And this was not a dog and pony show of process. This was real.
Speaker 3: Engagement with small businesses, with big businesses.
Speaker 0: With DART, the people that make a lot of these products to small restauranteurs that might not have understood some of the benefits of going this route. And so I want to say that tonight, not only am I proud for everybody that's in the audience that's been working on this, like Surfrider Sierra Club residents, but I'm really proud of the city for taking the time and I'm proud of my colleague for saying, yes, we could try to push something through very quickly, but instead let's do a phased approach.
Speaker 3: And as she recapped.
Speaker 0: For us, that last meeting that we had really did take apart from everybody, and it felt like we were all on that same page. And so I'm honored tonight to be here with everybody. And I like to always share with folks know, my first action of being a rabble rouser was not on a picket line. It was actually picking up trash door to door when I was in fourth grade.
Speaker 3: Going door to door to my.
Speaker 0: Neighbors and collecting cans and trying to do recycling. And my mom was like, recycle what?
Speaker 3: You know, she could not.
Speaker 0: Comprehend that I now had five bags of of cans.
Speaker 3: In our yard that I needed her to drive to take me to go recycle. And so from that being.
Speaker 0: My very first activism to being a part of this council where we are really taking the actions necessary, it's a proud day. And I hope that everybody can walk away tonight feeling proud and like we've put forth our best effort. So, again, congratulations.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Gonzalez, for your great leadership. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I know we have some folks cued up to speak. I want to just I wanted to speak after the makers of the motion on this issue tonight. And I want to just say a few things. The first is I strongly support the ordinance as presented by staff. I supported this since the conversation started by Councilwoman Gonzales, and I really want to thank her for her leadership on this issue. And I want to say a few things that I think are important to note. So in 2011, when I was on the council, I just got on the council and at the time we had an ordinance, a ban, single use, plastic bags. And when we did that in 2011, there's a lot of the same similar type of conversation. In fact, a lot of you that are here on this issue, we're also here on the conversation on the single use plastic bag issue. And it was difficult and we implemented a lot of this of of the similar kinds of measure to support small businesses and the phased in approach. And some things happened which were significant. The first is we saw an immediate reduction of plastic bags and the single use bags and the litter that they created all across the city and our beaches. And that was reported pretty heavily through the work of city staff. So there was an immediate impact to the city. The second thing that happened, more importantly, was Long Beach became one of the largest cities in the state of California to actually ban single use plastic bags, which led then the state legislature just two years later banning single use plastic bags up and down across the state of California. And so it is important for big cities to take initiative on issues that affect the environment so deeply, which is why I believe it's so important for Long Beach to do the same thing on on this issue. But we now have a state that moved forward on an ordinance at Long Beach, led on when it came to single use plastic bags. And on this issue, we can't expect as a community to ask our neighbors to not put their runoff and their pollution into the river if we're not willing to step up ourselves and eliminate from our own community the single source of pollution that we have in our river and into our coastline, which is polystyrene and Styrofoam products. It is it is causing incredible damage to our coastline. It's causing incredible damage to marine life here. And I know that. Yes, it is. I understand that it is a burden to some small businesses. I think that is a reality that that I think is true. But it is also true that there is no single, larger polluter and cause of devastation to our marine life and to our ecosystem in the San Pedro Bay than polystyrene. And so I'm hopeful that we move forward on this in a in a way that is strong and send a signal to the other. Is that this is a direction that they need to go as well in order to truly clean the San Pedro Bay. We have to lead for the other cities north of us to do the same thing and hopefully for the state of California to do the same thing. And that's how we get our local beaches here in the community clean. And so I think for for a city that has led on issues around solar and LEDs, conversion, multimodal transit, urban farming, plastic bags, I think this is a natural step in that process. And I want to uplift not just the work of staff, but the work of the sustainable the Sustainable City Commission. And I think it's important for us also to understand that the work that the Commission has done on this issue has been extensive. They've been discussing this issue for years, and I'm really proud of them. A couple of those members of those that have been involved are here, including one member of our council, and that was also a member of that group. And so I think that we owe that commission, but also the community to move forward and to ban Styrofoam in Long Beach. So thank you very much. And with that, let me turn it over to the speakers that are cued up, starting with Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. So a few things. First of all, I support this item very much, and I think the credit really needs to go first and foremost to those who came before us on this body who really laid these efforts, the foundation for these efforts. I remember talking with Councilwoman Lowenthal and Councilman O'Donnell when they were on this council with me about this item. And I know that Councilwoman Lowenthal was really working on this item and developing it. And we we had a lot of conversations about it. And as someone who represents the coastline and the bay, I think this is definitely a step in the right direction, although there's a lot more work to be done. So I do support the item. I will say, though, that when the item came forward in October, we had a very healthy and robust discussion involving the roll out as it related to our small businesses. And I think that a little bit of that has been lost in tonight's discussion. Jack and I Jack Cunningham is my chief of staff. That that meeting I don't know how many of you guys were there that night, but it was a very long meeting and the motions that went back and forth were very complicated. So Jack and I had a chance to watch the video the day after the meeting and circle back with the city attorney. Just to get clarification on what we had actually voted on. And because it was important for us to message to our residents and our business community what it is that we had voted on. We sent out an email after council meeting to our constituents, letting them know what has been voted on. And for that clarification, we reached out to the city attorney. I've also had the chance to read the transcripts of that night. This morning in preparation for tonight, because I don't believe that the staff report adequately addresses what was passed. And I know Amy Webber from the city attorney's office is here so she can step in and correct me if she thinks I'm wrong on any of this. But we've also talked with Charlie Parker on this. So I think I think we're accurate on this, the intent of the. Okay, so noticing tonight, there's a major gap in attendance by members of the small business community who were present in October. And I know for a fact the reason for that is because assurances were made to them by me and others that what we voted on in October involved us reviewing a study or a reporter data and being able to tweak it and modify it before we rolled out Phase three, that specifically what we had approved. And I think that that's what they relied on. So when we got calls from people saying, do we have to show up to council, we thought there was going to be an opportunity to modify or tweak before it rolled out to us. We said absolutely. That's absolutely what was agreed to. That's absolutely what we we committed to. And that was what was voted on. And I didn't hear that tonight. So I want to make sure, to the extent that it's clarified and I don't know if I need a friendly, I would refer to the maker of the motion on this, because I think the intent should be clear. And if a friendly is necessary or a substitute motion is necessary, I'm happy to make it. But the intent of the legislation that we passed in October was to give the council some data, some analysis of impacts before Phase three began so that we could have the opportunity to make changes if we needed to, for the small business rollout, specifically the motion that was made. By me was my friendly is specifically saying before we roll out the implementation of the small business portion, we as a body together would receive information on the data so that we could move forward with that implementation phase. Because you are right, if a TFF comes back and outlines the study, a council member may want to put it on the agenda, may not want to put it on the agenda. It may get lost in the mix. I wanted to actually come back so that we can hear the data and we can report to our small businesses that this is the data your rollout is about to start, and it's based on this great positive data. The city attorney then clarified, So if I can understand the friendly correct, then the 18 months wouldn't be a hard date. You wouldn't determine that date until you receive the study? I said yes. Then the vice mayor asked Councilwoman Gonzales, Do you need to respond to the friendly councilwoman? Gonzales said, Sure, that's fine. We can do a study session, but I would really advise this council to stick to the 18 months. I really would do that. The city attorney then asked for clarification and said, I'm sorry. I didn't hear the acceptance. I heard that the 18 month stayed in. Councilwoman Gonzalez hesitantly said, You're making me do it again. Yes. So the city attorney then said, and I didn't hear, is it the study session? Now that's the study session. And Vice Mayor Richardson said a report at council, she just referred to it as a study session. Councilwoman Gonzales said, and I agree with it can be a meeting, a study session, just some sort of a report back to council. And then Councilwoman Gonzales said an opportunity for us to review that. So I want to make sure that what we're voting on tonight allows phase one and phase to be implemented in the timeline that we've we've outlined. I think that's great. Phase three should not be implemented until we have a report back and an opportunity to make adjustments. We may not want to make any adjustments at all, but we may want to make a few tweaks here and there that make the rollout of this easier for our small businesses. I completely understand that sometimes we make hard decisions and the businesses feel it's going to be an impact on them. They feel they're going to lose businesses business. They feel that they're they might lose customers. We hear it all the time from small business owners who don't like legislation that we are going to be forcing upon them . I understand that sometimes those fears are founded, sometimes they're unfounded. What I'm trying to do is soften the blow for a lot of these small businesses who are genuinely concerned about what the rollout will impact them, in what ways it may not impact them at all and may impact them in positive ways. But the goal of this is for us to work collaboratively to identify possible changes to the roll out that we can make before Phase three is implemented. So I don't know if that's the understanding of the maker of this motion or if that needs to come in the form of an amendment or if it needs to come in the form of a substitute motion. But I'm just putting it out there and I look forward to hearing from my colleagues. I will also say just because I think I have a duty to because Councilman Andrews reached out to me and asked me to read this letter into the record I am currently sick from this is from Councilman Andrews. I am currently sick from severe allergies and unable to participate in tonight's meeting. And I feel that a small delay on this item is reasonable to ask to make sure my constituents interests are represented, to best represent my constituents, and to make sure this ordinance is done in the best way we can. Please postpone the first reading of this ordinance regarding polystyrene to the May 1st council meeting. I understand this email comes at the last minute, but I wasn't expecting until this morning to be able. I was expecting until this morning to be able to participate this evening. I do know that he had some health issues early this morning and so it prevented him from being here tonight. Again, I look forward to hearing from my colleagues on both of those issues. One, whether we postpone for Councilman Andrews at Councilman Andrew's request, and if we don't, whether or not the intent of the legislation we passed in October is included in what we're passing tonight, because I think that will determine whether or not I will be making a substitute. So thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman. Let me have Councilwoman Gonzalez maybe respond to the councilman's questions.
Speaker 0: Yes. So I would have to clarify the motion, because from what I understand and we've spoken to the city attorney as well as that the ordinance would move through and 18 months would be included. However, there would be, as a study simultaneously included with that. And we asked for a variety of things applicable to all small food establishments 18 months after City Council adopts. Yeah. So applicable after. After adopts the ordinance. We we basically included everything. We also included bean bags, crafts, straws upon request. We also looked at big belly type trash cans. So just to clarify this, because I'm from I'm then I'm in the understanding that it was in everything we have in this ordinance is going to be moving forward tonight. And that was the discussion I believe we had back in when we we had the previous meeting, but that the study would would simultaneously go forward. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: The way the ordinance is currently drafted, where the staff report is drafted, that is correct. So if you move forward tonight, clearly the ordinance that is passed would have a provision that allows for the roll out for the small businesses in an 18 month period. But there would be a study session sometime before then. And obviously, as with any ordinance the council passes, you have the ability to amend anything that you pass tonight. So if a year down the road after you have some good solid data on the larger businesses and you have a study session and you feel that it's not appropriate for whatever reason to impose those same criteria on the smaller businesses. You could simply amend any ordinance you'd adopted tonight.
Speaker 0: Okay, but the ordinance does include the 18 months act for small businesses.
Speaker 3: It currently does, yes. Okay.
Speaker 0: As long as we're clear with that, I'm good with that. Of course, more information will never hurt. Of course, I think we have all the studies we need, but absolutely, if we need to do some more studies prior to that so we can have more information to go forward, I'd be happy to do that as well. But thank you for the clarification. I hope that clears it up with my council colleague, but I'd like to move forward tonight with the motion on the floor.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Council member, you ring up. Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this forward. I was one of the cosigners back in October on this because I thought it was very important. I was the one, I think, that brought up the the Great Pacific Garbage Patch back and that that that meeting because I had seen the, the film a few months before at the Coastal Commission and it was very compelling story to see all the plastic out there in the deep ocean, if I can also make a pitch . I also have a license plate that will tell my loyalty to help protect our oceans. But anyway, I diverge. One of the other things that happened since that last meeting in October, the Coastal Commission also adopted a motion to ban plastic straws in the oceans. So we are. We are. I definitely support this motion. I support the the ordinance that we're putting forward today. I don't think we need to change it much. Inclusion of a study is part of that. So I think that we're moving in the right direction. And when we are able to change how the behavior of our of our restaurant attending people which are bringing in their own plastic containers or plastic bags or other items for them to take home, I think we're making a hell of a lot of progress in that direction. And I think it would it would only help our communities and it would only help our earth. And I think that it's a great opportunity to make a change in our world. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Cipriano, I'm going to defer to Councilwoman Pryce because it's her motion. But I think the point here that is so important for us is that we adhere to what took place in our last meeting. And it was very clear from the transcript that we asked for feedback prior to this. And it's interesting because that I was part of that whole piece, that discussion, I guess a lot of us were, because it lasted a long time, but it came before the utensils piece. So I don't think we can cherry pick what we decided on at the last meeting. We have to incorporate it all. So that's my point. Thank you. Best move, Richardson. Just want to I just want to be clear, because it seems like there's two accounts of what happened at the last meeting. I want to hear from the city attorney. What is what is before us in terms of the 18 months and the the study session?
Speaker 3: Vice Mayor Richardson, what is before you tonight and I apologize. I was not here when this came for the first time when you gave staff direction. So I can't really comment on the and I have not read the transcript, as Councilwoman Pryce just did. So I haven't looked at them closely. But what's on the agenda tonight is, as it has previously been described, it's basically as far as the small businesses go, it would require the small businesses to comply after an 18 month roll out period. It would.
Speaker 1: Require.
Speaker 3: The larger businesses to comply sooner than that. It would require that there be a study session at some point in time.
Speaker 1: Before.
Speaker 3: The 18 months. And I was just talking with Mr. Beck and he indicated that that study session would definitely take place before the 18 months kick in, and it would if council wanted to change course at that time. Assuming you pass the ordinance tonight, you would have to amend the ordinance to make changes to it. So if you were dealing with small the small businesses, you could amend it to delete that requirement, extend it out further.
Speaker 1: Or do anything else that was reasonable. Thank you. That's consistent with what I remember. There was a lot of debate and, you know, both sides came together. I think we got a unanimous vote. And I think it was sort of, you know, we were concurrently evaluate as we were going. And then when the 18 month kicked in, there was a study session. Any given Tuesday, you can amend or place it on the agenda to amend the ordinance. So there wasn't a a stop or two, so to speak. There was a deadline for staff to present a study session on the findings before that third phase, third phase commenced. That's what I understood. That's what I understood. And I think that's what's presented today. So I'm I'm sticking with staff's recommendation and the motion on the floor. And I think that I mean, that honors what we did in the past. You know, there's a lot of negotiation that took place, but I thought we did a good job that night. So that's what I'm gonna support tonight. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Brice.
Speaker 3: So if I can just jump back in for a second if one possible solution and it isn't clear from the staff report, but if you wanted to make sure that that study session took place without amending the ordinance that's before you, you could set a time certain tonight as part of a motion to have that study session . I mean, you could pick a date, but it could be no later than three months before the 18 month period would kick in or whatever date would be appropriate to give you enough time to later amend the ordinance if it was necessary to do that. And that way we'll all be assured. No question we're going to have a study session will be at a time certain.
Speaker 1: So let me let me go and go back to Councilman Pryce now has the floor. So, Councilman Pryce, thank you.
Speaker 0: And that's exactly what I was going to suggest, is that we have a time certain or a date certain. I do want to check with Amy Webber, who's here, because I know that she hasn't had a chance to review the transcripts in our correspondence with Charlie in October. If you can clarify really what the intent of the pass I mean, this is what happens when we make sausage. It's really hard to identify the individual ingredients. So if Ms.. Webber, if you can please tell us what your legal interpretation of what we approve that night was in terms of our intent.
Speaker 3: My understanding of what what was approved that night. And I do have a copy of the.
Speaker 6: Transcript that you and Mr. Murchison have referred to.
Speaker 3: Is, as Mike stated earlier, that that that the study session or the the the study was intended to occur concurrently and but that the Council was to be informed.
Speaker 6: Prior to.
Speaker 3: The effectiveness of the 18 month phase.
Speaker 6: In period.
Speaker 3: For small businesses. I would also note that in the transcript, the city attorney on the night of the event said, I'm not sure if your friendly is necessary. You can get the study back on any Tuesday and do an.
Speaker 6: Amendment to the ordinance or change.
Speaker 3: The implementation date of Phase three at that time. You could do that on any Tuesday. So I think the intent all along was that once you had the information, whether it was earlier or later or on a precise date, the council would be able to make any changes that they felt were necessary.
Speaker 6: To the.
Speaker 0: Ordinance. And that's and that's great. And that's my understanding of what we passed as well. I will say I don't believe the staff report clarifies that in terms of the study session preceding the implementation of Phase three and as having the opportunity to opine on the roll out of Phase three. But that's fine. We're clarifying it now. So what I would request, and this really would be up to the maker of the motion if she, she and the second are okay with it. Is that the and also it's not a really. Yes, we're having a study session but the the point of the study session is to study the impacts and the implementation of phase one and phase two. So we would be getting a report back of what the impacts, the benefits and all and such were. So my my hope would be that two months before the implementation of phase three, so that would be six months from the passage of this ordinance, we would receive no later than 16 months. We would receive information regarding the the rollout and what's been successful opportunities for improvement, recommendations for future implementation that will give us as a council about two months to make tweaks, if we want to, to any of the policies, procedures, incentives, etc.. So I don't know if that's okay with my council colleagues. Yes. And just so we're clear, October 2019, if I'm getting my math correctly, is about 18 months. So that would be based on what Councilmember Price mentioned would take us to about August of 2019. Do you want we can select a date now if we'd like to. We have August 6th, 13th, 20th. I'm I'm going to put it all out there. I don't want any confusion going forward. And I appreciate the clarification. And just so we know, just so I'm clear as well, you want to talk about the successes and that's just the whole ordinance. Not specific just for small business. It's for the whole ordinance and how the impacts are. Okay, perfect. We won't have implemented it on small businesses, but there might be lessons learned that we can't deploy. Perfect. So can we say I'm just going to pick lucky number 13, August 13th, 2019. Is that okay? It can be lucky.
Speaker 1: We can do the second, second week of August, second, Tuesday, August, me and Roberto's birthday that week next.
Speaker 2: Well, happy.
Speaker 0: Birthday. You're going to have to be okay.
Speaker 1: So why don't we just clarify, Mr. Mayor, if we can, to say, August 2019 and let us come back. That's in the middle of budget as well. So we'd like a chance either August? I think that's correct. Thank you. Okay. So I think that that hopefully clarifies that issue. Moving on to Councilmember Super now, just one last point, and this was back to that discussion in the past was who conducts the study are data gathering? There was a little we didn't want to put this all on city staff if it was too much of a burden . So can we just add to that will make that decision moving forward also so it makes sense in terms of of of who's actually collecting the data. And I would imagine that we would just we would do that study like we do every study. And oftentimes we contract we would contract that work out or we would work with our internal folks. And if we need additional support, we do that. Is that right, Mr. Modica? Yeah, that's correct. We would see what we could provide if we needed consultant expert experience on that or if we need budget. So we would have to come back and say, here's what we can do with what we've got or we'd need more money. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. There is a motion to second on the floor. Members, please. Gwen Casher votes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. We're going to do quickly, we're going to do item 26 and then we're doing the rest of the public comment here. Item 26 Important. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.63 prohibiting the use of single-use food and beverage containers made of expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam, rigid polystyrene #6, and non-recyclable and non-compostable material for prepared food distribution, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0344 | Speaker 1: Okay. We're going to do quickly, we're going to do item 26 and then we're doing the rest of the public comment here. Item 26 Important.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilman Austin Councilmember Supernova Councilman Andrews. Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of the Drug Enforcement Agency. Semiannual national prescription drug takeback events.
Speaker 1: Mr. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 3: Nicholas, thank you.
Speaker 8: Can we get a two minute break to allow.
Speaker 1: Them to clear out, sir? Okay. We're going to take a one minute break. All right.
Speaker 3: They me.
Speaker 2: They don't know when.
Speaker 1: I'm going to read to folks. Pull out so we can hear.
Speaker 2: You know, because. I'm not doing that. That's ridiculous. I did kill her.
Speaker 1: Okay, guys, I need everyone that is. That's talking to. Please go outside because we have to keep going with the meeting. Shush. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. So we're hearing the order is we're hearing item 26, which is a short item, and then we're doing public comment and then the rest of the agenda, we have another 15 items after that. So item 26, Councilman Austin, then we're going to public comment. Item 26. You're on.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to, first of all, thank Councilmember Andrews and Councilmember Supernova for signing onto this resolution to support the safe disposal of prescription drugs. This issue has been picking up momentum over the years. In 2014, President Obama announced new regulations that created a convenient legal avenues for safe, environmentally friendly disposal of unneeded prescription drugs. With the new regulations, neighborhood pharmacies and others were able to set up disposal locations. These regulations were in direct response to curb the opioid epidemic, which claims more lives in each year in America than motor vehicle crashes. Walgreens announced a few days ago that they are adding 900 drug disposal kiosks to their stores, and CVS plans to install 750 kiosks by June of this year. The opioid epidemic has a direct connection with homelessness in our community. My office receives phone calls and emails daily about issues and many of the individuals experiencing homelessness in Long Beach who are addicted to opioids. Drug disposal programs are one way to help stem the growing opioid crisis and reduce the number of drugs in our community. On Saturday, April 28th, 2018, Lombard PD, in conjunction with Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, is hosting a take back pharmacy event from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at 208 Atlantic Avenue. I'm sorry, 2801 Atlantic Avenue. And the event collects and expires unused pharmaceutical drugs. I encourage everyone to gather their medicine cabinet and expired drugs and collect them and attend this event. I'd also like to take a few people who are here today, and I know we'll hear from the Cambodian Association of America, Asian American Drug Abuse Program and the South Bay Communities Creating Change. Who approached me a few months ago to bring this item forward, and who are also leading the public awareness campaign to safely dispose of prescription drugs through increasingly increasing the availability of prescription drug drop boxes in multiple languages, community education, and promoting prescription drug takeback events. I want to thank you for being here, and I want to ask my colleagues for your unanimous support on this very important issue.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Skinner. I just like to thank my colleague, Councilman Al Austin, for bringing this item forward. I'm honored to support it with him, and I'm very enthusiastic in that support. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Pearce. Councilmember Price.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I, too, want to thank Councilman Austin for bringing this forward. As I know you guys have heard me talk about repeatedly, prescription addiction and opioid addiction is a huge problem right now. Most of the homeless individuals in my district are addicted to some sort of a substance, mostly heroin and of course, methamphetamine. But a lot of the heroin abuse that we're seeing is coming from prescription drug use that's leading to heroin use. And so I'm very grateful that you're bringing this any awareness that we can raise in regards to people getting rid of prescription drugs that they're not no longer needing and raising awareness is is something that I welcome . So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. As any public comment on this item, please come forward.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Now would be the time.
Speaker 3: Hi, guys. My name is Latoya marshall again. Yes, I have comments to it. Yeah, I got a thing to get rid of our expired prescription drugs. How do we get rid of. We are addicted to money. Yeah, I sit there. Yeah. Companies council meetings. Just sit there and decide what parts of the agenda y'all gonna jump from. Everything else supposed to be a line, which I disrespect the line. If I put in a car for a ten minute or, you know, the cards that come out ten persons to have a, you know.
Speaker 1: A word.
Speaker 3: Of it, I shouldn't have to wait 6 hours or 8 hours to sit there and say my little 2 minutes that you guys are supposed to grant me, or y'all sit there and ignore people where they get tired. And a 77 year old woman had to leave because of the simple fact you guys didn't even give her her 2 minutes that she requested. I go through this with you guys. Every time I come up here, I have questions for Dee Andrews. I spit out questionnaires to Alison King for an A housing authority. Everything else that you guys want to sit there and just act like it's okay to.
Speaker 1: Just jump the.
Speaker 3: Agenda, say, forget the people that did try to come here early and ask for 2 minutes from you guys. And then you have bring out this whole night where you do public speaking, where ten people, 20 people come up and make their comments. But people that sit there and sign these cards and say that, okay, yeah, we're going to give you a minute to speak. Don't do it. I'm six months pregnant. Been here for how long? I'm not being accommodating in any way, shape or form. And guess what? The only thing you could tell me is if you don't like it, go ahead and leave, and then my voice don't get hurt. Ah, my question is, don't get answered or I don't get the help that I ask for from you guys. I've been out here for over a year. I'm pregnant again. I'm still asking for questions, I'm still asking for help and I'm still not getting it. And you still sit there and ignore people, everything else but you, about greed, about money. So you talking about homeless people being addicted to heroin, opium. Y'all are addicted to money so much that's already blind, y'all, where y'all don't do nothing for the public. But you always say to the public, to the public it's a 13 years they help with pollution are to get rid of Styrofoam or whatever 13 years. Y'all need to really do something because you're embarrassing to this community, to this city, trying to act like y'all making changes when y'all don't do nothing but change your clothes and your wallet because they keep getting fatter. And I still didn't get my 2 minutes to talk about my issues that I.
Speaker 1: Have next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Yes. Hi. Good evening, mayors. Give me any give me good evening concerns my members I'm here since 345 awaiting I signed my card and I spoke with Jessie and I spoke with money.
Speaker 1: Respectfully, you speak on this item. Okay. So we'll get back in just a moment. Just a moment. If you hear from public comment, that's next. If you're on this list and you sign the card, that is next. I'm being right now we're speaking about the practice prescription drugs. Is that the issue you here to speak on? Do you want to speak to next.
Speaker 3: Is not only prescription drugs. Okay.
Speaker 1: So if that's the case, you're off topic. You'd be up next. We're going to pull up. Just sit right up front. You're going to be up next on where.
Speaker 3: Is this step in a light?
Speaker 1: This is a different item. There's a process. So you'll be up next. Thank you. This is public comment specifically for item number 26 on prescription drugs. Thanks.
Speaker 5: Good evening.
Speaker 1: Honorable vice mayors and honorable.
Speaker 5: Council members and Ireland boss city.
Speaker 1: Staff. My name is 20. I'm a district.
Speaker 3: Constituent. I'm currently working.
Speaker 1: With a Cambodian association America. And we collaborated with.
Speaker 5: Nonprofit agency, a group of them, some of them named SBC three.
Speaker 1: Stand for a South Bay Community Creating Change and DAP Asian American Service Program. And then thank you that you let me to have the opportunity to speak in front of you tonight about the prescription drug takeback three solution. And I would like to point out eight important points that are listed here that are one is the growing access of.
Speaker 3: Prescription drug in our community.
Speaker 1: Has created an epidemic in.
Speaker 3: The series of our.
Speaker 1: Survey. Two Driving under.
Speaker 3: The influence of prescription drug medications.
Speaker 1: Have created another layer of risk for pedestrians and law.
Speaker 3: Enforcement.
Speaker 1: Three black, Latino and multiple races ethnicity.
Speaker 3: Populations this proportionately.
Speaker 1: Affected by the.
Speaker 3: Prescription.
Speaker 1: Drug.
Speaker 5: Epidemic. Four It.
Speaker 1: Is very important we.
Speaker 3: Monitor.
Speaker 1: Safe disposal of and use and unwanted.
Speaker 3: Prescription medication.
Speaker 1: Five Safe deposit.
Speaker 3: Disposal is paramount in.
Speaker 5: Reducing the accessibility.
Speaker 3: Of and use and unwanted medication.
Speaker 1: Ending up in the.
Speaker 5: Hands of our youth. Six The number of.
Speaker 1: Visit for the overdoses has doubled for.
Speaker 5: Emergency visits in the past year.
Speaker 1: Seven opiate meds, painkillers, more most commonly abuse prescription drugs. And I'm thank you very much for your.
Speaker 5: Time and listening to me and for your support and your kind approval and recognition.
Speaker 3: Of these propositions to recognize and.
Speaker 5: Allow us to have this prescription drug.
Speaker 1: Takeback.
Speaker 3: Initiative in our.
Speaker 1: City. Thank you very much. Good night. Thank you. Good night. Next speaker police.
Speaker 3: Good evening. I'm by mayor and the Syrian government. Thank you so much for your time and your support. My name is only Priem and I'm working for Cambodian Association of America and MRSA and District nine. And I want to point out, this prescription drug crisis is impacting our homes, our school and our community. The abandonment of prescription drugs, particularly opiate medications, has led to a widespread misuse and addiction, notably among young adults. Recent survey data released from L.A. County Department of Public Health identified that Los Angeles survey. 21% of survey participants have missed prescription medications. The overall average and natural misuse of a prescription drug is 24 years old. However, for Latino, the average age is 18 years. For African-American, it's 20 years. Other key issues that relate to prescription drug crisis are related. Accident took over those drug poison and monitor medication and lead to easy access in the home. And in this proposal, unjust medication negatively impact our environment. On Saturday, April 28, 1928, the Long Beach Police Department, in conjunction with Langley Memorial Hospital, is hosting the National Take Back Pharmacy event. This event will support our local community organization and community volunteers to take back event, recollect and use an and pump pharmacy drug that can be abused by youth and harmful to waterways if not private. This post. We are asking the City Council to publicly declare and support through this resolution about promote prevention, through education, about take back medication, proper storage and proper disposal by responsible use. We thank you so much for your support. With national take back days the most properly through the proactive resolution, we anticipate to increase in community engagement with prescription drug prevention in Long Beach. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Terry. Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Her band. My name is Silken and I am one of the co-founders of Long.
Speaker 0: Beach Environmental Alliance and also a community leader for the Cambodian Association of America. I have asked my friends here to wear green. Today I am taking an environmental stance on this topic. So here before you are some leaders that we collected during our beach cleanups, we probably find like.
Speaker 3: A couple.
Speaker 0: In one hour of our beach cleanup. So imagine if we.
Speaker 3: Cleaned up for.
Speaker 0: Hours and how much we were fine and people walk barefoot. I also brought this this bag of pills that are overdue.
Speaker 3: From the community.
Speaker 0: And right now, I'm the drop box. So I'm waiting until April two to drop this off. But people can also pool their unused.
Speaker 3: Prescription.
Speaker 0: Pills and drugs and some or some salts.
Speaker 3: To our beach cleanup.
Speaker 0: April 22nd, the Sun Alamitos Beach from 10 to 30. And so, again, I'm here with.
Speaker 3: CAA and Asian American Drug.
Speaker 0: Abuse Program. So they both.
Speaker 3: Recently surveyed 112.
Speaker 0: Residents of Long Beach. So 47%, 47.4% out of 55 surveys threw their unused, unexpired drugs into the trash.
Speaker 3: So imagine what will happen.
Speaker 0: Sorry when you start over.
Speaker 3: So when we talk about how pills work. So think about how.
Speaker 0: Fast acting.
Speaker 3: Medication is when it's.
Speaker 0: Ingest into your body. See.
Speaker 3: Excuse me.
Speaker 1: Excuse me. In the audience. If we could just keep it down, please. In the back, in the salmon shirt. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Interesting. Thank you.
Speaker 0: So just imagine how pills.
Speaker 3: Medication work within our bodies.
Speaker 0: It's fast acting and is and absorbs in the bloodstream.
Speaker 3: So an environmental perspective. Think about how. How the water water.
Speaker 0: Bodies that we have on our planet. Farm streams, rivers, lakes, oceans.
Speaker 3: And how fast the medication would be.
Speaker 0: Released when they're put into the water. So it probably releases immediately when it touches the water. So if we have a drug Dropbox and we're drug takeback events.
Speaker 3: Imagine how much animals, plants and even.
Speaker 0: Ultimately saving our own butts.
Speaker 3: In regards to our health.
Speaker 0: Also.
Speaker 3: This will improve our soil and water quality. Soil, soil and water.
Speaker 1: Well, you've met your 30 or three minute shoemaker talking. If you want to complete your sentence.
Speaker 3: Just read it. Okay.
Speaker 0: So water and soil and water is vital for all life.
Speaker 3: We need.
Speaker 0: Those two resources to.
Speaker 3: Grow food. All right, food is life.
Speaker 0: What is life?
Speaker 1: What is life? Outstanding. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Name is John Kendrick with the Low Mic Environmental Alliance. And I'm also with the Cambodian American Association, the Coalition for Substance Abuse. And I have here some of the souvenirs that I collect off the beach each day. Our bus stops, our parks and our alleys in honor of blue light stations. These are marijuana bottles that I'm finding every day on a daily basis. And sometimes I find I find marijuana still in children and picking them up. And sometimes they mix in these bottles. Not just marijuana, but other drugs with them. Some of these bottles I've had for over a year. But yet, though, when you get close to it, it smells just like I just picked it up today. And when the city sun does on the beach, they don't do a good job. They cut them up into sharp edges. So now they're becoming a hazard on the beach. Now, with everything else on there. So, you know, this is now becoming the new thing. So if you're going to have marijuana in Long Beach, we need to find a way to do it right where the right people get it for medical use. And those that's not using it is not affected by it. Because I've seen people on the bus sitting in the back with marijuana, mixing it with other things on the bus, public bus. And says Long Beach no longer use public mean, use school busses no more. All our schoolchildren have the right Long Beach transit and there are supposed it is in smaller children. So this is now also need to be included into the drug take back. So I ask you please revise what we're doing with. And not sit there and wait until we start having problems, then try to fix something afterwards. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Councilman Austin, thank you. And I just wanted.
Speaker 8: To just acknowledge the the folks who who came out and spoke on this issue. I want to thank you for your patience and staying with us this evening and speaking on this very important issue. And again, I would ask my my colleagues for your support on this important resolution. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 3: I have to apologize for I thought I took my name.
Speaker 0: Off the list earlier. So I'm still talking right now. But earlier.
Speaker 3: When I stepped out, I want to apologize.
Speaker 0: For that. But I just wanted to say.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Austin, how much I appreciate this item.
Speaker 0: You guys know my mom's history, so let our office know how we can help in future events. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Richardson. Motion carries.
Speaker 3: I'm an I.
Speaker 1: Thank you. So now we're going to go on to public comment. So I see ten speakers lined up here, but I'm pretty sure majority of them are gone. So I'm going to read through the list. And if you could start making your way to the front, we can we can move through this. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of the Drug Enforcement Agency's semi-annual national prescription drug take back events and supporting the availability and use of prescription drug drop-boxes, in multiple languages, across the City. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0322 | Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you for your time. So next we have Summer Hanson and Summer Hanson here. Then Jim Albert is Jim Albert here and then Emma Christianson is and Kristen is the OC. That concludes public comment. So now we're going to move on back to the hearings we have. Hearing number four is up next. So let's bring up hearing number four.
Speaker 0: Report from financial management. Recommendation received supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing and grant the entertainment permit with conditions to hooked up ventures for entertainment with Dancing District five.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Is an oath required here? No.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: Yes, yes. Okay, let's. Let's go ahead and deliver the oath.
Speaker 0: Are there any anybody in the audience?
Speaker 3: Do you.
Speaker 0: Do you solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Monaco. The floor is yours. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The staff report be given by Sandie Singh Palmer, our Purchasing and Business Services Bureau Manager.
Speaker 0: Good evening, honorable mayor, vice mayor and members of the City Council. Tonight you have before you an application for entertainment with Dancing for Hooked Up Ventures LLC located.
Speaker 3: At 5456.
Speaker 0: East Alamo Boulevard, operating as a bar tavern lounge in Council District five. All of the necessary departments have reviewed the application and have provided their recommended conditions as contained in the hearing packet. I, as well as the police department, stand ready to answer any questions Council may have, and that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 1: Thank you. We'll go to public comment or any public comment here. Saying none will take you behind the rail. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 0: I mean, it's my understanding that this operator has been in good standing during the.
Speaker 6: Temporary permit since.
Speaker 3: December. Is that accurate? Yes, it is. And that.
Speaker 0: The current list of conditions we are.
Speaker 3: Placing on them are more stringent than the previous owner. That is correct.
Speaker 0: And that at any time, should they violate any of those, this.
Speaker 3: Can come back to council.
Speaker 0: And revoke.
Speaker 3: Their copy. Is that correct?
Speaker 0: Their entertainment permit. We could assign a hearing officer. I'm sorry. Thank you. And. And do a hearing for revocation. Wonderful.
Speaker 3: With that information, I'd recommend approval.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember. Anything. Okay, members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 3: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I believe we're on item 29. Is that correct? | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of Hooched Up Ventures, LLC., dba Boomer’s, 5456 East Del Amo Boulevard, for Entertainment With Dancing. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0347 | Speaker 1: Thank you. I believe we're on item 29. Is that correct?
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Was here item 29, please.
Speaker 3: Report.
Speaker 0: From economic development recommendation to execute all documents necessary for the First Amendment to lease with Catalina Landing to extend the term of the lease by six years district to.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Pierce. I matter of fact is that staff that's going to stay.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 1: Staff report first John Geisler and Johnny Vallejo. Hello Vice Mayor City Council. A Catalina landing is located at 310 340 Golden Shore Avenue in downtown Long Beach. The property includes four office buildings, a parking structure and an enclosed boat base in L.A. facility adjacent to those office buildings. August eight, 2015. The current lessee acquired the property upon purchase by its parent company, Colony Capital. Now Colony Northstar, Mr. Murchison is here on behalf of the lessee. The original lease established a rental rate with CPI adjustments every five years. Current ground rent under those existing terms is $1,166,400 per year and the lease currently runs through April 28, 2068. The current tenant has begun an ambitious and innovative Capital Improvement and Asset Enhancement Program, with an estimated investment of over $15 million through 2021. The improvements will include structural and placemaking improvements to the promenade, elevator and restroom upgrades solar and solar battery projects, allied retrofits, electric vehicle charging stations, improved suites in common areas, landscape improvements.
Speaker 3: Monument wayfinding.
Speaker 1: Signage, mural and bike share enhancements, free public Wi-Fi and more. To encourage this level of investment, the tenant has requested a lease.
Speaker 3: Extension of six.
Speaker 1: Years. In considering the.
Speaker 3: Proposal, city staff assess.
Speaker 1: The feature value of the extended term based on expected cash flows.
Speaker 3: And took into.
Speaker 1: Consideration the lack of fair market value adjustments in the current lease. To that end, the proposed First Amendment to lease number 29263 have been negotiated containing the following major amended terms and conditions. The terms shall be extended for an additional six years through April 28, 2084, the maximum.
Speaker 3: Six.
Speaker 1: Years allowed within the Caitlin's area. The amendment includes to fair market value rental adjustments on May 1st, 2043, and on May 1st, 2068 to reflect the fair market value of the premises based on the existing use and improvements, tenant shall make a one time lease.
Speaker 3: Extension fee.
Speaker 1: Payment to the landlord. The city in the amount of $1.9 million due upon execution of the First Amendment, and Tenant.
Speaker 3: Shall make a one time wayfinding fee payment.
Speaker 1: To landlord in the amount of $250,000 to be used exclusively by landlord to install and or upgrade gateway and.
Speaker 3: Wayfinding.
Speaker 1: Signage and make improvements to the general vicinity of the leased premises or remaining terms of lease to 1963 shall remain in full force. In effect, the city's fiscal consultant, Kizer Marston Associates, has reviewed the proposed amended terms and associated financial assumptions and supports approval of the proposed amendment. This concludes my staff report. Thank you. Back to council reporters.
Speaker 3: Yes, I want to thank Staff and Colony.
Speaker 0: And Mr. Martinson, I know that.
Speaker 3: This has been I feel like.
Speaker 0: I had this first meeting of my first week in.
Speaker 3: Office. So I want to recognize the.
Speaker 0: Skills of our city staff and really trying to make sure that we could get to an agreement that is.
Speaker 3: Beneficial to community members, where you have a community space, where they're working with.
Speaker 0: Us to make sure that it's a project that we can be proud of and really transform that into a space where people are engaged in the space where they're not now.
Speaker 3: As well as the wayfinding and some of.
Speaker 0: Those other efforts.
Speaker 3: So just I want to applaud you guys for really sticking it together and really going back and forth.
Speaker 0: I'm very excited to vote.
Speaker 3: Yes and ask my colleagues to do the same.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Very much looking forward to this and thank you for your work. Economic development. This is great.
Speaker 1: Draw public comment on this item. Good evening, mayor and Council. You have a very difficult staff to negotiate with and economic development. Okay, thank you. There's a motion and a second and membership is going to cast your votes. This is I'm really glad this is finally getting done as well. So it's good to see you.
Speaker 0: Very happy to have negotiated with you guys.
Speaker 3: Councilman Mungo, mike member Mungo.
Speaker 1: She's not here.
Speaker 3: She is.
Speaker 1: Where is she? Miss Mungo, are you voting yes on this or no? Okay, thank you. All right. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for the First Amendment to Lease No. 29263 with CDCF III Pacific Catalina Landing Long Beach, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, for City-owned property generally located at 310-340 Golden Shore Avenue, commonly known as Catalina Landing, to extend the term of the Lease by 16 years, for a new expiration date of April 28, 2084. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0354 | Speaker 3: Motion case.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Item 36 Communication from Councilmember Supernova. Recommendation to Increase Appropriations in general fund in the Development Services Department by 150,000 to support the funding of a hospital architect to determine seismic compliance at community hospital.
Speaker 1: Councilor. Mr. Brown. Thank you. This important issue and it is very time sensitive. So that's the reason for the amount and the urgency here. And I appreciate my colleagues support and thank you to my very hard working staff who made these moneys available. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Pearce. Okay. Public comment on this cut from Franco. Yeah. I just want to thank Superman for his championing the cause for keeping community hospital open. And I think that this fund, these funds would go a long way in trying to get the hospital. Stay there. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Murchison. I concur. I mean, this is big, too. This is evidence of why we need to make sure that we continue to support one time funds by council district. You're able to show leadership on the important issues that are important to your district and put your money where your mouth is . So, you know, I would just encourage I don't think that you should be the only one to have to do that. It's important. So cities, you know, city staff, city manager, if there's another way to pony up plenty of those funds, you know, they'll be good to say. District nine. I mean, I just don't think that it has it should necessarily I think it's great that he puts it up, but we should we should have a matching system. This is going to be about 300, about 300 to 3 50,000. Okay. Well, that's good. But I mean, the council is not just ponying up, it's seed money and we'll be filling in as well. Thank you, Mr. West City. That asset, I think Tina is a great place to look. See? No public comment. There's a mention in a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I think that concludes the items on the agenda that are necessary. And I wasn't here for the first part of the meeting. I got them all back. Is there a second public comment or anyone that has not spoken on an item is not on the agenda seeing none. Nope. Please come forward. Come forward, please. Just for clarification, Ken, can I congratulate. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to increase appropriations in General Fund (GF) in the Development Services Department (DV) by $150,000, offset by the Fourth Council District one-time infrastructure funds transferred from the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) to support the funding of a hospital architect to determine whether the City can meet OSHPD seismic compliance at Community Hospital. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04032018_18-0287 | Speaker 2: Report from Development Services recommendation or receive supporting documentation under the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution approving an addendum to Midtown's specific plan IIR for the purpose of analyzing potential impacts related to General Plan Amendment and adopt resolution approving General Plan Amendment 18 Dash 001 to amend the land use element to change the land use designation of 14 properties District one and six.
Speaker 0: Okay, we have a motion and a second. We have a step up.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Carry tie. Current planning officer will provide the presentation.
Speaker 2: Good evening again. Before you as a general plan amendment item A for the area generally around the intersection of Pine Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. On the screen, on the map is the boundaries of the existing Midtown specific plan area. There is a little red circle around the area that we will be discussing tonight. In terms of some background, the midtown specific plan was adopted by the City Council in 2016 and it generally allows for mixed uses, in other words, commercial and non-GAAP residential and nonresidential uses located in the same building. However, the underlying general plan designations at that time were not updated because it was anticipated that they would be done with the Comprehensive General Plan Amendment. However, there are and have been a series of development proposals for mixed use projects, and therefore we are asking for this a general plan amendment tonight to clean up this situation. So the purple area on the screen highlights that area that was circled in red. And and this is the scope of the general plan amendment. There is a smaller yellow dotted square that is the site of a pending site plan review application for a mixed use project. And then just that that project is a has about 3500 square feet of commercial space and 24 residential units. While it is while it would be allowed under today's Midtown specific plan, it is not allowed under the underlying general plan designation. So the requested general plan amendment would be to change the underlying designations to elude land use designation number seven, which is mixed uses. So currently on the screen, the area zoned as purple was the same one that was on the aerial. It is designated as land use designations eight end, which is shopping nodes eight P, which is pedestrian oriented retail strip A which is a traditional retail strip commercial. And those are all commercial only designations. And also portion of it is three B, which is only residential. So the change to allowed seven would allow for mixed uses in accordance with the Midtown specific plan. There is also an orange strip on the screen and that area is not within the midtown specific plan. However, changing the purple area would leave an isolated strip of a it's a it's a land use designation at a. And so rather than doing that, we are proposing to change that to a3b, which is moderate density residential, and that comports with the underlying land uses that are currently on the ground today. So on the screen is the is a rendering of that site plan review project that I mentioned that, you know, would need this general plan amendment in order to be approved. Basically, the this type of a project effectuate the vision that the Midtown specific plan has and creates a new investment, commercial and residential opportunities in the Midtown Specific Plan area. This matter for the General Plan Amendment was considered by the Planning Commission on March 1st. The Planning Commission found that the required findings for a general plan can be made in favor of this general plan amendment and also acknowledged that effectuating the Midtown specific plan, a vision would allow for the reinvestment that the city the city anticipated the project has with public notice, and the staff received several inquiries but no other opposition . Lastly, an addendum to the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report was prepared to analyze this project and found that changing the general plan designations to comport with the Midtown specific plan zoning would not have any additional environmental impacts. Therefore, a staff recommends that the City Council and Act to the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the addendum for this action, as well as approve the General Plan Amendment itself. Thank you. And that concludes staff's presentation.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me open it up for any public comment on this hearing, seeing none. Then we will go back to the council. There's a motion comes from Andrews. Yes. Thank you, Mayor.
Speaker 1: First of all, I'd like to thank the staff for their great work and input throughout this process. You know, the general plan amendment creates consistency between Midtown Special Plans and current general plans and has opened up the areas to the development, fitting our own change in our behavior. I'd like to thank the Medusa as a best of both worlds, because it brings the difference between us and one site. Acknowledging that the proposal for the two parishes at Pine and PCH was traditionally a strip strip mall, which has since involved into a mixed use residential project which commercial space on the ground floor. And with that, I'm asking that the council support and approve this general plan amendment. And I thank you again for a great job that you guys have put together here.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes, I great work, Councilmember Andrews. And thank you for to staff as well. I think this area is in much need of a lot of love. And we appreciate it and thank you to Midtown as well for for being here and being a part of this process to grant you.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes on the hearing.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution approving an Addendum to the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the purpose of analyzing potential impacts related to General Plan Amendment GPA18-001; and | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04032018_18-0307 | Speaker 1: Okay. I don't see the individuals here. So let's go ahead and move on to item number 22, please.
Speaker 2: Communication from Council Member your UNGA recommendation to approve the use of Seventh Council districts one time infrastructure funds in the amount of 50 50,000 to support arts and initiatives.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Council Urunga.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor. I'm very happy to bring this forward today as I look working with the community leaders and the Arts Council to bring some new and exciting programs to the district. Last year, I partnered with the California Heights Neighborhood Council on a mural at the California Heights Market, and it was so successful that I thought we could replicate it throughout the district. So I'm currently working with the Arts Council and the central chair where we are teaching youth in the West Palm Beach to play, read instruments and drums. And I would like to use this funding to continue that kind of program programing and also allow us to create murals and other exciting art work in the district. So I asked my colleagues to please support this motion.
Speaker 1: Thank you. City Attorney Parking. Thank you. Vice Mayor Members of the Council. Just for clarification, as if this motion is successful, that the expenditure of these funds would follow the city policy and be routed either through the city manager to execute any contract or purchase order necessary to carry out the intention of the Council. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any public comment here? Seeing numbers, please cast your vote. I'm sorry. It was that public comment. No, thank you. Members, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the use of the Seventh Council District's one-time infrastructure funds transferred from the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) into the Legislative Department (LD) operating budget in the amount of $50,000 to support these arts initiatives; and
Increase appropriation in the General Fund (GF) in the Legislative Department (LD) by $50,000. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_04032018_18-0308 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Number 23, please.
Speaker 2: Communication from Vice Mayor Richardson, Councilman Andrews, Councilmember Yarrawonga, Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of the Safe Consumer Lending Act AB 2500.
Speaker 1: Thank you. So recently the Center for Responsible Lending participated in heard about our everyone in economic inclusion work and asked that we, the City of Long Beach, take a position within a fairly short timeline on a B to 2500. So many families across California live paycheck by paycheck and stagnant wages, high costs of housing, childcare, other financial strains contribute this problem. Unfortunately, some lenders see this despair as an opportunity to trap borrowers into high cost loans, with exorbitant interest rates that far too often lead them into financial ruin. Payday lenders and other loan sharks disproportionately target low income communities that are really struggling to make ends meet. Currently, California law does not have a limit on NPR that lenders could charge on loans between 20 $510,000. So that's why that's where we see most of the predatory lending taking place. A 2016 annual report by the California Business Department of Business Oversight found that 58% of loans between 20 $510,000 had appeared of 100% or higher, with 25% of those being upwards of 300% APR. Today, the California Assembly Banking Committee approved legislation that will help vulnerable working families who take out these kind of loans. The Safe Community, Safe Consumer Lending Act, AB 2500, brought forward by Assembly member Ash Culver, applies a 36% rate cap on loans between 25,000 505,000. So I'm pleased that the the Banking Committee has approved this common sense measure to curtail some of the riskiest installment lending in the state. Families living paycheck by paycheck need to need needs, solutions to help maintain stable finances and build wealth. So I personally urge the full assembly to support HB 2500, and I ask for the City Council to pass a resolution in support of HB 2500. I want to thank Councilman Austin, Sheriff State Ledge, Councilman Andrews, who who's taken on this fight about consumer payday lending in the past, and also Councilmember Durango for signing on. Thank you, Councilmember Rida. Very happy to support this item.
Speaker 4: I thank you for bringing attention to a very, very serious problem. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor, and for bringing this item forward, because especially in my community, predatory lending is an issue that affects several households in the sixth District. And as a lender, abuse, in addition to the desperation of a family struggling on a check to check basis, high interest rates, keeping families in debt and unable to achieve financial independence. We have a responsibility to protect our vulnerable population. And with this said, this item has my full support. And thank you very much, Vice Mayor, for bringing this forward thinking.
Speaker 0: Councilman, Councilman, your encouraging comments. We did it. Did okay. Councilman.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. I also want to thank you for bringing this forward. Councilmember Richardson, I think this is certainly consistent with our positions that this council has taken in the past in terms of restricting predatory lending in our city. And so it has my full support as well. I also just would add, Steph, if we could just get in at some point, get a member memo to see where we are with predatory lending or payday lenders in the city of Long Beach. Because I know we did put some some restrictions on on where they could be or I thought we banned them altogether. But that was for one year. Was it a moratorium? Yes. So I'd like to see where we are with that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And since we're.
Speaker 1: But you brought it up, councilman.
Speaker 0: And I just it's as I've mentioned it before, I want to just add to what the councilman said. I know that there was and we know we put in place a yearlong moratorium on the payday lending issue. Since then. I know that I had mentioned a few times and that report that comes back the councilman just asked for. I also please include what are other further options are. I think this is a continues to be a total nightmare of an issue for the city of Long Beach. And please just respond to what our other options would be to that member the councilman requested. Thank you. It was a motion by Vice Mayor Richardson and Councilman, your rank is your public comment on this item. Okay, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of the Safe Consumer Lending Act (AB 2500). | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0260 | Speaker 4: And then we'll go into the into the regular agenda, as we always do. And so with that, I do want to begin with our first hearing that we will be hearing this evening, which will which is the hearing related to our the Board of Harbor Commissioners action. And around the port, it's hearing number three. If you can please read this Madam Clerk.
Speaker 1: Report from.
Speaker 2: Harbor.
Speaker 0: Commission recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record and conduct a public hearing on two appeals of the Harbor Commissioners Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the.
Speaker 2: Pier B.
Speaker 0: On Dock.
Speaker 9: Rail Support Facility Project.
Speaker 0: And adopt a resolution denying the.
Speaker 9: Appeals.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. With that, I'm going to go and turn this over to our assistant city manager who will introduce the item. Or maybe someone else will be introducing the item. What is it? Okay, so we'll we'll have the hour. We'll go and start off with staff that will introduce the item.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 9: Hi. My name is Dawn McIntosh. I'm a deputy city attorney. As you see, the city manager is not here tonight, so I'll be teeing this up for you and filling you in on the process.
Speaker 1: The appeal.
Speaker 9: Before you is somewhat unique from the harbor department, so I'm going to go over the.
Speaker 1: Process. On January 22nd, 2018, the Board of Harbor Commissioners adopted a resolution.
Speaker 9: Which certified the Environmental Impact.
Speaker 1: Report for the Pier be on Dock Rail Support Facility.
Speaker 9: They made some associated findings that are required for that certification.
Speaker 1: And they approved.
Speaker 9: That project and issued a permit for development of the project. As you know, under the city.
Speaker 1: Charter, the Board of Harbor Commissioners has sole jurisdiction over projects in the port, such as this.
Speaker 9: Pier be on dock rail support facility project.
Speaker 1: However, under the city's.
Speaker 9: Municipal code section 21.20 1.507, the environmental determination under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Speaker 1: Which was made by the board for the project, may be appealed to this body to such appeals were.
Speaker 9: Filed by Phillip Steel Company and Superior Electric Advertising. And those appeals are before you tonight.
Speaker 4: And Madam City Attorney, I just want to make sure, just as a reminder for the clerk, before we do need to do so, before we do any sort of comment, we'll do the ask.
Speaker 1: Thank you very. The scope of the appeals before you tonight.
Speaker 9: Is quite narrow. The city council's.
Speaker 1: Jurisdiction is limited to a determination of whether the port's environmental review resulting in the final environmental impact.
Speaker 9: Report was adequate under the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council conducts a de novo review, which means that you.
Speaker 1: Judge the facts presented to you and you make your determination on the evidence without deference to this made by the Board of Harbor Commissioners. It's important to remember.
Speaker 9: However, that the Council is not considering the merits of the project itself. The only thing before you is the environmental determination.
Speaker 1: The process for the hearing will be as follows Port staff and appellants will each.
Speaker 9: Have 20 minutes to present.
Speaker 1: Port staff will begin.
Speaker 9: And present the staff report, which will take approximately 10 minutes. After their presentation, the two appellants will have 20 minutes to present their appeals divided among them as they choose.
Speaker 1: At that time, the port staff.
Speaker 9: Will respond with their rebuttal for the remainder of their 20 minutes. At this point, you may take public comment and then take it behind the rail. After you've received all the evidence, you have two options.
Speaker 1: First, you may deny the appeals and.
Speaker 9: Approve a resolution affirming the second determination made by the Board of Harbor Commissioners.
Speaker 1: Or you may grant one or both of the appeals, set aside the environmental.
Speaker 9: Determination, and remand the matter to the Board of Harbor Commissioners for further action. I'd like to introduce additional counsel who are here with me tonight.
Speaker 6: To my right is David Alvarez.
Speaker 9: He is also an attorney with the city attorney's office who handles matters for the harbor department. Behind me is Cathy Jensen of Routan and Tucker. She is an attorney who specializes in environmental matters and has been advising the port for some time. Also behind me is Heather Tom. She's the director of environmental planning. She will be presenting the staff report tonight. And next to her is Matt Armes, who is the assistant director of environmental planning. And with that, Mr. Mayor, I will turn it back over to you.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. The as far as the additional part of the presentation, will you be doing that? I'm assuming the port staff will be doing that right now. Yes. Okay, then. Then if we can just hear from our harbor staff. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Good evening.
Speaker 2: Honorable Mayor Garcia, members of the city council, the harbor departments before you this evening to respond to two appeals that have been filed against the environmental impact report for the pier be on dock rail support facility project that was recently certified by the Harbor Commission will present a brief staff report describing the project, a summary of the appeals filed and our responses. Culminating an eight year process where the harbor department responded to over 300 comments on the draft air. Our board held a hearing on January 22nd where they heard presentations, the testimony of 42 public speakers, and they asked numerous questions. The Harbor Commission found the air to be in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or SEQUA, and approved the proposed project. The project is located in an industrial area southwest of Anaheim Street and the I-70 ten Freeway. Tracks from the facility connect to the iron dock, rail infrastructure in the terminals and trains depart the facility via the Alameda corridor. Rail is the most efficient, economical and least polluting means of moving cargo inland across the country. With the Pier B facility, the port seeks to enhance and expand the existing rail facility at the northern edge of our harbor district. The new facility would provide for longer arrival and departure tracks for today's longer trains. It would increase productivity at our terminals by providing them the ability to build longer trains on dock at their facilities with more storage and staging tracks. The result will be more efficient on dock rail operations to promote the transport of cargo containers on trains versus transport of cargo containers on trucks. To opt out of rail facilities, the project would also improve motorist and rail safety by eliminating an at grade crossing at the Ninth Street and Pico Avenue . The on dock rail support facility would be built in three phases over an estimated seven years. Construction of the project would create more than 1100 jobs. The approved project would expand the existing PRB rail facility from 12 tracks to 48 tracks, providing room to stage trains up to 10,000 feet long. Expanding this rail facility will carry out the goals of the port's master plan and Clean Air Action Plan and will allow more cargo to leave the port complex by rail versus having to go by truck. Currently, about one quarter of the cargo is loaded or unloaded within the port and moved by trains to meet our Clean Air Action Plan goals for improving air quality. Our aim is to increase the use of on dock rail to at least 35%. The potential impacts of the project were analyzed appropriately. Per SICA, using all of the relevant methodologies and all feasible mitigation measures were applied. All potential impacts associated with the project, construction and operation were properly disclosed. Following our board certification of the air. Two appeals were filed to the Long Beach City Council, representing the interests of Phillip Steel Company and superior electrical advertising. This figure shows the location of Phillips and Superior relative to the project site. The three locations owned by Phillips and the property leased by Superior are all located on Anaheim Street outside of the project footprint to the north. None of the properties have been identified for relocation or acquisition. The area where the project is located is zoned industrial, which is specifically slated for heavy industry manufacturing, railyards and port related and maritime industry facilities. The Harbor Department has provided detailed, written responses to each of the grounds for the appeals. I'll provide a summary of the key issues raised by both appellants. First, Phillips argues that various road closures will negatively affect traffic on Anaheim Street, obstruct access to its businesses and result in traffic delays. The air traffic analysis fully assess the operation of Anaheim Street during the peak construction activity and operations of the project did not identify any significant impacts. Phillips Employees and customers will continue to have direct access to each of Phillips facilities. Further, while travel times are not an environmental issue required for analysis and are secure, the estimated travel time delays of approximately 3 minutes are addressed and disclosed in the air. Also, the port is committed to work with businesses and contractors to develop a transportation management plan and will minimize impacts to the community and businesses during construction. Superior Electricals Appeal asserts that the air did not address the issue of train dust because this issue was not previously raised by Superior or any other commenter before or during the proceedings before the Harbor Commission as required under the Long Beach Municipal Code. This issue may not be appealed to the City Council, and the appeal on this ground should be denied. That said, particulate matter impacts associated with fugitive dust during construction and operation were appropriately analyzed in the air quality section of the air and the project will comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District Requirements for dust control. Superior also appeals the determination excuse me, Superior also appeals the determination that the railyard is industrial in nature and that the railyard is compatible with neighboring businesses. The zoning designation in the vicinity of the project is industrial railyards or expressly permitted uses in the General Industrial District and the port related industrial district where the project is located. Ellipse also contends that the significant air quality impacts identified in the air will negatively affect their employees. The air appropriately analyzed the potential health effects of the project and identified that cancer and non-cancer health impacts from the project would be less than significant. Impacts from nitrogen dioxide would be significant and unavoidable, as was appropriately disco disclosed in the air. The area where Phillip's properties are located already experience high background levels of snow too, and the project's contribution is small in comparison to the background conditions. Furthermore, the potential and O2 exceedances at Philips locations are expected to be temporary and occur infrequently during construction. Next. Phillips claims that the scope of the sequence analysis is inadequate and the IIR provides no plan for acquisition, relocation or compensation for adjacent businesses. The air fully analyzed all of the potential environmental impacts in compliance with Sequa and demonstrates that there is no need to relocate or acquire businesses outside of the project footprint. Phillips also identified a comment letter submitted by Caltrans on the Draft de Air, where they recommended the Ninth Street alternative. The air analyzed potential impacts at numerous street intersections and roadway segments and did not identify any significant impacts associated with ground transportation as it relates to public safety. The removal of the A-grade crossing at Ninth Street would result in a public safety improvement. Recently, in a letter to the port. Caltrans expressed support for the project and the Harbor Commission certification of this secret document. Caltrans also stated that the objectives of the Pier B project run in parallel with those of the IE 710 corridor and Shoemaker Bridge projects which overlap with the footprint of this project, especially those objectives which seek to improve efficiency and safety across modes of travel. This letter has been provided in the staff report. Phillips also argues that access to emergency services included at the close, including the closest major hospital, were not sufficiently studied. While emergency response times are not an environmental issue covered by sequa unless new infrastructure is required. The air did describe the locations of emergency responders, which are located near and on all sides of the project. Fire Chief Terry testified at the board hearing that his department reviewed the project and concluded that there would be no significant impact to emergency response capability. Further access routes to the closest hospitals at St Mary Medical Center and Long Beach Memorial would not change as a result of the project. Finally, Phillips states that the air was difficult to follow, should have been recirculated due to a number of changes, and that findings were not supported. The changes that were made from the draft document to the final were appropriate under sequa and served to reduce the potential impacts associated with the project in response to the comments received. Further, the findings offered 65 pages of detailed, factually supported findings, and the appellant did not specifically identify what changes lacked factual support. Neither appellant has identified any flaw in the ER analysis or explained why the board certification of the final air was in error. Therefore, the appeals should be denied this evening as described by the City Attorney's Office and considering the merits of the appeals by Phillips Steel and Superior Electrical City Council as tasked with determining if the Harbor Department certification of the final air is in compliance with the requirements of SEQUA. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. With that, we're going to hear from the appellants. So we'll put the clock at 20 minutes total. If I can, please have the appellants. You can feel free to use your time however you would like. Can have both. The appellants please come down. And you'll both just use part of the time, I assume? Yes. Okay. Whenever you're ready, sir. Are we good?
Speaker 0: Yes. Can you please raise your right hand and say I do or I will at the end of the statement to you and each of you solemnly state that the testimony you may give and the calls now in pending before this.
Speaker 9: Body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.
Speaker 4: I do. Good evening, honorable council members and other officials. My name is Darrell Phillips. I'm the proprietor of Phillips Steel Company here in Long Beach, a company that's been here for over 103 years. I'm no attorney. However, I have two general objections to the ports admitting the admitted rubberstamping approval of the C.A.R.. First, the proposed plan specifically creates unnecessary burdens for the on a number of local businesses to the point of actual destruction of companies, some of which have been pillars in our community and the city of Long Beach for over 100 years. The plan clearly designed to benefit the east side of the city while placing the costs of these benefits on your neighbors to the west side. This is patently unfair. And while the E.R. admits much of this discriminatory treatment, it is deceptive to the point of misleading. In its descriptions. Second, the proposed plan admittedly creates new levels of toxic pollution, health problems and destroys programs within our city that deal with the homeless, mental disorders and residents and others in need. It places the burdens associated with the unfettered expansion on those too poor or too conflicted to capably object. For these reasons, we ask the City Council to reopen the E.R. and request further findings towards mitigation and impact. More details as to these matters is found in the February 5th, 2018 appeal filed by our company, by our Council on behalf of our company, Philip Steel Company. Here are two purpose specific examples of my points. Just one part of the air admits that the project will materially increase nitrogen dioxide emissions. One of the most toxic emissions known demand short term exposure causes asthma, wheezing, hospital admissions and the E.R. visits. Long term exposure, which will admittedly occur with the port's plan, not only affects physical health of the people, but causes hazy air and nutrient pollution in our oceans. In its response, the report states that increases of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide are, quote, simply unavoidable. The port also concludes that the quote, quote project would also resort result in significant and unavoidable air emissions and health risks impacts on the cumulative impact level, unquote. These admissions occur just before the Port admits that the project will increase greenhouse gases higher than acceptable by the Southern California AQ, M.D.. How can the city knowingly enter into a program designed to generate new and unsafe levels of toxic air and water pollution? Maybe the port has determined this is to be in the best interests of the city and the Treasury. But I can imagine. That the class action lawyers are chomping at the bit. Another victim is the Long Beach Health and Human Services Building, which directly abuts the proposed new rails and my company. I am doubtful it is permitted to object to the project given the inherent conflict of interest. There will be noise, vibration, toxic pollution, interference with school, the homeless and the city's most vulnerable inhabitants. Let's just consider the noise. Noise is measured. Lager. I knew I was going to mess up this word. Lager and mythically. Close enough, for example. Normal conversion. Normal conversation is 60 to 70 decibels. A full blown rock concert is 125 decibels. However, a train horn is 152 decibels, equal to a jet taking off at about 25 meters. At this level. Eardrums burst. We do not see this addressed anywhere in the air. The port claims that we say now, the port claims that nothing we say now can interfere with its move forward. And none of the points we make are technically violations of sequel. For example, Square requires a ten day notice on the adoption of the final EIA. Did we get 11 days to analyze the thousands of pages before the port hearing? No, we got ten. We were supposed to have 90 days to consider the initial EIA, but the hearing was only 30 days after the last publication notice. So did the port technically technically comply? Perhaps, but it did so in a manner least designed to give notice and least designed to provide time to investigate and respond. We do not believe the City Council must simply. Sit back and allow the poor to hide behind technical defenses while its businesses and most vulnerable residential residents are devastated by the willful and knowing acts. Therefore. I ask you, please, to postpone your vote here this evening. Come to the west side. Meet us. Meet the people, meet the business owners, hear our concerns, work with us to formulate equitable and workable plans. If your goal is to disrupt the environment. Disrupt and displace businesses and its employees. If your goal is to cut off the West Side emergency services, if your goal is to impose detrimental health risks to your citizens. If your goal is to have a complaint in mandamus, then congratulations. You have succeeded. Please postpone your vote. Come meet us. Hear our story. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. And next, we'll have the next speaker in the appellant group. Pablo, do you have the remote? Good evening. My name is Stange Anoka, along with my partner, Jim Sterk. We are the owners of superior electrical advertising. Jim and I have worked together for 49 years, two thirds of my lifetime. So this is an emotional issue for me. I started at the bottom in 1969 after getting out of the out of the U.S. Navy. Worked my way up to management, went to school nights. And when the owner passed away in 1998, Jim and I purchased the company. We paid $7.1 million for the company. We borrowed. We mortgaged our houses. We did everything we could because we wanted to keep the business in Long Beach because somebody else wanted to buy the company and move it to Orange County. Superior has 125 employees. Of these 112 125 employees, 43 are Long Beach residents. One third of our workforce are Long Beach residents. I am. I am. I'm a Long Beach resident now. I'm in your district. So when we have an option to hire somebody, if we have equal, you know, equal people we chose, if one lives in Long Beach, we checked we chose the people, though whoever lives in Long Beach, we worked two shifts. We have employees on site inside and outside our building for 22 hours a day. We do over $25 million a year in signs and we pay a lot of taxes. According to the air, my back gate is 125 feet from the first rail track. If you turn around and you look at the picture right behind you, that's how far that's how close the trains are going to be to our business. This is the wrong project for the west side. Remember, the West Side also includes schools and homes east of the L.A. River. These are these homes and these schools will be affected. We are we had breakfast with Mr. Gonzalez last week, and we're talking about the issues of the of the trains. And there was an issue brought up about the train whistles. Mr. Gonzalez noted that she can hear the train whistles in her downtown home. So I'm wondering how loud will the whistle be at Cesar Chavez School and at Edison School when there are ten blocks closer than the downtown area to those rail yards? It's a it's a that L.A. River is not that wide and the tracks are right on the other side of the L.A. River. Let's talk about the west side. The west side industrial area is own I.G. Industrial general. The I.G. Drift District is intended to promote an industrial area where land is preserved, preserved for industry and protect it from non-industrial uses. A rail yard is not industrial use. There are some 300 businesses on the West Side, 2000 workers, 2000 men and women. How will they be protected from a 48 yard rail yard? The rail yard does not fall into the IG classification. It's not right for that area. What does a what does a 48 yard rail yard look like? It looks like that that's what 48 tracks looks like. If you look at the picture behind us, that's that's 48, that's 44, 45 rows. So it's massive. That's going to be in my back yard. Well, let's talk about Superior. We are in the old Coca-Cola bottling building. I invited everyone. I invited all of you to. To come and meet with us. And the only Lena had breakfast wasn't a talked about it, but she's been to our plant many times, and Al Austin sent his deputy down to to meet with us and see what we do. It's hard for you to realize how close and how much the train is going to affect affect us without being there firsthand. And Darrell Phillips was right when he said that you should postpone this and come down and take a look firsthand. We have a 50,000 square foot manufacturing plant and a 50,000 square foot open yard. We work in the open yard and store finish lines in the yard. We manufacture high end signage. Here we are. What are the most expensive flying companies on the West Coast? At any time there can be a half a million dollars worth of product finished science sitting in our yard ready to install. Our clients are businesses like McDonald's, Starbucks, CBS, Disney, Universal, Dunkin Donuts, The Giant, don't it, on Seventh Street and PCH for Dunkin Donuts. We did that, don't it? The the sign you see in front of the Performing Arts Center facing facing Ocean Boulevard. We did that sign, Gladstone's, the Pike Parking Structure. Our signs are in every district in Long Beach and not only in Long Beach, but across the country. So I'm just wondering how we can do business, you know, a stone's throw from our backyard. We're going to have whistles blowing all day long, screeching train wheels, metal on metal, coupling and uncoupling all day long. Especially the crushing sound coupling makes air pollution that wouldn't include dust that will affect the product we have in our yard . And Blythe, tell me how we do, how we entertain clients, clients, many of them looking at finished products in our back yard. How do we protect our products? Signs that are 100,000, $200,000 signs? You know, you can spend an hour and air anywhere you want. Nobody writes or presents a bad idea. According to the air, the port plans to use electric trains in the rail yard, but diesel locomotives will be used to pick up the 10,000 foot long trains. Not one diesel, but four or five diesels, maybe more. I learned yesterday that what's going to happen is that there will be two diesels in the front and two diesels in the rear. That means that diesel engines will have to come from the Wilmington area all the way across the rail yard to the east side, where they will get to that will where they will get on the back of a 10,000 foot train and push the train. So these diesels are going to travel through our backyard. The Earth states that this rail yard meets all Section eight UMD guidelines. But read a couple of lines in the air on page 11 dash tool for the four areas of environmental concern. Noise, vibration, air quality and transportation have been thoroughly evaluated in the draft. EIA only air quality impacts have been determined to be significant. On page 11, Dash 212, after considerable analysis determined there will be less than to say that these will be less than significant. The only exception being air quality impacts, which were determined to be significantly adverse. So air quality will be significantly adverse. If I stay here 125 feet for the rail yard, I will be subjecting my employees to noise and significantly adverse air quality. The first time one of my employees has a breathing issue. I smell a lawsuit. So what can Superior do? Not much. We can close our doors. After 62 years, we can. We can just shut our doors down to. We can move. But moving a company of our size is probably more expensive than we can afford. And move. Where? How do we find a 50,000 square foot building with a 50,000 square foot open yard, which we need? There are no properties in Long Beach that are available at beginning of this presentation. I said it's an emotional issue for me. It's an emotional issue for my partner, too. We've been working together for nearly 50 years and we have many employees that have been there for 20 years, 30 years, and we have our two sons there , my son and my partner's son. They've been with us for over 25 years. Our legacy was to leave the company to our sons one day. Well, that may not happen, you know, or if it does happen, it's going to be very difficult. Approving the railyard in its present format is the wrong decision for the West Side. Because we do not fall in the footprint of the rail yard. The Port of Long Beach position is that we are not directly impacted. Important words directly impacted. I strongly disagree that 125 feet from that yard is directly impacted. The port of Long Beach and the city of Long Beach will be changing the lives of many people. There are studies done by many universities across the country on rail yards, and they all conclude residents and employees near rail yards are expected to suffer asthma, cardiac disease, cancer, premature, premature death and at a higher rate than someone who lives four miles from a rail yard. You can see the trains, but you can't see the air pollution. The rail yard is wrong for superior. It is wrong for Philip Steele. It is wrong for everyone south of Anaheim Street. It is in the wrong. It is it is wrong for the entire West Side. I got it. One minute left. Good. You know, we met with the port yesterday. They came down to our facility. Not the first time. We've met one couple of times. We've met up with them at their office. And, you know, I think the port can see that the up the property south of Anaheim Street between Anaheim and 12th Street are in a zone and everybody in that zone is affected. Everybody in that zone is going to lose business. They're going to be hurt. They're going to be sick. They're just too close to that property. A 12 foot buffer is not enough. So I think you just need to really think of what you're doing to a half a dozen businesses that are in that limbo area. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. And we're going to go ahead and go back to the hearing order. And we do have now an opportunity for rebuttal from staff. So please.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Sir. Please, I the it's part of the hearing that will happen. So I will have it handled. So. Thank you, sir. Go ahead.
Speaker 2: Thank you. The Environmental Impact Report Process, the development of the process for this project has been going on for eight years, and it's been a process that we've taken very seriously. We've done our due diligence and preparing all of the technical analyzes, looking at all of the opportunities to reduce the impacts of the project to the extent feasible, and making sure that we have a robust process. As we went through this, we had numerous meetings in the community with different groups. We also.
Speaker 1: Had all of the required.
Speaker 2: Processes under secure with proper notifications, proper review times for the draft document. We're required under Sequoia to have a 45 day review period. When the draft document was released, we extended that comment period to 90 days and we held three public hearings as opposed to the one that's required. We also had the public hearing with our board when they certified the document and we had the documentation out under that, the required times for that. We feel that we've had a very robust process. We've had numerous meetings with the appellants that have presented before you today as well, and we will continue to work with them to address their concerns as the project moves forward through the design, the construction and the operation phases.
Speaker 1: The project did.
Speaker 2: Identify the analysis, did identify that there will be significant and unavoidable impacts for nitrogen oxide emissions at the through the analysis near the.
Speaker 1: Project area.
Speaker 2: And those impacts will occur during construction and operation. Looking specifically at the locations for the appellants for Philips, there was a receptor that we used for the modeling that identified that the impacts will be infrequent during the construction process and and that the majority of the impacts to NOx are actually coming from the background conditions. And the project contribution adds about a quarter of the the impacts that are seen at that site. But the 75% of the impacts are actually from the background conditions. There were no significant impacts identified from no noise and vibration associated with the project and also for the traffic evaluation. There were no significant traffic impacts from the project and. All of the appropriate sensitive receptors. We did look at residences. We did look at schools for both noise and air quality analyzes, and there all of the potential impacts to sensitive receptors. We're also properly disclosed within the document. The rail yard is an appropriate use for this location. It is located within the port industrial zone and rail yards are explicitly listed and listed as a eligible use. And in that area and building our additional rail infrastructure is consistent with our port master plan and our Clean Air Action Plan
Speaker 1: . If I may, I would just. Kathy Jensen with the law firm of Ratana Tucker, the city is secure attorney on this project. I would like to point out that secure is a disclosure requirement. It does not preclude the City Council from approving a project or the the Board of Harbor Commissioners from approving a project that has significant impacts. There are requirements to mitigate to the extent possible. There were findings made that this project has mitigated to the extent possible all of the impacts, not any of the appellate issues are saying that there was a disclosure that wasn't made. Instead, they are referring to disclosures that were made in the air. There was a reference to there only being 30 days from the closure of the comment period to the approval of the project. That is incorrect. The comment period closed on March 13, 2017, and the hearing before the board was not until January 12, 2018. And I think that's the only other issue.
Speaker 2: At this time, I'd also like to conclude with comments from our executive director, Mario Cordero.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And members of the City Council. The Pier B on dock rail support. The City project. It was an essential component to the port's mission of being the green port of the future and furthering our commitment to sustainable development. As you may know, in 2017, the port had its best year, moving 7.5 million containers. Best. In our 107 year history. The Pier B project not only enhances efficient movement of container cargo. But also in addition mitigates potential roadway congestion. And clearly and I will say again and clearly a less polluting freight transport system. You have heard commentary on both sides and both sides admit there's been a lot of dialog. There has been meetings. The port has never been dismissive of the concerns. And we will continue to commit to engage with our stakeholders and engage with those impacted, whether directly or indirectly. And thus, I would respectfully request that the Council confirm and affirm the certification of the final Environment Environmental Impact Report for their Pier B on Dock Rail Facility Project. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Kudo. I appreciate that. We're going to go into public comments. And Madam Clerk, do we need to do an oath for anyone that is going to make public comment and city attorney? We need to do that. Should we do one, one, one Big Arthur?
Speaker 1: I think. Did the earlier oath handle it for the speakers.
Speaker 9: Or do you need to do that now?
Speaker 1: The oath was for the.
Speaker 9: Speakers, the.
Speaker 1: Appellants.
Speaker 4: So no, nothing. If not, no need for public comment.
Speaker 0: Not for public comment.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 4: So. So now we will. You know, I'm not. Guys, please, no one. No one. Talk from the audience. We've got a handle. Thank you very much. Now we're going to be having public comment on the hearing. So if you're here to comment on the hearing, please come forward. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Hello. I'm Stephanie Dora, resident of Long Beach and business owner here, who will be very close to the proposed project. Ladies and gentlemen of the Council, I implore you to consider the job you were elected to do to serve this great city and as the people who live in it. Please be mindful that the vote you cast here today has a very real effect on and carries risks for the city of Long Beach and its people. The votes cast today in this room will change the city and its landscape forever. They may very well carry negative effects for Long Beach as citizens and businesses for years to come. Once you cast your votes, there are no do overs, no take backs, and you will be personally responsible beyond the reaches of your time on this council. The proposed pier be on dock rail support facility project is more dangerous than the ER report let on only more in-depth studies and considerations can prove that it will have very little effect on minimizing the number of trucks on the road and will inevitably increase pollution. It will obliterate small businesses on the west side of Long Beach, isolate its inhabitants and limit routes to downtown, thus decreasing access to restaurants, shopping, parks, meeting places and other vital resources, all of which will impact downtown businesses, residents and employees. Past studies following completion.
Speaker 9: Of other cities rail.
Speaker 1: Yards have proved that with rail yards come increases in crime, illness, pollution, unemployment and decline in property value. As a business owner and a resident here in this city.
Speaker 9: I am all too aware of the importance of responsible.
Speaker 1: Usage of car compliant equipment and the need for improvements in the transportation industry. But more trains so close to schools, houses and our main tourist attractions is not the answer for the city of Long Beach. Unlike other cities such as San Bernardino, L.A. or Oakland, just to name a few, we are a very small city. Our industrial parks are in very close proximity to the rest of our city. The estimated reach of pollutants from trains found in studies from places like London, China and even parts of the US suggest that they reach up to four miles. Ladies and gentlemen.
Speaker 9: Four miles goes a very long way here in Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Increases in cancer, asthma. Noise, dust and carbons will be painfully noticeable here in our beloved city. The negative impact on my family's business personally will include but not be limited to increases in noise pollution. Increase air pollution such as carbons and dust affecting myself, my.
Speaker 9: Indoor and outdoor employees.
Speaker 1: Increased maintenance costs to equipment such as filters, engine maintenance, upkeep and vehicle security. Decreased terminal access. Decreased access to and from our facility. Decrease in property value, increase in security costs.
Speaker 9: Potential changes to the heavyweight corridor.
Speaker 1: Increase in disruption of day to day operations, especially in the office. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Very much. Thank you. No problem. Next speaker, please. Gavin, your mayor.
Speaker 8: City council executive staff. My name is National Medrano.
Speaker 4: I represent the Los.
Speaker 8: Angeles, an Orange County building and Construction Trades Council, which comprises of 140,000 hardworking men and women in construction.
Speaker 4: And we're here to support the staff. Recommendation to move forward with construction appear to be the port must remain competitive. Trade moving through the port of Long Beach sustains more than 300,000 jobs in southern the southern California region, including 40,000 jobs in Long Beach. Construction of this.
Speaker 8: Facility could generate over 1100 jobs.
Speaker 4: The project would allow the port to move more cargo, more efficiently, continuing to sustain jobs and generate economic.
Speaker 8: Opportunities while reducing emissions and traffic.
Speaker 4: Cargo would be moved to and from Pier B only on trains. Each onboard trains saves up to 750 truck trips between the port and half dock rail yards. The proposed project will have a port wide project labor agreement that will support 40% local hire in the Los Angeles and Orange County's 15% disadvantaged worker go 10% of veteran worker go and 30% apprenticeship provision. This will be this will provide for many apprenticeship opportunities for communities, for the young people coming up here in the community. Thank you for your support of working men and women. And again, we urge you to support the staff recommendation. Good evening. Thank you very much. And I am right to your point and just about a minute, 15 seconds. So I appreciate that. So we have a lot we have a long agenda, sir. Obviously, if you are able to to to make the time a little shorter, that helps the process. So thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Mayor Garcia and members of the city council. I'm Tiffany Rao, director of government public affairs for Endeavor, speaking on behalf of our terminal and pipeline operator and the Port Tesoro SoCal Pipeline Company, LLC. We support the overall goal goals of the Pier B project, but we share some of the appellants concerns about the project's construction impacts, including potential effects on air quality traffic and circulation, emergency access and business disruption. We are committed to working with the port to resolve our concerns that construction of the project could require removal and or relocation of over 200 utility pipelines, including over 75 oil pipelines. Removal of hundreds of utility lines could result in significant disruption of the port's operations. And these disruptions would also directly affect our operations, our customers, public utilities and numerous other operators at the port. The impacts will disproportionate disproportionately burden to Thora. So Cal Pipeline Company who operates 15 active lines that require relocation. We have spelled out these concerns in our March 13, 2017 letter comments and commenting on the draft e.r. And again in the January 22nd 28 letter. On the final e.r. We have identified a solution that could significantly reduce these potential impacts, minimize disruption and limit unnecessary construction costs by allowing active pipelines to be protected and abandoned in place and safely abandoned. Inactive pipelines using accepted best practices and abandonment activities are strictly regulated by the U.S., D.O.T. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the California State Fire Marshal that prescribes certain steps for formal abandonment of pipelines, including the disconnection, purging and stealing of abandoned lines left in plant place in addition to regulatory obligations. The owner of an abandoned line continues to have potential liability for any nuisance or hazard that may be created by leaving pipe in the ground. Long Beach's Pipeline Ordinance Section 15.44.150. Provision for abandonment of a facility specifically authorizes abandonment in place when there is no detriment to the public interest. We ask and ever ask the city to consider development of a memorandum of understanding that identifies which pipelines need to be removed, if any, and which can be safely abandoned in place and establish specific timeframes for completion of all necessary relocation. Again, Endeavor supports the port's Pier B on Dock Rail Project, and we ask for your support, support and direction to staff to work with us to achieve a solution. Thank you. And I'm available to answer any questions on this matter.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council Members John Hanna, Governmental Affairs Director for the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters. Happy Nowruz. Council Members Price. I want to also thank the Council, particularly the Mayor and Councilman Nine and Councilwoman Price for your efforts to keep open community hospital of Long Beach. I would say on this the Carpenters strongly support the Pier B project, but I want to remind you what your mission is here tonight. Your charge, it's to deal with the certification of the air so it's not on the substance. So much was discussed on the process and on the process. There's been no evidence tonight that the city failed to comply with the requirements under SEQUA. In fact, they gave additional time, as your deputy city attorney reported, for people to come forward. And in fact, tonight we heard an admission that there was sufficient time by one of the appellants, but not one fact was ever presented that they were unable to produce in that timely manner to justify an extension of time. So I think that the city has the staff has has put it forward. And I think particularly the last item, the deputy city attorney said that 75% of the negative impacts, some of the stuff that was highlighted in one of the appellant's comments in paper is already there in the background. We think on the on the balance, this is a great project. It's not going to mean a lot of jobs for Southwest Carpenters. It will mean some. But for the over 2000 carpenters members and family members who live in the city of Long Beach, it means that this port will continue to be competitive. You've got people in Savannah, you've got people in Canada who want to take this business. This is the engine that drives the city council members. And this project will do two things. It will increase the velocity of moving those those goods, which makes us more competitive. But second, in the keynote for this city is that it's going to do it in a green way, reduce the pollution. That's what makes Long Beach unique. With all the ports, you're the greenest port in the country. Let's keep it that way. Thank you. Mr. Hanna. Next speaker, please. Late evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members and staff. My name is Diego Gomez. I'm a resident of Long Beach. I'm also a 15 year member of the IBEW. Our body is a membership of over 1200 12,000 excuse me, members here in the greater L.A. area. We're here in support of the project for various reasons.
Speaker 10: And I will be very brief.
Speaker 4: Pier B on dock projects supports well over 1100 jobs here locally. The potential to save 750 transportation trucks between the dock and the rail station adjacent to us is.
Speaker 10: A large benefit as.
Speaker 4: Well. But the most important part is the key infrastructure. That's for improvements for the dock, which will keep it competitive. We support this primarily because of the play components that do encourage local hires not only for veterans but disadvantaged workers as well. It aids in alleviating congestion in our local highways and streets, alleviating a lot of our membership, having to drive out to larger areas of the greater Los Angeles area. We fully support this project and the ability to provide good middle class wages for our membership and others that would benefit directly from the project. In conclusion, we ask that you deny the appeal, as well as urge the full council support in bringing the project forward. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Camilla Khatami. I'm a resident of Long Beach. And here today I'm representing the Hubbard Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce. We urge your support in the 12th Street option of the proposed Pier B rail yard project, which you will be considering as part of your review of the project's final earth. This project is vital to keep the Port of Long Beach competitive and meet the environmental goals outlined in the updated Cap Clean Air Action Plan. With the development of the Pier B rail yard project. Short haul truck trips will be reduced greatly, as will the emissions associated with them. These are factors that our membership considers as necessary to remain competitive in our industry. The Port of Long Beach has a strong track record of supporting their customers and tenants. We are certain that this air has sufficiently address safety, air quality and efficient goods movement. Without the Pier B facility, the port cannot meet their near-term goal of moving 35% of containers via on dock rail or reach the eventual goal of 50%. It is the best option to accommodate future cargo growth and boost the economic activity while sustaining the 30,000 jobs in Long Beach that depend on the city's port. We strongly urge you to vote in favor of it. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Lupe Valdez. I'm with Union Pacific Railroad. I'm the director of public affairs and I'm here in support of the project. We believe any time the ports can do projects of this magnitude that make everything more efficient for us, that's also a reduction in emissions. Any time you can have operations that clearly cut down on drainage, that moves. I have the near dock facility, you pitas and that's a four mile facility. And when you have facilities on dock that don't have rail service, this would provide for some of those smaller, smaller moves to all be connected into one train. I do want to tell you that the previous speaker mentioned about how we accommodate for the engines on a train. A lot of what is happening in terms of that's called distributed power. And what happens is that actually makes the train run more efficient and use less fuel. Even though you see those locomotives, the head locomotive is the one managing that train and it can really help a lot with efficiency in terms of reduction of fuel use. And that's something that's always very important to us. And with that, I thank you very much for allowing me to speak.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hello.
Speaker 1: Good evening, mayor, vice mayor and council members. My name is Elizabeth Warren and I'm the president and CEO of Dialed In Partners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. I'm here as a community stakeholder, business partner with the port. And I want to express my support of the Pier B project.
Speaker 2: And to urge the.
Speaker 1: Council to support the staff's.
Speaker 9: Recommendation for the final.
Speaker 2: Year. The port staff has done its due diligence over the years and has.
Speaker 1: Completed the environmental process above and beyond what is required. As you know, I've been a supporter of green growth, an efficient, efficient cargo movement for many years. That is why this added infrastructure is so important in order to move that cargo by rail to.
Speaker 2: Support the on dock.
Speaker 1: Marine terminals. It's not only important to our communities to get the containers on rail, we also need to keep our port competitive. The Port of Long Beach is the busiest seaport in the United States. And however, we need.
Speaker 2: To do everything we.
Speaker 9: Can.
Speaker 1: To keep our goods moving.
Speaker 9: Industry here in Southern California, to keep the cargo in the.
Speaker 2: Hundreds of thousands of jobs supported by that cargo here and not diverted to other regions or to other countries. Modernizing the port and greening.
Speaker 1: The port.
Speaker 9: Go hand-in-hand.
Speaker 1: This project is.
Speaker 2: Another example of how the.
Speaker 1: Port of Long.
Speaker 9: Beach can modernize and go green.
Speaker 2: At the same time. It's a key.
Speaker 1: Component, and it's critical to the future development of the Port of Long Beach.
Speaker 2: So I again urge the port.
Speaker 1: Excuse.
Speaker 2: Me to urge the Council.
Speaker 9: To approve the final EMR.
Speaker 1: Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening.
Speaker 4: Thanks so much, Nick. Speaker, please. Good evening, Dr. Mayor. Robert Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 7: My name is Jessie Equity with.
Speaker 4: POTUS. I am representing the Long Beach Chamber Government Affairs Committee with our 800 members. We really, really, really urge you to support this project for reasons you've heard and four reasons you're going to hear. Please support the Harbor Commission's decision, and we thank you for your support. Thank you. Thank you. Everyone's been keeping it under under 10 minutes, so we're going to step. There's not any objection. We're going to go down to 2 minutes. Just set the timer there. We'll continue. Good evening, Mayor. City Council. My name is Thomas Jellinek. I represent.
Speaker 3: PMC.
Speaker 4: We represent the marine terminals and ocean carriers that are the customers of the Port of Long Beach. We're here to urge you.
Speaker 3: This evening to support.
Speaker 4: The port's decision on certifying the air. This project will do three things. One, improve the port's competitiveness.
Speaker 3: And as you've already heard, competitiveness is key.
Speaker 4: To this port and retaining the cargo that flows through these ports. Two, it will benefit the community. It will benefit the community through shifting cargo from trucks, through trains, reducing congestion, and thereby improving the environment. And third, it will create jobs and retain the jobs that this port.
Speaker 3: Creates in this.
Speaker 4: Community and throughout the region. For those three reasons, I urge you to support this project and affirm the port of Long.
Speaker 3: Beach, the port of Long Beach, its decision.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name is Mining Premiere. I'm the interim executive director for Future Ports. I am. I'm here tonight on behalf of our 57 member companies, many of whom are based right here in Long Beach, to emphasize our support for the Pier B project and the staff recommendation. During the IR public comment period, we submitted comments in support of the project with requests to ensure that the project coordinate with utilities, some of whom you have heard from tonight, as well as with the Skegg rail yard for future development. And we are confident that as the project moves forward, the port will work closely with stakeholders, including our members. The Pier Beyond Dock Rail Project is vital to keep the Port of Long Beach competitive and meet environmental goals outlined in the 2017 update of the CAP. The project would provide more truck space to connect smaller train segments coming and therefore increase port efficiencies. Future port is dedicated to supporting sustainable growth at the San Pedro Bay Ports complex, and we believe this project is a strong example of a project that provides improved port operations, improved air quality and reduce congestion and will lead to more jobs for Long Beach residents. For those reasons, I urge you to vote to uphold the approval of the air by the Harbor Commission. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you so much, Nick Speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Council members, my name is Jessica Alvarenga. I'm with the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association.
Speaker 2: And I'd like to share our.
Speaker 9: Support for the Pier B project.
Speaker 2: It was initially approved by the Harbor Commission in January for its.
Speaker 9: Benefits in improving port.
Speaker 1: Competitiveness.
Speaker 2: And environment.
Speaker 9: And the environment by adding on dock rail capacity.
Speaker 0: This project will make.
Speaker 2: Port operations more efficient.
Speaker 0: While alleviating future truck.
Speaker 6: Congestion. Additionally.
Speaker 2: There will be a smaller.
Speaker 1: Number of trucks on the road.
Speaker 0: And the project. Construction will.
Speaker 6: Create much.
Speaker 0: Needed jobs in the community. This project will improve efficiency.
Speaker 2: Without increasing pollution. It will reduce.
Speaker 1: Truck.
Speaker 0: Congestion and create jobs.
Speaker 9: Please support the Pier B here. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thanks so much, nick speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Councilmembers. My name is Kendall Asuncion, and I'm here on the left on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. We are here to express our support for the air for the Port of Long Beach Pier beyond our rail facilities, as needed to move more cargo on dock, which will both improve efficiency and reduce pollution. The improvements will increase track space to connect smaller train segments and connect the cargo terminals, enhancing the system and increasing rail use, which will eliminate truck trips and congestion at the ports and throughout the region. Pier B on dock rail facilities will leverage the port's existing investments in rail, which will continue to have positive ripple effects to the community, including improved air quality, reduce poverty, reduce pollution, decrease congestion and construction, which will generate new jobs in the area. It will also play a key role in meeting the near-term goal of moving 35% of containers via undock rail. Given these useful benefits, the Chamber urges the Council to uphold approval of the EIA for the by the Harbor Commission. Thank you and have a good evening.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Council members. My name is Paige Polonius and I am here to speak on behalf of Assemblymember O'Donnell's strong support for the Pier B Project. Pier B expansion will reduce harmful emissions, reduce truck traffic congestion and increase port efficiency. To put it simply, this project will help the port become greener.
Speaker 2: Leaner and more.
Speaker 1: Competitive. For these reasons, Assemblymember O'Donnell is in strong.
Speaker 2: Support of.
Speaker 1: This project. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Nick. Speaker, please. My name is Paul Collins. I'm an architect in Long Beach in the West Side. I'm here representing the West Side Project Area Committee. We are firmly right now behind the port as far as we want the port to expand and we always try to be on the port side. But the pollution aspect of this has not been looked at carefully at all when I read through the air. And all the items that were checked that there was no significant impact. They weren't certainly talking about the industrial area. The only industrial area where heavy industrial can occur in Long Beach is in the West Side, and the pollution for us is going to be much greater than it is now. Already within a mile of the port, we have cancer rates and asthma rates up to 800% higher than any other part of Long Beach. And the trains are going to indefinitely produce more pollution for us. The trains that leave the port, they go through and they and they go long term. Those were not part of the port's environmental impact study. Those trains are a different type of train, and the port cannot control the people that own those trains and tracks on what kind of engines they burn. We've had we've taken pictures of these trains leaving long term and they have black soot coming out of them and they produce as much, if not more pollution than the trucks would. The businesses in the West Side have had good access for the city and for the to the city and to the port, and that's going to all be cut off. So all the businesses that require access to the port to get their items that they build in West Long Beach out of the port are not going to have the same access that they have now. And some of them have heavy loads and large loads. That hasn't been considered at all because they go up Santa Fe right now and Santa Fe is going to be closed off. And that does not work for several of the larger companies that have many jobs and have many people working for them that won't be able to get their items to the port to get them out of the country. Thank you very much, sir. Good evening, Mayor Garcia Garcia and council members. I'm keep this short. I'm a professional carpenter and I lived in the West Long Beach area all my life. I live two miles away from the project and I am for Pier B project. So I agree. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 5: Even Mayor Garcia and council members. And thank you for this time and opportunity. My name is Ted Humanas and I'm a representative with the Southwest Regional Council of the Carpenters. And what I have with me today is carpenters. Stand up, building trades, stand up. These are people here a few and quite a few are outside. And we're here to let you know that we support the project. I'm sure you heard all the details. I'm not going to be redundant. This is about hard work that's going to provide a lot of construction jobs. We're about a middle class living, health care pension with dignity. And whenever that opportunity is available, like you're offering here, we're strong supporters that we represent over 50,000 carpenters just in the southwest, 30,000 carpenters plus here in Southern California, along with the building trades . We urge you to support this project. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mayor and city council members.
Speaker 6: I'm an employee of a heavy industrial.
Speaker 0: Manufacturing company.
Speaker 6: In West Side, Long Beach. My understanding is the whole thing of tonight is just.
Speaker 2: Questioning her.
Speaker 6: About the environmental impacts are not good publicity. I was just wondering about the vibration impact because that has.
Speaker 0: A direct impact on precision manufacturing.
Speaker 6: And the train just in and of itself has an impact. And I don't think that that came up. Definitely things you can do about it. Right. But I don't think that that was brought up in the environmental report. So maybe that's something to look at. As well as the inevitable rerouting of the heavyweight corridor and the associated environmental impact as a current project directly impacts the heavyweight corridor. So I guess the question would be we need to kind of assess how it was evaluated and take a closer look because there's there are things we can do about the impact. Just we need to know what the impact is accurately. Right. But fair consideration, I guess.
Speaker 4: Thanks so much. Next speaker, please. Thank you, Mayor. City Council. My name is Lee Wilson. I own a piece of property at 1520 West 11th Street that is right underneath the railyard. The building will disappear. We've owned that property since 1965. I have a tenant down there today doing some very crucial work not only for this port, but for the country on some of the specialized handling that he does. He has no idea the future of his business. But I'm not here to speak against the air. I'm going to address the fact that and request that council postpone their approval of this tonight until they can convene a meeting and another hearing to where probably the dozen or two dozen people that were outside that have not been able to get in have left out of frustration. Because when I got here about 20 minutes before, there was a 100 yard line, long line, and it just grew and grew. If I had not been forceful at the door with the police department, I would not be in here myself. I want to thank I did talk to Mario and I talked to Rick camera. And I know Rick went out and got the fire marshal to go out, try to get people in. My buddy Larry here and other impacted business is here. But I don't think that the pop, you know, the people being impacted that have skin in the game had adequate time to address the council and raise their issues. I, I can thank the port and I am totally positive that they follow every rule in Sitka. I'm very familiar with the square and the processing, but I think the council as a whole has left the stakeholders down, not allowing enough of them into the meeting to hear the appellants. I only got to hear Superior did not hear the Phillips Company, which I missed. Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, Mr. Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Lawrence Mihara and I'm with 435 Seafood, Long Beach Sportfishing, Queen's Wharf Restaurant in the Port of Long Beach. And I want to talk about my opposition to the approval of the air in the air, or the response states that our business is not significantly impacted yet. In the first paragraph in black and white in the report, the project eliminates 53 parking spots. We already are unable to accommodate our customers with sufficient parking spaces, particularly on the weekends. There are no overflow lots and no alternatives for parking. To state that reducing our parking lot by approximately 25% is not significant is to ignore the facts and nature of our business located there, which are popular with the community. This is one of the only places in the port where local community has access to the port. The response states that no building will be affected. But just I just learned in a meeting with the port design team that Pico Boulevard, essentially a multiple lane highway, will be 12 feet from my from the corner of my building to state that no building will be affected also ignores reality. And I also want to talk about the air quality will be adversely affected for our employees and customers. The report admits that the air quality is significantly worse as a result of the nitrous oxide levels that are beyond the federal threshold levels. And yet it says this is not a significant fact. It defies common sense to say that doubling the number of rail tracks and trains and having tracks and road 50 feet closer to our business will not significantly increase pollution and affect our business. Our restaurant is mostly outdoors with people sitting outside. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. And it looks like we're nearing the end of the speaker's list. So we will be our last speakers that are here in line for this hearing.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Members of the City Council. My name is when I was meeting with the Regional Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. We're here to support business development. We support the Hispanic business community as well. We're here in favor of the Pier B on dock project. We're here because we support the jobs that it will generate. Trade through the port sustains about 300,000 jobs in the Southern California region. 30,000 of those jobs are in Long Beach. This project alone will be over about 1100 jobs, that it'll create it a lot more at the port to move more cargo more efficiently, generate more opportunities while maintaining low emissions, reducing traffic as well. The chamber supports the project. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Port. Port. I remember I adjudicate on employment law and some of the people, the attorneys who were called that office won it and adjudication determination in their favor simply because they were attorneys. Never mind that they were defrauding the people who were fired. When I heard this, and I'm sitting there with no real particular interest, and then my mind just skirted back to the airport argument. How beneficial it would have been financially, how the international community would have had access to Long Beach wanting to bring the Olympics here. And you got the aquarium that put this of the Pacific that you just gave $53 million to do. And the jobs that would have been created long term had you brought in International Airport to Long Beach. Why didn't you do it? You didn't do it because your rich clients didn't want it. That's why you didn't do it. They wouldn't have voted for you again, some of you, if you had brought that international airport that, you know, would have been of large global impact to Long Beach. It would have brought put Long Beach on the map like none other. But you voted no. Why did you do it? And now you're willing to say yes to this? Hypocrisy is terrible. The souls of men are being bought and sold here because the poorest of the community of Long Beach live there. And you don't care about it. Even though you're going to have jobs, you're going to have an international influence. But you said no to an international airport. You have a tunnel. The airport. You don't have a big boy airport. And why not?
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. And we love our we love our airport as it is. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Grady Mayor, the city council. My name is Tony Rivera. Most of you know me already. I was former chair of RTA on the West Side. And I will I will tell you to everyone, this project, I am not opposed to this project, but it's been done incorrectly. When we were talking about a long time ago, we were talking about Unite Long Beach, not divide it. Now Long Beach. The problem is decided to divide us. Put a rail wall in there so we don't go to the port. Number one problem. Number two, problem. They just said that we're going to have a clean, local motors for the neighborhood. I got burials right now with the locomotives coming in and contaminate all the west and downtown Long Beach with all this smog. There's not been taking care of it. So that's the second thing is bad. The third one is that the ships are coming in 40 miles. They come in slow, but everybody's talking about trucks and trucks leaving the trucks alone. They already clean, concentrate on the ships 40 miles, even 100 miles up in the air. All the contamination comes to downtown and you can go see my yard on Sundays. How black it is for that smoke when the ships and the rail. Now, I'm going to tell you this. We need to work together and we I will ask you to send it back to the public, have some hearings. The port knows they need to go back and do the engineering at work. We cannot screw American people over international trade. You guys are elected by American people, not by the we're all agents and everybody. And and I would make a little point in here. And, you know, we always get unions from other cities to come in and support these projects. We live in lobbies. I spent 18 hours for the last 40 years alone.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Well, that concludes the public comment part of the hearing. We're going to go and close public comment and come back to the council for deliberation. So let me begin with Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 9: Yes. Thank you, everybody, for being here tonight. I know that you have been through many different meetings, and so I will speak very shortly as you have. And we appreciate your time here. I want to thank everyone, particularly Darryl Phillips and Stan, to Nokia, as well as the West Side industrial area businesses. They have I've met with them about five or six different times over the last year, both my staff and myself. I've also worked very closely with our first district former first District Council member and Port Commissioner, Bonnie Lowenthal. We actually deci each other yesterday and chatted about this as well. And I want to thank our harbor commissioners as well as our harbor staff Rick, Samantha, Nina, Heather, Matthew, as well as our president, Mario Cordero. I've connected with everybody to make sure that we're getting this just right. And as you've heard here, you know, Phillip steal superior signs. I think the average time that the West Siders have been in business and invested out there has been probably it's the average is probably 60 years or so. Those businesses are historic. So of course, we we care very much about them. And although we know that this is going to be a good project, we have to be very mindful of this business community. And just to be clear as well, the city council is only making a determination on the appeal of the art in the segment analysis. So I have a few questions for staff. And really they're just two main concerns. And I know that they don't specifically speak to the air, but I feel like they have to be addressed. And I thank you for addressing this. So first, as it relates to access, as the 12 ST option was formally adopted by the Harbor Harbor Commission, it will remove access to Ninth Street. Do we have any other access options that we believe will be more beneficial for our Westside community other than Ninth Street?
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman. ACCESS Well, this shoemaker Brant ramps when they are removed can still occur through Anaheim Street and down one of the Archer arterials or via the 710.
Speaker 9: Okay. And I just want to make crystal clear as well, as you mentioned in the as far as the public safety access, there will be no issues with public safety going to and from the west side to attend to any emergency.
Speaker 2: That's correct. We have worked extensively with the fire department and other emergency services. They've done their own analysis about access and response times. There are no significant impacts or concerns with emergency service access. In addition, we've evaluated the routes to get to the nearest hospitals, and those routes will not be impacted as a result of this project
Speaker 9: . Great. Thank you. And then the second question is related to our businesses. Of course, as we've said here, and I want to emphasize how how many businesses do we have that not just the parcels, but businesses that will be directly impacted, either directly or indirectly, like Phillip Steel and Superior Science? Do you know how many actual businesses?
Speaker 4: So at this point, we can give estimates until the air was fully certified. We were limited in the.
Speaker 7: Amount of.
Speaker 4: Work we could do on the business relocation and survey side. But we believe that there's approximately 40 businesses that would be impacted in the project footprint.
Speaker 9: Okay, so 40 businesses. And after this decision tonight, should we move forward with staff's recommendations? How will we identify a strong business retention and relocation plan for these businesses both directly and indirectly impacted, whether it's receiving mitigations for noise and air just in general, and also finding alternative options in our city for these particular businesses.
Speaker 2: The port staff has already been establishing a project team to evaluate all of these issues, to work with the affected businesses, to work with the community. We've already been addressing questions and responding to the comments and questions that have come up through the process. We've also been reaching out to the other city departments like Development Services and Economic Development, and we will be continuing those discussions and looking for ways that we can relocate all of these businesses within the city of Long Beach and close to their to their current location. And so we commit to continuing to work through that process and to make sure that we're listening to all the concerns and addressing those concerns as we go through the design and construction process.
Speaker 9: Okay. And that was my next question. Have we worked with the Economic Development Department? You said we have. That's fantastic. So these businesses are fully aware of their options. And as the project moves forward, what is the timeline for the project? I understand this could be, of course, done in phases. Do we have something coming up, a milestone that we can hit and we can report out to, say, the Harbor and Tidelands Committee?
Speaker 2: We would be happy to report out to the Harbors and Tidelands Committee. I think in general, the the initial priorities are for us to start working on developing further development of the design. We'll need to go through a process for the evaluation of the properties that will be affected for the acquisition of those properties. And that will be a long term process. We'll also be moving forward with the ninth Street closure, which will be a early priority for the project as well. That's likely to take place in the next year or two to the acquisition process will likely be over about a five year period. And we'll also be doing some of the initial efforts for the utility relocation, which will also need to take place in the early phase of the project. So a lot of that work will take place over the next approximately five years.
Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you. So as we hit those milestones prior to ninth Street closing, which seems to be a fast tracked, you know, priority, I would just ask that we report this information out to the Harbor and Highlands Committee. I'm the chair. Councilmember Price and Pearce are both on the committee with me to ensure that our businesses are fully aware of what comes next and our residents are fully aware of what will happen next. And you need to just specifically notice them as well. So we're working either with my office or I know you're very you're well acquainted with our West Side industrial area, but for any other residents that might want to have this information and and be privy to it so they understand what exactly is going on with the project, I would just ask that we we do that. And then the last question I have here, will will there be mitigation and will it provide funding for the West Side livability plan for both residents and business stakeholders? This was the Westside Livability Plan that was a multi year process for communities and business stakeholders. They came together, they talked about many projects for lessening mitigations due to air pollution, noise, etc. So this can this be folded into to this project?
Speaker 2: So this project does have a contribution to our community grants program between the air quality and the greenhouse gas impacts associated with this project, there will be an approximately $1.5 million contribution to that fund. As a reminder, several years ago, our board established an overall program that will be providing over $46 million in funding through the Community Mitigation Program. So this this project will make a contribution to that program. Part of the reason why the Port of Long Beach worked with the city and development of the Livability Westside Livability Plan, initially we provided some. Funding to help support the development of that plan. Was that so that we could get a better understanding of the priorities for the projects that could be done to help address those concerns in in West Long Beach and to help us line up how we could prioritize some of the funding through our program. And so we look forward to continuing to coordinate with the city on those priorities and how those funds can help to address some of those projects. We will continue to work with the community as well each year as we go through developing the funding priorities for that program going forward. And so we look forward to continuing to support that project. And as a reminder, this project will make a contribution to help further that program.
Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you. I just want to make sure that was addressed. And I will just say let's just continue to keep connected to make sure that that was saved. Livability Plan sees fruition for the community. I know it's a big deal for them as well as businesses, residents, everyone. And so do we know what the community process will be in terms of that? Is that coming back at a certain time?
Speaker 1: It's it should pass, right?
Speaker 2: So each year it's an ongoing program. Now, that was part of the board's approval a few years ago is so that we could establish an ongoing program. So each year we go through a process of having community meetings where we seek input from the community. We also meet regularly with city department staff to find out about priority projects. So we go through a process approximately around the fall each year to gather input on funding priorities for the upcoming year. We make a presentation to our Harbor Commission in the early part of the year. We made a presentation in February of this year identifying the priorities that were shared by the community and the city staff. During those meetings, we made a recommendation for this upcoming funding cycle to focus on stormwater projects, and so we'll be releasing a request for proposals later this spring for approximately $3 million to fund projects that can improve stormwater infrastructure in the in the city in that area. But each year we go through a process last year that the funding was provided for air filters and community health programs. But each year we go through a process to seek input from the community about those priorities, and then we release a new funding cycle each year . So that will be an ongoing process.
Speaker 9: Okay, great. Thank you. And I will just ask, with that said, to make sure that we are connected. The council offices are connected. I know some of the meetings had been occurring on a Tuesday, which was a council Tuesday, and I would just really urge that we all just stay connected to make sure that the community is fully aware of what is happening at every step of the way. And I know that will do that. But we appreciate you answering those questions. So thank you very much. I will move that we review and I'm sorry we should receive and file all documentation of the record concerning the two concerning the two appeals and adopt the city staff recommendation and uphold the Board of Harbor Commissioners certification of the final air. I just want to say again, thank you very much to the Westside Industrial Area for coming out. I know this is very difficult. It's very difficult to deal with this. I get that. But I urge you to just stay involved with our office. We've been connected with you. We will remain connected with you. We will make sure that you do not lose sight of what this project will mean and entail. And we will ensure that everyone is privy to the information, both residents and businesses. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. So just to be clear, also, that's a motion on the floor then to approve the staff recommendation on the on the air and deny the appeal. And with that, the second on the motion, Councilmember Janine Pearce.
Speaker 2: Plus everybody in the room that's been coughing and sneezing. I want to thank first of all, I want to thank the appellants for being involved in this process, for advocating on your business's behalf, on your neighborhood's behalf. I know that a decision like this is scary and emotional because it is your livelihood that you have been building on and working on for a long time. And so I just want to thank you guys. I want to thank all the staff at the port, our commissioners, the staff at the city.
Speaker 9: It speaks volumes to me.
Speaker 2: That we had as many people here and support and a small handful of those that that spoke with some concern, somebody who's watched issues of the port for the last decade. I know that this always is a rare occasion to have so many people in support of. And I did reach out to my environmental.
Speaker 1: Activist.
Speaker 2: Organizations and nonprofits and tried to get their take on this policy on this earth as well. And so I'm happy to be able to support my council colleagues.
Speaker 9: Decision to receive.
Speaker 2: And file I did have. A couple of questions that I wanted to ask staff and I did want to also highlight. I think somebody started as a speaker here, but one train takes 750 trucks off the road. One train takes 750 trucks off the road. And to me, as somebody who takes that freeway almost every day and knows what the fight has been to try to clean up our air, really having a conversation around when the impacts are. And so my my first question is really when we talk about the air quality issues, I believe it was stated that a lot of those come from building out PRB and not so much that it's extremely long term. There are long term effects, but how much of of the the air pollution is caused from just.
Speaker 9: Building the projects?
Speaker 2: The air analyzed both impacts from the construction of the project over the seven year period through the three phases, in addition to the operational impacts associated with the the trains that will be operating in the facility for the for Philip Steel specifically and their response to comment that they had when we looked at the impacts at the nearest receptor to their location, the impacts were the significant impacts were limited to the construction phase of the project. But there were areas around the project that did experience both construction phase impacts and operational phase impacts for nitrogen oxide specifically. Okay. And then this is just an idea I had off the top of my head, so forgive me, but I know that there were the bonnets that were created for ships. Is there anything like that in the works for trains.
Speaker 1: To help reduce some of the pollution that comes from them?
Speaker 2: So there is a project that the the two ports established a technology advancement program many years ago. Over a decade ago. One of the recently funded projects that we're working on is with a technology developer called Vir Rail, and they have developed a near zero emission locomotive. So these are cleaner than the cleanest locomotive standards that are out there. These these have extremely low nitrogen oxide emissions. And so we've provided funding for the development of that switcher locomotive. But then recently through a grant from the California Air Resources Board, we're going to be able to replace the onboard generator in that locomotive with batteries so that the the locomotive can operate using zero emission track miles. So that's a project that we're developing right now, working with our operator, Pacific Harbor Line, who's been a great partner with us on demonstrating different technologies over the years. So we're hopeful that that technology will be effective and then we can look at future opportunities to get more of them integrated into the operations. Currently, Pacific Harbor Line is the cleanest switcher operate switcher locomotive operator in the country. They've done a lot of work over the years to upgrade their locomotives and they're currently testing out a Tier four locomotive. Great. So when we we talk about the air, it does not include that plan, right? It's based on what we have in place today. That is correct. We used a conservative analysis based off of what we have today, but we're hopeful that we can reduce emissions even further in the future. That's great. I think that speaks volumes again. And this is a question around the workforce piece. We had some conversation around local residents. This project falls in line with the project labor agreement that also has a local higher percentage. Is that correct? This project is included in the project labor agreement. Great. Thank you so much. I know again, operations at our ports having multiple layers and tiers of where we're doing that work is really a big challenge to please everybody. And I think that you guys have done a fantastic job. So thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker is Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thanks. I know Councilmember Arango represents West Side. If he wants to go ahead of me, I don't mind.
Speaker 4: Councilor Murray. Ringo.
Speaker 7: Thank thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson, for the permit. I want to thank my councilmembers. GONZALEZ It appears they touched a lot on the issues that I had obviously been the representative of the West Side. You know, we're talking about the West, the Westside Livability Study. We're talking about the trains. We're talking about taking off cargo on dark rail and away from freeways that would take 750 trucks out of the freeways. So based on the fact that there's a long term benefit to what's taking place here, I think there's a there's a support here for that when it comes to what the effects of the project would have in the short term, I think are outweighed by the benefits in the long term, when we're looking at taking container traffic out of the freeway out of the 710 and the issues that we deal with it with it there also the fact that in addition to having more on dock rail facilities, this was an issue that has been taking place for many years. And in fact, when I joined the city council four years ago, that was a big issue of debate in terms of whether the candidates at that time were in favor of undock. Rail And of course, I was, and here we are. Here's the opportunity now to move this proposal forward. It's a part of a process. Obviously, it starts with CEQA and then the engineering work takes place to make it happen. So I'm very pleased with staff and their support and their work in getting this done. I think that they've done it with the sensitivity to the neighborhood's impact in terms of the impact to the West Palm Beach community. And I, I think that it's a job well done. And I again, want to thank my councilmembers for their for their support of this.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. So I support this project. And I want to thank both the appellants and city staff who provided the presentation this evening. As the chair of the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority. I'm a big supporter of anything that we can do to stay ahead of the changing industry that we have in terms of goods, movement and on dock rail provides us an opportunity to do that. It allows us to stay competitive and really look to the future in terms of the way we're moving goods both locally, regionally and throughout the nation. And so I support everything that's being done in regards to this project. I think it's going to be a great model and it's going to allow Long Beach to, in practice, do what it always preaches, which is to be a zero emissions port move towards a zero emissions port. I'm grateful that it includes the play and I'm also thankful for the comments of my colleagues to try to mitigate the issues for the immediate neighbors. I think that obviously is an ongoing concern and something that should be addressed along the way. So I think everyone for being here tonight and I wholeheartedly support this this project.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Base me, Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I want to just give some kudos to the work that the port did. It's not often and I think Councilmember Gonzalez or Jeanine. Councilman Pearce mentioned it's not often that you see no environmental group opposing infrastructure investment at the port and you see a lot of positive comments here. So, so good. Good work there and sort of doing the outreach. And it appears that you've you've done a lot of work to be sensitive to those adjacent businesses and neighborhoods. On dog rail is smart for a lot of reasons. It's the standard we encourage it across the country gets, you know, trucks off the trucks off the street. It cleans up your your air and it creates a more efficient system. And then infrastructure investment in general supports job creation. And so obviously support infrastructure investment. Three things I want to note. So I recognize that conversation on the West Side about the Shoemaker Bridge up in North Long Beach. We have an area of town that's sort of cut off by the 17th is kind of the Coolidge Triangle Longwood area. And as infrastructure is modernized, we try to find ways to stitch communities back together. So I just want to say, if there are, you know, just ask if there are any conversations about mobility plans or seventh and or anything else to make sure that we're thinking about stitching communities back together.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 2: The port staff, our transportation planning and engineering staff have been coordinating with City Public Works as well as Metro and Caltrans on their work on the I 710 project and the early action projects that will affect the Shoemaker Bridge. So we'll be. Making sure to continue those discussions, continue that coordination, and making sure that we're developing circulation and traffic management plans that accommodate access through that area.
Speaker 3: Okay. And secondly, I want to recognize and thank you for the conversation about engaging economic development and development services, about thinking about ways to retain businesses here. I just want to just sort of just put it out there that if ever there is some displacement of a business, we should think about, you know, opportunities to clean up other industrial spaces and create economic activity there. For example, the gentleman who spoke about his sign saying business, I would love to have this same business in North Palm Beach if if the opportunity was was there. So there are other other industrial spaces that could use more economic activity to sort of raise the standard in some of those areas. So I just wanted to sort of put that on the table. And then the last thing I would say, I would encourage you or rather our frame it as a question, is there an opportunity to continue to to to work to find a solution with the utilities? The conversations brought up about the utilities and the pipelines. Is there an opportunity to continue working to find a resolution there?
Speaker 2: Yes. And we have had some initial discussions with all of the affected parties for the utility relocation work that will be necessary for this project. Once we move through the air certification process and can start the design phase, that's where we'll move forward with those discussions in earnest and make sure that we're working with all the affected stakeholders to make sure that we're accommodating those needs as we develop the final design.
Speaker 3: Fantastic. Well, you have a good project here and I'm happy to support it. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. There's a motion and a second, of course, that's been made. I just got a couple of brief comments. We all know, of course, that the actual vote tonight is a narrow one for the council from from the scope of the actual vote itself. But I do want to make just a couple of comments just for the public at large, I think are important. And the first is, I know there was some concern about pollution or impacts of the project. I just think it's important to note that long term, the actual benefit of on dock rail and the actual benefit of implementing the full cleaner action plan will dramatically reduce pollution in and around the ports and up, up and down the 710 corridor. And so from an infrastructure creation perspective, this project at Pier B and and the expansion of our rail capacity is critical to the to the clean air future that we all want to have in this community. So I do want to commend the Board of Harbor Commissioners for, I know the incredible amount of work that went into getting us to this point. Pier B and the conversations around Pier B have been going on for many years, and there were many decisions that led up to getting to this process. And it's critical that we expand rail. The only way that we ensure that Long Beach as a port remain competitive across the world is to expand rail. It is a critical piece of the future. And there were some comments about, you know, being global or being local. And I just want to be clear that the port provides 30,000 local jobs to people in and around the port area. And so we are talking about local issues. And I want to think there are many workers that are here, both carpenters and electricians and others that are local, live in Long Beach and that live in the area. And so this idea that somehow they're not local, I take offense to I also add that it's as important that we are working with our businesses. And I do. I well, I want to thank Councilman Gonzalez for I know having met multiple times with with these businesses. But I also I'm confident I look to our harbor commissioners. I know that Vice President Askew and Commissioner Lowenthal are both here. And I ask you, as I know on behalf of the council, I know that you will ensure that our our port team continue to work with the businesses. I know, Commissioner Lowenthal, how much you have worked with these businesses in the past and when you were here. And so just to those that came forward, I think we hear you and you have our commitment that we're going to do everything we can to mitigate these impacts to to meet with you. And I know our port team are going to do just that. And so, again, I want to thank Tom Lee and the entire Mr. Cameron, the entire environmental team. Mr. Cordero, your your senior staff getting here has been a long and long process, but an important one to make this to make the air cleaner and to move to a zero emissions port. And so with that, we do have a motion and a second on the floor. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Great. Thank you very much. And thank you all for coming out. We appreciate that. Okay. We are we are going to take as a reminder, we have two hearings left. We're going to take those two hearings next. We are going to just do take a one minute pause so we can clear folks out our fires, asks that we get some folks out first before we move on to the next hearing. And we will be doing hearing item number one next. Oh, everyone I knew I. If you were here for the first hearing, please exit and take conversations outside. Please take conversations outside. Okay. If you want to have a conversation, please, please take it outside. Where, as a reminder, we just finished our first hearing. We have two hearings left, and then we will go to the regular agenda of the city council. So we'll have two hearings left. Yes. Okay. We're moving on. I need everyone to take a seat or please. Exit. Exit the room, please. Okay. I need everyone to exit the room if you're having a conversation or we will move on. So we have the next the next two items are two hearings. So, Madam Clerk, hearing item number one. | Resolution | Recommendation to request City Council to: (1) receive supporting documentation into the record and conduct a public hearing on two appeals of the Board of Harbor Commissioners' certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pier B On-Dock Rail Support Facility Project filed pursuant to Long Beach Municipal Code Section 21.21.507 by Phillips Steel Company and Superior Electrical Advertising; and (2) adopt resolution denying the appeals and upholding the Board of Harbor Commissioners' certification of the Final EIR for the Project. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0256 | Speaker 4: So we have the next the next two items are two hearings. So, Madam Clerk, hearing item number one.
Speaker 0: Hearing item one is from a report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record conclusion, conclude the public hearing and adopt mitigated negative declaration. Mendi oh 617 Declare ordinance amending parts 11 and 17 of the use district map. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting for final reading. Declare Ordinance Amending the Long Beach Business Center Planet Development Districts. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting and approve site plan review and a tentative parcel map for three new light industrial buildings located at 2300 Redondo Avenue, 3200 East BURNETT Street and 3600 East BURNETT Street in the Institutional Zone Archives District five.
Speaker 4: We can hear the acoustics are really good in here, so there's a lot of folks having conversations out up there. Those all need to go outside. And if I can please have the fire marshal in the back, or we can just get someone from the staff. Please have the doors closed upstairs, please. Because we can hear all those conversations. Okay. Great. Thank you. Again, this is a hearing, so we just please need everyone's attention and respect as we move forward this hearing process. And so with that, thank you, Madam Cook. Do you want to you have to read the last sentence or are we okay there? Okay. Excellent. With that, I'm going to I'm going to turn this over to our assistant city manager.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council. We'll have a staff report from Carrie Tai, our current planning officer.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of the City Council. The project before you is a request for approval of a light industrial project at the site of the former U.S. Postal Service processing and distribution center at 2300 Redondo Avenue. The there's an aerial on the on the screen. You can see that.
Speaker 1: So the the.
Speaker 9: Building that's currently on the site is a 326,000 square foot processing and distribution center that's been used by the U.S. Postal Service. This facility is now closed and it was part of the Postal Service's system wide restructuring process. And so subsequent to the closure, the property was deeded to a private developer by the Postal Service. They went through a sort of a RFP process to select the suitable developer for the site. And then in terms of what surrounds the site there to the southeast is an art to neighborhood. I mean, it's largely developed with single family homes, but it's zoned R2. There's a in just an industrial campus and to the northeast, as well as the site of the new retail post office, which is going to be behind the distribution building there. And it's going to be off of Grand. There are industrial and institutional uses to the north and industrial and retail uses across Redondo in the city of Signal Hill. Directly to the south of the site is the California National Guard facility. The site for that's for development is just over 19 acres. It's actually a 20 a few and it's just over 20, if you include the part that's been split off to be for the new retail store. And the zoning is a combination of industrial and institutional to the north, be it's institutional to the south, and then it's residential to the east, and then a signal hill to the west, also zoned industrial. Now, part of tonight's request has to do with the zone change because the current zoning of the site is institutional, which is which would not allow for a light industrial kind of a development. And so the proposed zoning is what's called PDS seven. It is one of the city's zoning documents, and it's called the Long Beach Business Park. It currently exists to the northeast of the site and therefore the zone change would extend the PD seven boundary to the Southwest to include the subject site. So the developer proposes to build three new light industrial buildings, which would total 425,000 square feet. And that's what requires the approval of the site plan review. The subdivision is proposed to create an individual lot for each building, and that would allow for separate ownership of the buildings should that financial option become necessary. And I did talk about the zone change from institutional to PD seven. The zoning code amendment would be to alter the existing text of PD seven to create a new sub area. And actually, that might be better.
Speaker 1: If I can illustrate that.
Speaker 9: Right now, PD seven is is divided into three sub areas and the inclusion of the institutional site would be a fourth sub area and that necessitates the zoning code amendment. And lastly, for environmental review, the project did go through an initial study and resulted in a mitigated negative declaration, which I'll talk about a bit after I describe the site plan. So the project, as mentioned, is designed with three industrial buildings. The largest is to the south, and this site plan is oriented with north to the left. So the largest building is to the south and the two slightly smaller ones to the north. So the uses proposed for the buildings would be clean, light, industrial manufacturing, processing, research and development and local fulfillment type uses. There are truck courts for the buildings there, slightly of a U-shape, and that would allow for loading docks. The truck courts are 135 feet deep, which would allow for a sort of local fulfillment. But they are not as deep as, let's say, the typical logistics, heavy duty logistics uses that you would find in a larger facility. And that's important because the setting in which this is proposed is a lighter industrial nature, not intended to be any kind of a heavy trucking or heavy, heavy industrial use. The proposed buildings are of the architectural style you see on the screen, and they are a very high quality, modern, clean look with defined entries and and generally clean edges. The buildings are designed to be comprehensive with each other and they all match. So I'm going to go through the elevations. And there is a sort of an aerial rendering so you can see what the whole site looks like from Redondo. I did talk about the zone change a bit. And so I'm just going to summarize by saying the zone change would allow for a light industrial development on what is zoned institutional today. And this is the sub area map that I talked about. So sub area four is the subject site and it's to the southeast corner. The slide on the screen just summarizes basically the the zone change the like I said sub area for will pertain to the subject site that also includes development standards and use restrictions as part of the PD seven to govern the site from now into the future. I do want to mention one development one development feature, which is a 12 foot wall that separates the future site from the residential development to the back. And there is an alley there as well. As mentioned, an initial study was prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The initial study found that with mitigation measures, the project will not have any significant impacts to the environment. The there are a variety of mitigation measures that the project will be required to follow throughout its life. And in conclusion, I would like to just point out that there is a couple of different actions related to the the city's city council action tonight. The Planning Commission did hear this item and forwarded a recommendation of approval. So that concludes staff's presentation and we can answer any questions you have. The applicant is also in the audience.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. And so with that, we're going to go ahead and go into the public comment period, and then we will come back to the city council for any deliberations on this item. So with that, if there is public comment on this hearing, please come forward. Now would be the time. Is that no public comment? Yes, please. Please come forward. No. It's okay. Take your time. Take your time.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and city council. I am actually for this project. I live three blocks east of the new location, and actually they're already better neighbors. Pacific Industrial is already better neighbors than the USPS has been, so we appreciate them. They've gotten a lot of the bad rap from the USPS when they took down a wall, when they tried to use I saw it up on the board there that there was a driveway to nowhere and they tried to use that and make 23rd Street a thoroughfare for their retail location. So I work for Pacific Industrial. The neighbors are for Pacific Industrial. Thank you so much. Have a good night.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Is Pacific Industrial? Here to make comments? Yes, it. Good evening, Mayor. And council members and staff don't have much to say other than, you know, I think the staff did a great job explaining the project. I'm here to answer any questions, but being a local based company here in Long Beach, I can't tell you how excited we are to kick off this project. It's been a long, long process getting United States Postal Service off the property. They don't move at lightning speed. And they've we've had we've we've encountered a lot of obstacles along the way, working with the neighbors, you know, dealing with a very large government agency. But we've, we've, we've gotten there.
Speaker 7: They've relocated as of.
Speaker 4: Monday, correct? Charlie Yeah.
Speaker 7: So USPS is open.
Speaker 4: Has moved into the new retail facility as of Monday. So that's great news. It gives us the path to go forward as long as everything else goes smoothly tonight. So other than that, that's all I have. Thank you very much. I'm seeing no other public comment on this. I'm going to bring this back to the city council and. Oh, Mr. Goodhue, just very quickly, a highly intelligent project it certainly should have go through. I've been following it since day one. Thank you. Thank you, Amazon. This back over to councilman mongo.
Speaker 9: It has been a long, long process. I want to thank Neil and Pacific Edge. There was a lot of competition in the process for the postal service and the Postal Service chose you and we, my office, the neighbors, we're all so pleased that you've been so great to work with.
Speaker 1: The driveway to nowhere that she mentioned.
Speaker 9: Is something that the federal government thought that they would take advantage of our neighborhoods. And my council office was pleased.
Speaker 1: To scrape.
Speaker 9: Together some money really quickly and make sure that that was not going to be possible by changing over that configuration so that they would not be able to do things that they had promised and committed to our neighbors that they would not do. So I'm just so thankful that we have a guarantee now that we will not be using just a pony while with the USPS, but we will have a full size wall. It's important to the community, it's important to my neighbors, it's important to all of us. And so I want to appreciate the neighbors that are here today and also the developer. And this is a fantastic project. This is the way that government works. This is when government works, how it works, even if it was a little slow, but not from our city staff. Thank you. City staff for for you. Pestering and pushing the U.S. Postal Service.
Speaker 1: As much as you could.
Speaker 4: Thank you for. And before I move on, I know if our fire marshal is dealing with this, but we can't have folks on the side. So I apologize if there's a couple open seats. So please, if you're on the side, you need to grab a seat or please exit the chambers. So there's a couple of seats over here in the front, please, if we can fill those, I would appreciate that. So all the folks are here on the side. Please fill seats or exit the chambers. Thank you very much. Okay. We do have some seats on this side, too. Thank you, Counselor Supernova. I think you just want to say I support this project. This is an art craft manner neighborhood, and that's divided between the fourth and fifth districts. So some of the neighbors reach out to me, but continue to do that. FORDHAM Over to Stacy Mungo. But thanks again, staff. You took good care of this situation, so please be on standby in case something else comes up. Thank you. Councilman Ringo.
Speaker 7: The great project that I'm interested in knowing is the new post office is going to remain the Steve Bourne post office. That's what it was named before. Do we have to go to a name change new project.
Speaker 4: I think staff don't answer that. I don't. I yes.
Speaker 1: It's not our.
Speaker 6: Understanding that.
Speaker 1: Any development the U.S. Postal Services do not have to come to the city for any action development permit, plan, review of any type, including a name change. It's completely within the purview of the federal government and no local involvement is there is no local involvement in the in their operations.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. There is a motion and a second on this hearing to receive the supporting documentation into the record and conclude the hearing. Just before we do that, I just do want it to just about Pacific Industrial. I want to thank you for the conversations we've had about the project. I particularly want to just thank you for elevating the the the look of the project, the landscaping, just to ensure that we're going to end up with a real quality, you know, light manufacturing on site, creative use, all those type of industries that provide good jobs to Long Beach. And so we appreciate your work. And this is going to be a good project for the city. There's a motion in the second. So members, please go ahead and Castro votes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. We will now move on to for those that just came into the council chambers. We are in the middle of our hearings, so we have one more hearing. Then we will go into the regular agenda. And for those that are here, the first two items that we're hearing on the regular agenda. Are going to be item 13, which is to do with medians and item 27, which is to do with Women's History Month. Those were the ones that were requested to move up. So those will be first and then we will go on with the regular agenda. Next up is hearing item number number three. | Ordinance | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration MND-06-17;
Declare ordinance amending Parts 11 and 17 of the Use District Map (Zone Change ZCHG17-007) read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading; | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0259 | Speaker 4: Those were the ones that were requested to move up. So those will be first and then we will go on with the regular agenda. Next up is hearing item number number three.
Speaker 0: Hearing item number two.
Speaker 4: Number two, correct. We did it. We did three. I'm sorry.
Speaker 0: First hearing item number two is a report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt negative declaration and zero four Dash 17 Declare Ordinance amending various sections of Title 21 of the Lumbee. Tomorrow's more code relating to the regulation of tattoo parlors. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting. Adobe Resolution directing the Director of Development Services to submit a request to the California Coastal Commission to certify an amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program City.
Speaker 4: Thank you. We're going to go ahead and begin by hearing the staff report, Mr. MODICA. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 7: We'll have a staff report again from Kari Tai, our current planning officer.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Good evening again, Mayor Garcia. Members of the city council to know that before you tonight is an update to the city's zoning ordinance with regard to the regulation of tattoo parlors. Just a bit of background. In 2010, the U.S., the ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that tattooing is protected under the First Amendment. And then fast forward to March of 2017, where the city was involved in a lawsuit. And the court ruled, or at least had preliminary findings, that the existing zoning code unreasonably restricted the permitted locations of tattoo parlors in the city. And so therefore, in order to comply with the preliminary findings of the city attorney's office and city staff is proposing this update to the zoning code. Just to go through some existing regulations today, our zoning only permits new tattoo parlors with the with a conditional use permit in the following zones, just the H W zone and then also the downtown plan and the midtown specific plan areas. That's it for all the entire city. And so in addition to that, there are buffers, there's a separation requirement of 1000 feet from adult entertainment uses as well as tattoo parlors and bars. And there's also hours of operation regulations in terms of one of the reasons that the existing tattoo regulations seem to be pretty restrictive is that there there has been through time a sort of a negative stigma with regard to tattoo parlors. You know, and however that and basically today there are nine licensed tattoo parlors in the entire city of 50 square miles. Times have changed a bit. And not only that, but the with the court's new finding, there was the need to update the zoning code. The zoning code. So one of the first things that we did was study some of the more cutting edge tattoo ordinances throughout the state of California, many some of which like Oceanside and Hermosa Beach, also resulting from court challenges. So the proposed zoning code amendment would allow tattoo parlors by right, which means no conditional use permit that allows for certainty to be built in the process whereby an applicant can open up the zoning code, open up a zoning map, and determine for themselves in a clear and concise fashion whether a tattoo parlor would be allowed in a specific location. So tattoo parlors would be allowed by, right, as proposed in all of the commercial zones, with the exception of the sea ice zone. That's the one that's specifically reserved for self-storage and commercial storage facilities. But the rest of them would be a sizable for a tattoo parlor. Also, we would propose to allow tattoos in commercial zones in the in the plan development districts such as the downtown plan, such as the Midtown Plan, such as a PD one, which is the southeast area, up soon to be secret plan. And then we would also propose to retain a locational buffer, which is 500 feet away from existing tattoo parlors, as well as 500 feet away from schools in your pocket. We did include a map that looks like the one on the screen that details where tattoo parlors would be allowed based on those proposed criteria. And as you can see on the map, there's a peach color and that's generally throughout the city where tattoo parlors would be permitted and they run along the commercial corridors. The proposed zoning code amendment also has proposed performance standards. The reason is that these performance standards take the place of conditions of approval. Thereby, when the city permits a tattoo parlor, the up the the business owner or the applicant would have to agree to operate that tattoo parlor in accordance with these performance standards for the life of the business. And that includes hours of operation between 10 a.m. and 10 p.m.. Prohibition of service of alcohol and the like. And this is I would like to mention, in addition to existing health department requirements and other requirements that are outside of the zoning code. So so this would be in addition to the other requirements. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this item on February 1st and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council for approval. The in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed zoning code amendment was evaluated through an initial study and found to have no significant impacts to the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared. Public notices for this city council hearing were sent out. Staff received four phone calls of support and no comments in writing. And with that, the Planning Commission is forwarding a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the negative declaration and adopt the tattoo parlor ordinance as well as forward. This to the California Coastal Commission for a local Coastal Program amendment pertaining to areas in the coastal zone. That concludes staff's presentation and we can answer any questions you have. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. There that was. We're going to go ahead in the next part of the hearing and do public comment. So is your public comment on this hearing. Now would be the time to come forward? Seeing no public. Please come forward.
Speaker 8: I'm Eric Garcia, counsel. Well, my name is Joe Kasher, and I've been a tattoo artist for 27 years. I own Ace of Hearts Tattoo on Pine between seventh and eighth. And I have specific knowledge of this type of deal because I was helpful and instrumental in the legalization of tattooing in 1997 in New York. I was actually on the board that recommended that tattooing be legalized in New York and actually in that because of that. New York became a disaster as far as tattoo shops go. And by that, I mean the regulation that you guys are bringing down won't help tattooing. I'm not 100% against opening other zones of the city to tattooing, but this kind of 0 to 60 mentality that I feel is happening right now is very scary to me as a tattooer. And as far as keeping the tattooing, the quality of tattooing in Long Beach, which has that many shops, I guess eight or nine. We all know each other. We all kind of police each other. All of them are owned by tattoo artists. Opening the city up like this will have a negative effect in countless ways, but one of the main ways is people will see Long Beach, which is a great city and has a rich tattoo history as a cash cow. Non tattoo artists will open because there are no regulations saying a non tattoo artist can open a tattoo shop and they'll come in, drop their minimums down to negative. So there will be that part of it, which will be the financial for the other tattoo shops. There won't be any regulation on infection control because I've dealt with the health department very closely and Glen Fong and I worked very hard together to get everything and I went through a lot of jump through a lot of hoops, let's say, to make sure that everything was perfect in my shop. I just feel that it's very detrimental to the tattoo face of Long Beach to just immediately open up what seems to be so much more of the city to anybody who wants to open a tattoo shop. And I understand it's because of the lawsuit. And when I talked to people, the lawsuit was very instrumental in what happened. It's not good for tattooing and the industry in Long Beach, and I think Long Beach has had it's really the way it is right now is fantastic. And like I said, I'm not against opening up other zoning areas slowly, maybe letting a couple of other tattoo shops open every once in a while or every year or so. But just opening up the whole city, I think is a huge mistake. There will be if you go down, up and down Hollywood Boulevard and you see the way those tattoo shops are, there's no regulation. People get infections. There's a huge amount of people getting infection because no one's policing them. And health department, I don't think has the manpower to police every one of the tattoo shops, of which immediately there will be, you know, as many as you could possibly imagine.
Speaker 4: Thank you so much. Okay. Next week, replace him.
Speaker 1: Those of us who are of the intelligent design mindset that we have a creator, we are approaching an hour where we will be remembering, as Jesus asked us to, not his birth, but his death. Remember my death. I live every time I hear the statement. Original intent. I love those pretexts of statements. What was the original intent? Whether it is tattooing or same sex lovers or whether not medical or. We'd what we whatever we're going to call it the Orient, the original intention of God for a man and for a woman and the bodies that he put our spirits in. And if you're atheist or agnostic, this is not for you tonight. Council people.
Speaker 4: I want to make sure that we're sticking to the hearing. It's just to be here. Well, Mr.. Sorry, we have to speak on the tattoo parlor.
Speaker 1: You're going right.
Speaker 4: There. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I am going right there. We were all born with a body. And we get that body came out as God intended it to be. He made no mistakes for it. We have eyelashes and. Here where we need it curves where we need it. Now we're at an hour where we're saying, I want pain on me now. I want to write on me. And then the argument is not whether or not it should be authorized. I'm saying for those who have ears to hear, you're representing the city council. But God put you in your position. What's the original intention? People with no laws cast off restraint and they do anything. Your eight year old, your four year old? Well, they're going to be looking. How soon can I get my mark? And it's all leading to somewhere that mark. It's leading to somewhere. Tattoos now. Okay.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Stephen Morrison, CEO, Second District. With regards to the proposed ordinance and the specific part of it that outlines as part restrictions on marijuana distribution to that Section 5.9 of the Long Beach Municipal Code already prohibits that. So I don't know why that should be included in this particular ordinance. Additionally, if the purpose of this ordinance is to try to make it so that you're not going to have this being challenged in court, I don't see any particular reason why you have the buffer zone for near K-through-12 schools, unlike, say, comparable comparably to another sensitive use like marijuana, where there is an existing federal law that requires a certain buffer zone for that. There are no such prohibitions for tattoo parlors. I mean, a sense they should be regulated for marijuana use perspective. Now, I guess to say a barbershop and with regards to the again, to the specific of what was being outlined in that proposed ordinance, I think the other speaker spoke to it really to articulate as well, despite the fact that we have land, that we have health and safety powers, there were no specific outline health requirements as part of the on that proposed ordinance from a you know, the you're dealing with the injection of subcutaneous inks. I think that, you know, basically an autoclave, for example, would be required for that or certain capital investments in order to make sure that a tattoo parlor is safe and regulated as part of the rest of the community. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and close public comment and move on to the council accounts and reports.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I want to thank staff for the presentation. I know this is something that you guys have been working on since I got into office nearly 19 months ago. And so I did have a couple of questions. I know that right now we have four parlors that have conditional use permits, and I know that we have in here proposed performance standards and that it includes operations, appearance and health and public safety. When we we're referring to the state and city health regulations to be enforced, are those regulations particular to parlors?
Speaker 1: Yes. Those are specific for any tattoo parlor that opens and that would apply both to any proposed new parlors as well as existing parlors. They are subject to the state regulations as well as the local city of Long Beach Health Department regulations which require training in how to handle Bloodborne. Let's see what it's called here. Bloodborne Pathogens. They generally just make sure that the the facilities and the equipment are safe and that the employees that are employed in the tattoo parlor have been trained appropriately.
Speaker 2: Okay. So in addition so we passed this today, will new parlors come in, be subject to a new conditional use permit or just by these guidelines?
Speaker 1: Only these guidelines. The whole point of this was to based upon the the lawsuit, it the basis of it was that the city was making it too restrictive for the type of use. So the whole intent in working with the city attorney was to craft language that allowed an appropriate amount of permissiveness and that did not discriminate against the use based upon any specific type of characteristics of the use. So no new tattoo parlors would require a conditional use permit.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then let me ask for the locational buffer requirements. We have 500 feet from an existing tattoo parlor and public or private schools. What was that number based off of? Was that the state recommendation or did we come up with that in-house?
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 9: Thank you for your question. So staff.
Speaker 1: Studied.
Speaker 9: Of.
Speaker 1: Several.
Speaker 9: Aspects with regard to buffers. Number one, the the most recently adopted tattoo ordinance from the city of Oceanside was was an example, but also using existing buffers for other land uses. There are several other land uses that also use the 500 foot buffer from schools and namely alcohol as well as alcohol, beverage manufacturing. And so with the existing buffer being 1000, we wanted to make it less restrictive. And so we took the cues from Oceanside as well as other land use buffers.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thanks for answering those questions. I want to say, you know, I know that tattooing has come a long way as a form of art. My mother had slaves. I might have one or two. And I know that Long Beach is a city that embraces the arts. We have some folks in the Arts Council here today as well. And recognizing that the staff report includes kind of the pass view of the tattoo artists, which was.
Speaker 1: An interesting perspective.
Speaker 2: But I want to say, as a councilmember in the second District, I wholly support new artists coming in, making sure that we are doing this in a responsible way, that we're protecting the health and safety of our residents, and that we recognize this as an art form. I think we have a new parlor opening up in the second district. I believe his name is Carlos, who is well known in Los Angeles and really is going to bring some more attention to the city about being a world class art city. And I hope that, you know, I know we used to have on the Queen Mary, we had a big event around tattoos and trying to make sure that we're celebrating that, but doing that in a respectful way. And so I support the staff's items. I know you guys worked hard on this, and I appreciate all of that. I ask my colleagues to also support this. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: I just want to say that I'm appreciative of staff as well. And thank you to the owner of Ace of Hearts for being here. You're in my district and I really love the quality of your work. When I pass by there, you're open really late and we like North Pine to be open in a time where it looks active. And we really appreciate you being here. I, too, have a question, though, just related to the the 500 feet. I know we are trying to be less restrictive. I see other cities may push to 700. Would that be any would that be a big issue for us? I just I know in the downtown we're already dense, you know, so it just 500 is pretty narrow.
Speaker 1: That is certainly a reasonable request. And if we are so directed, staff would certainly go back and take a look at that and bring something back to council. That's not my understanding because it was not originally proposed that we could change on the floor tonight, but we could certainly bring it back if that is the direction of council.
Speaker 9: Yes, that would be great. I appreciate that. Thank you very much for your work.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. And I want to thank staff for their work as well, understanding that this was brought on as a result of a lawsuit. But in my opinion, we probably should have been ahead of this a long time ago. I did have just a follow up question regarding the the health and safety standards for the proposed tattoo shops. What is in place now? It says the ordinance reads that the applicant shall comply with all applicable state, county and city health human services regulations, including but not limited to the State Safe Body Art Act. I'm not really familiar with the State State Body Art Act, but I am curious to know what sort of local enforcements will we have and provisions do we have in place right now?
Speaker 1: I'll go into them very briefly because we didn't go into it in great detail here because it wasn't so much a land use issue. But in short, let me just quote from the staff report here. Any body art practitioners are required to annually register with the city. They have to obtain annual bloodborne pathogen training. They have to provide documentation of hepatitis B vaccine status. They have to obtain specific health information from their clients, including an informed consent for anyone who they perform body art on. So that's just a really brief summary of them. We can certainly, if you'd like more detail, we can get more detail and bring that back to you. But that's just a sampling of the kind of procedures that our health department requires for anyone who's actually performing body art. So they must be licensed. They must be trained, and they must take appropriate precautions.
Speaker 10: All right. Thank you very much. I think that's a very important element here and possibly something we need to look at further.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I had one other question. Just to be clear for everybody.
Speaker 1: Those that are already.
Speaker 2: Open and have a conditional use permit, if we change the number of feet that another parlor can be, are they still grandfathered in?
Speaker 1: They are correct. They would be considered as legal nonconforming users.
Speaker 2: Great. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I'm going to say a comment in return of the city attorney. Just as a reminder, I think some people spoke to is that the impetus for this conversation, one has really been about this this case coming to federal court, and we were in federal court on this issue. And so it's important that we react and respond to the findings of a of the court as well as what's going on with case law across the country on this particular issue. The second thing is, I think it's pretty clear, regardless of the federal court issue, the stigma around tattoos and body art is at a completely different place than it was 20, 30 years ago. And the the businesses that opened today, the the art that's happening, the kind of commitment to quality operations, I think is really important. I also want to thank the gentleman that spoke today, and I just also want to be clear to those watching that regardless of whether we open up additional tattoo parlors, which are illegal conforming use, they have to follow very strict state and local health regulations. And so we would never allow one to open that didn't meet the highest standard of health and safety codes, of which are which are both local and state level law. And so those would have to be met regardless of changes to this to this ordinance that we have in front of us today. So I just wanted to clarify that. Mr. Park and Jeff, anything else?
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. Yes. As mentioned by Councilmember Gonzales, I think what the council will be voting on tonight is to make the change to the buffer from 500 feet to 750 feet. We would need to take that back, make that and then bring it back to council for approval of the ordinance. So this evening, if I understand the amendment to the main motion would be not we can't approve it tonight, but we would update the ordinance to the buffer and then it would come back at a later date.
Speaker 4: Is that the.
Speaker 9: Yes, that's correct. And I said 700, but if seven.
Speaker 7: 5700, I thought it was seven. Okay. 7.7.
Speaker 1: Oh, sure.
Speaker 4: Okay. All right. There is a motion and a second, please. Members, go and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: We would need a date. Certain. So know. Date certain. Okay.
Speaker 4: Mr. said he tried to do a negotiation on that because I think we could if.
Speaker 7: We could select a date certain we would eliminate the need to re notice it. If we just take it back this evening and come back, we would have to re notice the hearing.
Speaker 4: To which we do have a recommendation on a date certain.
Speaker 5: 30.
Speaker 4: 45 days.
Speaker 7: After my first.
Speaker 2: My first.
Speaker 4: My first. Okay. We're okay with that because of the motion. Okay. So May 1st will be the date certain. So we have motion on the floor. Members, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mango. Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you very much. That concludes the three hearings. We're going to go on to the regular agenda. Can I just get a motion in a second quickly on the consent calendar before we go to the items, is a comment on consent calendar saying that please cast your votes. | Resolution | Adopt resolution directing the Director of Development Services to submit a request to the California Coastal Commission to certify an amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0270 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Thank you. We're doing item 13, please.
Speaker 0: Item 13 is communications from Councilwoman Price Council Membership Opinion Councilman Andrews Council Councilmember Ranga Recommendation to requires city manager and city attorney to draft an ordinance to prohibit pedestrian access to medians that are less than four feet wide or located on streets with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour or more.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I know I have some residents who arrived here at about 4:00 this afternoon for this item. So I'm thankful and I'm hopeful that they'll come up and give some comment if they are still here. But this is one of the items that I'm happy to be bringing back. Traffic. Traffic medians throughout Long Beach are dangerous places for people to walk, stand, sit, advertise for businesses, raise money for nonprofits, walk dogs or any other activity that is done while not in the process of legally and safely crossing the street. City staff issued a report earlier this year that that made it clear that some medians are not appropriate for standing and cannot safely accommodate a walkway due to insufficient with height, traffic speed, large traffic volumes and lack of accessibility. In the report, they further determined that the traffic safety concerns are heightened when speeds reach certain levels. City data and traffic studies throughout this country confirm that the risk of a fatality drastically increases for pedestrians when vehicle traffic around pedestrians has speed limits of 30 miles per hour or higher. The fatality risk increases between 3.5 and 5.5 times from 30 miles per hour to 40 miles per hour, meaning the risk of a pedestrian being killed at 30 miles per hour is relatively low. The fatality rate is nearly 50% at 40 miles per hour, and 79% of pedestrians struck at this speed sustained serious injuries. It doesn't matter what you are doing on the median. The median is not a place to stand at high speed traffic intersections. So as the city continues to work to improve pedestrian safety and make way for Vision Zero. This is a common sense policy that I urge my colleagues to support. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Councilmember supervisor standing in support.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I want to thank my colleague for bringing this item forward. I did have some questions of.
Speaker 1: Public works that I see.
Speaker 2: Mr. Buck here. Yes, I did. I know that we recently approved our Vision Zero contract to start pulling together that group. I wanted to know how we feel that this impacts that Vision zero work.
Speaker 1: If this is in alignment with that.
Speaker 4: Councilmember Pearce. I think this is in line with Vision zero one. One of the elements that we don't have yet completed is the safety study. So if you recall last week when we came forward and had a conversation about Vision Zero effort, one of the first components of a Vision Zero effort is to identify what are our worst corridors, where do we find the most instances of vehicle and pedestrian accidents to occur? That information would certainly help inform how this ordinance would move forward.
Speaker 1: Okay, then I would ask my colleague, is there a time frame that you have on this?
Speaker 2: I'm sorry. Councilmember Price.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry.
Speaker 6: Once it's approved, the city attorney's office would commence drafting the ordinance.
Speaker 7: And that would be correct. But as Mr. Beck said, we would need that safety study to verify and justify the ordinance before it came back. So we would be working with public works on this recommend if it is approved this evening based upon the information we received from the safety study. So it may not come back right away, but it would come back after the safety study.
Speaker 2: Great. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure I know that we've spent many years talking about our vision zero.
Speaker 1: Hopes and dreams. And for those that don't know, Vision Zero.
Speaker 2: Is to make sure that our streets are safe.
Speaker 1: For everybody and we have zero.
Speaker 2: Traffic incidences. And so I just want to make sure that that is in alignment with that.
Speaker 1: So if it is, then I will support this item.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 11: Yes, thank you very much. I fully support this item.
Speaker 3: Great councilmember area.
Speaker 7: Given that there was an accident, fatal accident not too long ago in my district, right around Long Beach Boulevard. And Wardlow well, the individual who was struck was not on the median. He was an individual that consistently was on the median. He just wasn't at the time of that accident. So I am fully supportive of this this ordinance, and I hope that it goes forward. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Counsel Juan Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I appreciate this as well. To make sure we, of course, get to Vision Zero. I also wanted to see if we can include in I don't know how if this would be possible, but we have people that are constantly on the metro rail line as well. And I know we've had a lot of discussion with that. Of course, we have our metro representative here, as in our mayor. But maybe just as a another caveat within this ordinance, we can just work closely with Metro to ensure that people are not getting on, that the tracks, they're not jumping over the fence because it becomes a huge issue as well. So thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. We're going to move on to public comment a public comment on this item. Please come forward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon, city council members. My name's Gay Shelton. I live here in the first district a couple blocks from here, and I appreciate this item. Public safety is, of course, one of the reasons that we're here. However, it mentions here that the staff report that was issued last September, I imagine, was a two from four. I'm sorry I never had a chance to review it dealt with the feasibility of these actions, and the report that we have in hand says nothing about feasibility. So I'm curious about it. Feasibility to me means cost. And when it comes to public safety, maybe cost isn't something that we care to talk about, but feasibility when we're talking about spending public funds to do such things as I would imagine would be required to prohibit people being on these medians, would be landscaping, fencing, bollards , maybe, and the maintenance and and so on. That goes with any signaling that might have to be added to intersections or areas where there's where there's median strips, lighting, perhaps striping. That would change. What we're looking at is something that that we don't know how feasible it is in terms of how many thousands, hundreds, millions. Who knows how many dollars would have to be spent in order to do this? We also don't have any sense from the public's perspective of how much of an impact there actually is. Where are their median scripts that are less than four feet wide? How long are they? Are we talking about only at intersections or for miles and miles where there might be a narrow median that would have to be somehow protected from from pedestrian occupancy? So if we're really going to do this, I think the public deserves to hear something about the costs, about how many miles of medians have been identified, just what this is all going to look at. Again, we understand the need and it's simply repeated in this in this document. But the public is in the dark as to the feasibility and the cost. So I do appreciate hearing from you guys any questions that you might have for staff that could illuminate us on that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Nic. Speaker, please. Stephanie Dawson, CEO, Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach Branch. As we discussed, as Councilwoman Pryce illuminated, this particular ordinance has been pretty much constructed in a way that makes it almost bulletproof to any particular challenge that would happen from, say, for example, the ACLU of Southern California as it's been constructed in a to provide a what's the word? Again, I'd rather describe it. It lacks a discriminatory intent. However, the discriminatory impact of this law will be unavoidable in combination with the recent prohibition against the bike shop, baking bicycle shop, chop shops and other type of actions that are being there designed specifically to be able to cut off revenue for homeless people. I mean, this is by doing this, we are essentially facilitating the removal of these folks and making them come over to a next city while doing so under the pretense of public safety. If right now, I mean, if you're applying for general relief, that's going to be under 50 bucks. If you're applying for Social Security disability, that's going to be, what, $600 a month or so? You know, people need a way to be able to live, especially with the rising costs of rent in Long Beach, which I think we'll be discussing later. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Heather Jordan, when I appreciate counsel bringing this forward.
Speaker 7: And the concern for safety that has been outlined today, if only we were more concerned with the that the people who this will mostly affect, you know, besides this ordinance. You know, I've seen the fences go up on seventh and seventh near Bellflower and PCH, and I've oftentimes close to Long Beach Boulevard and Wardlow. So I see the people who are out there on those medians there. You know, Councilmember Price listed a lot of people who might be on the medians, you know, nonprofits. But the the people that she didn't talk about are the people who are most often there are those that are houseless, people without homes, people who are trying to earn money. And I'm all for safety. I'm all for keeping them safe. I think they do deserve that. But on top of that, I think they deserve other things as well, like a roof over their head.
Speaker 4: So I just want to make sure.
Speaker 7: That whatever happens when we implement this, that the people who are there aren't going to be severely punished because if it's a fine or something like that that they're given, these are people who can't pay that literally cannot pay that. So I hope when we move forward with the safety ordinance, we keep those people in mind. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: He has told us what is good and what the Lord requires to deal justly. The same God of the flag. We are saluted tonight. One nation under him, he has said to deal justly and to love mercy. The people, my clients. I knew that they were the subject. They are the only people that are on the media and by and large, the homeless. You don't see a lady nursing her baby on the median. No one coming from the grocery store with the flowers in the hand on the median. It's the homeless. And some of you are running for re election. You said you were going to represent everyone. Yes. Everyone in it is offensive. But you have not probably shaken one hand of the homeless. One hand. How can you? How can you? That is not justice. To now say to these people, we don't want to say, you asked for money. We're not giving you a nickel of our spending. We don't want to see you with a sign asking for a nickel. It's why you're saying it. God sees it. That's what you're saying. Guilty. Your local charity. Don't give out to panhandlers. But there are no local charities where those signs are posted. The mediums is all they have. And I will continue to take food on the median. Matter of fact, I'm going to start printing up some signs. Give these people your dollars because it's against the law for them to ask you in jail to say, give to those who asked, to give to anyone who asked you. I am defending the cause of the poor. Some of you said you would do it. Where are you now? Yes. The shame is what it is. We have officers surrounding him with guns and sticks and they will protect you. I was protecting the homeless. I mean, protect like the officers with their weapons. It is offensive to that God you saluted tonight. It's an offense.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Bouchard and the speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 10: I think you guys said you represent the public and everyone with a balance. So I just wanted to say that my name is valued. My address is on record. This is my 47th wedding anniversary in a heck of a way to celebrate a wedding anniversary today. I was not going to. I was I was not here to speak on this. But when I noticed that.
Speaker 4: We have two parades in this city every year, that people jam on the medians. This may be left unsaid, but we need to make sure that.
Speaker 10: We protect those people. During a Belmont Shore parade and the Veterans Day parade that when they're on the mediums are not breaking the law. So there's got to be some type of exception to it, I would think. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Liz Waites. I would just like to comment.
Speaker 9: On a particularly disturbing and frankly sickening trend that I've noticed.
Speaker 1: Not in Long Beach.
Speaker 9: But also it's happening in.
Speaker 1: California, is these very thinly veiled attempts at shoving the homeless away out of sight. I noticed with the CSC or the Public Relations Department, there was some sort of collaboration about let's teach people to not give money to homeless people, give it to shelters. And I don't know if you guys have got the memo, but shelters are pretty brutal. And I just have to say the intention is transparent, the intention to force people out of sight and to not deal with them. You're not fooling anybody. And it's cruel and it's sickening. And I really you are here to represent everybody. And just because the homeless people out there cannot, like spare $20,000 doesn't mean that they are not worthy of protection.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. That concludes number public comment on this item. So we'll conclude public comment. I will go on to the rest of the council. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thanks, Mr. Mayor. And I just wanted to chime in and I you know, I tend to agree that meetings aren't the safest place for things to take place. But I think the audience raised to two questions that I would just like for city staff or the originator motion to speak to. So first, Mr. Lurch, thanks for raising the issue of the meeting. And so we want to make sure that we protect, you know, whatever whenever the street closures and and we actually have the opportunity to engage that meeting. We used it really well this last year in the Veterans Day parade sort of a line things along the median food trucks, things like that. So first I want to just address that. So, Mr. Beck, is there a way that we can make sure that we really take an accounting of when we do utilize the media and make sure that's reflected in this?
Speaker 4: Y would defer to the city attorney, but I would imagine we could easily add in special events would be excluded from any provisions that get written.
Speaker 7: I would agree with that. I think that the the ordinance and when we talked about when we would the delay in coming back is the safety study that's going to be conducted has to justify both the location and the action that the ordinance would be taking that to show that it is truly a safety issue and it's not a pretext for removing people from medians. So you're not going to have all medians qualify for this. It'll depend on the safety engineer and the safety study to justify the location.
Speaker 3: That makes a lot of sense. And then so the second thing I'll just raise, which was raised raised by the community here tonight, I want to make sure that we're not taking a step toward penalizing criminally or fining for creating a perpetual system where people can't pay the fine, but rather figure out ways to make medians safer and and sort of a discouraging activity. In the meetings, for example, we had a lot of activity on Jordan High School, people running across the street from Jordan to the apartments. They lived across the street and we wouldn't use the crosswalks. So we just built a nice decorative treatment in the median and people respected the crosswalk respect meaning use the crosswalk. So I would love to see industry, I would love to see sort of public works best practices utilized to achieve whatever is the best outcome so that there's no appearance that the intention here is to sort of penalize any particular group. And I know and and I would assume that that's not the intention here. Thanks.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thanks. And the first mayor, you actually stole my my thoughts here because I was going to say, I think the makeup of the motion, the intent here when you look at the language here, is talking about traffic and, you know, speeds of high speeds of 30, 40, 50 miles an hour. So I think the intent of what what is being proposed is to deal with traffic safety and prevent people from being hit by by vehicle vehicular traffic. Secondly, I think, you know, to your point regarding the treatment that near Jordan High School, I think more of that needs to be done. We need to engineer traffic safety measures. Well, we know we have have problems or potential problems. And so I'd like to see more of that type of those type of solutions on top of this from from our public works department.
Speaker 4: So just thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I just wanted to echo the same concerns that my colleagues recognize and anything that we can do to beautify the areas instead of just putting up a fence that we have some best practices and that this comes after, again, Vision Zero. I know that that Vision Zero will help guide us to make sure we're doing it in the right corridors and the right median. So thank you for that.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. There is a motion and a second on the floor to approve item 13. Please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager and City Attorney to draft an ordinance to prohibit pedestrian median access to medians that are less than 4-feet wide or are located on streets with a speed limit of 35 MPH or more. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0282 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Item 27, please.
Speaker 0: Item 27 is a communication from Councilmember Pier's Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Mango. Recommendation to receive and file representations from Human Relations Commissions for Women's History Month.
Speaker 4: Councilman Pearce.
Speaker 2: Great. Well, I want to thank our Human Relations Commission for joining us tonight. I believe we have four members that are with us, maybe five members that are going to take today to give us a little presentation on women's history, particularly focused on Long Beach. If I'm correct, I haven't seen the whole presentation, but we have to make sure that we take this time, especially with women in politics with. We've got an exciting announcement at the end of your presentation, I believe, on on another event happening in the month. So I'm going to let you guys take it away and just recognize that women are more than 50% of our population. We must be celebrated. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you for taking my taking my first line. Of course. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Garcia, city council members and of course, the esteemed city staff. And I want to thank this civically minded town for the turnout that has happened this evening. And I hope we can brighten your moment for the next 15 minutes or so. And let let this get back to you all. I would first like to, of course, thank the women of the City Council for bringing this forward and allowing us to be here tonight to talk a little bit about the state of women. We're going to do this in 15 minutes. So we are not going to even touch a little on what we really should be talking about. But we're going to give you four interesting topics tonight to think about exactly what Councilmember Pearce said. 51% of our population in the last census was women. If you look around this room, I've had enough time to be here. 65% of this room is women tonight. And and and women really have a big part of what we do here. Obviously, with four council members being women, it changes how things are looked at in in the whole city. We at the at the Human Relations Commission are excited to bring Women's History Month to the city in this very small way tonight. The purpose of the HRC is to promote full acceptance of all citizens in the community, in all aspects of community life. In 50 minutes, of course, we're not going to get to all citizens. But tonight we would like to share four interesting topics about women in our city. And those topics tonight will be domestic violence. We'll talk also about restorative justice. We'll be talking about homelessness and we'll also be talking about politics and the women leaders that we've seen come through our city. I'm very excited to have three of our commissioners here this evening, as well as we've brought in the women's shelter of Long Beach. They've come in on the last minute to help us with the domestic violence piece. So I'd like to first introduce to you Alexis Sandoval from the Women's Shelter of Long Beach to talk a little bit about the next topic.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Council members and fellow community members. My name is Alexis Sandoval, and.
Speaker 1: I'm here to share brief information.
Speaker 0: About domestic violence on behalf of women's shelter of Long Beach. So domestic violence is an issue that.
Speaker 1: Affects everyone, regardless.
Speaker 0: Of their gender identification, socioeconomic.
Speaker 1: Status, religious background.
Speaker 9: Sexual orientation and so.
Speaker 1: Forth. However, women are much more likely.
Speaker 9: To be victims of.
Speaker 0: Intimate.
Speaker 1: Partner violence.
Speaker 0: With 85% of domestic violence victims being women and 15% men. Too many women.
Speaker 1: Have been held captive by domestic violence.
Speaker 9: Whether through physical abuse.
Speaker 1: Financial abuse, emotional abuse, mental abuse, sexual abuse, religious abuse, digital abuse, or a combination.
Speaker 9: Of these.
Speaker 1: On nationwide, three women are murdered every day by a current or former male partner in the U.S.. 50% of lesbian women were experienced domestic violence in their lifetimes. One in four women will be victims of severe violence by an intimate partner in their lifetimes. Over 30 million women have experienced physical, intimate partner violence in their lifetimes. These statistics make it evident that domestic violence is an issue that affects the entire nation. But how does it affect Long Beach? According to the US Census Bureau, the population of Long Beach in 2016 was 470,130. Taking into account that one in four women will be a victim of domestic violence, this means that nearly 117,532 women in Long Beach alone may have been victims of domestic violence. Furthermore, since 2014, women's shelter of Long Beach has served nearly 8000 Long Beach residents. Their direct client.
Speaker 0: Services, outreach and.
Speaker 1: Education and adult and youth prevention programs. These numbers make it clear that domestic violence is a community issue that can only be eliminated through increasing awareness and making a collaborative community effort. Though we also be working towards this end through hosting.
Speaker 0: Awareness, raising events in the community and.
Speaker 1: Educating youth at local middle schools, high schools and college campuses. In addition, WCB also partners with the Long Beach Police Department, California State University, Long Beach, and other local.
Speaker 0: Organizations and service.
Speaker 1: Providers. Thus far, our efforts to eliminate domestic violence have had an impact on the lives of many. In the words of a domestic violence survivor and former WCB client Jennifer Barbosa, the support of women's shelter of Long Beach and my community helped me leave a life of hurt and violence behind. I now live a life full of joy, love and empowerment. I now have the knowledge and skills necessary to advocate for those who cannot advocate for themselves. Stories like Jennifer's show that as a community, we are working towards taking steps in the right direction. Thank you so much for your time. And I will now introduce Kimmy Mannix from obviously.
Speaker 9: S.J., who's in a speak on restorative.
Speaker 1: Justice. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and Councilmembers Kimmy. Monique is from CCE. Jane, also human relations commissioner for the Sixth District. I'm honored to be able to talk a little bit about restorative justice tonight. I know that restorative justice is kind of a buzzword that gets thrown around. And so I wanted to give you all the opportunity to just hear like a one on one and how restorative justice is being used in our communities here. So to begin, I'd like to share this quote from Frederick Douglass that says, It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. And I would say, actually, people this is a central believed to the tenets of restorative justice. We want to build communities that are trauma informed, that center relationships, that provide alternatives to punitive responses and the harmful impacts that they have on people and offer opportunities for healing. To give an overview of what restorative justice is, restorative justice is a practice and a philosophy modeled from the traditions of First Nations people to prevent and address homes and grow strong communities. We use relationships as a foundation for this work and utilize a needs based framework when intervening in harm to create true accountability. If you look at the current ways that we respond to homes and crimes, our default is that we rely on punitive practices for the most part. Typically, a punitive approach asks What was the crime? Who committed the crime, and what punishment is warranted? And restorative justice model asks us to shift this paradigm and actually think deeply about who was harmed. What is the impact of the crime and the resulting needs and obligations that need to be met to make it right? So in short, harms, means and obligations. In this model, we're able to settle the needs of victims or people, people harmed and impacted community members to come to a place of true accountability for the responsible for those responsible for creating the harm. And so what does this look like in practice? So restorative justice models are being in. Implemented in a number of settings and are showing tremendous results. So in schools, we're using restorative justice to create communities that value relationships, that respond to behaviors in ways that are trauma informed, that keep students in school rather than suspending and expelling people and offer ways for youth and adults to be accountable to one another when conflict and harms occur in the juvenile justice setting. Restorative justice is used to divert youth away from a path of incarceration and system involvement to explore true accountability and uncover what the underlying needs are that may have contributed to any given offense. Families and community members are able to find healing with this process. And you think, given an opportunity to learn about the impact of their behavior on others and grow from their mistakes in communities, restorative justice and restorative processes are used to mediate conflict, to provide resolution to homes, to strengthen relationships, and to identify needs that community members need addressed. And so the connection to women, there are many connections to women, but I think the one that I'll touch on is that, as we well know, the burden that women carry when members of the community are removed because of incarceration or any removal from the community is a larger one. To bear a reliance on punitive measures in response to harms and crimes create more broken men, more broken people, rather than building strong children. And so women take on the emotional and actual physical labor, a feeling in the massive gaps when people are removed from communities. And in the case of children who are removed from communities due to incarceration or system involvement, women again serve in this crucial role in their children's lives to be the ones to take on the additional labor of repairing harm that our system is creating for our young people. So while this just scratches the surface, I encourage for us to do a deeper dove into what restorative justice means for our community. Many connections to actually the prior presentation around domestic violence as well, and many things to explore with regard to community safety. So thank you. And I would like to bring up my fellow commissioner, Jill Ferraro, to talk about homelessness. Good evening. Mayor Robert Garcia, City Council members thank you. It's always a pleasure to come in speak especially on behalf of something I'm very passionate about. Go here. Homelessness. So those four concepts that you're or those four terms you're seeing up there, housing, compassion, relationships and hope creation. I want to bring up the fact that without housing, which we all know about, we're hearing a lot about without compassion and without building relationship with those in our community who are experiencing homelessness and without hope creation. We are not going to help homelessness, and especially women with women in our community who are experiencing homelessness. The Department Health and Human Services have a homeless count that you can get this information from. But we're looking at female right now, 28%, male 71%, transgender 1%, and those who do not identify as well up there . But the reality is 28% is something we get in a homeless count. We also see in our homeless.
Speaker 2: Count of.
Speaker 1: 2017 from the Department.
Speaker 9: Of Health and Human.
Speaker 1: Services, some populations of unsheltered adults on their numbers were serious mental health illness for 51 substance use disorder 315 Victims of.
Speaker 2: Domestic violence 141.
Speaker 1: I wanted to bring up some stats, but I also want to bring up an amazing person to have permission to speak on her behalf this evening as permission. Sandra Greenman, who I met in my advocacy work working with our our homeless, those experiencing homelessness in our community, as well as all the different organizations. I her story is that she's a vet. She was in the Navy. US vet is where villages.
Speaker 9: Of Korea was, where she started to get her.
Speaker 1: Recovery and assistance from. But she served in our military and and she ended up homeless. The reality.
Speaker 2: Of what Sandra did.
Speaker 1: Thereafter was amazing. She comes from a background of domestic abuse, rape.
Speaker 9: Many different things that occurred in her.
Speaker 2: Background.
Speaker 9: As early as 16 years of age as a teenager.
Speaker 1: She went into the military, came out, ended up homeless, living in her car. So this is an example of someone who was living in her car who we probably wouldn't have got on the homeless count because she's living in a car. She didn't appear homeless. She took care of herself. She's military, very clean cut, very disciplined. However, she was still homeless. She ended up at the villages of Rio, where she began her recovery. And lo and behold, she has been four years clean. She has been a mentor. She's been working at the VA and she is as happy as can be, although she does have her days where I'll get a phone call or text. The reality of this story I bring up is because of this, even though we do have these numbers and we do want to take these numbers into consideration, by all means, we do have people in very vulnerable situations that are either on the brink of homelessness. But we do need to remember as well those who are poor. Those who could be poor with just one one family member losing a job. And with those reality the reality of that, I just want to make sure that. Not only do we remember and be inspired by people like Sandra. But to all of you out there, women and those who those of you who know women, which is everybody in here, there's a preventative part to homelessness. And that preventative part is to grab your sister, your mother, your neighbor, anyone female and that one in for domestic abuse that she was talking about. You make sure you also provide a support system, a mentorship. Because that's how this is going to get better. And so as much as you come up here and you gripe and you point your fingers at these people up here, have a civil conversation with them, meet with them, and then meet with your neighbors and also supply support there. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: All right. We are going to move on to the last topic of politics, and I want to say thank you to Carlos opinion, who is our District two legislative lead. She's been very busy all night, wandering around, taking care of the people in this room and has asked me to read through her slides. But I appreciate her taking the diligence to put this together for us. You know, women have come far in politics. We've seen a rise of strong advocate women who have fought for the freedom and equity of our nation. Over 500 women are running for office right now. This year alone, Long Beach has had and continues to have women who have shown leadership in advocating and inspiring, inspiring many young girls that someone just like them can make a difference in our city. Thank you to the council women that are here today who do that every day in their own districts. And I would be remiss if I didn't also say, of course, Eunice Sato and Beverly O'Neal, she was Beverly O'Neal was the president of my college when I was in college. And she really reminded me when she became mayor that we can be whoever we want to be. We have some amazing women, African-American women in this town. And when you're given 3 minutes to talk about a topic Carla really wanted to highlight these women. So the women you see in front of you, I don't need to read each of these for you, but of course, Bobbie Smith I would like to speak to, because she was the first African-American woman to serve as a Long Beach school board member. Back when I was going to school board meetings every week with my mom and learning about how to be an advocate for this community. I also love to bring up Vera Mulkey. She was a great example of being the first African-American chief of staff to city council member back when Clarence Smith was here. And of course, Doris Topsy Alford. I mean, we speak of her all the time. She's amazing woman. First African-American woman to be elected to the Long Beach City Council. And these women have all had not only great lives in the city, but have spent time really advocating for humans, for everyone in this community. And tonight, we really want to celebrate all the women who have and continue to be involved in Long Beach politics. And we don't mean politics as in only being a city councilperson, but politics and advocating for the things that are right and just for the for this community and for this world. These women and many more have been and are the pillar of our community. They are the women that have fought for our voices to be heard, to be taken into consideration and have brought change to Long Beach. I really want to thank you all for having us here tonight. This is, again, just a brief snippet of information about women in this city. And much of it was brought to us because they're topics that the community have brought to the Human Relations Commission to talk about at our monthly meetings. And we appreciate all of that advocacy that people are doing here in the city. The last thing I want to leave you with is women in the city are doing amazing things. You know, I could sit here and talk about artists in the city for hours, but something that's happening just next week on Friday night is T with Alice and me with another one of our commissioners, commissioner, Zoe Nicholson, who'll be doing her one woman show at the Beverly O'Neill Theater nicely enough here in town. And we would love to invite everyone to come. And if you would like a ticket for this great event. Many of the local politicians have helped to get free tickets for this event. Please find us up at the top at the end for this. And again, thank you to the council for giving us the time tonight.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 2: I was going to just close it out real quickly and say one of the reasons we brought this up was because this month we have International Women's Day and it was a day to celebrate and honor the women that continue to build this country and to build the world to be a better place. And I needed to recognize that the Human Relations Commission and many of the people in that commission have been there for me in my hardest times. My new chief of staff, Dina, sort of on days, obviously, Carla and my colleagues on this council, you know, have really reminded me in times that have gotten tough that we.
Speaker 9: Stay with it.
Speaker 2: So that we can prove that tomorrow is going to be a better day for women, that it's going to get easier, and that we're going to have a more a deeper conversation around what what equity looks like and what having an equal voice looks like. And so I just want to recognize and thank all those that came before us and those that spoke tonight. So thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: But thank you to Councilmember Pearce for bringing this forward. And thank you, all of you ladies, for for making a really good, comprehensive report. I really love looking back at Long Beach and seeing what we've done and what we've been so successful at. But of course, as this is like the year of women, this could not be more timely in looking ahead to see what we have to do to be a little bit better. Not a little bit a lot better. A lot, much more. We have a lot of work to do. And I know that I served with some really incredible women here, and I'm really proud of this city for all the women sitting out there. It's right. You don't have to be a city council member to try to do some incredible things. And we hope that every one that's here really took this to heart and we can see even more forward.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Councilmember Wawrinka.
Speaker 7: Thank you for bringing this report forward. I remember a quote. I don't remember who said it, but it was the best thing that a father can do for his children is to love his wife. And I think that having a wife that is very understanding and having my daughter, who I have a daughter, see that relationship between me and my wife, I think she learned a lot in terms of what to expect from men and what to expect in relationships. When she would go out with a with a young man. I had many a conversation with some young men mentoring them in terms of how to treat my daughter. First of all, do you have a driver's license or do you have insurance? Just as an example. But I think that when it comes down to the treatment of women and we saw the stats that were so awful up there, is that sometimes, you know, we have to break that cycle and it's a cycle. And we as men sometimes have to take the lead ourselves and say we're going to break that cycle and be good to our women, be good to humankind, to people in general. Because when you're carrying two people, you're kind to everybody and everybody will benefit from your kindness. So I want to congratulate the Human Dignity Commission for bringing this forward. I hope we get a report every year. I think that would be a wonderful addition to our to our history Women's History Month or week every year to see how we're doing. And hopefully we can bring some of those stats down and make them a lot, a lot more acceptable. And we don't have to cringe every time we hear those awful statistics. Thank you for being here. Thank you for sharing.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I don't know where that quote came from, but I think that was his own quote because I think it was a great quote. A lot of this I think it shouldn't have to be what we call it.
Speaker 4: On women's history.
Speaker 11: When I think should be women's every day should be a woman's mind. Because the fact that you guys this is what it's all about, you know, without you, you know, we caused by a man's world. But it would be nothing. Not what? That woman. So thank you, young women, for having this man. And we appreciate it so much. Thank you again.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. And I want to thank you for the presentation as well. It was a lot of very good, I think relevant information are presented here. Our Union Human Relations Commission does a wonderful job and I had an opportunity to meet with them a couple of months ago, maybe a few weeks ago, actually, and the time all comes together. But I'm very impressed with the work that you are doing and the impact that you're making on our city. I think that has a lot to do with the the makeup of this council. This I think there's more women on this council than ever before in history. I'm proud to serve with a number of very, very strong and competent women on the city council. And I think this is appropriate. The woman who had the most impact on my life was my mother. I think she raised me to be a very fair minded, strong young man. And today. Would have been her 68th birthday. She passed away two years ago. And so when we commemorate strong women, I think think about my mother every every single day. And I try to live my life as an example that she will want me to live by. So thank you very much for your presentation today.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And I'll just I'll just add that thank you to the presentation for scheduling this presentation. Thank you to the Human Relations Commission. I think it's important that we do recognize the contributions of folks. But I also think what stood out here and you know, and we see a bunch of recognition, but what stood out was really the highlighting the vulnerable folks in our society and really letting this moment serve as a call to action that we have to continue. You know, the thoughtful, data driven presentation that really calls us out and says we have to be about the business of rooting out oppression wherever it exists. And that and that we have a responsibility, frankly, to really look out for one another. And so I hear you. And I would encourage, you know, whenever we have these sorts of presentations, leave something for us to work on. Because, you know, I saw a lot of relevant things connected to a lot of the issues that, frankly, we're dealing with tonight. So thank you. Is there any public comment on this presentation?
Speaker 4: In raising your name.
Speaker 3: For the record, please.
Speaker 4: Larry. Good work because the address in writing to support this I do so from a rather. Unique perspective as circumstances would have it, though unfortunately I was unable to meet her in her later years because of her declining health. I had a great aunt. Excuse me. Who was this nation's first first lady. To graduate with a four year college degree. She did so parenthetically prior to meeting my great uncle. And went on to become one of the most outstanding. First Ladies. This country ever had. The timing of it, of course, it was equally unique. It happened. In the thirties. At which time the Fix the San Gabriel the sink, the fix these families Saint Gabriel Land Development Company, which was the paradigm by which they granted certain lands to the city of Long Beach, was, which were subsequently fashion into what became the reading stadium. Specifically warranted. The city attorney will tell you it's ethically warranted. The city to enter into an agreement with the then secretary of war. My great uncle. For the purpose of. Protecting the special Egis. Of. What would become potentially along these Marine Stadium and precluding it from falling into the hands of the likes of Robert Garcia. Gary DeLong. And the newest commissioner on the Coastal Commission. He has a far from dry dream of becoming of turning that into a a labor force where he would become the labor force for that and so forth. But it's specifically warrants to city to go in and protect. If those. Facilities. And of course, as I pointed out before, the U.S. attorney by the end of the year will be dealing with the criminally complicit. Based upon the records provided by the highly credible then Long Beach police chief, now L.A. County Sheriff Jim McDonald.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Good. You see no further public comment, members, please cast your vote. Okay, we've got one more. Our last public comment speaker.
Speaker 9: Oh, here we go.
Speaker 1: Just about the presentation. I think you and I have seen so much suffering happen because women had.
Speaker 9: To stay in relationships that were not good for them, but they had no place to go.
Speaker 1: And I have seen so much potential snuffed out.
Speaker 9: I have seen so much trauma in kids.
Speaker 1: Because that relationship.
Speaker 9: With that, you know, they were.
Speaker 1: They they had no financial independence. You know, this man who was abusing them was their only way to keep.
Speaker 9: A roof over their heads.
Speaker 6: And I cannot applaud what you're doing.
Speaker 9: Like more the fact that you're.
Speaker 1: Giving them a chance to get out of situations.
Speaker 9: Where their lives are at stake and their mental health is at stake is absolutely incredible.
Speaker 1: And I would even you know, I think it'd be really cool if we worked together or we.
Speaker 9: You know, there.
Speaker 1: Was a project to keep pushing for women's economic independence because.
Speaker 9: Financial abuse in relationships is not something that a lot of people are even aware of.
Speaker 1: Happens. But it's a very frequent tactic of control. And the more the women are.
Speaker 9: Economically.
Speaker 1: Empowered and the more that they have control over their own assets, the less vulnerable, you know, obviously they're going to be to predatory partners. And I think that I think that we use something really, really cool to work on. It's just an idea that came to my head.
Speaker 9: But thank you for your presentation and thank you for the work that you're doing.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote. I mean. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Item number 15, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a presentation from Human Relations Commission for Women's History Month. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0272 | Speaker 3: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote. I mean. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Item number 15, please.
Speaker 0: Item 15 is communications from council members. Subpoena. Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Mango. Councilman Andrew's recommendation to require city manager and city attorney to review questions regarding a proposed Long Beach ordinance to enact rent control and report back to City Council on April 17, 2018.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Super Now.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you to my council colleagues for signing onto this item. My comments are going to be very brief, and I'd like to ask my colleagues to keep their commentary to a minimum. We are coming off of two back to back meetings where we went past midnight and I think would be great to avoid a three peat tonight. Actually, I have to get Pat Riley credit. I think he has the trademark on that term. 3 p.m.. The other reason for brevity is the specific nature of this agenda item. It is simply a request for an informational report on a proposed ballot initiative. Unlike our last two lengthy items, the Louie and the Values Act. This item does not involve a council policy decision. It is simply a request for information. The request is for the city manager and city attorney to report back to us on April 17th, which is with as much detail as possible in that time frame. Finally, I would like to ask my councilor colleagues to agree to restricting public comment to a minute and a half per speaker. This is not an attempt to abridge anyone's First Amendment right. It's quite the opposite. With 3 hours of public comment during our last two council meetings, many people informed us they did not have a chance to speak because they were unable to wait the length of time necessary. Therefore, the abbreviated time for each speaker should give everyone a chance to share his or her comments.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Andrews. Wait until that day. Okay. He wants to defer. Okay. So we're going to line up and call for public comment at this time and I'm going to acknowledge the requests. Let me let me see how many people are lined up here. Yes. Just a moment before you begin. Okay. Clearly there is a lot of interest in speaking. So I will that translators will get double. We always do that. You'll absolutely get that. So we're going to we're going to respect the request so that everyone gets an opportunity to speak. So let's queue up 90 seconds and we'll have our first speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor. Council members. My name is Mike Murchison. My address is on record. I'm here on behalf of rental property owners, investors, people that care about this community. They have cared for a very long time. I want to thank the mayor and the council for being supportive of not supporting rent control. Thank you all for being on the record of saying no to rent control. And as councilman super nice said. And I'll do it faster than 90 seconds, Darryl. I'm asking this council to support a very straightforward item. Get the rental property owner our community back as fast as you can.
Speaker 7: The investors as fast you can. The answers to these questions. We need these answers so that we can explain.
Speaker 4: To everybody in Long Beach why this is bad policy. I encourage you to support this tonight. I encourage you to have a coming back April 17th. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Vice Mayor and City Council. My name is Anthony. Anthony Walker. I'm the managing broker of Buckingham Investments. I'm a local real estate broker and a housing provider. Well, I think we can all agree that improving the supply of affordable housing in our city needs to be a top priority. We must understand that rent control is not the answer. There are numerous examples within our own state and country that demonstrate rent controls, damaging effect, and not only the real estate industry, but also the very people that seeks to aid my business and the business of my clients is to provide clean, safe and in the vast majority of cases, affordable housing to the residents of this city. We are the opposite of the proverbial slumlords. This ordinance will immediately cease virtually all reinvestment into our existing renter communities, as landlords will have no incentive to improve our housing stock. The quality of living conditions will decline. Vacancies in rent control units are likely to rent only to the tenants with the highest incomes and credit, removing opportunity from those with the most need. The economic effect on our city must also be considered. Rent control would severely damaged the real estate industry and all related businesses in Long Beach, which make up a huge component of our local economy. The number of different skilled jobs required to sit for the sale finance, operation, maintenance, construction and management of our housing stock is immense. All of these workers risk unemployment as our market stagnates under rent control. Let us heed the warnings of our neighbors experience and the overwhelming agreement of economic economists on both sides of the political spectrum. Rent control will destroy what progress Long Beach has achieved in the 21st century.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your time. No. Mr. Lurch. Just a moment. Just a moment, Mr. Lawrence, before you begin. I know this is a sensitive issue, and there are very excited individuals on both sides. But respectfully, I would ask, do not hiss while anyone's speaking one way or the other so that we can conduct a very respectful meeting here. So just please show this respect in this moment. Thank you.
Speaker 10: Please. My name is Val Lerche, former vice mayor of the city. Before being on the city council, I had another life. For 30 years, I manage multiple family housing. Well, I'm active duty. I manage the facilities at base Petaluma.
Speaker 4: After leaving the.
Speaker 10: Military, I manage real estate for both profit and nonprofit organization. I was the chair of the Long Beach.
Speaker 4: Housing Authority for five years. I was a Los Angeles County Housing Commissioner for seven years.
Speaker 10: During my career, I managed property from Seattle to the Mexican border from Kansas City to Houston, Texas. I believe I do have some knowledge of this firsthand. Those cities and jurisdictions that had.
Speaker 4: Rent control I observed over the years.
Speaker 10: Did not work. That intended to do. And the rest of the.
Speaker 4: Gentlemen told me, we've said before this city just approved a land use element plan, which is.
Speaker 10: Heavily based on use of.
Speaker 4: Rental properties and multiple use family units.
Speaker 10: Many investors will not invest in rent controlled areas except for low income investors who rental housing.
Speaker 4: And which is always.
Speaker 10: Subsidized by the government. Long Beach has the lowest.
Speaker 4: Vacancy in 30 years. So it is obvious to.
Speaker 10: Me the market is being is bearing the cost of housing.
Speaker 4: Finally, imagine you have started a clothing business. The city comes and tells you. Thank you, Mr. much.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your call and continue to finish your thought. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Hi. Good evening. My name is Perry Pineda.
Speaker 9: And I'm.
Speaker 2: Actually here to speak on behalf of my.
Speaker 1: Dad. He's 72 years old and he.
Speaker 0: Recently overexerting himself so he couldn't be.
Speaker 9: Here.
Speaker 0: My dad.
Speaker 9: Fled Cambodia and was harbored here in.
Speaker 0: Long Beach and he was very thankful for the freedoms he received.
Speaker 9: Here as opposed to.
Speaker 0: Communist control in Cambodia.
Speaker 9: And he was very thankful for the free education.
Speaker 1: He received here.
Speaker 9: As well as help with housing that he received here. Six years, he took advantage of that. Very, very thankful for it. And after six years, he was able to.
Speaker 0: Achieve the American dream.
Speaker 1: He went to school.
Speaker 0: Graduated from Long Beach City.
Speaker 9: College, and within that timeframe, he started.
Speaker 2: Working for the county.
Speaker 1: Los Angeles.
Speaker 9: And was able to purchase a house for us. Before that time, we were all renters, six people.
Speaker 0: In a one bedroom. We know what it is to be a renter. We know the.
Speaker 9: Struggles.
Speaker 0: Of, you know, making the rent and rent going up and trying to fit as.
Speaker 1: Many people as you can in one place so that you can.
Speaker 0: Save as much money as you can. We understand.
Speaker 1: That. And we haven't forgotten that.
Speaker 9: So.
Speaker 0: In everything that my dad has done with a single income. I appreciate.
Speaker 1: The hard.
Speaker 9: Work that he put.
Speaker 0: In.
Speaker 1: Having received.
Speaker 9: All the graces of Long Beach City in.
Speaker 0: America in general.
Speaker 9: And he has worked very hard and was able to buy.
Speaker 3: Well, then conclude your thought. But thank you.
Speaker 9: He was able to buy a property here in Mr. Andrews District, and that is his retirement.
Speaker 0: So I just don't want.
Speaker 1: Him to lose that.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: My name is George Panetta. And I just want to remind the mayor, city council, that our.
Speaker 4: Country is a capitalist.
Speaker 8: Country. It's not a socialist country. I know we have some representatives from some socialist group, and I would like to remind you of that. My parents, my.
Speaker 4: Father.
Speaker 7: Fled Cuba.
Speaker 8: Which is a communist country, which is a form of socialism.
Speaker 7: Is the sister or brother sister of socialism.
Speaker 4: My mother fled El Salvador because of the.
Speaker 8: Civil war there, and they were the communists trying to take over the country of El Salvador. They came to this country because of the freedoms and the opportunity that this country gave them, the freedom to purchase property, the freedom to rent their property at whatever price they wanted. If their prices were too high, then they would have to lower their prices. We live in a capitalist country.
Speaker 7: Where we have free market.
Speaker 8: Rent control is a form of socialism that does not work. And I'm sure.
Speaker 7: You will do your due diligence in.
Speaker 8: Looking at cities like San Francisco, New York. So some people.
Speaker 4: Call it Beverly Hills. What about Beverly? Beverly Hills rent control has worked there. None of us could afford to live in Beverly Hills. May I add those of you that are.
Speaker 8: For rent control and use.
Speaker 4: Beverly Hills as a support? But anyway.
Speaker 8: Again, I, I think that that the market, you know, rents if somebody wants to charge you know a lot.
Speaker 4: Of so.
Speaker 3: That's been 90 seconds thank you for your thank.
Speaker 8: You very much appreciate it. Well.
Speaker 3: Let's go with this.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name is John Angel. I was born and raised in Long Beach and I've been in the housing industry for 45 years. Recipients of this measure are not being means tested, means testing means an examination into the financial state of a person to determine eligibility for public assistance. This measure this measure steals money from landlords and gives it to persons that may very well not need it. Does not make sense to only help people that need help. There are people that need help. Let's help those people. Let's not help everybody that doesn't need help. You can have a tenant. There's more wealthy and have more assets and income than the landlord that's going to receive rent control. This is very bad for the community as landlords will slow maintenance and stop improving properties. Property managing real estate is very time consuming and costly. Existing tenants will never move and new tenants will pay more. With no supply of available housing. This is economic injustice for all at its peak.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Mexican police.
Speaker 4: Mark Panetta is going to come at it from a different perspective. I own rental property and rent control areas as well as non rent control areas. And you know, at a high level, it just doesn't work. Rent control. Both economists on the left and the right agree that it doesn't work. When you have a relationship with a tenant under rent control, you have to be very unforgiving if they're late on the rent, whereas you might work more with a tenant that's a non rent control area, give them more time to pay, upgrade their kitchen, maybe put in some ground it in a rent control area, you extract the maximum and you put in the minimum. You know, that's just the way business works and it does change the relationship. Also, we heard about homeless the homeless crisis. I've housed six homeless veterans in rent control areas. I could not put one in a rent control here because just in case something doesn't work out, you have no way to to give notice to that tenant if it's causing a problem in that in that building. And we have a duty to keep a building safe for all of our tenants. And I thank you for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next week, at least.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Council. Mayor Garcia. My name is Johnny Weir, and I'm the president of Better Housing for Long Beach. Oh, no boos. We do support review of this proposal, and I want to thank the council member that brought this to the forefront. I'm also here tonight representing my amazing tenants in District one, District two, District three, and District four. In fact, some of them are here tonight. Thank you for coming. If this ordinance is passed, those tenants will be displaced. And if housing affordability is the true bearer, there is countless research that rent control raises rents. Rent controlled cities have the highest rent in the country Santa monica highest in the nation. I would like every person here tonight when you leave here, the highest rate in the nation and you'll find they are all located in rent controlled cities. I cut this down to a minute. 300,000 people, renters over there we've vacated out of their apartments in New York when strict rent control laws came into place. So where did this tenants go of the 300,000 tenants go anyway? Stand up against rent control. Stand up.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Let's look at blues names.
Speaker 4: Pat Kennedy from Fifth District. Thank you, mayor and council members. I was here in 2005, 2006 talking about, you know, with the need for a housing trust fund. The city council passed a housing trust fund and said, we'll put $500,000 a year from the bed tax into the housing trust fund. But and the reason we did that was because people, homeless people are living in motels and contributing to the bed tax each year. However, there was a clause in there that said if available, and for some reason the city managers never found the money available for the housing trust fund. So we've never invested in a housing trust fund to build affordable housing. We haven't done inclusionary zoning. We haven't created linkage fees. So we have a city that's failed to provide leadership in terms of addressing this housing crisis. And it's not just the city. Obviously, the market has failed us also, if you look at the subprime mortgage. Couple of things I'd like to see if you're going to do some research. How many absentee landlords do we have in Long Beach? How many how many dollars from monthly rent end up in the local economy? And the final question is, what would be the increase in community safety if we stabilize rental communities? Thank you for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next week, at least.
Speaker 4: A little Brian Matheson, resident of Long Beach. I read some very insightful comments on.
Speaker 10: The petition and now.
Speaker 4: Fully understand why rent control cities so huge declines in rental properties. But of all the pages of Byzantine rules and regulations, I found the introduction in Section two in the preamble the most damning. There are 15 subsections in Section two and only five offer bits of data to back up their imminent warning of doom. The other ten subsections appear to be made up and completely subjective. It doesn't seem right that unverified statements can be made without documentations and presented as fact. To their credit, they did use correct facts when they referenced the horrible housing problems in Los Angeles. But a laughable lapse of logic in the petition in Section two, A and B makes reference to the grave situation in housing in Los Angeles as a basis for bringing rent control to Long Beach. If there is a poster child for the ill effects of price fixing rent, it has got to.
Speaker 10: Be Los Angeles. Los Angeles is the city.
Speaker 4: You use to prove rent control does not work and makes the problem worse. Price fixing fair rent is the same as taking the wrong medicine and finding out the proposed cure is worse than the disease. So no matter the changes in the House, which you might consider to the petition, you still are price fixing. At the end of the day, you have a program that will turn away investors and developers. You will have a program that decreases property values for apartments as well as private homes, resulting in a decline in value forms. Going to the. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Sir, for your testimony. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Even honorable council members and mayor. My name is Fred Sutton. I'm with the California Apartment Association. We represent housing providers throughout California and here in Long Beach. I want to thank the council for bringing forth this item.
Speaker 7: I think reviewing questions on this topic is incredibly important because if it's implemented.
Speaker 4: It will affect every single resident and person in this city. Price controls and eviction restriction policies are commonly associated with Byzantine bureaucracy, onerous requirements and counterproductive outcomes. It is important that clarity is obtained on some of the details as it will help us cut through the rhetoric. Community members should not be pitted against each other as we seek to find clarity on issues of shared concern. We thank the council members and we urge you to support reviewing these questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Please.
Speaker 0: An honor to Mayor Garcia and the city council.
Speaker 6: My name is Sybil Baldwin, and I am here for rent control in Long Beach. I am a child development.
Speaker 0: Supervisor with a Long Beach Unified School District. And I just wanted to share the impact that Long Beach.
Speaker 6: Without rent control has.
Speaker 0: Affected our Long Beach Unified Schools and our child development centers. We have over 25 child development centers under Long Beach Unified School District.
Speaker 9: Where we have closures.
Speaker 6: Because our families are leaving, letting us know they can't afford to live in Long Beach. Our enrollment in our and our.
Speaker 1: Elementary schools and all of our schools.
Speaker 2: Are affected.
Speaker 0: By the fact that our.
Speaker 1: Families cannot afford to live in Long Beach. They have left and we have classrooms closing.
Speaker 0: And I'm just here to ask.
Speaker 1: For your support for rent control in Long Beach so that we can provide the educational opportunities for our early.
Speaker 0: Early childhood.
Speaker 1: Children all over Long Beach and in our schools.
Speaker 0: To make it affordable, to.
Speaker 1: Live in Long Beach and.
Speaker 6: To give us rights.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Very effective message in under 60 seconds, I might say. Thank you. Next speaker, please step away.
Speaker 4: And so the Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach. I'm going to be very quick here because unfortunately, apparently, Darryl, despite only contending counsel three times a week and not holding office hours, doesn't want to listen to all of us. The elements of a local housing crisis can be summed up as this affordability, supply and habitability. The supply issue was addressed best by the land use element. Affordability is a more complex issue given the parameters of capitalism. Rent control is just one tool used to address affordability by ensuring that the rents paid by the working poor who cannot buy but also do not receive assistance from the federal government, can stay inside the city less strict and therefore less effective. Tools for including the use of contractor development agreements are already being employed by the City of Long Beach and are not doing the job. The problem of habitability remains largely unaddressed by this council, but it remains a serious public health and equity issue. My questions are as follows What ever happened to the preemptive inspection program? Wait. Why is this council still being concerned about the marketability of the Long Beach housing stock? This myopia is at best helping heal local housing bubble and is at worst a sign that you're ignoring your primary responsibility as a council, protecting the rights of the residents and not property. We all know that the large percentage of the parasitic landlord class here have 714 area codes, and frankly, their return on their investment should do the last thing you are concerned about, especially given the fact that, unlike them, we actually vote on your on your elections. Where are the increased calls for housing inspectors are credibility poor can be directly tied to the massive cuts the city has made to the city of Long Beach's workforce. Without it put more housing inspectors to ensure the safety and health and safety of our residents, we again are at the mercy of the private sector doing that. Engage in a race to the bottom.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 4: And finally, if they can't afford a fixer six, how.
Speaker 3: Come they have an excuse to please?
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Sandra Krall and I reside in the third district. Actually, I want to thank you for your foresight tonight in preparing so thoroughly for the coming of rent control. Collecting relevant information gets the city ready to act as soon as the measure is passed. And it can also help to dispel some of those scary scenarios that are already being spun by the opponents. And I sincerely believe that this measure will pass. I'm getting enthusiastic signers to the petitions in the north part of Long Beach, in the downtown area and on the east side. As a member of the faith community and a church that is on the east side, most of whose members are I won't say most, but a large number of our members are property owners. And they're eager, eager to sign these petitions even are the landlords in in the congregation, because these are the local landlords. They have relationships with their tenants. They treat them fairly. They want to keep their properties rented and at a rate where they can keep up their improvements on it, but also get a fair return on their investment. So I sincerely hope that you will. The agenda item tonight.
Speaker 2: Truly does.
Speaker 1: Yield the impartial data and clarification it claims to.
Speaker 3: Seek. Thank you for your testimony next week at this.
Speaker 4: Before I begin, I would like to point out I don't think that Council member Andrews is aware that he's blocking the view of the clerk from here. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 3: That's the problem.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Garry Sheldon, again, before you and I've already lost 20 seconds of time.
Speaker 3: All right, you get that.
Speaker 4: That you have seven pages of questions here. I hope we're not limited to those questions to be considered as this goes to the staff, for your information. The council has it's not a policy, at least an urge to have less than 60% of the city as renters and more than 40% as owners. Somehow to shift that that paradigm, to use that word again. That's going to take the changing of thousands, tens of thousands of units of housing from renting to owning. And there's only so many tools in the basket. One of those is condo conversions. And I don't know if we'll ever solve it through condo conversions, except for one thing. I think you're probably going to learn that this rent control ordinance could result in the loss of rental units. And what will those units become? They'll become owned units. And so what you've got here is the opportunity to ask staff to report to you if we get rent control, which would be a good thing if we're really honest about trying to convert renters to owners, then we need to know what is the quantity. That rent control could change that paradigm here in Long Beach. Are we going to get maybe 20,000 condo conversions, 50,000 condo conversions? So that's a question that isn't anywhere in this list which could back you up for voting for rent control. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Good evening. My name is tonight Ken Faye from the sixth District. Oh, man, this is crazy. Well, I just had a guy come up here and somehow masquerade the right wing death squads in El Salvador who can't fight with Romero and say they're a socialist. I don't even I'm.
Speaker 4: I'm I'm I missed that part. And then I had another guy who, you know, I thought, this is.
Speaker 8: A city, you know, built by veterans. I had another guy live. He just said he would rent to veterans.
Speaker 4: Because, well, rent control.
Speaker 8: It would be kind of hard to get them out. But, you.
Speaker 1: Know.
Speaker 4: I mean, maybe I was.
Speaker 7: In the same same chambers.
Speaker 8: Anyways. As you can see, I'm an African-American.
Speaker 7: It's a beautiful thing. And I bring that up because as a part of the black community here in Long Beach.
Speaker 8: It is a declining one. 6037 people, according to the.
Speaker 7: US Census of African-American origins, left the city. Maybe that's because 73% of the black population in the city are renters, and with the fluctuation in rent prices, we are most impacted, going from 14% of the population of the city to now 12%. So being that as in May, we need rent control. We need rent.
Speaker 4: Control because we don't need to be.
Speaker 7: Evicted from our buildings for Airbnb. We don't need to be evicted for our buildings for people who want to have demographic change in particular neighborhoods in this city, we need rent control. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Campaign next speaker, please.
Speaker 12: All right? Yeah.
Speaker 3: I hope we don't get extra time for the claps in the middle, so let's just keep the moving.
Speaker 4: Thanks. Thank you. My name is Peter Hart, and I want to give you a face for the mom and pop of the world that have invested in Long Beach. I believed in Long Beach. I came here from Chicago, but 30 years ago, and I chose Long Beach because I believed in this city. And I invested all of my life's work and earnings into a housing unit so that I could perhaps live a good life here in Long Beach and retire. If this goes through, it will be taken from me, period. I believe that this is the United States where we have a freedom of choice. This takes it away and it puts on the backs of people that did nothing wrong except invest in Long Beach to subsidize the all the social ills that we're facing today. As far as, you know, housing issues. So I just ask that we look at this in a clear way and don't put social injustice on the backs of people that have invested here in Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 3: As we speak, the police.
Speaker 0: Good evening.
Speaker 9: And thank.
Speaker 1: You, Vice Mayor and council members.
Speaker 2: My name is Johanna Cunningham.
Speaker 1: And the.
Speaker 2: Executive director for the.
Speaker 1: Apartment Association, California Southern Cities. Tonight, I would like to thank the City Council for their thoughtful approach.
Speaker 2: To taking time to review the questions that have been submitted regarding.
Speaker 1: The proposed rent control ordinance, the negative impact and burden that this ordinance will place on the city.
Speaker 2: Of Long Beach.
Speaker 1: On development, and on the small property owners, deserves to be explored. Many of our owners did invest many years ago, and the majority of them were.
Speaker 9: And.
Speaker 1: Still are the work force that this ordinance claims to protect. The workers, your workers, the Long Beach workers, teachers, nurses, maintenance, grocery, hotel, retail, bus drivers, etc. Each of our owners invested in this city and this industry as part of their retirement goals, goals that are now being threatened. We encourage you to be thoughtful about all, including small property owners, that will be impacted because even those who are relying on this income.
Speaker 2: To take them to their and to their retirement years.
Speaker 1: Will be impacted. So tonight, I'm asking that you vote in favor of reviewing these proposed questions.
Speaker 9: And thank you for your attention.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Josh Butler, executive director of housing Long Beach, and I am one of the proponents of this measure to bring rent control to the city of Long Beach. And I want to.
Speaker 7: Thank the council members for bringing this item forward. Thank you, Councilmember Supervisor, and thank you to Mr. Murchison and the landowner to help write this item. We think it's great for.
Speaker 4: Understanding that this is commonly referred to as a 9 to 1 to report. This is something that the Council is allowed to do. Elections Code Section 91 to states that quote during the circulation of the petition or before deciding to adopt the ordinance or put it on the ballot. The legislative body may refer the proposed initiative measure to a city agency or agencies for a report on such matters as fiscal impact, effects on consistency with the city's general and specific plan, effects on land use, impact on funding and infrastructure. So it is my understanding that you all have three options once we bring the signatures into once the city clerk certifies those signatures. Option one is you can place it on the ballot. Option two is you can make it law. Option three is to ask a set of questions under elections code, section.
Speaker 7: 9 to 1 two. So we thank you for initiating that this evening.
Speaker 4: And we look forward to all the questions that the council members.
Speaker 7: Have, and we can get that out of the way now so that when we turn the signatures in.
Speaker 4: We can move toward certification as quickly as possible. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Act and act.
Speaker 1: Can we fight President of District One? I'm really fortunate in that I have subsidized housing. But every day I see the struggles for other seniors and people in our community.
Speaker 5: Who don't.
Speaker 1: Have nice landlords. There's a lot of profit being taken out of our community. The goal of landlords is to invest, to make money. A lot of landlords are coming into our community and that is their major goal. We're seeing it in the conversion of units to Airbnb. We're seeing it in the corporate landlords that are coming in. A lot of the landlords in our community are absentee landlords. I would really like.
Speaker 6: To add an inquiry.
Speaker 1: How many absentee landlords that we have? I think that's important for us to know. So we look forward to having an open, honest discussion about rent control and how this can really make our community inclusionary and engage in the equity process so that we can keep the valuable, valuable population that we have in our diversity and equity across the board. Thank you all.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Deena. I live in the second district.
Speaker 6: I'm an organizing member of the Long.
Speaker 9: Beach Tenants Union, and I'm here in support of the rent control ordinance, the proposed rent control ordinance.
Speaker 1: I'd like to thank you again for.
Speaker 6: Proposing these questions so that we can get the conversation started about rent control in our community. We have for decades understood that the relationship between landlord and tenant is one that requires regulations from our habitability habitability laws to our Fair Housing Act.
Speaker 0: These regulations have become an.
Speaker 1: Integral part of our political.
Speaker 6: System because we recognize that the.
Speaker 1: Skewed bargaining power in this relationship by the decisions of one landlord could determine the outcome of one or more people's lives is important. So this decision, the decisions that lenders make, can determine whether or not people have roofs over their heads, whether they can afford to pay for food and other necessities after paying for their rent, how many jobs.
Speaker 6: They need to work to make up the difference, and what their health outcomes will be. One of the other few places we see relationships with this power.
Speaker 1: That can have great impacts on someone's life.
Speaker 6: Is an employer and employee relationship. And in that case, we have extensively regulated those relationships to prevent an abuse of power and protect the most vulnerable party in that contractual relationship.
Speaker 1: And so additionally, we have seen a false narrative of mom and pop landlords as vulnerable stakeholders in this discussion, while ignoring the real.
Speaker 6: Estate speculators who are driving the housing crisis.
Speaker 1: The mom and pop landlords are, of course, guaranteed a fair return on.
Speaker 6: Their investment by law, even in rent regulating cities, and continue to make well above a fair return in such cities.
Speaker 1: For any economic decisions through the plight of small landlords allows.
Speaker 6: Critics to question rent control without addressing the prevalence of corporate real estate speculation. There are, in.
Speaker 1: Fact, corporate.
Speaker 6: Real estate speculators in San Francisco that profit extensively by converting.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much for your testimony. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Next week at least.
Speaker 2: Thanks to the city council and the vice mayor. My name is Catherine Cox. I'm speaking as a second district voter and a member of the renter majority in Long Beach. I want to address some of the misinformation I've seen and heard tonight.
Speaker 1: Number one, rent control is bad for everyone. This is patently false. Just as this housing crisis does not impact everyone equally, neither does rent control. Displacement overwhelmingly affects low income communities of color. And in the 13 California cities that have passed rent control, these measures have prevented low income tenants from being displaced as market rents rise. That's according to a study by the Urban Displacement Project. Number two, rent control raises rents.
Speaker 2: Landlords raise rents.
Speaker 1: If this were true, the real estate developers in the room would be out there collecting signatures with us. The housing crisis is caused by land and housing speculation. Rent control. One can't help these rising costs, but it can curb the devastating displacement.
Speaker 2: That we're seeing in Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Number three, landlords aren't responsible for rising rents and shouldn't be punished with rent control regulations. This is opposed to rent control isn't a punishment.
Speaker 2: It's a protection for vulnerable renters. We as a community should not.
Speaker 1: Have to bear the burden of displacement and neighborhood instability so that a single industry can profit unfettered by regulation. Displacement causes trauma to our communities, its neighbors, our neighbors from their families, homes, schools, places of.
Speaker 2: Worship and.
Speaker 1: Community services. I ask the City Council to support the.
Speaker 2: Voters as we move.
Speaker 1: For affordable.
Speaker 2: Housing. Just because eviction and other renter protections in Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your.
Speaker 12: But the truth.
Speaker 7: Obviously I have no say on whether this goes on the ballot or not. I just want to dispel the stereotype, number one, that the landlords are all parasites trying to take advantage of their tenants. When I bought my four plex in 2004, I thought I was on Easy Street and I would be living free and clear for a long time. That's not the way it works. I don't know if you realize this, but the average housing stock in Long Beach is about the 1920s. Have you ever tried to take care of a building that was built in the 1920s? This is my stack of receipts from 2017. I had the same from 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 all the way back to 2004. I am very hard trying to take care of that building and in the meantime, my taxes. I don't know who said that they're only going up by 1%. But in 2015, 2016, according to Zillow, it was seven and a half. Part of the reason the prices are going up has nothing to do with landlords being greedy. It has to do with the fact that people like me over the last 14 years haven't been adding anything to the rent. And I'm sorry, but there's a point where we have to catch up. Otherwise the building will be sold and my tenants would be homeless because quite frankly, it's on 5000 feet of land. Somebody could do something better with it than I could. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: But evening, everyone. My name is is that Velez, and I am a resident of the First District. I am one of many affected by a 60 day notice. I stand here with all my neighbors and friends to fight for our rights. I'm currently pregnant and I have to move by me.
Speaker 5: I will be five months pregnant when?
Speaker 1: When they have to move. I have been exposed to chemicals of pain and risk. That was done by me, by the new owners. Beachfront properties took no consideration in the news. Notices that they were going to remodel our apartments due to the smell of paint and rose grinding. I have headaches and coughing and I cramp every once in a while. I have become good looking for places to live, but I have found nothing new.
Speaker 7: The area.
Speaker 1: I do not want to move because all my doctor's appointments have already been sent. I already have my hospital where I have my baby. I hope my representatives can make a difference not only in the life of my town, but the life of other children who are being pushed out and exposed to toxic chemicals due to the way these companies are operating. I hope these companies are held accountable for their actions.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next, could you please? Well, my name is Paul Babcock. I live in the fifth District. I own a duplex rental in the first District. Purchased that through blood, sweat and tears. I'm trying to make a return on my unit. Rent still go down in 2008 when the economy crashed. I had already rent 300 a month.
Speaker 8: Per unit on the two units. I'm still at that.
Speaker 4: Same rent as the man said. Expenses are going up, taxes are going up. And I don't wish to. I understand the plight of some people, but I don't wish to have that solved on my back. Our expenses include monies that were invested to remodel our properties. We'd like to have that return recognized or that investment recognized and considered as an expense, unlike the measure that's in front of you is excluded and there are protections for eviction. It's under California state law. The city attorney is well aware of that. So hopefully that'll bring out the address, the notion that there's no protections for renters. Thank you.
Speaker 12: Thank you. Thank you. Let's go to Bruce.
Speaker 1: My name is Teresa Alvarado. I've lived in Long Beach since 1954. My parents worked for the Unified School District, and I've lived and worked in Long Beach the majority of my life. I've been a renter and an owner, and I feel deeply rooted to Long Beach and a stakeholder in what happens. My husband, Paul, just spoke. We have a duplex. We never intended to become real estate moguls or be millionaires from from owning that property. But this ordinance, if it's passed, is unfair to small property owners. It's poorly written. It assumes that in 2016 and 2017, the base years, there was a fair rate of return. In our situation, we haven't raised rents in many years and so we barely, if at all, break even. And now in order to do improvements that are needed and to recover, we need to be able to raise the rents accordingly, not to gouge anybody, but to just get a fair return.
Speaker 2: So that we can protect our investment.
Speaker 1: The result of this passes.
Speaker 2: Is that we will be directly.
Speaker 1: Subsidizing our tenants who are not.
Speaker 2: Needy or not, for by.
Speaker 1: Any means it will come out of our pockets and we are retirees with fixed income. So please don't pass the ordinance as written. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. That's what the police. Hi there, Jodie in seventh District. I first want to dedicate this to the people who are working double shifts right now to pay their next rent payment and the rate increase. I would also like to acknowledge Carol Price and my wife who have brought this forth. We're very grateful.
Speaker 7: That this is being brought to us so that we can dispel some of the myths that you see here tonight.
Speaker 4: So let's get some numbers here right now. Let's talk about the Stanford University.
Speaker 7: Study on rent control that happened in.
Speaker 4: November of 2017. There were multiple rounds of publication circulation that ended up trying to frame.
Speaker 7: This as rent control is bad.
Speaker 4: But let's look at the numbers. So actually, when the study first came out in November 2017, there was a net $2.1 billion.
Speaker 7: Benefit to renters in San Francisco.
Speaker 4: And there were also benefits net to.
Speaker 7: The landlords at.
Speaker 4: The very worst. There was no effect on the rental.
Speaker 7: Market whatsoever in San Francisco, as studied at Stanford University, this is.
Speaker 4: NPR data. What's interesting to note is that the actual benefits for tenants were cited as $7.085.
Speaker 7: Billion, and that's based on.
Speaker 4: The fact that they were able to afford the.
Speaker 7: Rents, they were able to build what they were able to save that money. What's interesting about that number is that that is only for one specific year, 1994. They didn't count any renters before that or after that. So there are literally billions of dollars in benefits to tenants in wealth building.
Speaker 4: And the best part about this is that the study.
Speaker 7: Also concluded that landlords didn't end up feeling any harmful effects. They continued to get a fair return on their properties. So thank.
Speaker 4: You. Please review these photos very much.
Speaker 3: Next week piece.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name's Annie NC. I am from District one, Lena Gonzalez's district, and I don't even know where to start with one a minute and a half. Should I start talking about the gentrification that's happening in Long Beach with the help of Robert Garcia? Should I talk about how the homeless the homeless issue between properties as my neighbors are all here, just bombed my building. I've been living there for 17 years. I go to school, I work, I'm doing the best I can. I do the best I can. I haven't seen my dad in three weeks. Why? Because he's in his fifties. Because he had to get another job to pay for the rent increase they are renovating and all they're doing is painting. Why are you so afraid of rent controlled? Because it can exploit us now. Because we can't take those out. Don't. And let's just be clear. They go into neighborhoods, to poor neighborhoods. You you choose to buy poor apartments and then you paint it and you double the price. And then you're saying that you are investing in this. We pay your buildings, we put the money in your pockets and stop acting like you're doing us a favor. And also, I just wanted to say thank you. I was giving you don't forget, these people are going to work at three, five in the morning to pay. What are you guys going to your house? So you're like rich house. Was you rich pockets? These are working class people that you're kicking out. I know these are working class people. And we also vote. We are all looking into how we're going to vote for Robert Garcia for our representatives. And I hope Lena supports this because this is all your district. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening. Good evening, Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Ms.. Gonzalez. Everybody else. I would like to start off by introducing myself. My name is Kimberly Navas.
Speaker 0: I was born and raised in Long Beach. I am currently living in District one.
Speaker 1: And I say currently because sadly I will have to leave my city soon. I have lived in Long Beach my entire life. Long Beach is home to my family and I. I have been living in the same apartment for 20 years and out of nowhere the owners of my building evicted.
Speaker 2: All its tenants. And now that my.
Speaker 1: Family have to look for a new place, we come to find out it's nearly impossible to stay in Long Beach due to such high rent. We need.
Speaker 0: Rent control. Long Beach is.
Speaker 1: Home and I have to leave because my family can't afford it. I went to.
Speaker 2: International Elementary, which is.
Speaker 1: Now Oropeza Elementary.
Speaker 2: I went to.
Speaker 1: Jefferson Middle School and I am second generation Long Beach. Wilson graduate. I had the opportunity to leave my city after graduating, but I decided there is no place like home. With the help of Long Beach Promise, I am currently a student at Long Beach City College. Just like you both, my goal is to graduate from Cal State Long Beach. But because of such high rent prices, I am forced to leave and relocate and pursue my education somewhere else. I have a younger sister who one day I wish to see graduating from Wilson High School and become the third generation. But because we no longer can afford our home, we might never see that day with the cost of rent and property management evicting their longtime tenants. People are deciding to leave Long Beach not because they want to, but because they are being forced to leave the city they know as home.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, my. I live in the eastern one. My name is Christina. Mine. I haven't lived for 26 years. I'm here because my family and 25 more families from our building are being picked to a beach from Hong Kong beachfront. And different companies like this are kicking people out for Long Beach. They are raising the rents. They not be to they can't afford to pay higher ends. This is our city. We love our city families. Ah, this is. Sorry. I'm so terribly sorry. Because they cannot for pay rent. It's so heartbreaking to see seniors crying. To see where I'm going to go sleep tomorrow. Because I don't have money to move because they. This is our city councilwoman, Lena Gonzalez. Mayor Robert Garcia, people like me who fought for you to represent us. We need your help. Your Latinos need your help. So please do something for us because we know we make the right decision to put you guys in there. So we still believe in you guys. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And just a moment, please. That's just a moment before you begin. Mr. City Attorney. So I have a request from some people behind the dais. Can we just sort of highlight what the scope of this motion is tonight so people can speak to it?
Speaker 7: Certainly the motion this evening, as proposed by the council, is to refer a list, I think a six and a half page list of specific questions regarding the initiative ordinance that is currently being circulated. There is no action that the city council can take this evening either for or against rent control. This is strictly a request for information at this time.
Speaker 3: So just to be clear, this is, you know, there's no action, there's no ordinance before us for the city council to consider. I just want to make sure that that's out there clear. City council will not be taking an up or down vote tonight on a rent control ordinance. Just want to be clear. Next speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Cynthia. Jesus, and I live in the second district. Mayor Garcia, City Council members. My time's cut short, so I'm just get to the point. This poster is from 1979, and the title says People who can afford to live here should move someplace else. This was from the press telegram sent by president, member of the Lumbee City Council. Now there's a war going on in Long Beach. This war amounts to one big eviction notice for the elderly, the disabled, for people on fixed incomes, for minorities, for unemployed and underpaid working people of all races. Long Beach Master Plan calls for righting the city of individuals families that don't have a lot of money to spend. Instead, higher income consumers are being invited to frolic in a new landscape shopping malls, condominiums, racket clubs, Jacuzzis. This new landscape is evidence of a city economy geared to profits rather than humaneness. It's 2018, but yet we still have the same problem. So, I mean, it's time to wake up and do something about it. I know you guys are just listening and all. They're not going to vote, but at the end of the day, you guys do have the power to make your city better and make life not same easier, but make it comfortable for not only the family but the children that are going to be a future of Long Beach. Hopefully, if not, they're going to be in Kentucky or somewhere else where they can afford to rent. So thank you for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next week, Bruce.
Speaker 4: Translation of a chance.
Speaker 3: A sure thing. Let's double up the time for trying it for interpretation. Thank you for seeing.
Speaker 1: Me emulate this Haslemere. Giving up royal control the rent that it is a local who stole from me. I mean, it's a local news. The publisher for me, the originals. It's just on the condition it is lucky. Opposite a member of a mental institution because your.
Speaker 0: In my venue.
Speaker 1: I'm Sally Everest. You're another MIA for the popular Missy Variety apology album. What the hell? He was in our consolation parody. Mr. Strahovski up the near you several venues in Ethiopia under religious apartheid. Mr. Dunham, the Rwandan military see them there. Bill Gigaba, the M.C. Anton of Anthem. Ms.. De la Renta. No, it's important, I think. But when we dramatically opening up in circuit, we see who's psychology come anticipo zero mal your stupid portrait, Mrs. Adams. People forget the personal things.
Speaker 4: So, hello. My name is Letitia Duma. I come here to support rent control and just cause eviction. I was evicted unjustly for fighting for my rights. These are some of the conditions I was in, in my apartment. The ceiling fell on me. There were snakes that came out of the restroom. I wouldn't sleep because I had to take care of my children and this process. I had to pay for a motel to protect my. My, my children. I lost my two jobs because the owners would lie to me and tell me that they were going to do a fumigation , but they never did. I would pay thousands of dollars for electricity because they would rob my electricity from my building for other units. This is also recorded in the city. I would pay 975 for rent and the electricity bill was 8198. Everything I pass and the apartment and the light.
Speaker 8: Bill caused me to have stress.
Speaker 4: And some of my children have psychological problems due to this. It was it was a nightmare. And I found depression. I also got sick from my gallbladder. I had to have a surgery. And I also had to also is very stressed up to this day, my daughters and son, I can still find a place due to the fact that there.
Speaker 8: Is no.
Speaker 4: Housing available. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. And let's look at this.
Speaker 1: When I started. Murray Anthony, Antonio, your up there controlled our entire brigade. We will not departamento they will not a camera. And this cannot allow to elaborate on what they want. One sec. West America is my manager gave me a camera, the Departamento de Medici in the Gambia, but still getting Occupy out of me. This and on the power of mercy internment they single and your customers? We are on Siendo la. This is mutual case. They are not neutral animal person.
Speaker 4: Hello, my name is my Antonia.
Speaker 5: And my.
Speaker 1: Goal is have been no monopoly or control.
Speaker 4: I come to us for rent control together.
Speaker 1: Rent handling department didn't have a camera because.
Speaker 4: I rent a11 bedroom apartment.
Speaker 1: And the parliamentary looks cannot allow they have labor is not what the UN do. I want them to remain.
Speaker 4: In the room with my daughter. There's the ceiling is leaking.
Speaker 1: If the baby Armani had to make. I'm going to the parliamentary committee.
Speaker 4: I ask the manager to move me to another unit, but they're charging me 1200 a year.
Speaker 1: Get them in control. You're not trabaho e look at your thing. All the little guy. Your circle is at your tratando competition director.
Speaker 4: And I would like for there to be rent control due to the fact that I don't not work and I just survive half of what I make.
Speaker 1: Because I'm a young single with a mother Mexican.
Speaker 4: And if I try to move again just to get a new apartment, it's going to there aren't going to be a dozen, 100.
Speaker 1: It with billable, hardworking man. Okay. You are not going to see some of those times that people will control the rent.
Speaker 4: And I ask you to support the people as they ask for rent control.
Speaker 5: And I.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. Next week, the first thing when I'm not.
Speaker 13: Just the number of hassles, but I want you, we will see that. Yes, there's a street in law. Ultimately, my mother is real macabre, though. There's a lot of things so center the Esperanza responsibility e is move pocket the ample estate loans would be must also mammoth anesthetizing little of owners i.e. local school of permanent purpose plastic was over.
Speaker 5: But I'm.
Speaker 1: Okay. My name is this Bravo. I live on 10th and theater district one he looking.
Speaker 5: Good.
Speaker 13: Thing.
Speaker 1: Daniel he's he's been living there for 20 years and recently he received a 60 day notice to move out. The beachfront properties have started to do their renovations in which they started painting and covering the windows. While he's been living there.
Speaker 13: He was left of a no no center. No the island. But a limping. He. You place the fiscal in control of parliament and at the empl. It was when.
Speaker 1: He said that with the windows covered, it's really hard to breathe in there. There's no air circulation. And he's been looking for a new place. But it's really hard to find a new a new place to live in 60 days.
Speaker 13: It was rehearsal for that for you seniors. How you control the rental. He installed the glasses.
Speaker 1: And thank you. If you do support rent control. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Let's look at this.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Guadalupe Rios. And when us not just calls her her little girl, this year will be doing me apartamento Ms.. The U.S. Attorney's Cassie Daniels. Amitabh Mian Mandela Notification Center. Yes. You're not doing well for a proposed idiot. Jesse. Don't clean up responsibility party for indoor girls. The problem is your age only party better accompany Anthony No Rosa Apartamento Don't nominate a particular center Poor woman All the name here we have a serious close Apartamento system in Muller's condition. This work also in La Renta Turtle no more mind your condo telecom pioneer There is not a castle in Mikasa Leo in know Newcastle initials in le Carré you will put up one particular track working miserable life. In the meantime, you see no melancholy you can be a joy to look at can be transformed by us. But it's Alfredo and not asthma. At the Liverpool airport April I would at all look Italian construction this purple is tan is on chemicals can not also line you can weather we will do quo but I just killed whether we meet competitors conduct on this camp whether we be a status quo to look after the animals under Lisbon the Luna casa no policy equals animals being hello dancer Lucas Lucas Cousteau cannot you know want temper tantrums in the scenario Camilla's current can know either annoy this hello who as you that your Bambi and be one of the distrito eunuch is here I catalyst concealer go by the protection of the loss interests is corporate cooperatives EU Then I'm Antonella Lombard All of our local metro the longest longest is meal how long this is those Latinos it percent Latinos this I say no little emails Cousteau Davos almost this my most mischievous animals follows and in my list let's put out Ambien veteran of stratospheric animal is gracious. Good evening, councilmembers and Mayor. My name is Guadalupe Berrios.
Speaker 6: I've been living in my apartment on 10th and Cedar for almost 20 years, and I as well have been given a 60 day notice and I don't have a place to go. I have been a responsible renter paying my rent on time and not causing any issues. I have done my part, but the company has maintained the apartments in an inhabitable condition in my apartment. A fungus came out, a.
Speaker 1: Mushroom out of the floor.
Speaker 6: This is not normal.
Speaker 1: And when I told the company they did nothing. No, nothing has changed.
Speaker 6: My carpet was never changed. I have had to change my carpet out of my own money. How many of you live with roaches? Rats? Bedbugs?
Speaker 1: They do neither. One time I have had to.
Speaker 3: Go beyond double. If you just summarize the. The rest of the message.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 6: I have lived in this district and in this city. I hope that you would protect us, not just the corporate interests. Please help maintain Long Beach an affordable place to live.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Let's be clear, please.
Speaker 13: When I look at Ramiro Vergara, everyone listening this year to the last year it ambiente then going to anyos I won't see any of my Nigerian Lautrec companion come home. Chaotic Newcastle little Cassie Robyn. That is nuevos personas. Yes. No. Lord Winehouse eloquent answer center. Yes. Baraka. Messala LaCour. Alistair your sterility. Diallo Yes. There are no apenas meal. Siento McKee Thomas yea pirate your cientos is getting so we may lowly mill city into lotteries the only Pueblo Sarkar in their. This is what I think.
Speaker 1: Hi. Good evening. My name is Ramiro Vergara. Vergara. I've been there for 20 years and this apartment and never left. I to receive the 60 day notice along with my neighbors that are here. And we are here to fight for our rights. It's not just that this company has the power to evict us and just to evict us to get more money. With no fair reason, these companies like beachfront properties, are destroying our city and are in this war thinking, okay, they're destroying our city and separating families. I implore you, I implore on behalf of our neighbors to stand up and not be afraid anymore to speak about these the way they manage these properties. The object is not to move us simply to raise money. It looks like we let you do this. Okay. And then just to summarize, he he wants to. He's pleading for you guys to have support for gun control. Okay.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Well, not just the number of mice, each of us.
Speaker 13: The millennial apartamento that lost the additional revenue and they work at home. And which of them is best, you know, setting, you know, go under on this you almost inevitably tequila company occupy the common payroll company of the Palm Beach them you know that element of my motto is a saint that he has nothing apparently to make is say, give me the NBA and Long Beach. I don't know whether they will get Bahamians status. So. CONTENTO Sacrificial lamb, an impressive touring Quinta Party, Los Apartamento, Caracas, 80 inches Europe.
Speaker 7: Dennis left Paris more, I think, on the really poor.
Speaker 13: Terms and at the lower so looking a lot more commercial into a language but.
Speaker 8: I.
Speaker 4: Hello my name is Moses Torres and I too live in the apartments of 1019 Cedar Avenue. Seemed like many of my neighbors I have had to live with in habitable conditions because a company doesn't worry about us. I have lived there for nine years and the company Beach Front has given me a 60 day notice and I have nowhere to go. I would like I would like to live, continue living in Long Beach, but I can't pay the thousand 600.
Speaker 8: That they are asking for payments.
Speaker 4: Know that the cost to move. I, too, have to live with cockroaches, rats and bedbugs. Well, it's already hard for me to pay the rent. I pay I own 1350. I want to continue living as a resident in the area and I would hope that our elected leaders do something for the community and perhaps in support rent control. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, city council. I know it's a very sensitive subject. Recovering. My name's Eduardo Perez. I've worked in the city of Long Beach since the 1980s. I had food distributing business, and after many years of work, I bought some units and in the north and the south part of Long Beach. And it's a day to day job. We don't have I don't have anything fancy. Fancy, but it's it's lots of work, not eight hour days as 12 hour days to keep things running the way they should be with property taxes going up and putting a cap on on what you can work with. As far as the rent is concerned, it makes it very, very difficult to keep to turn a product that tenants are comfortable with and come to expect. And if you have a fixed amount that you can only go a certain percentage and it makes it almost impossible to provide adequate housing in and keep Long Beach looking the way it is now. Back in the eighties, this area of Long Beach was not the prettiest or the safest, and every day I see much prettier. Housing is much better kept. The roads, everything is. Unfortunately, our property taxes go through the roof. So that's another thing that, you know, we have to be able to keep up with what's going on. But God bless and do your best.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Please. Hi. My name is Omar. I am a resident for District District one Healthy Lives Matters for Low Income Families and Communities. The reason why I mentioned is that I have experienced displacement and homelessness many times in the past, and when you are displaced as well as homeless, you go through fatigue and lack of sleep. I mean, it totally distracts your daily life. You know, it's like being a full time student number of times. And I've been homeless during the times that I was in and in school. And most of us, all of us, I bet, been through lack of sleep, fatigued, have no idea where to go to do your homework and live a happy life. How how how were you feel? It was it was that you're in that position. How will you feel? How. How will it be to not have a roof over your head or a place to sleep it? Then the next day you have to work full time and and go to school or a nice school. Sarah. Sarah. So I say that housing is a human right and please support rent control. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name's Martina Chapa, and I'm a 25 year resident of Long Beach. I've been a resident of District four. And I want to give you a firsthand perspective of what it is to be an owner landlord. Regarding my residency in the art craft metro area, where the neighborhood is principally duplex, I also owned my previous residence, another duplex in Los Angeles that's under rent control. So I have experience under both systems. My tenant, a Long Beach I've had for five years, I was able to work with her as a single mother. I reduced the rate of rent that I was asking for and I cut the security deposit in half. Five years that she's been there, I've raised her rent on average of 2% throughout this period of time. She's still not paying the rent that I requested when she first moved in. I would not be doing those considerations if I was under rent control. And when my property in Los Angeles, if you pass a rent control, that leaves a lot of discretion out of my hands. I'm faced with property taxes. I'm faced with a lot of other expenses that isn't rent control, property tax consideration. I had those same issues and pressures. There's a lot of economics going here and I feel there is an unfair burden that's going to be placed on small time landlords, especially, to try to even out the disadvantages of a lot of poor people here that are disadvantaged. You know, my heart goes out to them, but also consider the small time landlords that are trying to make a decent living. The home is my home. I run it not as a business, but as my home. And I'm looking for a good neighbor. Don't leave that discretion out to provide those things.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Let's look at this.
Speaker 0: Good evening, city council and mayor.
Speaker 1: Like all of you, I am a public servant. I'm a professor at Cal State Long Beach. My name is Dr. Chuck Harmony, and I wanted to give you the perspective of what it's like to be an instructor in a classroom at a university. And these are from 2017.
Speaker 0: Data.
Speaker 1: When one in five students are hungry and one in ten students are homeless. So I wanted to give you a picture, a face to what you see as homeless. It's not just destitute families that that you can kind of just shove away. These are my students and they are homeless because they can't even afford to live in a city where they're trying their best to get an education and to be civic citizens in this city and to give back and to be part of our future. And I wanted to leave you with three things that I, as a social scientist.
Speaker 0: Tell my.
Speaker 1: Students. And I would hope that as as civic servants like me, you would consider data that's holistic, not just data that is from one side. I think a gentleman actually gave really good research tonight, and I hope that you wouldn't use research that is quantitative as well as qualitative. We have a lot of anecdotal stories tonight that will help you inform your decision decision making. So just not just quality quantitative data, that's one side, but qualitative as well. Thank you for your time. Oh. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the Council. My name is Steve Barong, and I live in the fourth district. I am a rental property manager here in Long Beach. I manage about about 330 apartments in the Greater Long Beach area and in every district in the city. And I just want to express my strong support for this agenda item, and I hope that you guys will pass it and ask these important questions. As a property manager, I feel a fiduciary obligation to both my tenants and my property owners, and I do understand that they are not always in agreement, but I do think that good compromises can be made. I know just yesterday I gave 260 day notices to tenants who I love because the property owners own condos and they decided to sell now because they don't want to pay a relocation fee. Other tenants. So I lost excellent tenants who got 60 day notices. So I do feel in my heart for these people. That's why it's really important that we take the time to ask these questions. How is it going to affect all of the properties in the city of Long Beach? I'm frightened to own my own house, but my circumstances could change. I could face homelessness. I actually became a property manager because I came three days from losing my house in 2012 and I was unemployed and I went to work as a property manager, and that's how I saved my own home. So both sides have good points, but we really need to examine this proposed ordinance before we move forward with.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next Speaker First.
Speaker 1: When I'm address, embrace America. So I go and then I go to Tampa is what I would say. Gillespie opinion. But I would control the Tampa so you know my mom and I family face personas this person I mean they think there's a rent.
Speaker 0: And an.
Speaker 1: Apartment in America. Men and women have become more but a lot of multiple apartments here because I'm in community centers and schools public opinion and I mean they came here and render and women panel for me him in a.
Speaker 5: Paralysis.
Speaker 1: Make it through thinking around me. Yes but I will. I mean, I'll pay the rent bill. I guess I better. If there is any men that are looking at him as an instrument, then they don't get an analysis.
Speaker 5: Hmm.
Speaker 0: Good evening. My name is America Antonio. I am ISO. I ask that I ask for help for rent control. I have a family of six and I pay 1200 and rent. My husband doesn't earn enough to pay for another increase in rent. And he would look for rent for he would look for other housing and he would fine of 600. 1600. 2000. And that's why. And we can't afford and that's why I ask of you in the name of all the families that work and all the children of those families that you support, rent control.
Speaker 1: I guess.
Speaker 0: Right here. We're talking about numbers and loss of money. But the generations and our children, where will they really stand? Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Madam Speaker. So the gentleman in the burgundy, some of the fire fire marshal told us the last of the people on the outside are now in. So I would advise line up now because we're getting close the speaker's list in a moment. So after this next speaker, whoever's the last person in line, that's who's going to be last speaker. Thank u next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hi everyone. My name is Benjamin Chao. I am a constituent of the ninth district. Fortunately, my family owns their home, but I'm also speaking on behalf of my grandmother and my aunts who live in the eighth District and Bixby Knolls. From the perspective of, you know, owning a home, I think we oftentimes forget that homeowners and renters share the community. And I learned the other day that the only apartment complex on my block has just been purchased by the same company, Westland Real Estate Group, that is also redeveloping the the Uptown, which is in the Artesia corridor in the ninth District. And I point that out, because private real estate speculation in our city is one of the leading causes for rents going up and is threatening our existing affordable housing stock. And so because of this, I want to ask Mayor Garcia and especially Vice Mayor Richardson to really reevaluate their stance on rent control and look at the facts and look at our community. I want to ask, how do you plan to advocate for home ownership in the ninth District without first addressing rising rents and the rising cost of living in our city? Please put people over profit and protect our renters. Invest in people, not private property. You have the power to protect your people from investors. We are not dollar signs. Please stop the bleeding by instituting and considering a rent hike freeze like Santa Cruz has done and let Long Beach voters decide their own fate. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And I'm looking forward to getting a cup of coffee with you next week.
Speaker 1: Please call me. Oh.
Speaker 3: My neighbor here next week, please.
Speaker 1: Oh, because I work as a barista. That's why I thought.
Speaker 3: Maybe we'll come to your shop next week, please.
Speaker 1: Okay. I'm Mary DeSoto.
Speaker 9: A lot of people know me here. I am a homeowner.
Speaker 1: In the ninth district.
Speaker 9: As you know.
Speaker 1: And like I've said before, I also pay property taxes. My property taxes do go up and don't get so excited. I think it is absolutely wrong to want to make a profit. I can't make a profit if my.
Speaker 2: Community is not thriving.
Speaker 1: Equity is important to me and my property is important to me. One day I planned to maybe rent my property and I still don't think that it's okay that my neighbors are paying $1,600 for their one bedroom apartment. That's shitty I've seen. I've been inside their apartment. It's crap they don't. The landlord that lives in Orange County, she doesn't fix the apartment. She hasn't painted it. It smells in there. The carpets are bad. They it's roach infested and they pay $400 less. And what I do for my mortgage, I represent over 700 workers here in Long Beach at our hotel workers. Most of these workers live and work in Long Beach. And there most of them are renters. It is not and it is not a uncommon conversation that these workers can't afford to live in Long Beach. Let's not be the city that has to outsource to other cities to have workers. This is not about making this is about making Long Beach white. Again, let's be honest.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Let's take a this.
Speaker 1: Oh, no, it's me again, piggybacking off of that. So it really strikes me how outrageously disempowered so many people in this room feel. We have people who have put in a lot of economic you bring a lot of their own money into owning one property and now they are severely compromised. And now we have a lot of people here who have either been pregnant, women who have been poisoned or people who have been sleeping on the streets, because we have, as correctly pointed out, corporate landlords coming in and putting their boots on the back of the people who make Long Beach. Long Beach. And, you know, in terms of the five year plan, I, I maybe we should just take the lesson rather than trying to make Long Beach sound sort of like a corny version of Los Angeles. Maybe we should invest in the people who are already here rather than inviting in outside influences. I, you know, in this really like ugly, exploitative, neoliberal thing because the abuse is so ugly, all you can only understand what it is like to not have control over the roof, over your own head, if you've experienced it, because I can't communicate it verbally, that terror or something, you have to live. And so many people in this room are living it right now. And you've got to take that into responsibility as public servants, the terror and the fear that these people are experiencing in this room.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. So raise your hand. The last person in line. Okay. So the young lady raised the pin. Last person in line. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: My name is Gregory. Dean and I reside in both the first district and the seventh District. I am the proud property owner of two vintage properties, one specifically located in Downtown's West Side. The other in the neighborhood of Wrigley. The Downtown property is a 1923 art deco four plex. It is a multifamily property first spotted in 2003. At that time, it was primarily low income and Section eight tenants. There are 14 people living in one small, two bedroom apartment. Since purchasing that property, I have become as an owner, I have replaced the roof, the ingoing, outgoing plumbing. I have refurbished all the interiors. I have completely restored the exterior of the property. I have repaired all termite damage. I have worked directly with the lawn and garden program to re landscaped the property and I've also benefited local businesses who I have hired for that work. Those those units are now what I take pride in as a property owner. I also stand as somebody who struggled with both homelessness and addiction in the eighties. And I am proud to say that I run a quality place for people to live. And I make no apologies to anybody here in this room. So as you do your research, I hope you'll keep in mind that some of us are good landlords, responsible landlords, and treat our tenants with compassion and fairness. Always.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, council members. My name is Shannon Llewellyn. I'm a social worker here in Long Beach, and I deal with developmentally disabled clients who live on only $900 a month that include utilities and food, by the way, which I would like to see all of you do a social experiment and try to live on that. We cannot continue to spend 70% of our income on rent where we have no more to put back into this community that we live in. I grew up here. I did a brief survey of our city back in the day, if you will. When I was in high school. It was contentment. Now it's chaos.
Speaker 1: The rental requirements are almost.
Speaker 2: Three times the amount of income. 655 AE And no blemishes. The people that are against rent control are well off. Lower standards. I heard from what they're already low subsidized.
Speaker 1: Don't pay landlords enough.
Speaker 2: Greed has the wheel of this vehicle and you're driving people out of Long Beach faster than a race car. The mayor has already said his stance. Limitless opportunities for builders and developers to make for profit apartments. You need to make low income apartments. But we have no money. But yet $900 million for a civic center and 1.5 million for bicycles. I think you guys need to redirect your attention to where it's actually needed.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you for your time. My name is Andrew Carr. I live in the second district. Thank you to all my fellow residents for being.
Speaker 7: Here and city council for staying late on the third week in a row like this. We really appreciate I appreciate it. I want to say two things. First of all, that the lived experiences of our of our.
Speaker 4: Community members should always be believed. And that includes that what property managers.
Speaker 8: Talk about when they talk about their experiences. But I also want to remind everyone that when renters talk about their experiences, even if it seems like it's outside the.
Speaker 4: Scope of our reality or some of our realities, that those experiences are very real. A Renters should be believed when they talk about what they're facing.
Speaker 7: In this city. Second of all, I want to say as regards to rent control, that rent control as a policy does not increase the quantity nor the quality of housing. But that's because the function of rent control, quite clearly is not to do those things.
Speaker 4: The function of rent control is to keep people in their homes all the time. The time to increase the quantity and the quality of housing in Long Beach was about six years ago, but instead this city chose to pass the downtown plan and.
Speaker 7: Now that ship has sailed.
Speaker 4: And that conversation is over. If we're wondering why, that's why we're at an initiative.
Speaker 7: You'll notice that an.
Speaker 4: Initiative is not a conversation. There's no chance to amend an initiative or anything like that. Initiative either gets passed or it doesn't. It's really unfortunate. It's actually not as democratic as it could be. I think this is democracy and initiative is an unfortunate thing. That is a last resort. And we need to ask ourselves why it is in the cities that renters are at their last resort and that is rent control. It's not a perfect policy, but it's the last resort. And I think we need to stop pushing renters into this corner because there's nowhere else for them to back out of and they're going to end up leaving the city.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hey.
Speaker 4: How are you? I'm Nancy Tyler. I am in the process of moving here from Santa monica, moving into Long Beach First District. And all I can do is tell you what I've seen in Santa monica since I've been there. I've seen day after day living proof that rent control is not helping the people who actually need help. Santa monica has an enormous homeless population there, and it continues to grow. It is out of control. Despite decades of rent control, few units are available and when a rent controlled unit becomes available, the only people who get them are the people who show up at the property management office with a pile of cash, a 700 plus credit score. In other words, exactly the people who have no need for rent control. The building I live in is rent controlled and the garage every day I would see Mercedes, Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, all these people who do not need help. There is a person in there. No kidding, who is driving around in a mercedes E-Class convertible and rents out some of her rooms to sub tenants for market rent making money off of this place. It is maddening. There are more and more things like this, I could begin to tell you, but there are things that we can do that will actually fix the problem and provide housing. As a human right, we can provide subsidy programs like Section eight. We can fund affordable housing so that we can choose who actually gets the affordable housing here, not just the Mercedes driver I mentioned. My wife and her family moved to America from Vietnam when she was ten, after her father did seven years in a North Vietnamese P.O.W. camp, earning citizenship for him for for him and his family . They lived in subsidized housing in San Jose, and I lived there with them for a time. It is safe. It gives the residents the dignity they deserve and these programs can actually solve the problem.
Speaker 3: We are all to salt. Thank you for your testimony. Your next bigger piece.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and city council and Long Beach residents. Thank you for your time tonight. There's no doubt that most people in this room already know which side of this issue they support. We have heard many opinions on rent control tonight, and with all respect to both sides and everyone in the room. Most of them are irrelevant to the agenda item being discussed tonight, which is only to vote on these questions. I that's my place here. I stand here to remind everyone in this room that the proposed ordinance will affect every resident in Long Beach, whether you rent or own. There are a lot of unanswered questions, including the seven pages in the agenda item. In order for all of us to make our own educated decision, we need more impartial data about the proposed ordinance. Agenda Item 15 will provide this impartial data by answering the submitted questions with all with answers for all to review. And as stated in the agenda, there is no negative, no known negative. Fiscal Impact Impact Agenda item number 15 needs to be passed for the sake of all of us, not just one side. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Hi. My name is Sherrie Posey. I moved to Long Beach in 1994 from New York City, where I was under rent control.
Speaker 6: And I was an.
Speaker 9: Illegal roommate for the person who was had lived there for like 25 years. I was paying triple her rent.
Speaker 6: So it happens.
Speaker 9: And yes, there are laws, but.
Speaker 6: That's what happens. When I moved to Long.
Speaker 9: Beach, I rented for about five years. My husband and I bought our first house.
Speaker 1: In the fourth district.
Speaker 9: Which we still own.
Speaker 6: But it's a rental.
Speaker 1: Then we.
Speaker 9: Bought another house.
Speaker 6: Or another property, a little.
Speaker 1: Condo in the second district, which we still own.
Speaker 6: But it's a rental. And then we bought.
Speaker 1: Two small one bedroom condos in the seventh.
Speaker 9: District. All of our rents are from.
Speaker 1: 1125 and the house is 1400. We're not getting super rich.
Speaker 9: Off of these rents. We are hoping that.
Speaker 1: You know, the properties have increased in value.
Speaker 0: They're our entire retirement fund.
Speaker 9: We work for ourselves and we don't have pensions. This impacts us.
Speaker 1: I live in the fifth District. And I intend to live in Long Beach. Well, forever. But these kinds of measures that, I mean, from my standpoint, seem to be one sided.
Speaker 9: Maybe not well thought out. Need to be really looked at. I'm glad you're looking at them, but the.
Speaker 1: Initiative as it's proposed doesn't make sense to me as a small property owner.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your time. Speaker, please.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 0: I'm going to translate.
Speaker 13: It will be less back on Tara's better. Mary Costello. Ms.. Roberto Garcia came as possible. Okaloosa pharmacy executive, who was mired in inequity, will go to a sukanya tota and wear the Casillas. And. And. I've yet to hear de la Paz someone move to take on ceramics. But. How am I interpreting little Tommy Christy? I know feeling will make me that bother trying time. But we are lucky in unwavering time where we turn kill. Which I hate to say it. Our thought here, Luciano, when this demented commode spun, represent the annual puzzle you were catching on, would you put your own album? Comandante the Vancouver Judicial, possibly reform. But when I was in Asia. You will not see in my Kuryakin where we are. Not yet. But it is crucial in keeping less content. They must instantly retrace Quatermass. This one was a psychotic anomaly.
Speaker 0: My name is Victor Chacon.
Speaker 5: I think.
Speaker 1: I live in a 939.
Speaker 0: Pacific Avenue. I've lived there for 30 years.
Speaker 13: Diego Gentile, you?
Speaker 1: I have.
Speaker 0: Eight. I'm 81 years old.
Speaker 13: Can it be? No. They don't want an audition. We fatica you, Golan. Now you come alone, as it were. Me.
Speaker 0: So the manager came up to us and gave us a notice of eviction. Like very aggressive, arrogant manner.
Speaker 13: From.
Speaker 4: Appropriate.
Speaker 0: Beachfront management properties. That's what she would explain.
Speaker 13: Okay, you're not dating women since his email podcast has yet to meet a new reporting venue, a laundry room. And we're reporting it by value. And our client. Don't know why Janice is our client.
Speaker 1: And seven months.
Speaker 0: They haven't fixed the laundry room.
Speaker 13: Or the laundry room.
Speaker 1: A lot of complaints about.
Speaker 0: Repairs in the building have not have yet to be met.
Speaker 13: 37 minutes to talk with you.
Speaker 0: For seven months that we've been asking for these repairs, she's still yet to repair them under development.
Speaker 13: Wow. Wow.
Speaker 4: Wow. Well.
Speaker 0: Basically, he's been humiliated and demeaned by his own property manager.
Speaker 13: Well. Well.
Speaker 5: Mm hmm. Because I would.
Speaker 13: Like to see young people in equipment safe way, condo, yeoman dandy, etc.. Break it down. Okay.
Speaker 0: He has the paper with him if you all want to read it.
Speaker 13: Yeah. Goaltending.
Speaker 0: And it wasn't just him. It was also his neighbors.
Speaker 13: So they go for break at the end of an audition for termination.
Speaker 0: An eviction notice for 30 days. He and his wife are both disabled.
Speaker 13: Intolerance. He will find it. They need the dancer sent.
Speaker 5: To.
Speaker 13: Them.
Speaker 3: Thank you. If you could just summarize the final one.
Speaker 13: Mean my English debut. You go my paper to is why wag when they say not playing with me? Can we rely on papel determination? Thank you, Tango. Gentlemen, you trained Daniel BBN to throw a hand on estimating he commits to papel aubergines told me to read the book. You're laboring on Delta. She wrote the mutual special. Thank you.
Speaker 3: I understand there's a language barrier, but I would like for you to interpret the importance of summarizes remark. I don't want to cut him off in the middle of it.
Speaker 13: You only see it. The contents are you because you were meant to communicate mostly. Okay.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you for your time.
Speaker 13: You know what? You know.
Speaker 4: If you go to the also some more. I'm with.
Speaker 13: Osama.
Speaker 1: You're with us. Well, there was a lot. And this was all, like, intoxicated.
Speaker 9: Me me of using it.
Speaker 1: Gracias.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 0: It's my turn now, and I ask that you give me time to, because I'm going to translate for my for myself.
Speaker 3: If you have the ability speak English, then then it's 90 seconds. The the double time is for you.
Speaker 1: To provide it.
Speaker 0: Like translators for us to.
Speaker 1: And the audience member should have.
Speaker 0: Had translator translator headphones as well. So, I.
Speaker 3: Mean. Thank you. Simultaneous interpretation is why we give double time so two people can speak.
Speaker 0: I will meows. I keep going. You'll get going. Your ego goes to understand damilola him.
Speaker 1: But God, Eunice. God, I am angry.
Speaker 0: That you.
Speaker 1: Guys haven't been providing people with translators. People here have have a necessity to.
Speaker 0: To tell you guys what they are going through. Looking back at the analysis theories. They look a little pasando. Ozark or lemming would like. Jesus. I got a lot to say, but men like y'all want to put me down to one minute. All right. So I am a student at Long Beach. And I told you guys this last week as a student of this issue, albeit with each of us, when I say Mana, when you guys wanted to put this as a receive and file cannot get in as it is more they. You look up at a bonus expressed by Bloodsworth and I told y'all that I was I used to be homeless. I told you all that I was struggling to pay rent. Conor Lesniak, your skill at a homeless and untamable miracle investor tratando baby renter. And yet I still have to pay. Figure out how to pay with three other roommates. One quarter. They lost the little commas. And I still have to tell them how I'm struggling to pay for a two.
Speaker 1: Bedroom and basically an.
Speaker 0: And as I said, to keep us in rent control. I need you to pass rent control. Fuck.
Speaker 3: Like speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Yeah. My name is George Cornelius and I was born and raised in Long Beach.
Speaker 7: I lived in the fifth District for 42 years.
Speaker 4: And I just want to tell you, actually, 40 years, we all have personal stories. And I can tell you why some of the personal stories that affected me in.
Speaker 7: Regards to housing. One of them included my mother, who was a diagnosed schizophrenic. She had an autistic child that she could never accept. My parents separated because of it. I had to leave our house eventually because my mother got followed home at three in the morning when I was young and I had to pull a gun out to get the man leave, to leave her alone. My point is, we all have to make hard choices in life. My sister recently resided at Fairview State Mental Hospital and it's being closed and I had to move her and it was difficult. So I'm a property owner in Long Beach. I still love the city. And I relate to these people's problems. But by the same time, we have an issue to address. Sometimes good intentions go awry and they create the most unintended consequences. And it's your job as council members to make sure that doesn't happen.
Speaker 4: We can tell you emotional stories. But emotional stories don't solve the crisis. What solve the crisis.
Speaker 7: Is bringing more housing to Long Beach. That's what solves the crisis and the market can do that.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony and that speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Questions for a review regarding rent control, rent board and eviction limitations. Number one work economic class is served to be disenfranchized if such rent control is not is negated. Is the economic class of owners larger or smaller than the ruling majority? What percentage of landlords in Long Beach refuses to honor Section eight with the Long Beach Housing Authority in place? Why are we yet addressing this? Then you address this year after year. This isn't new. How many developers and building are building affordable housing that is based on the lowest adult living wage earner in Long Beach? Is there an understanding between the city and the possible landlords that renters are to be desired as a continued demographic? Those of you who are running for reelection, will this be addressed before your voting days in light of the fact that your constituents are being evicted tonight? How fast will this issue be resolved if you put a moratorium on evictions and increases until this review leads to a workable resolve? Do you personally know any landlords who do this without enforcement?
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hello. My name's Mark Pineda. I'm 16 years old and I'm quite new to this issue. But in the time allotted, I understand that I cannot explain to you all the dangers of rent control. But we did provide a bunch of questions for you two that I urge that you read, and I thank you for considering and reviewing this important issue. It's very important to me and my family. One thing I could say for certain is that what I've learned from history is that we don't learn from history. If you if you look at the cities and the countries that have been destroyed by this socialist like Bill, it destroys the economy. Why can't we learn from it? I'm.
Speaker 1: I'm no, I'm no expert.
Speaker 8: But trust me, I'm no fool. If you look at other countries, they failed.
Speaker 1: And to the lady who.
Speaker 8: Saying that it's wrong to earn profits, try living in a country, with all due respect, because I had no ill will towards her. All due respect, child, living in a country where your profits mean nothing to you. Our country is built on profits. That's why we have a beautiful city, a beautiful country.
Speaker 1: The people were saying, see, suppress the issue. Can you can make it? My parents, they.
Speaker 8: Were three jobs to pay their bills. Hey, it's America. We were built on profits were built on hard workers. And that's how we got to do it. I oppose rent control. Rent control. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your testimony next week, at least.
Speaker 1: They protest?
Speaker 3: Desdemona, let's let that situation calm down real quick so you get your free time just. Just a moment before you guys start. So you get the whole time. We're women. Respectfully, everyone, let's respect the speakers. We've gone through quite a few. We only have a few more. Let's go ahead and respect that. So let's not fight one another in the audience. Thank you. You have 3 minutes.
Speaker 1: But I know she is honorably, like a little better. Garcia less than Milwaukee. A story. I woke up with a sack of money there.
Speaker 6: Good evening, mayors, honorable council members and mayor. Once again, I'm here advocating for my community.
Speaker 1: To work within a circle, not to look and say Hi, Lace. I say I knew maybe you meaning a key one, though not as I look at what I work on. Eddie Fisher. They're going to need our this continues con discapacidad is in all its important this aloha. I'll say I knew maybe you.
Speaker 6: A year and a year and a half ago, I came down here letting you all know that my building of 20 units was bought and I was being evicted. And you did nothing.
Speaker 1: Finalement. Yeah, but when I say my ninth, is it get the Newcastle Mail apartment and country album? No, no, no. Since we can get rhythm in in Barcelona so we don't go let us.
Speaker 6: I wanna be. One week before my eviction was up, I found a place. This place has increased my rent numerous times.
Speaker 1: In the city.
Speaker 6: And in the in the past month they increased it to $200 more.
Speaker 1: Equal to Yosemite a year. Not heavy. I don't care Jacobo if he is going nowhere. They do not know North Cardinal Edificio yet. They run by nice Aloha Bank, the familiar mass.
Speaker 6: Once again, my ironically, my building just got sold yesterday. We got the news that our building got sold another 20 units. They don't want us in there. And so I'm going to be evicted again.
Speaker 1: Eastern time what need tell us what needs to expand country on El Centro. Tampa CEO says get your ass on your entire body but I want all incredibly mental lost lost precious. The noise about our records.
Speaker 6: The units they're building in central and downtown Long Beach are beautiful. I would love my dream is to live in one of those, but honestly, I've been looking at the prices and I can't afford any of them.
Speaker 1: You know. So based in the areas established by Orlando milking in those means they see and those Polaroid cameras see in Miami I rather morbid I want Eddie Fisher in Ocean Boulevard. For those lowlifes getting sick and also looking at those barriers is ten mascaras Kayla Ocean Boulevard.
Speaker 6: Not again in neighborhoods there. There is 1500 to 1600 studios in two bedrooms. One of my friends just moved in to a two bedroom for $2,000 on Ocean Boulevard.
Speaker 1: And Seascape, considering in three months had a yellow rating. Anarchy. And if they didn't permission, I say. SAROYAN Considering, you know, they were equals of. Swamp Kraken, the Genesee Ghetto, even Long Beach yesterday in the end of February. That gave me a talking head photos. If I look at those either plus are those your second noisiest areas is are they buy faster. Say it's not always the. So think about.
Speaker 6: It when.
Speaker 1: Corporate.
Speaker 6: Landlords come in it's not they're not building affordable housing. It's not for us. It's not for the people who live here. And it's for people who are out of Long Beach. And I know it's not for you. It's it's. This problem has existed since Foster's time here.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Yes, I really do. Look, I will stay there.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: And that is your gift.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening or good morning. I'm not sure what time it is. My name is Tiffany Davy and I reside in the second district. Thanks everyone for speaking.
Speaker 8: I would like to highlight that we do need to collect thorough data.
Speaker 1: Independent data, perhaps.
Speaker 8: Give us some insight to what the rental market has really been like over the past four years. Who's most affected? Which renters, which landlords. And if we could quantify how many 60 day notices have been distributed since the rent control initiative has been put.
Speaker 1: Into the public sphere numbers?
Speaker 8: I've lived here in the city for 14 years, in this state for 32 within the past 14 years. I think the total and I'm forgetting a few different situations here, the amount of money that I've spent for rent, if I average it to be 600 to 1200, which it has been, equates to just under $252,000. My last household, which I resided in for quite some time, we paid upwards of.
Speaker 1: $90,000 the entire time that we are there.
Speaker 8: Members are important and I hope that we focus on the correct ones and we allow democracy to take place. Thank you, everyone, for doing what you are.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And our final speaker, please. And thank you for being patient.
Speaker 1: Good evening.
Speaker 6: Honorable mayor and council members. My name is Maria. I am the proud daughter.
Speaker 1: Of a hard working.
Speaker 6: Migrant single mother in the First District. I am a new renter in the seventh District.
Speaker 1: And I'm the director of Community Organizing for Housing Long Beach. The tenant landlord struggle.
Speaker 6: Is more than just an issue of good versus evil. It is a question of whether you. It is not a question of whether you have a good landlord.
Speaker 1: Or a bad.
Speaker 6: Landlord.
Speaker 1: The struggle is based on two different competing interests that have nothing to do with personalities of the landlord or the tenant. The landlord is seeking to make a profit of the apartment while the tenant is seeking to make the apartment, his or him or her or their home. A landlord sees the apartment as a commodity. A tenant sees his or her home as community. A commodity versus community. Conflict is basically at the root of every landlord and tenant dispute. It is clear.
Speaker 6: That Long Beach has a housing.
Speaker 1: Issue. Right. And it's been said.
Speaker 6: Clearly that you.
Speaker 1: All are opposed to rent control. So I am as baffled.
Speaker 6: And confused as to how you I can.
Speaker 1: Trust you to make an unbiased decision when it's been said that you are opposed to rent control. And I want to close off with saying you need to support rent control because when tenants rise, cities thrive.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So that concludes public comment. So now we're going to take it back behind the rail. So the second are the motions, Councilman Andrews. But I think you just mentioned you want to defer. Okay. So next is Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: So in light of the great public comment we heard here this evening on all sides, I'm going to be brief. I just want to appreciate my colleagues for bringing this item forward. I think the questions are in the in the document are important. And it would be good to have our staff work on that so that we have good information, that we all have good information moving forward. I want to appreciate the organizers on both sides, all sides of this issue for organizing. Thank you. Yes, you guys did a great job. Turn it out this evening. And, you know, we've been been having long city council meetings for for some time now. The I want to just say that that I think this issue is an issue that, you know, we've been grappling with for for some time, too. And for my colleagues here, I know that each and every one of us, I can speak for myself, but I know that everybody behind this dais cares about this issue deeply. This is something that each and every one of us spends a lot of time putting, a lot of thought into a lot of research into and and we're looking for answers every day. This is not something that popped up yesterday. This is something that we've been dealing with for four years. And we've also have taken deliberate steps to to address our housing issues through because of the issues that you've brought before us. You know, it's our job to take care and to make a difference. This is I want to be clear. This is not a black and white issue. This is not an easy issue or eternal. There's no panacea to fixing a housing crisis. Right. This is not a Latino issue. This is. This issue engages and involves seniors and people from all backgrounds in our city. And and I think every district is impact impacted on this. I've done a lot of research and I've been looking at the 15 cities in California that actually do have rent control. And I'm not convinced that it's a panacea for for for for our housing crisis. I do think and I have been very deliberate, we need to build more housing in the city that we passed the land use element and went through that process. And it was a it was a painstaking process to go through. But we are laying out and putting the foundation together for to improve this situation. Now, I think the challenge before this council really is going to be is how do we fast track? You know, because I don't think we can we can wait three, four, five, six years for housing to be developed. We need to make it happen now. And and I will say that, you know, San Francisco I was talking to an elected official in San Francisco just last week. He was talking about the rent control, but was also talking about the the fact that the average rent for for a two bedroom apartment is somewhere close to four, $5,000 a month. I don't know if that's that's what he said. Right. That's that's that's serious. Santa monica. It's it's the rents are very, very high there. Beverly Hills, Berkeley, West Hollywood, San Jose. These are all cities that that have rent control. Right. And and when you look at the average rents in Long Beach, we are well below those cities. And I'm not saying that that is a good that is a fact. And that's something that we all need to take into consideration. I'm not saying what we need to do in the city also is is focus on creating great jobs because that's going to bring the incomes up and that's going to be prudent. That's going to put people in a in a better position to be able to afford quality housing. And I speak to quality housing because that is where this I think the issue started a few years ago. You know, we we had our housing advocates come before the council and say, hey, that the the quality housing the quality of our housing isn't where it needs to be. We know we have old housing stock, but but we heard stories and we're still hearing stories about subsub, you know, horrible living conditions that people have to live through. We sought to improve that by bringing forth a prep policy. We we we raised the minimum wage in the city. We've made deliberate efforts to address these issues, and we're going to continue to do that. So I want to again thank my colleagues for bringing forth this, this, this. This item. I want to thank everybody for having, I think, a heartfelt conversation about this. I think this conversation is going to continue over the course of the next several months, and it's going to be a citywide conversation that needs to be had. I'm going to tell you right now that I'm not I'm not sit in on any sort of policy. Yes, no or indifferent. I'm waiting for a lot of this information to come back. But again, I do not think that there is a silver bullet or a or one single solution to this issue. It's going to take a full court press and it's going to take a multi-prong strategy to deal with housing. And that's the way we have to do it and do it responsibly. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I, too, want to thank everyone who came out tonight and who spoke and gave testimony on both sides. I think sometimes when people feel passionately about one side or the other, the conversation can get unnecessarily divisive. And it takes a while for us to get to some solutions. And hopefully this is part of the start of that process. And we can get to a place where we have some solutions. But, you know, I think I kept reading the item over and over again because as people were talking at the podium, it wasn't clear to me that everybody understood why we were here. It's not really council's position to be objective on this particular issue. Certainly we want to learn and we want to hear. We want to continue to get more information. But we're talking about a voter initiative. We're not talking about where the council members stand. So, you know, a few people said, you know, you're not objective. I I've done a lot of research on this issue already. I think I have a pretty good understanding of it. I think I have a very strong standing of where I'm at. I don't believe rent control will be beneficial for the city of Long Beach. That's my personal opinion. And but I'm one voter. I'm one voter. And I think that having an opportunity like we have tonight and I appreciate the housing advocates who came forward and thanked council and super non those of us who signed on for bringing the item. I thank you for thanking him because in fact that is going to provide us some additional information with which we'll be able to further elaborate on our thoughts or opinions or maybe have our opinions, our minds changed. I don't know. What I will tell you is for me personally and each of us takes a different journey in determining where our policy positions are going to stand. For me, I've read just about every single study that anyone here has sent me. I've reviewed analysis of what has happened in other cities that have passed rent control. I've reviewed economists, progressive economists, conservative economists, their analysis of rent control based on all of that. I'm going to formulate my own opinion about the voter backed initiative, should it get to that point. This is not an issue where we're asking council to be objective so that they can vote on an item. We're talking about getting more information as we start to educate and have those conversations with the voters. So I think I've been pretty. I've met with anyone who's requested to meet with me on this topic, anyone, and always happy to be educated. But I'm also not going to talk out of both sides of my mouth because I don't think anybody deserves that. I think it's important for you to get a sense of where your representatives stand on this issue. We've certainly had time to educate ourselves. And, you know, I thank everyone for coming out. I agree with Councilman Austin. We have done a lot in the city to talk about the issue of housing. Housing is definitely an issue that is a priority for this council. And if you don't believe it's a priority to this council, then you may not have been watching what we've been working on for the last three and a half years and creating opportunities for housing stock and the third district alone. We've had specific plans that have been approved and now we had a general plan that was approved. And we've created over 2000 units of additional housing over the course of the next 30 years. That is that is progress. And so I think the other thing, as you know, we've talked about some policies that I think are going to be detrimental, frankly, to housing needs like short term rentals. I think I personally believe that that is going to take away long term housing units from individuals and how we're having that conversation at the same time that we're having this conversation. It baffles me, frankly, because I don't know how we can say we want to add more housing for people who are displaced and then say we want to vacate these properties so we can make an income off of taxing it. I don't understand that. So that's just my personal opinion. And I would I would I would ask the housing advocates to be engaged in that conversation to meet with my office. Let's. Talk about that because that's an area where we have tons and tons of apartments that would be much more lucrative to be rented out as Airbnbs than they would as permanent housing for families that need it. So that's where my head's at on this issue. But I thank everyone for coming forward and sharing your thoughts with us and I think my colleague councilman super now for bringing this forward.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 11: And yet yet. Yes, thank you very much, Mayor. You know, Jeanette, I want to acknowledge everyone who came out to speak on this item, because I want to thank you for sharing your concerns, because the fact that tonight's vote is requested for an expert, you know, opinion about looking forward to receiving details, reports on an application this ballot initiative will have on our city. And I think what will it have in our city? We talk about a ballot that you're going to go to the polls, try to find out where we will stand. And what is really bothered me today is that I look and find out that we don't even have enough votes on the ballot to even be able to get this passed. So what are we talking about when you talk about rent control, where the people that are supposed to be there to go and get these people to be on put on the ballot in order to get this done. I don't think rent control is going to be the key to finding out whether people will be able to stay in Long Beach. I think we're going to have to be able to get jobs. Will it be able to pierce enough money to be able to stay in Long Beach? And without building not low income housing we're talking about, you say low income, we're going to have to just start building because without that, we're going to have it won't even be about rent control, which is that more, you know, homeless people. So what we're going to have to do is really get serious about putting some houses out here where people can live in Long Beach and having jobs where they can't afford to live in Long Beach. And I think tonight is one of the greatest thing to show people coming out and giving their concerns and how compassion you are about this, because I'm a renter myself, but I tell you, I'm going to work and I'm going to make sure that we're going to have to be able to pay my rent. And most of you guys will be able to do the same thing when I look in for a pity party. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember Durango.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. As I understand it, this request is basically a study session. It's it's a study session that's going to come either before us now or come later. So I'm basically going to support this initiative now because the sooner we have our questions answered about what we're going to be dealing with, the better for it is for all of us. So I will be supporting this.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: Yes. Thanks to everybody for being here. I know we're all very tired. I'm sick probably because we've been averaging about a midnight plus, you know, time here. But these issues are very, very important to us. And so I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. I think that it is true that every time we can collect more information, it serves us all a better purpose. So I really appreciate it. And in addition to this, I know we have to listen to different perspectives and we have to make sure that we know what to expect because something is on the horizon and we don't know what that's going to be. Signature gathering may happen and we may get to that point and we don't know what the voters will will do in November. But we do know that right now, I know many of my residents are being served 60 day notices. They are being displaced. I myself, we're setting up a meeting with beach front, but that's just one out of probably a dozen property managers that I've met with that we will continue to work with, you know, seniors at Plymouth West, people at ninth and Pacific and 10th and Cedar. We're intervening as a city council office. I'm actually writing a letter of support to urge them to offer an extension in some cases, because we know people in 60 days, that's not going to really give you a lot of time, unfortunately, to come up with another security deposit and really get yourself into another place. And so I just want to let everybody know that we support you there and we'll absolutely do what we can there. In addition to that, we know that some of the conditions that people are living in, although it's not described here and this is off topic, but very relevant to the conversation is, you know, they're living in below quality of life issues but below quality of life. And it doesn't speak to all landlords, but it definitely speaks to the very small percent of landlords that we know can do a lot better. And we need to be keeping more track of that. So what have we done here? I think our first year in office, many of us actually got together and we did a 120 day violators list and that is posted on Development Services website. And I'm actually working to make that more transparent so people know which landlords are not playing by the rules when it comes to quality of life issues, serious quality of life issues. In addition to that, we work to, you know, just to make sure that people have, for instance, seniors that have low income housing currently, that they can stay in that sort of model of low income housing. We actually put together a report that asks for options and what we can do to keep those covenants, because we know a lot of those remain in downtown and what can we do after that? But aside from that, I just want to continue with this step because it's very important. You know, downtown gets picked on a lot. And I get that, you know, there's a lot of development going on in downtown, but we're home to over 1700 affordable housing units. Currently, we have 300 to 500 more coming online with very low income housing models. It's really it's something I'm very proud about. Do we need to create more? Absolutely, we do. But it needs to be an equitable distribution throughout the city. And I have been I've always said that and I will remain saying that that we need to advocate everywhere in the city, not just in downtown, all all parts, to ensure that people can live in Belmont Shore, just like they can live in downtown and still have lower rents in that respect. So I'm with you. I'm listening. And we'll certainly connect, you know, on on what we can do going forward. And I thank my colleagues again for bringing this forward.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 2: Yes. I want to thank everybody. It's great to be here at 1105 and have as many people are still present. So I want to thank my colleagues as well for bringing this item forward. I have had many conversations with.
Speaker 1: Both advocates on.
Speaker 2: Both sides around where do we have this conversation in our city and how do we do it in a way that reaches as many constituents as possible? I have long said that I support some type of management process, something that allows us to get a handle on the rents in our city and understand what those impacts are going to be. And I have also said that I have a little bit of some challenges with what is directly in front of us. And having an everything at one time is a bit of a challenge for me. So I am thankful to have this item here and. To go through the process to answer these questions as at the same time that the community groups are out there advocating and trying to collect signatures, we need to make sure that we have the facts in front of us so that we can advocate on that.
Speaker 1: So I did have a question for our.
Speaker 2: City attorney just to clarify.
Speaker 1: What this item should.
Speaker 2: And I know there's a lot of questions that will come back. But for tonight, if if the advocates get the signatures and it gets on the ballot and people vote yes on it, is there anything that this council can do to make a change to that ordinance.
Speaker 1: Or does it have.
Speaker 2: To go back to the voters?
Speaker 7: Well, I think the short answer is they cannot it cannot be amended or changed. And I think a couple of the public speakers mentioned that by by the council, the council could put something on the ballot to repeal it or to change it. And the voters could vote on that. There could be an initiative that would be a competing initiative that could cancel that out if if in the process of answering all of these questions there or the court determines that maybe some of the provisions of the initiative as written are not constitutional or not valid, then it could be changed by the court. But the council could not do that.
Speaker 1: And those flowers look lovely in front of your face. Mr.. You kept bobbing around, though, a nice touch at.
Speaker 2: 11:00 at night. Okay. I just wanted to be clear that and we can also, as a council, if we get these answers back.
Speaker 1: The council could.
Speaker 2: Propose to put something on the ballot that might.
Speaker 1: Be different than what our.
Speaker 2: Voters have in front of them right now.
Speaker 7: It it may it depends. If it's a charter amendment, then maybe you could maybe you couldn't, depending on whether you meet the timeframes and the statutory requirements for the November ballot.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you for that. I again, just want to highlight that I didn't hear a lot of comments around the 60 day notice. I get that in my district a great deal and that beach front was one of those factors that seemed to come up a lot. And so I want to let my councilmember know that any help that my office can do to work with them to make sure that we're creating a safe place and a safe home for people. That's definitely the number one priority for me. In the second District in downtown, we've created 2000 new residential units developing right now. I do agree that we need to add to the housing stock. I also firmly believe that we need a no net loss policy so that any new developments that come.
Speaker 1: Up, we're not losing affordable units on the back end, and that there are several other policies that we should also be.
Speaker 2: Looking at.
Speaker 1: To see what is the.
Speaker 2: Best fit for our city. And so I.
Speaker 1: Do look forward to having these questions.
Speaker 2: Come back. I implore I know today was heated for a lot of folks, but that we don't see this as a black and white issue. I don't see this are when people ask me, are you for rent control, yes or no? That's not a question. That's easy to answer because this policy that's in front of us has a lot of detail to it. And so it's about finding the right fit for Long Beach. And that means that we need everybody to be at that table together.
Speaker 1: And so I look forward.
Speaker 2: To the responses coming out and I look forward to sitting down the table with all those stakeholders. So thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this conversation in front of the city council, this much debate with very little that we can actually vote on tonight. So so thank you for that experiment. I'll just say I'll just say so a few things. So, one, I acknowledge the concern on both sides. I am not deaf to it. I hear it. I see it here when I when I hear week after week, we hear people come down and say, hey, I got a 60 week, 60 day notice or my entire block , you know, my entire building has gotten a notice. I also hear it when I hear neighbors, my neighbors in North Long Beach, salt of the earth people, working people that work jobs, regular jobs, who have, you know, for one reason or another, maybe one person owned something and another person on to something else, and they got married and they end up having a rental property. Right. And they made smart choices and they're afraid of us intervening and jumping in those processes. And, you know, frankly, that that's actually something I do encourage homeownership and figuring out a path to build wealth because we have to figure that out. But I'm not ignoring what's happening. I see that one thing I want know is that the housing crisis is real. The housing crisis is real. And I want anybody see that movie, Butterfly Effect, Butterfly Effect, a guy makes a decision, goes back in time, tries to fix decision, it gets worse, goes back in time again. Try to fix the decision. It gets worse. And I keep and someone came up and talked about the downtown plan. And I remember that conversation because I remember that conversation because I was chief of. Staff to a councilmember here in the ninth District when that conversation did come up. And I know folks don't like revisiting history, but there was a big debate here. And he said investment and development will beget displacement. And someone said if it is good for one area, that should be good for the entire city. These antibodies placement loss. And you know, I can't speak for the past council, but I can tell you that the anti displacement laws haven't haven't kicked in. And so while yes. I don't know that I'm you know, I don't know that I'm ready to support rent control outright. What I can say is I acknowledge that we need to do something on displacement. We need to address something else significant that happened. Redevelopment, you know, is gone. That was our chief tool to fund housing. It's gone. We have to replace it. It's very difficult to build affordable housing without a local source of revenue. So we have to talk about what tough decision is going to make to actually fund housing. I think we need to have a lot more education around this issue. You know, I'm going to support this motion tonight, but by no means do I expect these questions are really unfair and biased. Unbiased. I think they're need. I would encourage staff to not just be limited by these questions, but do the diligence and try to present a fair and balanced assessment assessment on it. And then the other thing I would say is that someone mentioned that it might be too late to do something about any any specific plans that we've done. I don't know that that's true. I don't know that that's true. I think the city is embracing specific plans. We've seen downtown plan, we've seen midtown plan. We've seen see it. We're doing uptown plan. And I think we should look at whether going, going, looking. We look at going back and doing some analysis on whether we really did think about attaching sort of anti displacement laws to specific plans if those specific plans do trigger additional investment. I don't I think it was very controversial five years ago. I don't know that it would be as controversial this time. I think in this environment, some people are going to you know, some people are going to say whatever you whatever you suggest is going to be wrong. But the reality we have to put all the options on the table here. You can't be in a deficient defensive crouch and say the issue isn't here. I don't want rent control. I don't want just for just calls for eviction. But on the other hand, not not really for do something, you know, in a timely manner. And so I acknowledge the work that the city council has done. I acknowledge the leadership people have shown. But in reality, we we haven't produced anything tangible just yet. And that needs to happen. That needs to happen. Or I'm afraid that even if this measure doesn't doesn't qualify for the ballot, who's to say that in two years there won't be another measure that would qualify or qualify for the ballot? And then our hands are tied to the city council. We need to do our jobs and create public policy faster than we're doing it then we're doing because this issue isn't going to go away. So my thoughts are, so I'm going to vote to support this because I believe education is needed, but I do hope that we get some sort of fair and balanced assessment of this. And I thank you for your time.
Speaker 4: Thank you so much. Open up. Thank you. I just have one final comment before we go to the mayor in his final comment, but I just wanted to thank everyone for speaking tonight and in particular, thank you for adapting to the 92nd rule. I think it was a great experiment and it worked very well. And there are far more people in the audience than there were the last two meetings. And the body language is a lot better. So thank you. Oh, yeah, yeah. If there's no council objection in the future, we're going to I'm going to call that the supernatural and we're going to we're going to do that. Okay. I have a couple a couple closing comments. And I obviously, I support the the the item and thank you, councilman. Super on Shirley support getting all the information from the city attorney on the analysis and everyone on on all sides of the issue that came forward tonight. And I want to echo a couple of things that were said. The first is that the issue around housing and homelessness is is the issue of our time for the next ten, 20 years. There is no question that the issue around housing, the issue around homelessness is at the top of every single city's agenda, whether it's Long Beach, whether it's San Francisco, whether it's Santa monica. With all the other cities that were mentioned tonight, it's the number one issue. What is also true is that people have a variety, different of different opinions of how to get to what I believe most people believe is the same goal, which is ensure that there's enough housing for people making sure that it's people can afford to have housing and that we're passing good, smart policies that allow people to live productive lives. Nobody I don't believe anyone, whether you are a landlord and certainly not an advocate for housing, wants to see people suffer or displaced. And I think there are. A lot of sometimes I think accusations and insults are thrown around. And I don't believe that there are people that that that enjoy seeing people displace or people suffering. And so I think that all of us want the best for everyone in the city. It's how you get there and what you believe is the best policy that takes us there. I think a couple of things are important. I have said, and I continue to believe with every ounce of research that I have done and absorbed, similar to what Councilwoman Pryce said, that the single best way of getting out of this crisis, not just in Long Beach, but statewide, is housing production. And and to ensure that there is to ensure that there is consistent, consistent forms of producing housing of all types, and, of course, particularly housing for those experiencing homelessness, for low income folks, for seniors in need, affordability, but also housing at the workforce level. And for middle class families. You have to build housing of all types that get us out of where we are right now, which is essentially a math problem where our population is grown, but housing production has not. And so that's why you're seeing the pressures that you're seeing across the state of California and in Long Beach as well. I want to also ask, and maybe it's an expansion of the questions or a friendly to the council member or to Mr. City attorney. I think there's also some misinformation about what actually exists in Long Beach currently. There's a lot of folks that say we want to have rent control or stabilization or we want this or that. Long Beach has about 6500 units that are rent stabilized. Rent stabilization exists in Long Beach. It has existed for probably 40 years in this community. So this idea that rent stabilization doesn't exist is not true. It exists. And I want to make sure we get that exact number maybe and staff can help us with this. Maybe it's 6200 units. Maybe it's 6500 units. But the fact is that these units exist in Long Beach and they're mostly in the city of Long Beach. They are for people that are experiencing the people that have disabilities. They're for low income seniors. They're for housing. Look the village is at Cabrillo that we support so much in our community out Carmelite cos there's a lot of housing in Long Beach that is already rent stabilized. It's also true that we have increased, not decreased the amount of rent stabilized units in Long Beach over the last few years. And so the way we have done that is through production. And so every time we build a project, Councilman Gonzales alluded to about 300 rent stabilized units that we currently are building right now in the first District. Every time we build a project like on Anaheim in PCH or senior or low income senior housing or expand like we just did 120 units in West Long Beach by the villages of Cabrillo. We are expanding that rent stabilized number from, you know, 6000 to 60 500 to 7000 and higher. And so what I hope is while there is disagreement whether rent control actually works or causes disinvestment in housing production, which I believe a lot of the research does, does lead us to, I hope we can I hope we can all agree that housing production and expanding rent stabilized units is beneficial to everyone in the city of Long Beach. And I and I would think that whether you're a property owner or whether you are an advocate or a tenant wants to see us, look at how do we increase the amount of rent stabilized units that we have for seniors, low income families and so forth. And I believe you do that by focusing strongly on production in addition to that. I want to just make sure and when we when we come back with this is the more information that we have on these units, these units that have existed for decades in Long Beach have covenants on them. And we've worked really hard this the city has invested millions and millions of dollars on keeping these units, had to have actual covenants. You may not hear about it or read about it in the paper, but time after time, meeting after meeting, this council is voting on putting resources into keeping these rent stabilized and affordable. And I want to make sure that we're also getting that information back to to the city council. And so the last thing I'll say is, I hope that over the course of the next few months, we obviously all have different opinion, different opinions on how to get to affordability. But I do hope that we can focus on the areas where we all agree. And I would hope that we can all agree that production supporting the rent stabilized units that we currently have are appropriate are appropriate ways of trying to deal with this, the statewide crisis. And so I want to thank everyone for for coming out. I know that we don't all agree completely on this issue. And that's and that's okay. But we'll continue to make this a big. An important part of our agenda and and say one thing I heard a few folks say, you know, we need to address this. We do more. I agree. We need to do more, but so does a state. We lost almost all of our affordable housing dollars through the loss of redevelopment, which Vice Mayor Richardson said, which is a total disgrace and our ability to actually build more housing. But I also believe that this council has done a lot of work on this issue, whether it's been through the land use element, whether it's been through the 26 policy ideas that this council passed last year on on housing production. So we'll continue to do that. I look forward to work with everyone that wants to be at the table. I plan on having a lot of conversations on this topic, as is every mayor in the state over the next six months, year, years, in the in the future on this topic. And I invite everyone to be at that table in the future. So with that, there's a motion in a second by Councilmember Super and I strongly support this item. Members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 5: Y'all November.
Speaker 4: Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you. And we will. We're going to go ahead and move on to item 12, please. Just the next item on the agenda. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager, or designee, and City Attorney, or designee, to review questions regarding a proposed Long Beach ordinance to enact rent control, a rent board and eviction limitations and report back to city council on April 17, 2018 with responses. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0271 | Speaker 3: Thank you. So next, we'll have item number 14, please.
Speaker 0: Item 14 is communication from Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman praise councilmember turanga and Vice Mayor Richardson recommendation to support the 35th annual Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride Festival and Parade by examining ways to reduce city and staff fees pertaining to the event.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Pierce I have a presentation for us, so I want to thank the.
Speaker 2: Gay and lesbian pride. Long Beach Gay and Lesbian Pride for being here tonight. I'm delirious. This is the third time we've been here this late. I want to thank you guys for your work and your supporters for being here. I do have a presentation I think they have ready in the back. And so I want to do the presentation first and then have you guys speak and we'll try to go through it. You know, not super duper fast, but fast enough to get us home before one. I know vice mayor is like, what?
Speaker 1: Okay, in the back. Could you guys play on the video? We got a little video to wake you guys up with.
Speaker 2: Hopefully it works. Let's try it again.
Speaker 1: No. We'll give you, like, one more. We go.
Speaker 5: There we go.
Speaker 2: So I believe this video was done.
Speaker 1: By I'm not sure who.
Speaker 5: It was done by, but.
Speaker 2: Enjoy.
Speaker 4: Both. David Memory is my first here living in Long Beach and going by the is the first time there has been a. Felt really comfortable just being in a city that.
Speaker 5: We loved and feeling like just having challenges, whatever I.
Speaker 4: Had nobody judges at all. My Oscar and my stage name is Mia Farrow, and I'm also the current 46th elected president of the International Import of Palm Beach launch party. Was the first time ever something like. Artist like in the first year that he represented.
Speaker 5: And I was a lot of.
Speaker 2: You guys have enough? Yeah. So if you could go back to the presentation, please.
Speaker 9: Yeah. There you go.
Speaker 2: Next slide. Okay. So this year is the 35th year that we have had Long Beach Pride, rock and roll in our streets and really bring a sense of celebration to the community. I know in the eighties and particularly in the eighties, our community was struggling and having a moment to celebrate and a weekend to really lift up . The fact that we're stronger together and to celebrate the diversity of our community has been fantastic asset to our city. In three decades. And over the last three decades, Pride has been a grant giving organization where they've used their funds to give over $1,000,000 to other nonprofits, whether it was to youth services, mental health services, transgender services . And so we are really thankful that in Long Beach we have such a robust giving organization that supports all aspects of the LGBT community. And one of the most exciting things is that we have an organization that really is not a district organization. It's not a second district, a first district. A third district is an organization that brings an event that is an a regional event. And with that regional event, we get $12.3 million annually to Long Beach's economy and 23.4 million to the regional economy. We also make sure.
Speaker 1: That we celebrate the corridors that.
Speaker 2: Embrace that community, and we have new residents that come as a response to it. Be culturally diverse. Diverse? Yeah, I'm tired, guys.
Speaker 1: See?
Speaker 2: Okay. So one of the challenges that our organization that we're very proud of is struggling with is over the last four years, the revenue has fallen. This is reason cited to this are performance cost changes to ABC regular regulations as a result of an expanded process that they've had in making sure that we.
Speaker 1: Are.
Speaker 2: ID'ing everybody at the right areas and that we're protecting our residents and following code as needed. We've had lower ticket sales and I want to be clear that these changes are not necessarily a direct result of the city increasing fees, but that the costs have become more because we've changed the way that we've operated, from what I understand. So my goal today was to ask my colleagues to support Pride as a.
Speaker 1: Regional.
Speaker 2: Asset to our city and to explore a couple of options.
Speaker 1: One thing I want to be clear is that Pride Parade.
Speaker 2: And festival is not a city sponsored event like MLK, like the Veterans Parade. And so we have not in the past reduced any cost for this organization. All those costs have been paid for by this organization's ticket sales and and garnering individual support.
Speaker 1: So what I'd like to.
Speaker 2: Ask for today is to make sure that they provide their plans for 2018, no later than April 1st to special events. And we're actually trying to get them a little bit earlier. I would like to ask that the organization work with special events and economic development, which they have not done in the past, to identify cost saving measures like parking plans, smaller footprint, maybe shorter days, advertising opportunities. And then the next 40 day.
Speaker 1: 45 days.
Speaker 2: Return to council. I know in the agenda item it says 30, but I've talked with special events and I know that it's a little bit challenging. So we'll try to get as close to the 30 days as possible, but give us a little bit of extra time on that.
Speaker 1: I also spoke with the city auditor previously today and spoke with her about wanting to.
Speaker 2: Support this organization, continuing to grow and to thrive. And I know that there's conversations out there around the audit that you guys have been trying to work with somebody. And so our city auditor would like to sit down with you and try to identify some best practices so that.
Speaker 1: We can come back and see how we as a city really support you. I know that in cities.
Speaker 2: Like West Hollywood and other great cities.
Speaker 1: Their charter allows them to support.
Speaker 2: The organization in a different way than we do in Long Beach. And so as city attorney, I.
Speaker 1: Did want to ask one question, because they're not a city sponsored event. Does the charter hold us.
Speaker 2: Back from removing costs like police and fire and issues like that?
Speaker 7: I don't believe it's the charter that holds you back. I believe it's the policies established by the city council.
Speaker 1: Okay, so I had some this.
Speaker 2: Information given to.
Speaker 1: Me. So if in the next. 30 to 45 days when we're working with special events. If we could identify.
Speaker 2: What opportunities the city has to help reduce some of those costs, at least for the next year. That would be my intent of this item. And so I want to thank my colleagues for signing on to this. I know that it's an organization that we get to see our senators, our assembly members, our Congress members in this parade. And it.
Speaker 1: Really is a great opportunity, especially when every year we have different hate.
Speaker 2: Crimes that happen in our community. And I find that this is the moment when we really get to rally around with all the events that come with pride. And so, again, I want to thank you all for doing your due diligence for coming to the city and asking for some partnership. And I know that my colleagues, I expect, would support this, and I want to hear from any public speakers. Sorry. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Oh. Are we going to public first? Okay. Public comment, please.
Speaker 1: Uh, your honorable vice mayor and city council members. My name is Denise Newman. I'm the president of Long Beach, Lesbian and Gay Pride. I've been a member there for five years and it has been a tumultuous five years, but it's been a rewarding five years. When I became a member, I stepped into an organization that was completely in flux. We sat in our first city meeting and for me it was absolutely horrible because I heard about an organization that was out of alignment with the city, ABC guidelines, etc. because our festival was primarily supported by volunteers. The volunteers didn't have a stake in whether or not they did things right or wrong. And as a result, it kind of tarnished the name of Long Beach Pride. So for whatever reason, I got dubbed that person to come and be a part of Long Beach Pride and fix it. So my nickname became Fix It. I am so proud today to stand before you and say that we have done what I said we were going to do. When I came and spoke to you about four years ago, we now have a very flourishing relationship with special events and filming. We have an excellent relationship with Long Beach Police Department. I too am tired and fire. We went from a meeting where people glared at you to a meeting where we can now hug. But the first time we held a meeting at Long Beach Pride versus the Convention Center or at special events and filming. And that's something I think that we should be proud of. Councilwoman Pierce, you actually made a number of my points in regards to how we can partner together. I think we have a unique opportunity in front of us, as this organization has had to move from pretty much a mom and pop type of thing. We've had to kind of grow up. And unfortunately and fortunately, the organization is made up of volunteers. Volunteers like me. I have a full time job 10 hours a day. I got to be up at 445 tomorrow morning. However, we are bound by the level of talent that's within the organization. So we had questions in regards to why do we use so many consultants? Well, the primary reason why we had to do that is because we didn't have the talent within the organization to do some of the duties that were required of us to do . We didn't have someone who could do festival setup. We didn't have someone who could do parade. Right now, we struggle with we're slow to get talent and even slower to do marketing in order to put that information out to the community.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much for your testimony.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I forgot I had.
Speaker 4: You got like an extra.
Speaker 3: Minutes, so you're good. Okay. Thank you for your time. Speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening.
Speaker 1: Honorable mayor, vice mayor and City Council. My name is Judy Horne and I'm a member of the board of directors of Long Beach Gay Pride. Thank you for allowing me to make. Not really a presentation, but an opportunity to address things in several areas. And not just the LGBTQ team, whatever population, but overall senior age groups. I've been connected to Long Beach gay pride since the late 1980s, and finally, six years ago I decided, well, I'll just join this organization and see what I can do within it. I've always been impressed with the outreach to all communities, but especially with the gay community population. I received my my first mailing from AARP. You know, when you turn 50, you get that. I thought that 23 years ago. Okay, 23 years ago, I got that. But I guess I want to bring out the fact that there are so many challenges that crop up as you age. Some of you may already know that. I don't know. Okay. But but I've also found that getting old is not not for sissies in any community. It takes guts. It takes determination to weather the storms as you would begin to age. I'm a good example of that. But Long Beach has always been the pride. It's always been a forerunner in community issues and help. And you saw some things on the video up there that explained that at Christmas time, we even have a toy giveaway in there and the community and those parents bring their kids because they know every year they can get a brand new toy, at least one brand new toy, and they come to Long Beach Pride to get it. There's just a small elementary school right behind us, and we have interacted with them and their principal and one time send them somewhere like to Knott's Berry Farm. So there's a lot of interaction there within the entire community. So but now going from the childhood years, this is my segway here from the childhood years that we help, we're going to go to the senior hood years. I made that word up the senior.
Speaker 7: Hood years.
Speaker 1: In 2018 at Pride. I'm especially excited about a whole brand new annual event beginning its maiden voyage at Pride 2018. It's called the Senior Fun Zone. The Senior Fun Zone. You know, a couple of years ago, I think that they had a place where they would play some oldies but goodies, music, and the seniors would sit around and listen a little bit. Well, that's not what this is. Key word is fun, and the key word is interactive because we're going to have bingo games, we're going to have karaoke, you know, all those people that can sing or think they can. Okay, we're having bingo games and karaoke and we games that be okay. Anyway, it.
Speaker 3: Really does sound like a lot.
Speaker 1: Of fun. It is.
Speaker 3: I do have to let you know that we were up on our.
Speaker 1: What? You all can come and join us if you're at least age 50.
Speaker 3: Saying 20 years. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 14: Good evening. My name is Paula Goldberg and I serve as the executive director for the LGBTQ center of Long Beach. The LGBTQ center of Long Beach strongly supports this agenda item for the City Council to explore ways to reduce city and staffing fees pertaining to the annual production of the Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride Festival on Parade. The center also strongly encourages the city of Long Beach to actively and consistently support this event on an annual basis by a sponsorship or significant reduction in fees associated with renting city property, street closures and staff expenses, as it has done in many major metropolitan cities in the United States. Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride is one of the oldest continuously operating LGBTQ organizations in the city and continues to serve as a vital institution responsible for the city's outward facing presence as it relates to demonstrating LGBTQ inclusion and integration within our city. As the city is aware, our Pride celebration also has a tremendous positive economic impact in the millions of dollars on an annual basis. Pride also serves as a vital charitable funder for hundreds of local nonprofits and individuals. Through their annual grants and scholarships program, many cities can currently provide fee reductions to their pride organizations, including the city of West Hollywood, which continues to lead the way in California as a model example for prioritizing LGBTQ equity through their many policy initiatives, work groups and public programs. The City of Long Beach has an increased. The opportunity to demonstrate leadership and make an impactful commitment to supporting our LGBTQ community by supporting Long Beach lesbian and gay pride again for these reasons and so many more. The LGBTQ center of Long Beach enthusiastically supports the current agenda item. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Thanks, Porter. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 15: Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor. City Council members, city attorney and city staff. My name is Leslie Smith, and I've been practicing law in this state for 27 years. I'm here today to express my opposition to Resolution 14, which seeks ways to reduce fees and the 2018 Pride Festival. I've been investigating the Pride Organization and its affiliates, and I have special knowledge about the pattern and practices of this organization's current regime. The investigative knowledge I've ascertained reveals the following. Sexual harassment settlements involving several sitting board members, including its current president, Denise Neumann. Fraudulent activities involving the operations at the Pride Office and the festival event. Misappropriation of charitable funds and gross mismanagement of the organization, including failing to perform background checks and live scan of its members and volunteers. Violations of codes of ethics and other statutes. Exposing the PRIDE Organization and any affiliates to extensive liability. Engaging in a pattern of collusion in awarding special favors and lucrative final financial contracts to the field. Representatives of high ranking public officials such as Tanya martin, the field representative for State, Senator Ricardo Lara. Ms.. Martin alone has received over $100,000 from Pride in the past few years. Additional lucrative contracts have been awarded to other friends of Pride's current administration, some of whom are unlicensed or unqualified to perform the task for which they were paid. It is further evident that this practice of collusion has extended to many local political clubs whose boards are staffed with yet more employees of current elected officials who have the political power and control to influence and manipulate nonprofit contracts. The city of Long Beach has been unfairly blamed for Pride's inability to provide community grants and scholarships. It's no coincidence that Pride's net revenue has fallen the same number of years. This current regime has been leading the organization. Sadly, the regime is led by a president who has a history of fraudulent and deceitful conduct, as demonstrated in these public records. You would be rewarding illegal, fraudulent and unethical behavior by giving any concessions to pride at this time. At a minimum, before giving any concessions, you should first demand an independent financial audit the removal of those board members who were the subject of sexual harassment.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your time and you're more than welcome to submit back their comments in writing.
Speaker 15: Scans. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Next to your police.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I am not speaking for the religious community in Long Beach. I am speaking as an individual pastor. Tonight. When I first heard that the city was allowing a. Rainbow flag to represent same sex relationships. I just pondered for a moment. And. There. I felt in myself. I felt God was saying it's being flown because now it is time for the religious community to openly address the issue. That is why the flag is being flown. So since the flight, I don't know if it's still up, but since it was flown when it was last when I was last here a couple of years ago, I thought, okay, I'm here tonight. And it's that issues on the agenda, so let's address it. I just.
Speaker 3: Be clear. The meeting's not about the flag. It's about the.
Speaker 1: I understand. Okay. I just used that as a pointer. You. You took some of my minutes. Can I have them back? Thank you. To first of all, the definition of gay dating back to Merriam Webster's dictionary and all the way back to 1948 means the state of being emotionally happy. It had no sexual connotation whatsoever. It means the state of being happy. Like I'm gay to be here tonight. I'm not gay that it is going on 1:00. But I'm gay to be here tonight. To know how someone pleasures their sexual partner is none of my concern. To have a flag flown in that regard. I could say let's fly a flag for all people who are menopausal. Let's have a menopausal flag. That we're having to have a discussion of that. I like people. God likes people. And I'm not going to think one way or the other. On gay porn, same sex pride day that okay, this is what we're doing. We're celebrating people who have same sex relationships. I rather believe it's frivolous. That the only celebration we need is that these people are breathing and that they're that they're human, as I that we're able to stand here. I celebrate that. I don't take anything away from a person because they have a same sex relationship. Nor am I granting anything because they have a same sex relationship. God's intent for men and women stands. That will not change because we have decided that we want to go one way or the other. God said, Let us make man in our image, male and female.
Speaker 3: Next picture, please.
Speaker 4: And good evening, Vice Mayor Richardson and city council members. Thank you so much. It's kind of late, but I'm here to just share with you just a personal story. I was an associate member of Long Beach Pride, and Long Beach Pride gave me the opportunity to be a part of the organization, especially somebody who was just coming back in reentry into society. So very, very grateful to this this organization. But I'm here in support. I'm here in support from project. All of a recipient of the Long Beach Pride Grant for the last three years. And in our inception in 2013, we were 12, formerly incarcerated, LGBTQIA, gender nonconforming, loving individuals who needed a safe space . And we were embraced by Long Beach Pride. And we were given the opportunity to build a movement, but more importantly, a loving space that has now flourished with a documentary that has gone to San Francisco, Boston, another one releasing this Friday at Long Beach City College. But it's that funding that gave us the courage to build our voices, but more importantly, to build community and to build love within our community. And this past year, although Long Beach Pride did not give any of the community organizations a grant, I was fortunate enough to be the recipient of the scholarship for the last two years , and it's because of Long Beach pride that I'm thriving. I will be graduating June 7th from Long Beach City College and I am going to be attending Cornell University in the fall. And when I was a homeless person who was formerly incarcerated and was stigmatized by many people in our community, even those within our LGBTQ community, my marginalized voice was embraced by Long Beach Pride, and I will continue to support this organization. And I feel that when we reciprocate this law of reciprocity, where we can take a look at some some of the loopholes in opportunities for us to give back to our community, because let me tell you, I know we all enjoy pride . We all have a great time at Pride. So whatever we can do to take a look at saving and reinvesting back into our grants and scholarships, I'm hoping we can build more courageous change agents that will step forward, come forth and build. City of Long Beach.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Final speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name's Tanya martin and I wish I had $200,000. Sorry. I came here tonight to thank the City Council and vice mayor for considering this item today. For those of you that don't know the history behind Pride. It's it's been a long battle. It's been a hard battle. And to be here with the organization today in front of you, it took a lot from us because of the fear and then in the things that we have been through since we've been a part of the organization. Me, myself, I met my first pride in 1992, straight from Alabama, and for the first time, I could hold the person I cared about. I could hold their hand. And I felt safe. I felt protected. And it gave me strength to do the same thing outside those festival walls and that protection so much that helped a lot of people. Today, all the pride's around the world to help us fight for equality and the right to marry. To marry, which I'm now married to a beautiful woman and we have four kids. So I just want to say thank you for this opportunity. Thank you. Special events and filming for working with us. And we hope that you will consider to vote. Yes. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. All right. To no further public comment. We'll take it back behind the rail.
Speaker 9: Councilmember Gonzalez Yeah, I, I really do love this item. I think it's definitely warranted that we look into options and supporting pride. You all have supported the community so much. It's not just pride that you're out. You're at Belmont Shore helping Belmont Shore as volunteers, you're helping MLK as volunteers, you're out in the community. So the reputation that I know of you has been such a stellar one. And so I just want to thank each and every one of you for your work. And it goes far beyond the weekend of pride, and we know that. But I will say to, you know, we have a I think what Councilmember Pearce brought forward was fantastic to look at a plan because we do need to look at, you know, what the city is going to look like. We treasure the pride. You know, we treasure the parade. We treasure the. A festival. This is something that makes our city so very unique, and we need to make sure that we support it as much as possible. So private funding. You know, having a large downtown parade or downtown festival, you know, how can we help you with with what we're doing and collaborating with special events and with some outside promoters to really assist everything that you're doing. So we'll continue the discussion. I thank you for bringing it forward and just know that I'm here to support you as well.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Brice.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I, too, want to thank you for being here tonight and the gentleman that spoke. Absolutely. I think every single one of us has a great time at Pride. It's a fantastic day. It's just there's no question about it. It's it's a really great event that we have in the city. And I'm I'm I'm proud to be a part of it. There are a few things that I do want to highlight, though, and I signed onto the item, so I support the item, but I think one of the speakers said this is a great opportunity because the event has changed. It's changed from where it started. The organization has gone through a lot of changes and there probably are a great deal of efficiencies that can be found if there is more direct partnership with the city. So I my my ask of the city would be if we're truly going to have a partnership that we sit down and we think about some efficiencies that can be had. Are we paying you know, are we are we paying too much? Are you paying too much for things that you could be saving money on? Are there vendors that you could be using that would ultimately result in your costs being less? So I really would hope that staff could come to the table and give us some honest feedback regarding some efficiencies so that we can move forward in that light. The city hosts and assists with so many special events and every single one of them is incredibly important and special to our city, not just for the communities that are bringing them forward, but for all the for all the diversity of our residents that we have. And I think we need to be mindful that when we do something special for one organization, we have to be willing, ethically and morally to do the same for everybody else. So what I don't want to do is enter into kind of a slippery slope where there's an expectation that year after year we're going to be subsidizing or helping or there's an expectation because I think what we could really do is maybe this is the year, what we get on track, figure out what the efficiencies are, and maybe change some things in the model that allows us to have better results in terms of our financial status after the parade. So that's what I'm really.
Speaker 9: Helpful for.
Speaker 6: And I think this is a great opportunity to do that. I also think that so there's so you know, I have two parades in my district and they don't receive any city subsidy. And I know it's always stressful for the organizers of that event. They have to run things so efficiently to make sure that they don't come out in the red. And so maybe even talking with other event program organizers to find out, you know, what is it that they do? How can we learn some of those backpack best practices? Now, you've probably already done that, but if not, that's something I would recommend because I know for them it's always to the penny what they've budgeted. So so I'm in favor of of using this year as a time to figure out what efficiencies can be made and seeing what we can do to help. I will say one thing, since I have you all here last year there were some amazing concerts that happened very late at night. In fact, they were so amazing that on the eastern most part of the city, our windows were rattling because the concert vibration was heard on the east side of Long Beach. It was. And I was communicating with special events. They were actually there trying to turn down the noise. I don't know what happened, but when I was getting bombarded, it was it was a Sunday night, so kids were trying to go to sleep. I kid you not. The windows in our house in Alamitos Heights were rattling. We were getting text messages from residents all over the city on the east side. It was on next door dot com. Everybody was saying, what is going on? We couldn't figure out. It sounded like the concert was at Rec Park, which was down the street from our house. So kudos to you for maximizing the volume of efficiencies. But please, please, if we're truly going to have a partnership, I think after such a beautiful weekend of pride activities, it was such a negative way to end that weekend. And so I asked you guys to please if we can be mindful of that partnership. But, you know, I love the event. My my staff and I participate. We have a fantastic time. Anything that we can do to help you guys keep this going, you've expanded it to a new level. Now you have a new norm. And that new norm is going to. Evolve a new model, a new business model. So I thank you for being here, for allowing me to say my piece. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Bianca.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. My first pride parade was back in 1990. I was the recruitment officer for the city of Long Beach at that time. And I asked the the organizers if I could have an information booth at the actual events park to try to recruit knowledge, recruiting police officers and firefighters at the time. And they were so welcoming. I did have some difficulty at that time to get some firefighters and police officers to join me, because at that time it wasn't an acceptable. Acceptable, except it's late, acceptable, acceptable, I think, to accept it or to come out at that time so that that didn't happen till later. But I see this parade and this event as one that is has been breaking barriers for for a long time. And it seems like every time that that comes forward, there's something new that's being presented or being and another barrier is coming down is being broken. So I'm I'm very supportive of this. And that's why I signed on to it, because I think it's it's an event that needs to be sustained, that we need to continue. And if the partnership with the city would make it all that much better. And and, you know, to a casual woman, prices are concerns. We probably do need to work together and and create those parameters that we can all work together within. So, I mean, I'm very supportive of this and I look forward to working further with gay pride.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 11: Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I'd really like to say more, but I didn't put this on the agenda for 12:00. So kudos to you guys. Good luck.
Speaker 3: And also in Austin, thank you.
Speaker 10: And I appreciate the item coming forward. You know, 35 years, something is working. The pride parade has grown every year and become more and more of a, I think, exciting event. I think because it is a volunteer organization, you're going to have some natural challenges with with that. And, you know, I'm glad that we're having this conversation because I think we can the city can the council offices can be of assistance to to making sure that there is a consistency. Right. When you have elected nonprofit boards. Information is lost. Often times the leadership changes and organizational changes. I know for a fact that some of the people who were very involved in planning this parade are no longer with us. And they were they were key key to key actors in the in the planning process, you know, over the years. And so I understand that hearing the the public comment understand that there are challenges within the organization. But I got to tell you, each and every year, it doesn't show, you know, and oftentimes, you know, those challenges are very, very painstaking when when you're actually planning an event. But from the outside looking in, if you're not involved in the nuts and bolts, I think most of us appreciate, you know, the experience that pride provides everybody year after year after year. And so to those involved in the Pride organization, I just would salute you for the the dedication that you have put forth, understanding that it is a volunteer organization. And, you know, nobody's or most of you aren't getting paid to do the work that you do. And I'm glad that Councilmember Pearce brought forth some some more recommendations that I can certainly support this evening. I will just to say that I think it's it's really good if our city auditor can get involved and provide some some guidance. I mean, many of our our departments are run a lot better because of her, her hard work and her eagle eye. And inside of our department, they can give you some best practices and practices and ideas on, you know, how to make the pride parade more efficient, but also ensure that I think the operations are more standardized and that hopefully, you know, we can we can celebrate, you know, 50 years in another 15 years. So with that, I'll be happy to support item Councilmember Silvano.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I'm just looking at an email I got from Danny at nine this morning, so thank.
Speaker 3: You for staying up late.
Speaker 4: But I was so impressed by it because she put seven letters into one email and I actually called her to compliment her on that. Our offices would run so much more efficiently if everyone did that instead of seven emails. This is a great system, so I have high hopes based on that efficiency. It's just how well you guys are doing in the future. And also, thank you for the video. It actually had a shot of the Pride headquarters building, which is in the fourth District. And Councilmember Andrews and I talk about this all the time. There's not too many shots of the fourth District or sixth District in citywide video. So thank you for that. And also, I know you reached out to our office recently and please continue to do that if we can help in any way.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. I'll just add my comments here. I know when it gets late, sometimes council members we turn into pumpkins or gremlins or whatever it is. But please don't count that against us. This is it's good. It's a good parade. We want to see it indoors. Got a great legacy in the city. So we want to want to do whatever we can to do that. And that also goes to the broader conversation around, you know, last year, the big issue was the Veterans Day parade and special events. We were able to figure out some ways to improve it and make it better. And so I see a good future there. And so if that's what this year is for the pride parade, then then I encourage a lot of cooperation to figure out how you can get to the next I mean, how many years? 35. So the next 35 years. We've already done public comment. We've heard from the council members, please cast your vote. And this this motion carries. Thank you. Okay, so these next few items, when we call it, I'm just going to look to the left and the right signal if you guys want to want to speak to it , because I'm just going to straight go straight to Stanford Court. So most of these these last ten. So I'm number 15 please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to support the 35th Annual Long Beach Lesbian & Gay Pride Festival and Parade by examining ways to reduce city and staffing fees pertaining to the event, and report back to City Council within 30 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0274 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Member 17 please.
Speaker 0: Item 17 is a report from Parks, Recreation and Marine recommendation to submit a grant application to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Land and Water Conservation Fund program for Davenport Park. Sports Field and Recreation in an amount not to exceed or up to 3.1 mil. I'm sorry. Three male. Just game.
Speaker 3: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded the signature USF support. Okay. Let's hear from staff.
Speaker 10: Just a brief staff report that this is a very exciting opportunity that I think we should just make sure we get on the record.
Speaker 4: So interim director Steve Scott and Meredith Reynolds, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council are we're excited to be here tonight to bring forward this item, which is requesting authorization to submit a grant application to the Department of Parks and Recreation for the State of California Land and Water Conservation Fund. This is for the.
Speaker 7: Second phase of the.
Speaker 8: Davenport Park Expansion and Recreation Project.
Speaker 4: The project is planned for the Western 5.6 acres of Davenport Park and the is going to include amenities as identified through a community engagement process, which will include a multi-use sports field exercise equipment along the existing dog walk walking path and a shade.
Speaker 8: Structure and picnic area.
Speaker 4: So that in a nutshell is the grant application.
Speaker 7: We are very excited to be pursuing this. That concludes staff's report.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Anything else, Councilmember?
Speaker 10: Thank you for a report. I just want to say that, you know, we've been working very hard over the last several years to complete phase two of this Davenport Park. And I want to thank Parks and Rec, the staff who for who who have been working as partners but working very hard to make this happen as well . I'm really encouraged by this this grant opportunity, and we will do all we can to support it and wish I wish you all the best of luck for for our mutual community. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any public comment on this item saying no members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Cosmo appears. Russian case. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to submit a grant application to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Land and Water Conservation Fund Program, for the Davenport Park Sports Field and Recreation Phase II project; accept said grant, if awarded, in an amount up to $3,000,000 for completion of the project; and, execute all documents necessary to accept the funds and implement the project. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0276 | Speaker 0: Motion case.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I don't. Number 19, please.
Speaker 0: Item 19 is a report from Technology and Innovation, Financial Management and Public Works recommendation to amend contract with 20 properties, Long Beach to Civic Center technology, infrastructure and in an amount not to exceed 7 million and authorize city manager to execute multiple lease purchase agreements and financing documents with Bank of America Public Capital Corporation for the Financing of Civic Center Technology in an aggregated amount not to exceed 8.4 million citywide.
Speaker 3: Is there a public comment on this item saying No members, please cast your vote?
Speaker 10: Councilmember I mean. Vice Mayor Can we get a brief staff report on this?
Speaker 3: Councilman Alston I just outline with processes. As soon as we as soon as the item comes up, I'm going to look for the left or the right signal. If you requested, I'm trying to be respectful and get folks out of here.
Speaker 10: I'm being respectful. We'll do it. There were other people that actually motion to seconded. So.
Speaker 3: So that's fine. We'll go through a staff report if staff could be brief and then moving forward, I'm going to go through and ask everyone if they want comment before we move forward. Staff was going to have a presentation.
Speaker 4: Lyrics and.
Speaker 1: Good evening. A mayor and members of City Council or vice mayor. This on December 5th, technology innovation presented that $67 million of critical technology infrastructure needs to the city. And on that night council authorized city major submit these purchase transactions for these technology needs at future council meetings. So last week we started with those and this week we continue again with the item that you just passed and this item. And I'm going to turn it over to Jason Lee, our Infrastructure Services Bureau manager for the Staff Report.
Speaker 4: Vice Mayor and members of the City Council before use a recommendation to authorize city manager to amend a contract with plenary properties for purchase and installation of civic center technology infrastructure at a cost of $7 million and execute a lease purchase agreement with Bank of America Public Corporation for the Financing of Civic Center Technology Infrastructure. As background, the Civic Center Technology Infrastructure will include foundational components for the following areas the council chambers, the conference rooms, access controls, cameras, wireless and wired networks, the data center and cellular distributed antenna systems. In December 2014, City Council selected plenary to construct, operate and maintain the new Civic Center plenary is is in the best position to purchase install the identify technology infrastructure that did the design equipment costs were and equipment costs were extensively evaluated by a team of construction, engineering, design and technology consultants to ensure the solutions were consistent with the Civic Center design and were competitively priced. The need for plenary to provide these foundational systems was identified and included in the equipment category of the critical technology infrastructure needs. Presentation to the City Council on December 5th, 2017. The the source of the Civic Center technology costs of $7 million is is the proceeds of lease purchase financing for term of up to 15 years. The annual estimated lease payments and lifecycle costs of 1.1.8 $9 million will be recovered from client operations or client departments via the Technology MRU. We will be coming back for the $7 million appropriation during the second budget adjustment. With that, I conclude my report and would be happy to take any questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pearce motion case.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So we're going to go through the rest of these items. If I don't see the maker of the motion or someone cued up, we are going to continue through these items. So the appropriate thing to do would be to queue up if you have something to say. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute the necessary documents to amend Contract No. 34242 with Plenary Properties Long Beach, LLC, of Los Angeles, CA, for Civic Center technology infrastructure, in an amount not to exceed $7,050,000;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute multiple lease-purchase agreements, and related financing documents, with Banc of America Public Capital Corporation, of Scottsdale, AZ, for the financing of Civic Center technology infrastructure, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $8,476,000 including principal, interest, and escrow fees, payable over a term not to exceed 15 years; and
Increase appropriations in the General Services Fund (IS 385) in the Technology and Innovation Department (TI) by $454,000, offset by charges to user departments and funds. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0281 | Speaker 0: Motion case.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Number 26, please.
Speaker 0: Adam 26 is a communication councilman andrews recommendation to approve use of the six council districts one time infrastructure funds in the amount of 15,000 to support a partnership with Cambodian town for the 10th annual Cambodia Town Cultural Fest.
Speaker 3: Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 11: Yes. Supporting this time has become a tradition, especially in my office. I am very excited to be a co-sponsor as we celebrate the vibrant culture and heritage of the Cambodian community. I would like to amend the amount of this transfer from 15000 to 10000, keeping the source and destination to the same.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember. Anything?
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any public comment on asylum saying members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Mission case.
Speaker 3: All right. So the meeting is about to conclude, and I'm going to call for public comment if anyone like to address the city council on any issues, seeing none. We're going to go into the ladies. Oh, come on down. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the use of the Sixth Council District's one-time infrastructure funds transferred from the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) into the Legislative Department (LD) operating budget in the amount of $15,000 to support a partnership being entered into with Cambodia Town Inc., for the 10th Annual Cambodia Town Culture Festival; and
Increase appropriation in the General Fund (GF) in the Legislative Department (LD) by $15,000. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0222 | Speaker 0: Appreciate that. We did have a presentation, but I don't know that they're going to make it in time. And so we're going to move on with the rest, with the regular and rest of the agenda. And so I'm going to open up hearing number two, which is the small cell hearing. And I believe there is going to be actually a motion before we even begin, Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Yes, I believe it's my understanding that we're still working out some details with our telecommunication partners. So I'd like to ask if we can hold this hearing over for two weeks.
Speaker 0: There's a there's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment? Only on holding over the motion, seeing? Not a please go to your house.
Speaker 5: I'm sorry. We're going to have to. We can't just hold it over two weeks. You'd have to completely re notice the hearing if you continue it for, you know, listen, you have to continue to a date certain. You need to open the hearing, continue to a date certain. You just can't say.
Speaker 0: Well, the hearing I've opened, I've opened the hearing, and I think there's a motion to reschedule the hearing.
Speaker 3: Then for April 3rd, which would be the next the first Tuesday in April.
Speaker 0: April 3rd.
Speaker 5: We'd actually like to request that be the next available April, April 3rd. We wouldn't be able to present on that date.
Speaker 0: Okay. So just the next available April, is that okay? Sure. Okay, great. Then that's the motion. There is no comment on moving the hearing. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 5: And for the record, that will be April 17th.
Speaker 2: Can. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Also, just to get it out of the way, there's another item that there's been a request to to postpone. And that was by, I believe, Councilmember Andrews. That is item 25, I believe. And so if I'm going to bring up item 25, there is a motion and hopefully a second to postpone 25 to a | Resolution | Adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute License Agreements, and any necessary amendments, with wireless telecommunication providers and carriers, for the non-exclusive use of City-owned properties for wireless telecommunications facilities, for ten-year terms. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0233 | Speaker 0: The next one to get requested to move up is the consent calendar that was pulled. Absolutely. Which is item 18.
Speaker 2: Report from police recommendation to receive.
Speaker 3: And file the application of Sanchez Tacos for an original application of an ABC.
Speaker 2: License at 5272 East Second Street District three.
Speaker 0: Councilman Price.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I just want to let my colleagues and everyone who's watching know that this is a fantastic newish business that's in Belmont Shore on Second Street. We wish them the very best of luck in everything that they do, and I'm very happy to recommend that these conditions be approved by my colleagues. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on the pooled consent? Poll consent? Okay, members, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 2: The motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Motion passes. Okay, great. We're going to do the mix up. Items are going to be 23, 24 and 33, which have all been requested to get moved up to 23, 24 and 33. I think we'll probably do 23. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive and file the application of Sancho’s Restaurant, LLC, dba Sancho’s Tacos, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 5272 East 2nd Street.
(District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0237 | Speaker 0: Okay. Motion passes. Okay, great. We're going to do the mix up. Items are going to be 23, 24 and 33, which have all been requested to get moved up to 23, 24 and 33. I think we'll probably do 23. Can we do 23 fairly quickly, Steph? Okay. So Madam Park.
Speaker 3: Report from City Manager Recommendation to accept and expend grant funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation and the amount of $491,211 to implement a feasibility study and randomized controlled trial to.
Speaker 2: Evaluate the Long.
Speaker 3: Beach Justice Lab multidisciplinary team citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Mr. West.
Speaker 5: We have a quick staff report by the team director, Tracy Klinger.
Speaker 2: Honorable mayor and council. Thank you for.
Speaker 3: Having us here this evening. In January.
Speaker 2: 2018, the Long Beach I-Team launched, as you know, the first of its kind justice lab to provide new tools.
Speaker 3: For first responders to divert.
Speaker 2: Offenders out of the criminal justice system. The lab has several initiatives. One of the four most prominent ones is the MDT or multiple distillery team, which convenes.
Speaker 3: City and county departments to better coordinate.
Speaker 2: And reduce the burden on individuals.
Speaker 3: Accessing and navigating services such as mental.
Speaker 2: Health, substance.
Speaker 3: Abuse and homeless services.
Speaker 2: In addition to Datamart, as.
Speaker 3: Part of the city's data driven justice brings together multiple datasets to cross-check information with police, health fire, the city prosecutor.
Speaker 2: And other departments to help coordinated to help coordinate.
Speaker 3: Excuse me, much needed wraparound services for residents.
Speaker 2: If you recall, in November, the City Council authorized the city manager to receive a half a million dollars in grant funds to implement the MDT and Data Mart. With this new grant funding item in collaboration with Cal State, Long Beach and UCLA will conduct a feasibility study to evaluate the effectiveness of the MDT.
Speaker 3: Team based.
Speaker 2: Method of.
Speaker 3: Service planning and care care management. I would like to thank the team for all their hard work.
Speaker 2: This new funding secures a total of $1 million in grant funding toward the implementation.
Speaker 3: Of the Long Beach Justice Lab. That concludes my report. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Tracy. Mayor Garcia, innovation team. I'm very supportive of taking a look at this work and I'm glad that you've been able to identify the funding. So please continue to keep us keep us updated.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 3: Thank you for bringing this, and.
Speaker 2: We're excited for the opportunity.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Pierce.
Speaker 2: I feel like it's late. And I want to congratulate you guys on the good work. I know we heard about this at the mayor's state of the city. Do you have any of the numbers in front of you right now on do we have the numbers on the high frequency offenders? Yes, we have about 875 high.
Speaker 3: Frequency offenders that were.
Speaker 2: Booked or cited 11 or more times over a five year period. Currently, we're.
Speaker 3: Looking specifically at 22 cases.
Speaker 2: So the multiple dictionary team, our approach is to look at a small.
Speaker 3: Number of cases at a times.
Speaker 2: Triaged around them.
Speaker 3: So currently we're looking at 22 cases, 22 individuals that cross sector the various city departments for services.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you so much for that. Thanks for the great work and keep it up. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Yes. Yes. Thank you very much. Mayor Tracey, I just want to congratulate you guys for the fine work you're doing. If I knew anyone know how to get money. Your group knows how to go get it. Congratulations. Thank you. And I'll just add, obviously, I know there's a lot of work happening around the justice fund and I appreciate all the the interviews. And I know we're also been involving just the community that's interested in the justice lab. Want to make sure to me, one of the most important parts of the of the initiative is the putting the mental clinician in our city jail, which we have never not done before. And so do we have an update? Is the grant going to address that or is that moving on a separate track?
Speaker 2: It's a separate track. However, we do have the Emmylou finalized and the clinician will be in the jail. Jail effective April 2nd.
Speaker 0: Oh, that's great news. So, so so this you're talking like in a month?
Speaker 7: Yes, in less than a month. And it is.
Speaker 3: Funding through the innovation fund. That's funding that that pilot program.
Speaker 0: Okay. Well, I want to congratulate you guys. And I know the chief in the police department for working on that. I think that's going to be a very, very important move in the right direction at the jail and certainly to ensure that we're providing the right services for folks that need help, particularly those that are that are at that time. So I thank you for that. And I'm sorry, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I'm sorry you're on, Mr. Mayor. And I was thinking about court. I was. I did want to acknowledge the I-Team because they came and did a presentation at Public Safety Committee, and it was a fantastic presentation. I've been using the information from the presentation as talking points at all my community meetings. I would like to let you know that I think probably after six months of having the clinician in jail in the jails, we'd love to get a report back on some of the data and how many people were routed into services and what types of services and all of that. So I'm sure you have some data tracking in place, but if not, I think we'll be looking for that information about six months out.
Speaker 3: We'd be happy to provide that update. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Councilwoman, is there any public comment on that, this item? Seeing none, sir, you know. Okay, no public comment on this item. Please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all necessary documents, and any amendments, to accept and expend grant funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, in the amount of $491,211 over a three-year period, to implement a feasibility study and randomized controlled trial to evaluate the Long Beach Justice Lab Multi-Disciplinary Team, beginning April 1, 2018 through March 31, 2021; and
Increase appropriations in the General Grants Fund (SR 120) in the City Manager Department (CM) by $491,211, offset by grant revenue. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0238 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item next issue is item 24, which is the we're going to 24 and then 33. Item 24 is next.
Speaker 2: Please report from Development.
Speaker 3: Services Recommendation Receive and file a presentation providing an update on the city's efforts to encourage the production of affordable housing citywide.
Speaker 0: Turn this over to staff.
Speaker 5: Our interim director of development services, Tom Morgan. Point of order, Mayor. We just got. I made them up. I made up a motion, but I didn't get to say it. We just got this today. And then we were dealing with the item 22. And I really haven't had a chance to review this given the issues that we did last week with the QE and given that a lot of our audience is gone and probably gone from the TV as well. I think that we should give this a more focused attention, and I think we could do that in the next 30 days.
Speaker 0: Sure. If that's if that's your motion, there can certainly be the motion on the floor. Is that your motion? Councilmember? Yes. Okay. Vice Mayor Richardson, is that were you seconding that motion of Councilmember Pierce or actually Vice-Chair? Do you want to speak to that motion? Okay. Councilmember Pierce. Nope. Okay. So this is a motion to to bring the issue back. And what did you do a time certain council member?
Speaker 5: I think I said 30 days.
Speaker 0: Okay. Is there any public comment on moving this item? Yes. Please come forward and and please. The public comment has to be germane to moving the item not not the item itself. Okay. If it.
Speaker 5: Hi there. For those who don't know me, my name started when I was good being out here tonight. I just wanted.
Speaker 0: To say that.
Speaker 5: Especially given next week's agenda, which regards a lot of questions regarding the Long Beach rent control ordinance, it might be important to prioritize talking about this. I also do understand, though, if there is a review process, but there are a few people who wanted to speak on this item tonight. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Mirta Lopez. I'm a community organizer with Housing Long Beach. And I just want to allow some residents to speak because they've been waiting here for a long, long time. And I believe, you know, they're seniors and they're disabled. And it would be unfair for not allow them to speak today. So I want to make sure that you give me 1/2. So I just want to make sure that the motion on the floor is to move the item. It's not to hear the item. And so just prior rules. Councilmember public speakers can speak only to moving the item, not on the item itself. You're sticking to your motion, correct? Correct.
Speaker 5: I'm sticking to the motion to revisit this that 30 days. However, if they have. So what you say today. I have no issue with that.
Speaker 0: Okay. I'm I'm okay with that as well.
Speaker 5: Chair.
Speaker 0: It's okay. Unless there's any objection, we're going to allow the people that spoke. Okay. All right, cut. Certainly, I somewhat touch on one of the cases because they had to leave. His wife had a fever. They're seniors. The guy is 81 years old. He's been living in his unit for the last 30 years and new property management has bought up the building. It's on 10th and Pacific and they're being put out. Right. They have to move by March 31st, but they have nowhere to go and nothing is being done to assist them. Sorry, he couldn't be here to speak. He had to leave. I don't know if you saw. I know you were all busy, but I had to escort them out because his wife had a fever. And it's really unfair that these people who have been long time Long Beach residents are being put out so unfairly and nothing is being done to protect them. And I'm tired of getting all these phone calls of entire buildings being put out with 60 day notices, and there's nothing to protect them. And when they ask, what is city council doing, there's not much I can't say. And that's the story of Victor Chacon at 939 Pacific Avenue and I'm that somebody else speak. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Sorry Mayor Garcia and counsel.
Speaker 0: Let me let me actually mama have you first if you can come to that so we can just I want to show that what we can hear you for the record on the mike. Thank you.
Speaker 2: I I'm sorry.
Speaker 0: Mayor Garcia and counsel. I had a stroke two years ago.
Speaker 2: I stay at 939 Pacific. I've been there 19 years. They gave us a 16 hours and they told us we got to leave. We have nowhere to go and withhold our money to make up. And I don't want to be homeless. Excuse me. My daughter will speak better than I can. Hello. Council and mayor. My name is Jennifer Chadwick. I also live by 939 Pacific Avenue. Recently, my mom and I have got a 60 day notice. Our management company has bought our building and is forcing us all out. My mom is disabled and on a fixed income and I have done a lot for the community, including volunteering at the Aquarium of the Pacific, doing beach cleanups and a lot of other things. For years I've supported Long Beach, but right now I'm really hoping that the City of Long Beach can support me as well. I would like to ask the council and mayor to help support and protect the renters on beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Very much. Our next speaker, please. Good evening, council and mayor. My name's John Russo. I'm also speaking of the terms of rent control. We need rent control in Long Beach. Apparently, it's been looked over for many years. Different cities have rent control. Los Angeles has rent control. And I do believe Los Angeles is L.A. County, which I do believe Long Beach is L.A. County. Now, I don't understand that. But anyway, I've lived at this apartment complex for three years. The first year, I wasn't even there a whole year. They wanted to raise my rent. I send them a letter saying, Hey, have you been here a year? You want to raise my rent? Second year they raise my rent 700 and some dollars a year. Okay. This year went up to $100 and it wasn't even 60 day notice. It was a 30 day notice. I called fair housing and they just like, oh, well, they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, how much they ever want. And there's nothing. In other words, we have no rights as renters, which, like I say, matter. That's not fair. I mean, from what you know, there's got to be something done. You know, we're trying to get maybe a rent freeze or something and to to compensate us. But, you know, $100 a month is like 14%, you know, and and it's it's insane. And the building I live in is built in 1946. And a lot of things have been going wrong. And a lot of people are are afraid to ask to get things fixed because boom, they can buda sound at any time. That's a notice thing. They can throw anybody out at any time, whenever they want without any given notice. I mean, you could pay your rent on time for 20 years and next thing you know, we're booting you out because we want to we want to raise the rent. We want to re rent your place and we want to raise it.
Speaker 2: For.
Speaker 0: Sure. Councilwoman, did you want to speak after the speakers or. I know you're kidding. After the speakers are now.
Speaker 3: Addressed, I think the mother and up there they are upstairs. And I know Rajan in my office has been in contact with you and I know it's beachfront property management is your. So we're in the process of connecting with them. So I just want to let you know and Corey and my office will be out here to just make sure and we solidify that we're following up. Okay. Thank you so much for being here.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And did you want to speak now?
Speaker 2: Councilmember Councilmember Pearce and I also wanted to ask you guys to reach out to Long Beach Cop. We just created a new fund with them on assisting people transitioning.
Speaker 3: And so it's another.
Speaker 2: Good resource that you might not know is available yet because we haven't publicized it.
Speaker 0: But thank you, Councilmember. And next week, please, Josh Butler, executive director for Housing Long Beach. I'm also a resident of the third district. And with regards to whether or not this item should be delayed further, I can't say that it's any surprise given the lack of urgency that affordable housing has received in this city. We have I was part of a study group to prepare recommendations to bring them forward. It's been almost a year since we put those recommendations forward. We are hoping to hear tonight about the progress that we have made in those areas. The sense of urgency is missing from this body. The people that are here are smaller numbers compared to the people that are coming to see us for housing. Long Beach, whose entire buildings are being sold, they're being thrown out with nothing. The owners of the building are making money. The people who are purchasing the building are going to make money. But these residents, they hurt and they lose. And so delaying this for them delays a conversation about how we get to solving some of their problems. So we would like to have that conversation sooner than later. It's very disappointing to read in the initial report that did come out this afternoon that inclusionary housing looks like it's that we're still a year away from seeing that even come to the light of day. That would be about almost two years from the time that the recommendations were made to this body. It'll be almost three years from the time that we initially had the conversation about inclusionary housing in this city. Meanwhile, 5000 units of housing have been built in the downtown area. Only 3% of those units are affordable. And of those 3%, 97% of them are spoken for, for seniors, veterans. And then the rest are set at 80%. Am I? So there's literally no affordable housing being built in the downtown area? Yeah. We're going to wait longer to have this conversation. It really we can wait because there isn't a whole lot to say. We're still not meeting the mark. We're still not getting there. And I am glad that next week we will be having a conversation about the rent control ordinance. It seems like that's the only way to get anybody's attention around here on this issue, is that people got to do it themselves because we're getting no support here. We don't want funding is great for people to get dollars to help them pay for an application fee or for a rental deposit. But we would prefer them to not have to move in the first place. There's nowhere for them to go right now. That's the problem. I know it's late to you all here. This is a wait to me because I was here just as late at Housing Long Beach last night with an office full of people who are being kicked out of their units. We're hoping to come here tonight to get some answers, only to be told that we have to come back for that. And so I guess we will be back. But I guess the first priority will be to have a conversation that's being brought up by districts three, four and five. The east side of the city, which is the homeowner dominant part of the city, is going to have a conversation next week and start to dictate to the rest of the city, to the 60% of the people that rant about what we should and shouldn't have, what policies we should and shouldn't have, and what are going to affect us and not affect us. So I think the priorities here are just getting a little bit out of whack and we'd like to figure out how we can bring them back into the mainframe. Thank you, Mr. Butler. Thank you, Mayor. Before I do the next speaker, make the maker of the motion wants to speak.
Speaker 5: I think, given the fact that there are people here who are interested in this item, I figured that we wanted to have a more robust conversation on this. But certainly, if they're ready to move forward, I would withdraw my motion.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay. So so we want to have now we're going to have the presentation. Okay. So what we're going to do is we're going to go back to public comment in a minute. We're going to but we're first going to we're going to do the presentation and then you'll be the first one for public comment if there's no objection. Okay. So we are going to do we will do the presentation counts. From your accounts. We recognize requests. There's an emotion. There's emotion. Second, I believe, to receive it far this presentation. So why don't we start and please staff do the full presentation. Okay. And Mr. West or Mr. McEwan.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the Council. I'll be turn this over to staff to go through the the PowerPoint presentation. But where we all started with this was back in May 2nd, 2017. This Council received and filed a very extensive report on revenue tools and incentives for the production of affordable housing and really adopted a very robust workplan for staff to follow on affordable housing. So there were 29 different recommendations that are really designed to encourage and increase the production of affordable housing. We prevent provided a number of written updates on those recommendations. Throughout the last several months, we've made great progress on some. Some were still going on and some were still working on. And this is in response to a request on January 16th to give us a formal progress report. And so with that, I'll turn it over to Patrick Geary, our housing officer or housing bureau manager, to go through the report.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Tom. We seem to be missing our clicker. I don't know if it's around here somewhere. Thank you. Just as a reminder, the 29 policies that were adopted in May are broken down into three categories policies to implement immediately existing initiatives and process and new initiatives for development and implementation. So I'm just going to run through them in order. Excuse me. Starting with 1.1, which is to encourage housing preservation. This is ongoing. Since 2014, 1376 at risk units have been preserved in fiscal year 17. We worked on Beechwood Apartments, which you can see here on the slide, a photo of the existing building on the left and a rendering of the new building on the right. This is currently under construction. And then we just are wrapping up the preservation of Sara's apartments, which is 29 units at 240 West Seventh Street. Unfortunately, I don't have a picture of that project, but that one is also underway. And then one point, too, is to encourage the use of project based vouchers. This is also ongoing and we've been partnering with the Housing Authority quite a bit lately with the beacon that's currently under construction. There's 160 units in the project and 158 project based vouchers. And then with the spark at Midtown, that's 95 units with 40 project based vouchers. We're hoping if we get all the financing for this project, we'll start construction by the end of the year. And with Last Fontana's Apartments, this is at the corner of Long Beach and PCH, we're very excited about this project. 101 units with 40 project based vouchers. This will also begin construction at the end of the year and then again spares apartments that was also preserved with 29 project based vouchers. 1.3 is to continue to waive developer impact fees for affordable housing. This is also ongoing and recent fee waivers include Emmanuel Place, Anchor Place, The Beacon, The Spark at Midtown Las Fontana's Apartments and Vista del Puerto. Here, the total value of these vouchers. I'm sorry. These waivers is over $3 million, resulting in the funding for 552 units. 1.4 is to promote the city's density bonus program. This is also ongoing. The program is regularly promoted by two housing developers, by both planning and economic development staff, housing staff as well. I think a lot of the recent affordable projects have taken advantage of the density bonus program. 1.5 is to continue to partner with developers in the pursuit of housing funding, and this is also ongoing. And in fiscal year 17, staff assisted with funding applications for the beacon in the amount of $70.4 million. And we're currently working on funding applications for Last Fontana's Apartments, The Spark at Midtown Vista, still Porto. And in total these projects will include $174.2 million in leveraged funds and $19.5 million in city funds. Policy 1.6 is to explore the development of student and workforce housing. This is also something that the economic development staff and housing staff discuss when they meet with developers. When we meet with developers, which is pretty regular. And then there is an exciting new project that the Planning Commission just approved on the Broadway block that includes 400 units, 14 of which are affordable, which was a voluntary A for affordable allocation. And then that that project includes housing for students and faculty, of course, who will be. 1.8 is to support sector reform. This is also ongoing during this one. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I missed 1.7 track federal and state housing legislation. This is ongoing through the city manager's office. In fiscal year 17, the city supported funding for CDBG at home programs SB two, which is the Building Homes and Job Act that will give direct funding to the city for affordable housing. And then SB three, which is the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act. That's a $4 billion general obligation bond that will be on the ballot in November. 1.8. Support seeker reform. This is coordinated through the city manager's office and there are currently eight bills in the at the state level that are under review. And 1.9 is to create and maintain a database of publicly held land that maybe may provide housing for housing opportunities, excuse me. And economic development is preparing a comprehensive list of potential development opportunity sites throughout the city, including government owned sites and privately held sites. The city also notifies market rate developers of housing, operating or affordable housing developers of opportunities when they dispose of city owned land. Here is our next section 2.1. Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. This has been completed adopted by the Planning Commission on July six, 2017 and the City Council on December 19, 2017. 2.2 implement state requirements for reduced parking for affordable housing. At the time that this was put in here, it was AB 744 was the bill that imposed new parking restrictions. And although the city has not codified that state bill, the city is implementing that bill and all of our recent developments have been able to take advantage of that. So. 2.3 contact financial analysis and next to study the coastal zone. And Lucy. This, I admit, has been going on for a long time. But we do have a financial analysis from our consultant. We have met with community groups. We will be proposing some significant, I think, increases to the in lieu fees for the coastal zone program. We are working with the city attorney's office currently on preparing an ordinance or a changes to our existing ordinance, and we're hoping to have that back to the council in September. And the same goes for the condominium conversion ordinance 2.4. Again, we met with the advocate groups and hope to have that back in September. 3.1 explore a local bond measure as a one time source to capitalize the housing trust fund. So we did some analysis on this. We sent a memorandum up to the Mayor and Council on September 25th, 2017. Our analysis indicated that to develop a thousand units of affordable housing, we would need about $126 million in subsidy. And so should the should the council council wish to proceed with a bond measure, city staff would conduct further analysis to refine those numbers. 3.2 began the development of an inclusionary housing policy. And so the good news to hear is that AB 1505 was adopted in 2017 and this clears the way to allow for inclusionary and rental projects, whereas previously it was only allowed in for sale projects. We released an RFP in October. We actually had interviews with consultants just a few weeks ago and we're wrapping that up and hopefully we'll have a contract in place by the end of the month. And that will take about a year. A large chunk of that is community outreach. But there's analysis that has to be done and and some modeling and things like that.
Speaker 0: But the community is ready for it.
Speaker 9: We know where to find you. And then 3.3, investigate the possibility of establishing establishing a local document recording fee to fund affordable housing. This is ongoing. You know, as I mentioned earlier, this, the legislature adopted SB two in 2017. We're still trying to understand what that means. That could bring anywhere from 2 to $300, $300,000 in funding. And as we understand it, some of that money will be allocated directly to cities. And we're hoping and we believe that Long Beach will be one of those cities. So that will be a tool for us to help fund affordable housing. 3.4 Investigate the possibility of dedicating city resources for affordable housing. We do this annually during our budget process and in fiscal year 18 we asked for funding, but there were no general fund dollars available for this purpose. I, I will say, though, that funds deposited into our housing fund from successor agency loan repayments for this year are about $5 million. And then, of course, our federal home funds are about $2.1 million and the housing authority is $75.6 million. Policy 3.6 modify the. The moderate income definition to include up to 150% i. This is pending. This is not something that we have made a decision on. This is something we will consider in conjunction with any new source of funding. And during the inclusionary housing study in mid-May or may not be a good idea. 3.7 Encourage the adoption of specific plans to encourage a more rapid entitlement process. This is ongoing, and I'm sure we all remember that the general plan, land use element, urban design element, place type and height maps were approved by the City Council last week. The Southeast Area Specific plan was adopted by the Council in September of 2017 and the mid-term plan was adopted in 2016. And we're already seeing several new projects in the Midtown Plan area. 3.8 Consider expanding one for one replacement in areas outside the coastal zone. This is pending and this will follow after we are done updating the coastal zone in Lee and Lucy program. 3.9 develop and offer first time homebuyer programs. This is also in process. We have begun some research here on the cost to offer homebuyer programs. We're also researching we're partnering with our economic development staff, and we're researching lending practices and partnerships and homebuyer education programs. 3.10. Encourage the adoption of regulations to allow and incentivize shipping container construction for housing. This is ongoing. We sent a memo up to the Mayor and council on August 2nd, 2017 on this that provides a little bit more information with the memo outlining the suitability, advantages and requirements associated with the use of shipping containers as housing units. Currently, staff is working with local and regional groups to establish development standards that currently do not exist.
Speaker 0: Okay, let's get to the presentation with the public comment on.
Speaker 9: 33.2 study short term rental regulations. And this is in process. We have a consultant on board and we're expecting to take about six months to complete this with a proposal to the Council in the fall of 2018. 3.13 ensure that sufficient resources are available to implement the city's proactive rental housing inspection program. This is also ongoing, and for fiscal year 18, fees for existing services were increased by 2.23%, resulting in a $5 increase to each of the three tiers of fees for the program. No new fees or services were included in the fiscal year 18 budget. 3.14 explore the feasibility of using new structures such as enhanced infrastructure financing districts. This is pending as is 3.15 Explore Article 34 Referendum 3.16. Provide the necessary city staffing resources to manage increased housing production contemplated by these policies. And this will be done as part of our annual budget process and in conjunction with any new funding that we receive as part of these policies. So conclusions and next steps. We expect the following accomplishments for 2018 additional housing preservation, additional project based vouchers continue and begin construction on 403 new units. Develop a citywide inclusionary housing policy. Develop a short term, short term rental regulations. Complete an update to the coastal zone and legal fee program and the condominium conversion ordinance. And then there are some additional initiatives that the Council requested on January 16th and February six relating to tenant protection programs and homeowner assistance programs. And so we are beginning to research those items as well. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Let me go back to start with the maker of the motion. I know you didn't speak to this motion. Did you have any comments? Customary, Ringo, by summary. Richardson.
Speaker 5: I think I'll just say.
Speaker 1: You know, it is late and folks have been waiting on this for a long time. When do we. I need clarity on this. Some of this stuff is like red meat stuff like the inclusionary housing policy and things like that. What does that timeline actually look like for the inclusionary housing recommendation?
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor The inclusionary housing policy will begin right away. Once we have a consultant on board, which is going to be at the end of March, it's going to be about a year to get from that point to when we get back to the council. Okay.
Speaker 1: I support yeah, I support that. I think it was more politically challenging to do five years ago, but it's pretty standard now and a year from now, you know, it takes a lot of time to develop. So the sooner we can sort of expedite that process, the better. And and I saw you mentioned some of the work we talked about with some of the barriers to homeownership. You know, the barriers becoming more difficult. So have we sort of begun the conversations with, you know, some of the folks who spoke and talked about the resources for down payment assistance? Have we done those conversations yet?
Speaker 9: We had a meeting scheduled with HSBC Bank last week, but that got postponed until I believe it's tomorrow or Thursday.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 9: But we economic development staff and housing staff have met and we have started talking about this. We also have a consultant working on some cost for subsidy programs, which is just one component. And that really comes out of these 29 policies. But the the research that's related to the March or February six request has been started, but we do still have some work to do.
Speaker 1: All right. That's fine. And then the last thing is, you know, I know there's a lot of conversation about rent control. You know, I'm not you know, I'm not necessarily there yet. But I think there's a lot of questions and a lot of statements. I, I got the floor listen to use my time. I think the renter protection piece, though, you know, we've heard enough to see that we have to we need to be doing more on the rent protection stuff, particularly when people are you know, I mean, look, we have we have to take it more seriously. We need to have the tough conversations about renter protections. And so my question is, what's the timeline? Look, I know that there was a motion, but what's the timeline to actually get the ball rolling on that?
Speaker 9: We are conducting research right now and we are planning on we have actually started working on what we think our schedule will be, but we do not have a date certain yet. But we are planning to have a memo up to the mayor and council within the next couple of weeks that will provide a timeline for that
Speaker 1: . A couple of weeks we will know more. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. I'm just going to just jump in because I just want to follow up. The vice mayor said, I just wanna go back first. There's three things I want to bring up. First of all, on the inclusionary, I think the report's great, but to me the three things that stand out is one is the inclusionary zoning ordinance. So I'm trying to understand why it would take a year. No question. Can we please.
Speaker 5: Expert? Let me jump in a little bit on kind of the process and how this how we came to be where we're at. So when we got direction from the Mayor and council in May, that was really the kind of first policy direction of go forward and do this inclusionary housing. We went to the budget immediately, got money to put that in the budget and you adopted that in in October. And immediately in October we put it out on RFP. So this is going to be a big planning effort. This is a lot of technical capability that we're going to need and also to keep all the development projects going. We have a lot of affordable housing projects going, we have a lot of other projects going through needed additional resources. We've done the RFP, we're bringing on the consultant, and then there are a number of steps in and Patrick can go through these. Public outreach is going to be important. That's probably going to be at least several months long. We need to do the research of what other cities do, come up with their recommendations, go to planning commission and then come back to council. So there's going to be steps you see along the way. The year is really from start to the very finish to where you're actually putting something into place, but there's going to be a lot of work you're going to see in 2018.
Speaker 0: Okay. I would just I mean, I appreciate that. I would just challenge us that it just seems like we could just do this faster than a year. And I think this part this this piece of the policy, there's to me just some general consensus that we there's support. I think that this is how we get more housing affordability immediately. And so. Can we cut that down? And listen, I don't I don't want to I don't want to skimp on public outreach or going through the planning process. But I would just just if we can just please at least look towards a way to get this back in front of the council sooner that I think I think most people would appreciate that. Sure.
Speaker 5: We'll take a look at doing whatever we can. We do want to reserve some time for the public outreach, but if that's something that we need to shrink a little bit on, if we need to look, if we can go faster as well with the policy recommendations and not do as broad of a study, we can look at areas to tighten that.
Speaker 0: I just want to make sure that we ask whoever the consultant is that's going to that we're bringing on and we challenge the consultant to do this in a shorter time period. I think that would be and and if we're going to shorten it, let's not shorten the public input part, but if we can just shorten some of that, that would be we'll.
Speaker 5: Go we'll go as fast as we can.
Speaker 0: The second thing is, the other one I think that makes a immediate impact is the short term rentals. I think this is a that I'm not also sure why this one is taking as long as it is. Can you please explain that to us? Yes. So short term rentals was the same. We were given direction to move forward.
Speaker 5: We got that immediately in the budget. We did an RFP process. We are selecting. We have selected one that falls under the City Managers Authority. So we don't we're not having to come back to council for that one. We have them on board right now. They're starting their public outreach in March and we expect to be back in the fall on that. Actually, even though it's six months is very aggressive. The city of L.A., by the way, is that year, two and a half of trying to do short term rentals, and there aren't any closer to actually getting it done. So a lot of cities that we've seen, this has been a 2 to 3 year process to get short term rentals and we're looking to get it done in six months. So we're going to be doing a number of community outreach. We really believe it's important to get out and talk to the community on short term rentals. There's a lot of different opinions. We'll be interviewing stakeholders who are doing community meetings and then doing the research and bringing that back both planning, commission and council, hopefully by fall.
Speaker 0: And you think and you think this will get to planning commission in the summer? If I remember the schedule, right, it.
Speaker 5: Was probably August around that time, the Planning Commission and September or so for council.
Speaker 0: I think and again, I know that there's a an important planning process to go through on this. And so I'm not trying to in any way cause any issues there. But again, I think this is another issue that could bring immediate benefit relief. I think there's a lot of interest in the city in getting a short term rental policy in place. I think that there are some communities that have implemented them. I know that L.A. has been a very different sort of situation, but you're saying that community input or give the community process starting this month?
Speaker 5: Yes. So we're going to be actually next week interviewing all the council members first and getting kind of your sense of who are the stakeholders you're hearing from. We're going to be doing specific stakeholder interviews so that we get a sense of all the different aspects of people who want to be involved. And then we're going to be doing at least three different community meetings throughout the city along the process to get input, share data, share the data that we've received, talk about some of the recommendations, and then staff will come forward with a proposed recommendation.
Speaker 0: Okay. And the last thing, I think the vice touched on it as well. I think, you know, the sooner that we can get staff's initial first pass on the studies and the look at the tenant protections that the council passed, I think a big part of that was the kind of national review of what other cities are doing comparable to Long Beach. And I think that the sooner that comes back to the council, particularly the data on what other cities are doing, I think is important for the council to make some decisions there.
Speaker 5: So, yes, we understand that that is important. We do have a small but mighty housing staff. Most of them are behind me right now. So we will be looking at that one and we don't have a budget for that, but we actually are putting a lot of effort into learning this kind of newer field for us. So we will be bringing those forward again. A couple of weeks will give you an update of what we've accomplished and what else we still have left to do.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much, Councilmember Pierson.
Speaker 2: Thank you staff for sharing with us the two from four memos and giving us a digestible breakdown of that. And I do I want to echo my colleague's sentiment and even echoed the sentiment of those in the audience. It is frustrating because we are a big city with a big vision and we're tackling a lot and so feeling like this is going a little slow. I completely feel the same way and I want to thank staff. I know that you guys just went through the land use element and that we are short staffed with Tom sitting in as director right now. So recognizing those challenges, I know that this is a received file. A couple of things that I want to highlight is with for the inclusionary policy. Look at making sure that we are having the consultants look at both rental and owners to include the highest percentage that we think that we can get to. Also identifying that community process and realizing that it's not as debatable or as intense as STR. So hopefully we can figure out a community engagement process that gets us back to this group sooner. And also wanting to follow up on where we are with the Mello Act. I didn't necessarily see a timeline for that. Did I miss that?
Speaker 9: Councilmember. Are you referring to the coastal zone and.
Speaker 2: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 9: We should be back in September on that one.
Speaker 2: Okay. And I know last week I spoke a lot about no net loss. And it says in here that we'll look at no net loss after we look at that. Is there a way for us to report back on no net loss at that same time?
Speaker 9: When you're I'm sorry. When you refer to no net loss you're referring.
Speaker 2: All on I'll find your your phrases for this is what happens when you've been doing work in the housing community and then you have to learn new words.
Speaker 0: Council member.
Speaker 2: Expanding one for one replacement.
Speaker 0: Correct. I think you're referring to there's a 1.8 replacement requirement in the coastal zone. And at last week's council meeting, you asked for the status of one for one replacement outside of the coastal zone. So that is not on our work program. But based on your comment last week, we're finding a way to put that on the work program. Additionally, there are some changes in state law that took effect January 1st of this year that require us to implement no net loss outside of the coastal zone. So we have a number of report backs that were requested last week. We're working with the city manager to work through all of those. So we can't give you that answer tonight. But you will be receiving a TFF type document about all of the report backs from last week's meeting, and it will give you a clear timeline for that item.
Speaker 2: Okay. Just to be clear, it's 3.8 on the presentation you guys just gave. So it does say that 3.8 consider expanding one for one replacement, the area outside of the coastal zone. This item will follow up after 2.3. So I just wanted to make sure that we're on a on a track to where we don't have to wait another year after.
Speaker 0: I understood and it was on.
Speaker 5: A longer track and based on your.
Speaker 0: Comments last week, we're looking at what we can do to move it up.
Speaker 2: Thank you so very much. One other thing that you know, in the conversation around rental protections, it's not in this presentation. I brought it up in one of my briefings today. One of the concerns I have and I'm going to bring it up publicly today and then follow up with staff on how we move forward on it . But one of the challenges that I'm having is that we are having homes or apartments that have illegal conversions that might have been done ten years ago or 20 years ago. And for whatever reason, it seems like we're seeing an increase of people being evicted because they have to go in and the landlord needs to make changes or revert back to the original intent. And one of those cases is even the the women's shelter has a home in my district. And so they've had to remove a whole apartment based on an illegal conversion that was done years ago. So in the future, when we bring up renter issues, I want us to talk about how we're dealing with illegal conversions and what that what those numbers are and if there's any benefit that we as a city can help landlords get to code without removing tenants so that we are in fact protecting existing housing and not losing that in the middle of our time, in the middle of our crunch. So I appreciate the efforts and I expect to in the next month or so, have a deeper conversation around our housing stock. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 3: Yes. And I just want to solidify I have to say it on the dais as well, my support and urge for us to just get up and running and started as soon as possible with the inclusionary housing rental protections, of course, shipping, container construction. And I know that will be going through the process and talking to each council member, but I really hope we emphasize on directly working with the impacted neighborhoods. As we know, lots of people, especially in my district, are getting evicted. They are getting sort of thrown out of their their space. And so we want to make sure that we're doing this as soon as possible for for that reason. And then I know we're in this transition. So I just hope that and I don't know what the the timeline is for our new development just development services director , but I hope that whoever that might be is going to be up to date and up to speed with all of this. And that includes an equitable distribution of affordable housing throughout the city. And so I just have to put it out there, but I thank you very much for the work and I look forward to engaging in those stakeholder meetings.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 7: I want to thank staff for the report as well. I do want to make a correction because I think when we've talked about the short term rental options, we've been a little bit dismissive. Not just that, not just development services, but we had a report from Financial Services a few weeks ago that had short term rentals in there as a possible run of revenue gap and filler. And that's a concern to me because I have many communities in my district that are adamantly opposed to us allowing short term rentals, which are illegal right now. And so it's important for me to be able to advocate for that community and to that community that that outreach has not even started, that they will be involved in that outreach, that, you know, there's a lot of data out there about whether short term rentals actually limit affordable housing because they're taking away spaces that can be used for long term rentals. But again, these are all discussions that I'm hoping that we can have. But I think to to talk about short term rentals as if it's it's something that's definitely happening would be ill advised because that's certainly not the intent of everyone on council. And so I do think staff I love to see that so many of these policies are implemented. There's a great deal of work to be done. I'm happy to have been part of the creation of a lot more housing in the Ccep area, although I don't know to what extent that's going to qualify in terms of affordable housing, but it is providing some additional housing stock and it has yet to be determined what the price points will be. But I think in regards to our work, there's a lot more work to be done. And again, for my residents who may be watching at home, we have not approved short term rentals. We've not set a policy on short term rentals. We are not relying on short term rentals as any sort of solution for the city of Long Beach. That conversation is just getting started this month. So thank you.
Speaker 5: And I'd like to confirm that also 3.12, which is the policy that the council asked us to move forward with, was to study short term rentals. So we haven't made any conclusions about what that program will look like. That's why we're bringing on the extra help and some great analysis of what has worked in other cities. And then we'll be doing the public outreach and coming back to you with some recommendations.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. Since we're on the short term rentals discussion, can you clarify for me? Because it was my impression that even though Los Angeles has no official short term rental policy and they've been working on it for a few years, that they are charging it to vote on on units. And that and I mean, they're receiving tens of millions of dollars without a policy. Is that true or not?
Speaker 5: So they have they basically are collecting only from one of the providers through a voluntary tax sharing agreement to $2 on a use that is illegal in the city of Los Angeles. So it is a very strange situation. We've been following and tracking this a lot. We have not recommended as your staff that you do that because that precludes you from really making decisions about, you know, how and where you should create your own program because you've accepted the money and you've already program that money. So we're close. We are, as your budget staff are projecting, that you should be looking at that money starting the next year's budget. We're being very conservative with that, and it's an estimate at this point.
Speaker 0: Can you in in this public phase, that's that's about to start on this issue. I would also like just additional information on that piece, because it is it is clear to me that many municipalities in which short term rentals are, quote unquote, not allowed are collecting significant funds into or out of which governments are using for a variety of reasons, whether it's additional housing opportunities or other uses. I just want to make sure that that I understand exactly what's happening in these other cities. And and maybe it's not a good idea for us. And I can I understand that. But but I want to understand that piece more because I don't have enough information about it. Sure. Thank you. Councilman Mangum.
Speaker 2: Mr. Modica, in my understanding, the types of revenues that they're using are being programed against one time expenses. And furthermore, if you currently do any illegal activity and create a income from it, the federal government collects income tax against it and this would be no different. I mean, putting it into a fee schedule, the city of Los Angeles to date, I believe, has received $56 million. And so to not allow this group of individuals to be on an even playing field when this council is often fighting over 250. Thousand dollars. And where to put our afterschool programs? I would encourage us to have a discussion sooner rather than later, and I would not limit it to one provider. I would encourage us to ensure that the top five providers know that even while this is not a permitted use, any operation of those programs in the city shall be created with the same 12% total that are leveraged against our hotels so that that money can go back into our communities and ensure, even if we set it into a fund specifically for helping out in understanding the communities that are most impacted by not having rental access to to just leave that money on the table seems . Point made.
Speaker 5: So we are looking at, if you remember, the July budget projection we are looking at including that money in our FY19 budget. So we are looking at putting $900,000 into the budget. It's a conservative estimate and it is you know, we're not at the level of an LA, but we are looking at that. And right now, the only way to collect that without an ordinance would be through that. One company of the five is the only one that allows that. If we were to go forward with a with an ordinance, we would be looking at collecting it from every single one. So we are seeing that as a revenue opportunity. We would require anyone who does a short term or two to pay our full 12% total under a program.
Speaker 2: Mr. Motoko, I appreciate your perspective. If we set a fee and state that anyone participating in the use of short term housing is required to pay that fee just because the platform that they're using would not make a transfer of that funding to us easy and convenient does not mean that they would be that they would be exempt from paying it. So if, for instance, I was a neighbor, let's say in the 1988 off of Wardlow Road and I was renting out my property on a platform other than the one you mention. And I rented out my property 65 days a year at $100 a night. Then that $6,500 would then generate 12% that I would be responsible for coming down to City Hall with my check and turning it in and stating, Here's the money that I owe you. I mean, just because the platform that they would be using is not Airbnb, be willing to give us an agreement does not mean that you cannot have a fee associated with a use that is not currently ordinance that I mean, that would be my argument. It seems as though with that kind of money on the table, it should at least be before this dais to make that decision, because every single day that's passing, if you have what is the estimated number of units we believe are on the market in Long Beach at this time.
Speaker 5: I don't have it off the top of my head, but it's probably over a thousand.
Speaker 2: So over a thousand at 30% rental would be 300 units at an average of 150 at night times 12%. I mean, we're just watching money not come in that I think is is irresponsible. So thank you so much for hearing us out. And I hope that this item comes back before us. I recognize that there still does need to have a robust discussion about this as an ordinance and as a policy. But that process, if it's going to take till the fall, that's six months of revenue, that could be for our children.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I wanted to queue up, just to be clear. Obviously, this issue is going to be a hot issue and we will have a long night whenever this issue comes before us. I definitely do not support receiving revenue on an illegal operation in the city if it's not legal. We should not be taking revenue because that tells companies across the board that they can come here and try to bribe us to pass a policy. So I would say that and saying that I hope that that encourages us to get this item before us sooner rather than later. I know that because they took that step in L.A., it has made creating the policy extremely difficult because there is now money on the table that you cannot vote to take that money away should it happen. Thank you, Stacy. So it makes it very difficult. And so I just want to say, we need to have the entire conversation as one package. That was my intent when I agenda was the item. And making sure that we do have constituents from across the board. It also last time when we talked about Oscars, it wasn't reflected in staff's notes that I wanted to make sure that we were exploring using that fund to fund affordable housing. It was not my intent to put that agenda item to say here, this all goes to the general fund, and I know that's how it's already been allocated in the budget, and that's not something I support either. And I know that from talking to the different platforms in this process, that they are supportive of trying to balance out an affordable housing challenge that we do have in the city. So I know that we all have a different idea of what short term rental policy could look like. And it sounds like staff has an idea, as you just said, you would come to the city and tell us what to do with that total. We haven't voted yet, so we need to make sure that we get this item here soon so we can have a thorough, transparent conversation instead of talking about the what ifs every time we bring this up. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much. Councilmember Councilmember. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 2: This council supports the collection of authorized sale of marijuana, which is federally illegal. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: This is completely unrelated, related to how late it is. But I just want to say I just want to say, you know, these council C measure how many items that we do last year, city council agenda items. You got any idea?
Speaker 0: I have no idea. Okay.
Speaker 1: I don't think I don't think it's going to be less next year. I think meetings are going to get like later and later. And frankly, it's just unfair because this these are good issues. And I bet more people would be here and want to engage in this. So all I'm saying is I just want to say maybe I know people may throw a dagger at me for saying this, but maybe we bring a council meeting on the fifth Tuesday when months are like really jam to try to take some pressure. I'm sorry, Sylvia. Don't throw the dagger, but. But I'm just saying, these are I mean, it's it's like. It's like almost midnight. It's like two weeks in a row. I just think at some point we've got to figure out, I mean, we're not having the same agendas that we had before. I don't know if it's the fifth Tuesday. I don't want I we got to figure something out. I'm just saying.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much. There is a motion and a second take public comment on on the presentation. Sorry to the the the lady and actually can we get the lady in the front, please? Who was first in line?
Speaker 8: You guys will get it. Good evening, council and mayor and Vice Mayor. My name is Iyana Cobb, and I think what everyone was trying to do is just kind of get their comments is what they wanted to say since they have been here all night. Not that they wanted to hear the presentation tonight, that they just wanted to say, I just want to get out. I've been here for like 17 hours. So but anyway, I am a U.S. veteran. I'm an Army veteran of. Thank you. And I just want to say that instead of us going outside looking for other examples, I was a homeless veteran and in the city of Long Beach, and it was something that I never thought that would happen to me. Fortunately enough, I landed in the Cabrillo Century Villages, which has done an amazing job. They have amazing resources. Obviously, there's still a lot of things to do, and I think that's an opportunity for the city to actually look at that model, sit down and talk to them and see how they did some things instead of us using our resources. Kind of go out of that is great though. We do have a lot of buildings that are being built for public vouchers, but it still does not resolve the issue with regards to preexisting housing that does not have rent control. It's like we're banding bandaged in it. We're not really treating the issue. We're kind of tap dancing around the situation, not me, myself, that will eventually become a homeowner going through this process. I understand that we don't want to oversight how someone owns homes and how they, you know, issue our rents to people. However, at the same time, we also have to realize the health and welfare issue with someone becomes homeless and that also affects their mental wellness. And then it just took us out to a whole lot of different other things. Some stories I've heard where rents are increase within 30 days, 60 days, 90 days. If you're on a job, you're lucky if you get a raise in a year. So to just kind of like keep giving them, you know, raising the rents is just kind of exorbitant. Just a quick scenario. For example, I was in a situation where my daughter was still in school. I had already given my notice to my other apartment. Complex wants to move into a current apartment complex before I became homeless. And I didn't think to ask what the fee was for because common sense would say the the life will probably be about $25, maybe 50. But when I want to go sign the lease here in Long Beach with Cabin Group Property Management, the late fee was $150 and my rent was only $895. So I was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Like, Okay, I can either sign this now, I'll be in the car with my daughter. So I think there needs to be a lot of oversight with regards to rent control, property management companies, how they do things. And also when we control topic comes up next week, it should be in the beginning of the agenda so that everyone will have an opportunity to actually engage in the conversation. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you for your service. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hi, Mayor. City Council.
Speaker 5: My name's Gary Shelton. Years ago, when I was first dealing with affordable housing issues, we worked really, really hard on campaigns to have inclusionary zoning and a housing trust fund. We got the housing trust fund with no money in it. We never got inclusionary housing.
Speaker 0: You know, that was a dirty word back then. Another dirty word was SRO, single room occupancy. But guess what, folks? We've got it now in zones all over the city. We finally got it.
Speaker 5: Thanks to you all.
Speaker 0: Guess what else? Rent control. We're going to be doing a lot of.
Speaker 5: Talking about rent control over the next year or two. Starting next week. It hasn't already started.
Speaker 0: What I'm saying is that the previous councils did a lot.
Speaker 5: Of work that got us nowhere, got us to here, where we're finally dealing with some of these issues and get them on getting them on the plate.
Speaker 0: One that when we were looking at the downtown plan, we had a campaign about that to temper that down a little bit. We were guaranteed we were promised by council member IT chair one council member. It chaired two different council before you folks that there would be no gentrification. But what do these mean people been talking about? They've been talking about getting kicked out of their places because they're being gentrified.
Speaker 5: Out of their units.
Speaker 0: That's right. Now, what I'd like to have heard from this instead of all this. Oh, we're planning this. We've got this going on. We've got these plans going out. Exactly what you asked for, Mr. Mayor, which was immediate impact items. And what can we do to cut down the timeline on this? Because previous councils have always stretched out the timeline. Previous staffs have always stretched out the.
Speaker 5: Timelines on these things. What I'd like you to ask them, though, tonight is to look at.
Speaker 0: The arena numbers that we have that we're not matching right now. Remember when we had 873% up above median and 17% of low and moderate? Low and extremely low and very low. We're doing the same thing right now. What I want to hear is how many housing units have we lost to gentrification compared to how many? If you add it up, what Mr.. Your report was I couldn't add it up. Was it 50 units? Was 150 was 800. I don't know. Whatever the total number of units that are on the ground right now with keys being unlocked and lights being turned on compared to what we lost in gentrification just over the last year. Ask that question and see how you like that answer, please. Mr. Shelton, next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. I'm tired, too. I'm trying to gather my thoughts together because I can think it's been a long day. But I am a homeowner. I'm a homeowner in the ninth district. I lived on Hewlett and Elm. I bought my house two years ago. Thanks to my union, I could afford it, I. I have a various apartments that are right around my home, and recently some of the neighbors that I've got gotten to know since I moved into my property. They moved out and I saw signs going up and the signs are saying that the rent for a single bedroom apartment with no parking is $1,600. And I'm baffled because my home, it has three rooms, two bath garage, and I paid $2,000 for a mortgage. And I find it appalling that I hear that the districts that are mostly homeowners are putting a proposition now to talk about rent control or talk about rent. When, you know, as a homeowner, I cannot consciously make a profit and build equity knowing that my community is suffering. I can't do that. It makes me angry when I see two, three families living in one apartment because they can't afford it. It is not an uncommon conversation in Long Beach to know that somebody that you love or know has either been evicted, has to have a bunch of roommates in order to survive. Even in a union wage. Most union workers can't afford to live in Long Beach and working Long Beach. And this is very concerning because these are the best paid hospitality jobs right now in Long Beach. What are we going to do? Are we going to really be that city that outsources our workers because we don't want them to live here? This reminds me of the zoning laws of the twenties in the forties and fifties, where people of color could not, you know, their communities were not invested in and they had to go live a far away and walk in the alley. You know, one of my coworkers, he tells me that he was in the he remembers the day that the first day he was able to walk on Pine Avenue because he's black. And, you know, he just got evicted from his house, from his apartment. And, you know, it's just we got to do better. Honestly, this is this is a conversation that I feel like it's pretty obvious if we have companies that are coming in and paying $3 million for an apartment complex and, you know, are charging $6,000 for rent, they could afford more than 14 units to be affordable for Long Beach residents. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Can we say resident of the first district? And I'm really tired. So if I don't make sense, I apologize in advance, see if I can read my notes. There is so much going on with housing in our community right now and we cannot keep up with what's happening. We have these large corporate landlords that are coming in and buying property, anticipating making huge profit.
Speaker 4: Profits on short term rentals in conjunction with the.
Speaker 2: Olympics. We're seeing it downtown. We're seeing it in the north side of town. They're going into the low income areas. I work at the senior center, used to be once a week I'd have somebody come in and tell me that their rent had been raised 2 to $300 and they're on fixed income. That was their food budget. What were they going to do? How could they get access to food? I tried to find housing for a woman that was becoming homeless. She had to go to L.A. to even get any.
Speaker 4: Services because there was nothing in Long Beach.
Speaker 2: The building next to the one that the people were there, their residents all got two and $300 a month income.
Speaker 4: They're all seniors on fixed incomes. My building.
Speaker 0: Our.
Speaker 2: Contract expires this year. We've had some of our residents have been given notice that their buildings are going to be they're going to be moved from one bedrooms to studios so they can convert the one bedrooms to market rate units. Who's tracking that? Nobody's tracking that. There's 33 plus senior buildings in the city. That's another great net loss that we could be experience. Most of those contracts expire in the next few years. Short term rentals. I was here when those people got up and I couldn't believe, why isn't somebody penalizing those? Those are people in the community. And they were proudly announcing that they were making huge profits on their. I was.
Speaker 0: Appalled.
Speaker 2: Let's find them. They're doing something illegal. We're talking about condemning our immigrant population. And these people are proudly announcing that they're in any illegal business and we're not fining them. I find that incredible. The rent freeze. We need to look at a rent freeze. Otherwise, we are going to see more and more seniors out on the streets. I have been homeless. I don't want to be homeless again and I don't want any of our seniors to experience that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hi there. Jordan Wynn, again, thank you once again for everybody sticking out tonight. I know it's a late night, but hopefully this is reminding you of your activist days. So I'm going to tell a little bit of a story about who I am in relation to Long Beach. I am in a family of renters. We've always rented our home and we've lived in three different homes as long as I've been here. I was born and raised. I lived in the third district, then the fifth District, and now I live in the seventh District in Roberto Aranguiz. And I graduated from Long Beach Poly and I was lucky enough from the space program to be able to get into a small liberal arts school in Portland called Reed College. For my senior thesis, I researched the phenomenon of gentrification, specifically gentrification in Little Tokyo, Los Angeles, and I analyzed three different unit, three different census tracts to track the ways in which the units were changing and the populations were changing at the same time. And what I found was astounding.
Speaker 0: Gentrification is a fact fast.
Speaker 5: Acting process that happens within 3 to 7 years.
Speaker 0: Something that takes place rapidly. It's a crisis.
Speaker 5: In downtown L.A. right now. It's actually been identified as the most gentrified place.
Speaker 0: And so I came back eager.
Speaker 5: To help my city, eager to give back to the community that had given me so much. And what do I find when I come back to our downtown? The same exact phenomenon, gentrification going on downtown and across our city today. Somebody actually told me that a unit on Walnut and Fourth Street, which used to be pretty affordable neighborhood, a studio.
Speaker 0: Is now going for.
Speaker 5: 1700 dollars in this city of Long Beach, which is unbelievable for me as a student coming back. I don't have anywhere to live. I'm living at my parents house. My parents just got a rent increase of $300. So where am I going with all this? How does this relate to the study? Well, you know, there's a lot of cool policies that have been outlined, but I think the most important have been sidelined or way far back in the policy process. For example, policies three, one and three, two I cited in the the presentation are in process and pending it are some of the most dire needs for our city. It's one of the ones that is least for the furthest down on the policy pipeline. 3.4 not being available from general funds when 40% of our fiscal responsibility from the city was spent on police really makes me question who we're protecting here. The people who are going to come into the city or the people who are already living here. And then.
Speaker 0: 310 we can have.
Speaker 5: Affordable developments, but those can often be parts of gentrification process as we've seen around the country. And I'm wondering with things like what Rex Richardson presented last month, where is that discussion? I appreciate it. And bringing that up tonight, where is REP?
Speaker 0: Where is rent control?
Speaker 5: Where is just cause eviction? And the discussion about this? And most importantly, where is wealth building in our most vulnerable communities?
Speaker 0: These policies that have been presented.
Speaker 5: Tonight are for a city that is not in crisis.
Speaker 0: It may be standard process now, as Rex.
Speaker 5: Richardson said earlier.
Speaker 0: But this is no longer a standard issue. This is a housing crisis. We are dealing with people who are receiving rent increases of 300, 400, 500, $800.
Speaker 5: At a time. And my family might get this place of the city. I don't know where I'm going to go after that.
Speaker 0: The mayor wants to know what.
Speaker 5: The standard among cities are when it comes to renter protections. And I can tell you with a firm.
Speaker 0: A firm statement.
Speaker 5: That it is renter protections. Look into it and thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: I'm fucking livid.
Speaker 3: I swear you don't know what's going on. You're asking questions about these things that apparently has been in the works for so long. I'm just like, God damn. My name is Jennifer and I'm a student, Cece UAB. And the only reason I'm able to live where I live, where I live is because I'm using my financial.
Speaker 2: Aid, all of it, to go to my rent. I don't think my friends even know this, but over the summer I was homeless. I was looking for housing in L.A., and I only found it here. And that's because I had financial aid. And you have people who are being evicted, who have who are disabled, who can't afford better living right now. You guys have the audacity to call this a receive and file. It's a fucking emergency. We might be homeless. At least you'll have homes to go to tonight. I'm calling on you as the people who make the decisions in Long Beach to protect renters in this city. I am one of 60% of renter population that this this fucking city. Many people are being displaced for no fucking reason, not just because of big shit. And that's perfectly legal because we don't got rent control. I stand with all renters who speak out against the injustices due to gentrification. You all really need to fucking do something about this. Let's see what happens if we cut your salaries. How fucking fast you're going to get this shit through.
Speaker 0: I know you have a right to speak to. Please. I just would appreciate this. The language. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because I hurts.
Speaker 0: I'm just. I'm. You are. You have a personal right to say what you want. I just wanted to say that you have a right to say whatever you want. Continue.
Speaker 2: All right, fine. Fuck it. Look into temporary rent. Freeze and just cause eviction until November. Until you guys decide to get together and actually do something about this temporary rent freeze. No more building those goddamn things outside the construction around in downtown. Stop over until you guys come together.
Speaker 3: And actually do something about it.
Speaker 2: A lot of Long Beach residents to decide on rent control because we need it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Speaker, please. Hi, everyone.
Speaker 4: My name is Ben. I'm a resident of the ninth District. I've spoken in front of city council before regarding affordable housing issues in the past. I guess what I really want to talk about is just to really let you all know, you know, what informs us and I know this is something the city council is trying to do, is really inform themselves about the issues. And oftentimes I hear from city council members when we bring up issues that the public is not informed or that we're misinformed. And so I want to offer the experiences that have formed my, you know, my, you know, living in Long Beach for the past 20 years, my family living here. And also really to explain the anger that I think a lot of us have when speaking to city council members. When my family first immigrated here to the United States to Long Beach, renting was the most affordable option we have. And so we moved around and we we eventually settled in a spot on Orange and San Antonio in Bixby Knolls that my family lived in for several years. And we were evicted because my mom had complained about several pest issues that were occurring in the apartment complex. And because Long Beach doesn't have any just cause eviction laws, you know, my mom was given no other option but to find another place. And for my mom to have that courage to speak out to her landlord to fix those issues and maintain the property was really difficult because I also come from an undocumented immigrant family and as a single mother, this was very important for her to maintain the well-being of her family and provide a home we faced housing insecurity for. I faced housing insecurity for a majority of my life. And actually for about two years I had my family of five, a single mother and four sons lived and essentially what was a smaller than a studio, a back house of one of our family friends in the ninth District. And so, you know, this issue is very urgent. As people have said, this is a housing. We're not in a housing crisis. We're in a housing emergency in Long Beach. And it's not just affecting Long Beach. It's affecting the whole state. And so what we do here ripples to the whole state. And we have to take leadership locally. We can't just stand and take a whole year to do a study of of what other cities are doing. We know that other cities in California have have set precedents for how we should establish rights for renters. 15 cities in the state of California alone have rent control, and more cities have just cause eviction policies. And their cities. These are cities with smaller renter populations Long Beach, the 60% renter populated city. You would expect that we would have a baseline of standards for how we should treat our renters because they deserve to have this. They deserve to have some stability if they decide to rent and live in Long Beach. And for many of us, Long Beach has been affordable. And with the changes we've had, with the growth that we have, we have to look at different options and respond to what's happening now, because if we don't respond now, it'll be too late. And we'll lose we'll lose the language that we've we've we've learned a lot.
Speaker 1: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: I thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor, and members of the city council. I for the record, I wanted to hear the presentation from city staff. So thank you very much. I know that a lot of hard work.
Speaker 5: Has.
Speaker 0: Been put in by the community and that we have had community meetings, we have.
Speaker 5: Had public meetings and we have taken.
Speaker 0: Public input. And I agree with the City Council.
Speaker 5: That it seems pretty clear that there is consensus.
Speaker 0: Among this body and the public that we want to see an inclusionary housing possible right away. And if that can happen, then this body does need to consider a a freeze on development until we can get that policy put in place. You also need to be considering a rent freeze until the election. You're all taking this item up next week now, making it now a much larger part of the public discourse now. And so now that that's happening, landlords are getting even more nervous. And as they get more nervous, they're raising their rents. All of this is going to create a more work in the back end because when that passes, renters are going to go back and they're going to go back and get their money back from the landlords who've been gouging them in an effort to try and raise the rent as much as they can. Before we passed an ordinance that actually does protect renters in the city, something that we have failed to do. What are other cities doing? They're passing rent control and just cause eviction. There are seven cities right now in California, including Long Beach, that are working on getting to the ballot in November . Long Beach is the largest city from San Diego, where the largest population of renters from San Diego to Seattle. That does not have any basic renter protections that we don't have just cause eviction. We do not have rent control. So we want to be a major city. We want to bring the Olympics here. Then let's be a major league city and let's act like the other big. Cities do and treat their renters right, protect their renters. One fifth of our city is living in poverty. I guarantee you those one fifth are renters. We're not doing anything for them. They're not part of this conversation tonight. We had we spent a lot of time tonight not talking about affordable housing, in fact, as very disappointing. We spent a lot of time talking about short term rentals. That's not affordable housing. In fact, we're taking affordable housing units off the market with short term rentals. We're taking apartments off the market for short term rentals. That's not affordable housing. So we're going the wrong way. And if you're not going to put that money into a fund to create affordable housing, then we will stand absolutely opposed to this ordinance. We will stand only for opponents like Santa monica, which says the owner has to be on site. It reduces nuisance, it reduces problems, and it keeps available rental units on the market. We're not going to be a city that has entire apartment buildings gutted so that they can be rented out for Airbnb. 60 days a year. Student housing. That's not affordable housing is not affordable housing. It should not be.
Speaker 5: Discussed as such.
Speaker 0: 11 1100 units of.
Speaker 5: Student housing is not affordable housing. To pretend that it is is is dishonest.
Speaker 0: And I think we know better than that. Thank you. If you.
Speaker 1: Want to just complete a.
Speaker 0: Share. These guys are working overtime. I don't understand why we're in the midst of this crisis.
Speaker 5: Why we aren't getting these folks more resources to get this work done.
Speaker 0: You tell them to make it a priority. But what are they supposed to do? They just spent six months on the land use element, and only really half the city actually cared about, maybe even less. You got 60%, 60% rents, but they don't have the resources to address it. So I think you.
Speaker 1: I hear you. Yeah. Thank you for your time. Want. I mean, we went about a minute over. So thank you.
Speaker 0: I appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Vice Mayor. Mayor. Council and staff Brian D'Andrea with Century Housing. Like Josh, I too was a member of the Mayor's Study Group. We put a lot of work into our recommendations and our staff put even more work into its 29 point plan that was adopted by Council in May of last year. I'm struck by a couple of things tonight. One is there's a tremendous sense of urgency and recognition of urgency, both on the part of council and the community. And we appreciate that this is an issue that impacts everyone. Second, I. I would be remiss if I didn't recognize the winds and some of the progress that staff reported on in this in this update. And so I want to thank the Council for maintaining a focus on housing, maintaining and maintaining some accountability towards these recommendations that were adopted last year. I just got back from Sacramento, our state housing conference and housing is at the top of the agendas for our gubernatorial candidates, at the top of the agenda of our state legislators. There are new resources that we expect will come out of Sacramento, some of which were discussed this evening. I think one one critical piece for you all to think about is that for us to really maximize the flow of those state resources into our local communities like Long Beach, we need local match.
Speaker 4: Whether that's in lieu fees through an.
Speaker 0: Inclusionary ordinance, whether it's bond proceeds that might be invested in affordable housing. Our ability to attract outside resources really depends on those local dollars. So it's something for you all to to think about. So thanks again for maintaining your your commitment to this issue and for listening to the community.
Speaker 1: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hello again, Vice Mayor and City Council here. Here with Libra. I just wanted to speak on on some of the items today, but I want to sort of offer a context, especially on the heels of the the land use element. When we're talking about building density, it's now more and more time, more than ever. Do we need to really consider affordable housing creation, especially when we're talking about density. Density is not a proxy for affordable housing, and the only way to get affordable housing is to build affordable housing. So I want to thank the council members that actually brought up the idea of renter protections and tenant protections, because housing. Housing is is a very complex issue. And I know that there's a lot of folks, especially up in the capital, that think that we're that we just need to build more housing and that that's going to solve all of our problems. Actually, one of the the candidates for the governor was stating that that's all we need to do. We need to remove regulations and just continue to build more housing and then everything's going to be fine. But I am you know, I'm in my mid-forties and I don't think I've ever in my lifetime seen rents go down. Have you? So even if we built if we built all the housing that we need today, the rents are still going to stay the same. And they're still going to say out of reach for a lot of our a lot of our residents. So we don't believe in the trickle down theory of building more housing and that things are going to get affordable. Studies have shown that it takes decades for that to happen. So I really do appreciate the city council members that really brought up the idea that we need tenant protections along with really considering robust inclusionary housing policies. And I am going to urge the council, too, when we're talking about inclusionary housing, that we're seriously considering a large set aside for the very low income level folks. Because one thing that I still want to see from these recommendations completely stricken is this idea that we redefine moderate income to 150%. Amy.
Speaker 0: That just needs to go away because that is.
Speaker 5: Just absolutely ridiculous that.
Speaker 0: We are going to be building moderate.
Speaker 5: Affordable housing for people that are making close to $100,000 a year.
Speaker 0: That we we cannot allow.
Speaker 5: That to happen. So that just needs to be taken out. And I do appreciate that the that the idea of.
Speaker 0: No net loss was brought up because there's all kinds of different tactics and strategies that we can be considering to to ensure that we're producing affordable housing, but we're also preserving affordable housing. And we are losing so much affordable housing right now because there are no tenant protections, because we don't have any laws in place that is going to preserve affordable housing.
Speaker 5: So knowing that laws, policy seems to be a reasonable solution. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 1: All right. So that concludes public comment.
Speaker 0: All right. This morning. Kate, we just completed public comment. We do have a motion in a second to receive the report. I see no other additional council comment. Please cast your votes on that.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay, motion carries. Thank you very much. And thanks for the people that folks that came out for that item. Let me just continue here. Me once. Just give me 1/2.
Speaker 2: 33. What do you want to know?
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to please have. And guys, if we can just continue our meetings, we just have the conversations outside. Please, madam, quick, can you read the next item, which is 33? Kelly could you just the mike thank you. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a presentation providing an update on the City’s efforts to encourage the production of affordable housing. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0204 | Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to please have. And guys, if we can just continue our meetings, we just have the conversations outside. Please, madam, quick, can you read the next item, which is 33? Kelly could you just the mike thank you.
Speaker 2: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to Declare Ordinance Amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating.
Speaker 3: To the designation.
Speaker 2: Of the VIP record sign as a historic landmark.
Speaker 3: Read for the first.
Speaker 2: Time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution establishing a historic.
Speaker 3: Resources designation for.
Speaker 2: The AP record sign.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We have a believe a staff report on this short staff report.
Speaker 5: Christopher. A quick staff report.
Speaker 0: Good evening or morning. Council members that I am before you is strictly related to the historic preservation of the Pope record sign. So as a reminder to council members, this item does involve an agreement between the city and the owner of Pope Records, the owner of the sign. And that was a previous agenda item. There was a previous agenda item declaring the sign, a historic landmark and the way that works procedurally. Council gave that policy direction and then an ordinance was drafted by the city attorney. It's here for your first reading. So as this evening is just a procedural matter, there is no staff report beyond that. Okay. Thank you. There is a motion and a second. Councilman Andrews. Yes, I know. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 7: I support this.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Public comment. Well.
Speaker 2: Good morning. Good morning. Good evening. By Mayor and city council. I'm exhausted, but not just from tonight, but from this whole year long journey. So on March 14th, a year ago, we extended an olive branch to the city. And it was an olive branch. Because to be honest with you, we could have filed a lawsuit against the city of Long Beach for civil rights breaches. When our sign that was built by Calvin Anderson. When someone behind the scenes worked to strip him of his rights of that sign. We move forward because sometimes mistakes happen. And when we met with you, Mayor Garcia, you assured us of your commitment to VIP records. And and as much as I'm fond of you, you have not met your commitment. You have allowed Councilman De Andrews. To completely block this process from moving forward. We have a historic landmark that increases property values by 15 to 20% in the city of Long Beach. It brings in block grants. It brings in jobs, in economic opportunities. And we were promised by the mayor that he would help us find a home to anchor that sign. First, we were promised he would you would never put an appraisal in on the property where the history was built. It didn't happen. You then promised us that you would do everything you can to ensure we secured our home and MLK and Pacific Coast Highway and that now we are in a bidding war against other developers. But we have a contract with the City of Long Beach to find us a home. Mayor Garcia, you were going to. And please communicate with me. I know you're tired, but I'm tired too, brother. I really am. If you want to talk about inequity, talk to a business that stood here for 40 years. And we have to go to petitions and to media in order to get a meeting with the city attorney, in order to get a meeting with our city councilman. So what I'm asking of you today and honestly, respectfully, because I do respect the majority, probably eight out of ten council members. And the mayor is I'm asking you to work with the city attorney as a family and put the political B.S. aside and find a way to secure our history on MLK and Pacific Coast Highway where it was built. This is in equity and we want equity. We are not here to play. We're here asking for leadership. Not I can't touch it because it's not in my district. As we get roadblocks from the sixth district. So I appreciate. I'm going to wrap up. I need to be cut off. I appreciate your time. I really do. And to every council member that has reached out, that supported us, it's taken meetings. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. But please know we've been through a lot, and I need you to come together as a family.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Thank you. As there any other public comment on this issue. Senior members, please cast your votes. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Here's. Here's.
Speaker 3: Mr. Mayor, I think I think just in light of I know I know that there's been a few people that Shereen and Calvin have talked to. And I'm just wondering if someone can just update us on what the next steps are, just so we're clear on that.
Speaker 0: Mr. Castle, can you give us an update, please, on the next steps?
Speaker 4: Honorable mayor and members of the city council. Good morning. I can provide you with a quick update on the agreement between the city and VIP records. As you know, back in May of 2017, the city council authorized an agreement between VIP records and the city of Long Beach. And part of the agreement was to assist VIP records in the up to $80,000 in one time funds to to ultimately achieve five goals. One of them was the removal of the sign. One was transportation and storage of the sign. Number three was restoration of the sign. Number four was preservation of the sign. And number five in the agreement was relocation. Ultimately, a lot of progress has been made to this date, and that includes launching an online marketing and promotion campaign to raise funds, retaining the historic preservation experts to develop the relocation and preservation plans, as was mentioned. And the Cultural Heritage Commission adopted the recommendation on the 13th I'm sorry, November 13th of 17. And then in December, the city council asked the city attorney to draft the ordinance, which we're reading tonight. Also on January 11th, the contractor was selected jointly by VIP and the city to disassemble, remove and transport the sign. And on the 22nd of January, the sign was securely stored at a city owned location. And so we've really accomplished the first three objectives as part of the agreement. Now we have three to go. And in terms of progress and what comes next, we need to work collaboratively on the remaining terms, which primarily are the restoration of the sign and then the identification of a permanent home for the sign. And some progress obviously has been made. But although the city agreed to fund restoration up to $80,000, it was clear from from the agreement and upfront that that we both sides acknowledge that the true cost will probably be much higher for the restoration of the sign, and that VIP will need assistance in the fundraising process to ultimately generate the funds to to restore it. So we're hoping that the community will also help us out on that regard. And then in terms of identification of a permanent home for the sign, the agreement calls for the VIP and the city to work together to locate mutually acceptable permanent site for the relocation of the sign located within the city of Long Beach within the next two years. And so really, those are the three remaining objectives that we have as part of our agreement. Originally, the timeline was established to complete all of these tasks within two years, ten months in a lot of progress has been made and ultimately we've got a lot of work ahead, but I'm confident we're moving in the right direction. If there's any any questions. I'm happy to answer them. But thank you again for your support. This has been a fantastic project.
Speaker 0: Catwoman is. Was that okay? That's which is a.
Speaker 1: Just good question. And, you know, I don't like to you know, I don't know. The reference was like council members like to respect each other's districts. I personally, you know, believe in that that we should as late but something was raised so I'm going to ask maybe Dean wants to answer a john was answer what's the deal with the site in question the MLK and time.
Speaker 5: We are way beyond the Brown Act here getting I can understand a report on that was raised but we can't engage in a discussion of the merits of a property of MLK and PCH. When I the item.
Speaker 1: That was referenced in the report that was just.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's correct. But that report wasn't part of the agenda either. The agenda this evening was on the designation of the sign as a historic, not it.
Speaker 1: Well, I'd like to know at some point what the deal is.
Speaker 5: So we would certainly ask for a report back and on the future agenda.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is a second call for the vote. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much. And, Madam Clerk, please, the next item.
Speaker 2: We're off the radar.
Speaker 0: We're just getting on back to the just regular order for the agenda. So we just did 33. So I believe 36 is is 36 next? | Resolution | Adopt resolution establishing a historic resources designation for the "VIP Records" sign, as prescribed by Chapter 2.63 of the Long Beach Municipal Code to be recorded pursuant to the authority of Government Code Section 27288.2 and Public Resources Code Section 5029. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0243 | Speaker 2: Stacey.
Speaker 0: Motion carries out 28, please.
Speaker 3: Report from recommendation to adopt resolution to execute an agreement with social.
Speaker 2: Bicycles.
Speaker 3: For the purpose purchase of bicycles, station racks and associated parts and equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach bike share program in an amount not to exceed 1,500,000 citywide.
Speaker 0: Kate, There's a most interesting and I see a couple of folks queued up. So do you want to a quick staff report on this? Craig back. Thank you, Mayor. Members City Council. We're excited to bring this item before you. I think many of you, if you haven't actually ridden one of the blue bikes, are very familiar with our bike share program. It's been a successful program. We have roughly 400 bikes deployed through primarily the downtown and coastline areas of the city. This request before you this evening would allow us to purchase probably in the in the order of 500 more bikes. And our next expansion would essentially take it up through Bixby Knolls in the north Long Beach following our bike boulevard routes. So we view the bike sharing, the Bike Boulevard project and expansion kind of going hand in hand. And so we're asking for council approval tonight to allow us to move forward with purchase from the vendor, which is S.O.B. bicycles. That concludes my staff report. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Bike share shares coming uptown. That's it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 2: Yes. I am excited to see the bike share expanded. I did want to see. Are there any smaller bikes? I'm five one. I'm not even a kid. And it's really hard for me to ride those bikes. Do they have a smaller bike?
Speaker 0: Councilmember I'd be happy to show you how the seat.
Speaker 2: I know how the seat adjusts and when I adjusted all the way down, it's a challenge of it's a challenge for me. It might be a challenge for a junior high kid that wants to go on a ride with their parents.
Speaker 0: You know, all seriousness, we are actually working with a vendor for a couple of things. And what we would like to introduce into the system are tricycles as well.
Speaker 2: Not I don't want to try.
Speaker 0: Not not little people off of tricycles, but adult tricycles because some people have asked for something that's more stable and something with a basket. So we're looking at tricycles. We're also looking at e-bikes as well. So electric.
Speaker 2: Bikes.
Speaker 0: I will ask him something specific for.
Speaker 2: You know, people in between, you know. You know, he said tricycles. Yeah, adult tricycles. I like it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Supernanny. Thank you. I just spotted some e comments here. And I guess for the purpose of telling the audience that we read the comments even at 12:12 a.m.. But there is you know, I'm sorry, but it's the comment was no measure eight funds should be spent on these bicycle. So I think the confusion is Proposition eight versus Measure A. Mr. Beck, could you explain that, please? Yes, Councilmember, thanks for bringing that up. That is correct. We are not asking for approval to utilize Measure $8. Proposition $8 are transportation dollars that the city receives through its partnership with L.A. Metro, and they're targeted specifically for transportation projects . So it's really quite different from Measure A in that is, is it would you call it like a reimbursement or.
Speaker 1: What would it be called?
Speaker 0: The city receives a share of the Proposition $8, which again are transit oriented dollars that can only be spent on transit projects. Measure as you're very familiar as a tax the city receives, it is essentially general fund dollars. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Just really quickly, Craig, since we're on the issue of tricycles, thinking of our little ones. Councilmember Price had mentioned maybe a unicycle.
Speaker 2: I'm kidding. But actually I have thought about.
Speaker 3: Children or families with children like my own. And we often think of adding the little one and putting I don't know if the the addition for children. I don't know how we incorporate that, but I've seen that in other cities. So I don't know if we're even perusing that, but it'd be a really good one for us to add maybe down the line if we could, just throwing it out there. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Counsel. Actually, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: But that break does bring up a good a good question. I know. Is it true that people under 18 can't do can't check on a bike? Is that true?
Speaker 0: So one of the things that we're looking at is modifying both our rules and our rate structure. Okay. We believe it's important in our community to add a rate program for those that are lower income. So that is something we'll we will be bringing back to council. And when we bring forward that rate adjustment, we'll also be talking about who has the opportunity to utilize the bikes, essentially. A vice mayor has to do with being an adult. So if you're 18, you can sign up for a program yourself. If not, you would need an adult. Got it.
Speaker 1: Understood. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? None. Please cast your votes. As we move on to the next item, we officially have passed the land use element meeting from last week on time, which which I didn't think was possible, but we always find a way. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute an agreement with Social Bicycles, Inc., of Brooklyn, NY, and any necessary amendments, for the purchase of bicycles, station racks, and associated parts and equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach Bike Share Program, in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and
Increase appropriations in the Transportation Fund (SR 182) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $1,500,000, offset by Proposition A funds available. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0244 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? None. Please cast your votes. As we move on to the next item, we officially have passed the land use element meeting from last week on time, which which I didn't think was possible, but we always find a way. Next item 29.
Speaker 3: Report from Public Works Recommendation to.
Speaker 2: Award a contract to a tool design group for preparation of a Systemic.
Speaker 3: Safety Analysis Report program and a Vision Zero Action Plan and an amount not to exceed 199,817 citywide.
Speaker 0: There's a motion I just briefly. I know I know that it's late, but can we just please get vision zero is actually really important. And can we kind of come back and give the council an update? Because I really think that we've spent some time talking about Vision Zero and can I maybe a status on how the action plan is going? Can we do that? Mr. BECK Yes, Mayor, we can, but why don't you just give me 30 seconds? Because this this initiates the program. Really, what we're asking this evening is to allow us to hire a consultant. The consultant is going to do a number of community meetings and help us develop a Vision Zero plan. So what we will be bringing back to council when we have that plan is how we plan on approaching achieving a Vision Zero, which for the audience means that we would have no pedestrian deaths from vehicle accidents. Excellent. Thank you. Any public comment on this item saying none, are it? Please, cash? Yes.
Speaker 2: Can I go? Thank you. I also want to just highlight how great this is that we are finally hiring a consultant. I know Mr. Beck knows how important Vision Zero is to me and my constituents in my district. We've had a handful of incidents and two deaths in my district since I've been in office. And so I was wondering if you could clarify for us just quickly what a safety analysis report program specifically analyzes on traffic safety.
Speaker 0: Thank you. At 1215 in the morning.
Speaker 2: It's okay. Welcome back. Back in two months.
Speaker 0: No, I can I can tell you that now, essentially, Vision Zero starts by looking at the data, and the data will show us where the most dangerous intersections are in the city. So that's the start. And then we'll take that information out to the community and start identifying where we have our most dangerous intersections and. Improvements at those intersections.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP PW17-131 and award a contract to Toole Design Group, LLC, of Silver Spring, MD, for preparation of a Systemic Safety Analysis Report Program and a Vision Zero Action Plan, in an amount not to exceed $199,817, for a period of one year, with the option to renew for one additional one-year period, at the discretion of the City Manager; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents and any necessary amendments, including adjusting the fee schedule for inflation; and
Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $225,000, offset by grant funds. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03062018_18-0186 | Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And let's find out. What's my baby at home? Thank you very much. Okay. We're going to go ahead and get started with the with the agenda. The hearing is up. First, I just want to explain how hearings work. Hearings are a little different than a regular agenda item. And so I just want to make sure everyone is aware if you haven't been through a hearing before. So in a hearing, the clerk will introduce the item I want you to do staff who will then make the presentation. Then there is the public hearing or public comment. Then I have to close the public comment hearing period and then open up council deliberations. So that is how the hearing will go, just so that we're all aware of the process. And with that, I'm going to turn this over to the clerk.
Speaker 2: Report from Development.
Speaker 1: Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation under the record, conclude the public hearing and confirm the proposed general plan, land use element and urban design element, place type and heights, maps and direct staff to update the program IIR and increase appropriations in the Development Services Fund in the Development Services Department by 350,000, offset by funds available citywide.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. And with that, I'm going to turn this over now to our city management team.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the city council. I'm Tom Modica. I'm the assistant city manager. And it's my pleasure to lead the presentation tonight along with our staff from Development Services. Behind me are Linda Tatum, our planning bureau manager, Kari Tai, our current planning officer, and four new one of our planners. So I.
Speaker 4: Will have a.
Speaker 3: Fairly lengthy presentation tonight. This is a very complex subject. It's one where we've obviously heard a lot of community concerns and a lot of very good questions being asked. So we're going to spend some time going through kind of what is the plan and how did we get here and why are we doing this? And talk a lot about those community concerns that we've heard and how the plan addresses those. At that point, we'll be looking for public comment, of which we believe we're going to have a lot tonight. And then we'll be turning to the council. And I will. And the council we expect we'll be making several changes to the plan as we as we consider this. And so if we can bring up the staff report, please, on the screen. Okay.
Speaker 0: There we go, Mr. Murdoch. And as the presentation comes up, I just want to also just remind the audience that once a presentation is over and we do, we begin the public comment period. Folks have a variety of input, will have different ideas and people will have different opinions. I just want to make sure that we're all respectful of everyone's opinions, regardless of what their opinion is, that everyone has a chance, a right to be heard. And so I want to make sure that we respectful of not just the people speaking, but of the staff as well. And so. Mr. Modica.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much, sir. So we're going to start by talking a little bit about what a general plan is. And so a general plan is really a long range policy document that guides future development. There is a requirement for every city to have a general plan, and there are seven elements that are required by state law . One of the key components of a general plan is that it must accommodate the required amount of population growth, and that's set by the state of California. The zoning ordinance is another part that we talk about often, and that's different than the general plan that implements general plan policies through detailed development regulations. Those are things like specific use types, building standards. It talks about allowable uses on each parcel and its development standards and parking requirements. So that's a granular level down from the general plan. And then the entitlement. We've all heard that word before. And when a building is granted an entitlement, what that really is, is the approval from the regulatory body to use or develop that land. And so that is your permits to be able to build or remodel or expand. And so the state gives us some guidelines on what is the land use element and really it designates type intensity and general distribution of uses of land. And those are for things like housing, business, industry, open space, our educational facilities, our public buildings and waste disposal facilities, those types of things. Typically, a land use element is a long term planning horizon. It's about 20 years or more. We also we'll be talking tonight, tonight about something called an urban design element. And that really is something that looks into the three dimensional realm. So you're focusing on what a place actually looks like when it's built the relationships of the buildings to each other into public spaces, as well as design and quality of sidewalk. So ensuring that you're going to get quality design as we plan our city for the next 20 years. And so the general plan has a number of visions and goals. These were drafted as we went out in 2004 to 2006 and really looked at and asked the community for what is it that you want to have as a city, the planning commission and the city council as well. And so those goals are things like implement sustainable planning and development, strengthening our fiscal health by stimulating continuous economic development and job growth, accommodating strategic growth and change, supporting neighborhood preservation and enhancement. Diversifying our housing opportunities. Ensuring a fair and equitable land use plan, providing reliable public facilities and infrastructure, increasing access to and the amount and the distribution of our green and open space and preserving and protecting our natural resources. And so the vision of the plan that you're going to see tonight, it is a complex plan, but it essentially boils down to a couple of things. It's really about a strong urban center in the downtown. We know that a lot of growth is happening currently in the downtown and it's been planned for growth in the downtown plan is working very, very well. And this plan encourages that. We're also looking at creating a very strong North-South connection along the Metro Blue Line. We're very fortunate to have transit in our town. That really is the future for cities. All great cities have some type of strong transit system, and we have one along the Metro Blue Line that we're looking to in to be able to enhance some opportunity around that. And then the plan also looks for some modest growth throughout the city so that there's other opportunities and we have a balanced city. The land use is more than just residential development. You'll hear a lot about that tonight, but really also plans for commercial, open space and industrial development. So why should we update the plan? What are some of the reasons? I'd like you to take you through a couple of numbers just to give you a sense of of the need. And the first one really is looking at what when did we last do this? When were we all sitting in these seats? And it wasn't us. It was our our predecessors. But when were people here making this decision? It was in 1989. That was the last time that we enacted the current land use settlement. Then that horizon year for the current land use element is 2000, so it planned out 20 years to 2000 and obviously we're 18 years past that horizon date. That plan. The current one really does not address climate change. There are no policies on sea level rise. There are no policies on environmental justice and no policies on disadvantaged communities. And those are all things we talk about now, but weren't really talked about in 1989. We've grown since 1989. We have 44,000 new residents that have added to our city since 1989. But we really didn't grow in terms of housing. We have built one housing unit for every ten population growth in our city over that time period. We all know that housing is expensive in Long Beach and the median 2018 home value right now is $579,000 and $500. So what does it take to actually own that kind of a house? It takes $118,000 of joint income to pay the mortgage on that house and the taxes. Not even to mention affording the down payment. And so as we look at just some examples of affordability, a Long Beach Unified schoolteacher currently makes about $58,000 starting salary. Starting salary of a Long Beach fire recruit is 58,000, and the starting salary of an accountant is about 50,000. And so what else has changed since 1989? Besides 44,000 new residents, our port has grown dramatically. We are tripling the size of our throughput at the port. We did not have a blue line in 1989, so that has changed and we're very different now. We've had investment in bike and pedestrian and infrastructure. We've had a major renaissance in downtown and the aquarium didn't exist back then. Also the pike and I should say the new Pike. The old pike did exist earlier, but the new pike didn't exist and our downtown town landscape was very different. Additionally, the Internet really came on board in 1990, so the first World Wide Web browser was created and e-commerce has really taken off. So back then, e-commerce wasn't really something we looked at. Now it's 8% of national retail sales. We've changed the way that we shop. The Grove is a great example where the Grove in 2002 was the first kind of entertainment destination, where instead of just going to get something to shop and leave, you're there for an experience. And so we're seeing those throughout the region now, including in Long Beach, the Navy coast. We lost about 50,000 aerospace and Navy jobs over that time period. And we've had this paradoxical rising of population and falling public school employment. So one of the other reasons we really look at a land use element is to implement our economic blueprint. That's something the city council spent a lot of time putting into place over the last two years, a big priority of the mayor and council. And so updating our general plan will allow us to remain an engine for growth. We will look at economic inclusion and development and create some development standards and future predictability of where growth will go. We also need to pay attention to our assessment for fair housing. This is a federal requirement to make sure that we are treating people fairly and that we have equity and people of all types can find housing in Long Beach. And of course, our affordable housing and workforce incentives. So establishing incentives and strategies for housing production throughout Long Beach and also looking at some of our specific plans and how to provide regulatory relief. So it's also take a look at a little bit about who we are. So we all get a sense of that. We are a population of 485,000 people, and we're the seventh largest city in California. Although we're the seventh largest, we have the 10th slowest growth rate of the top ten cities. So of the top ten cities, we are the slowest growing at 0.66%. But even at this rate of growth, it's about 3200 new residents a year. And if we were to put all of them and put a housing unit around those 3200, that's about a thousand units that we should be building to keep up with that growth and our arena numbers. And we'll talk about that in a little bit. Our housing production goal is actually lower than that at 783. So we're also a younger population relative to our neighbors, relative to Los Angeles, the state and the country. We are younger. Our median age is 34. Half of our residents fall under the age of 20 to 54 years old. And we also have a smaller elderly population. But we're going to see that population grow over time. We've also changed as a community in terms of our demographic makeup. In 1980, our Latino population was 14%. Today, it's 40.
Speaker 4: To.
Speaker 3: 46% of all Long Beach residents speak a language other than English at home. We are also a city, primarily of renters. Many of us in this room are fortunate enough to own a house here in Long Beach, but actually we are the minority. 60% of people who live in Long Beach are renters rather than owners. Household types. Our household is 176,000 households with an average size of 2.8 people. The majority, 61%, were families. 51% had children. But what we've seen as a trend since 2000 is that families with children have decreased by 11%, while families without children have increased by 14%. So let's talk a little bit about our housing and our housing stock. We have 176,000 total housing units in Long Beach. We have a 4.6 vacancy rate. That is how many of those are actually vacant at any given time. And our housing stock is primarily in two different areas. Single family homes are about 42% and multifamily buildings are about 39% of our housing stock. And a diverse housing stock really is important to ensure that all households have the ability to find housing that's suited to their lifestyle. We have an older housing stock. About 57% of the housing is over 50 years old. Here in Long Beach, we are an old city and 85% is over 30 years old. So we really don't have a lot of the newer stock that maybe some other cities do see. So why is an update necessary? We've kind of established kind of what we look like and what how things have changed, but why should we be going through this effort? So I want to point out that about 12% of our population are overcrowded. That's 56,000 people live in overcrowded conditions, and that's according to federal standards. We also look at what people pay for and what their housing. And typically about 30% is what has been recommended in the past to pay for housing. And 24% of our population or 114,000 people pay more than 50%. And 47% of our population or 2220 1000 people pay more than 30%. This plan also looks at growing jobs. So it's not just about housing. We are planning for about 28,000 jobs, 20,500 under the proposed we update. So the economic blueprint really is important. As I said before, it's really changed the way that we shop, the way that we engage in business growth and in job growth since 1989. And we need to be able to keep up with that. So this is just a graph that shows you that e-commerce sales nationwide has doubled in just the past six years. So many of us that would never have used Amazon ten years ago are now finding that that's the way that we purchase things. And I do that myself. I love to shop local, but I now find sometimes the convenience of Amazon is is alluring. And so we're changing the way that we that we interact with our city. An increase housing shortage. We're really looking at a housing crisis here in Long Beach. There is not enough housing being built to meet the current population growth in the city, let alone future growth. Our land use element does not plan, are currently in development, does not plan for sufficient housing opportunities. And without an update, we're going to see conditions worsen for a number of residents. Seniors and students in particular are having very difficult times finding options for housing. And so the state does give us goals on what we should be producing. Those are called arena numbers or regional housing needs assessment. And at this point, it's a production requirement. It's not a production goal or it's I'm sorry, it's a production goal, not a production requirement. And our goal is about 783 units a year. We have a goal to build 7000 units over the next four, eight years. And they tell us in what categories those should be created. And actually, our number one largest bucket is above moderate income at 3000 units. And then you'll see on the chart moderate income, low income and very low income. And so we wanted to give you a sense of how we're doing. This shows kind of our housing starts from 2006 to 2017. And then you can see our annual goal at the top. That's that 783 number at the top. So even with the housing boom, we are doing very well right now in terms of a lot of projects in downtown in 2016, 2017. Even with those years, we have not met our annual growth numbers. And so there are some consequences to not updating a land use element. It is severely out of date as we as we have looked at tonight. And that can open the city up to some potential legal challenges. We also have seen some state bills being proposed or have gone into effect that really are targeting cities that aren't planning for additional housing and additional opportunities. And so we are concerned that state might come in and impose some sanctions on jurisdictions that are not meeting their production goals. And then we do believe that growth is going to happen one way or the other, that we have seen that in the past. Even if we didn't have an updated plan, we saw for 44,000 people come to our city. So we think development is likely to happen without L.A. settlement, but it won't happen in a haphazard manner that isn't really planned and doesn't have a community vision. And so I want to talk a little bit of our process so far. How did we get here? And before we even get into community input and engagement, I do want to pause and just say there are several people we've heard them very, very loud that have felt that we have not had enough opportunity to engage. And we take that incredibly seriously. Our plan, whenever we do an effort like this, is to reach out, to get to a representative population, to reach people who want to talk to us, and also people that we would normally not engage with City Hall, because they're, you know, busy living their lives. And we try to reach everybody. And so we'll go through and tell what our plan was. But I do want to acknowledge that there are many who felt that we didn't do enough. We can always learn from our from processes. Yes, there's more that we could have done. But I do want to acknowledge that a lot has been done and you and your city has adapted. So in the past 18 months, we've heard a lot of concern. And so the city council has asked us to adapt. They've asked us to hold those meetings that had thousands of people with them. We've had roundtable meetings, so we'll talk a little bit about that. But I do want to acknowledge that we we always do want to reach everyone who wants to engage with us so that 170 community engagement meetings over the past 12 years, including ramping up to 67 engagement meetings just over the last two years. We went and you know these are be in the in the slide for you to take a look at but there's kind of three different sections. There's 2040, 2017 where we went to community engagement events, general plan festivals, planning commission. We did some visioning, we reached out, we did some surveys. I'll go to the next slide from February 2017 to 20th August 2017. We additionally had more planning commission meetings and study sessions. We did some specific outreach to really to some of the environmental justice groups, to the plan opponents. And then we came to the council and the Planning Commission and then really in the last several months, we've had the big the biggest amount of outreach where we had those four large citywide community meetings with a thousand attendees each. This has been one of the biggest processes in terms of community engagement that we've seen, at least since I've been with the city. And then we did additional targeted outreach to really go out and talk to people. And then we also had our survey responses. And then of course that culminated with the latest round of the meetings, the roundtable meetings that the Mayor had organized with Kono to get additional information and sense of the district. And so this is an evolving process. The maps have changed. They have changed many, many times, and they've changed. We expect them fully to change again tonight. And so I do want to recap quickly what those are. I'm not going to go through every change, obviously, but just a sense of what has happened. We have made changes in all nine council districts. Every single district has had a change throughout this process, reducing height and reducing intensity. What the plan looks like now is 44% of the city is really that single family place type that is are single family neighborhoods. Nothing is changing. And those in those single family neighborhoods, those 44%, 19% are regional serving uses. These are things like our airport, our port and other infrastructure. 16% are public and private open spaces and parks. 6% are those neighborhoods serving corridors and centers, which are the possibility for future mixed use. 5% are multifamily developments. Those are apartment buildings. Essentially, 2% are transit oriented development around major transit stations. 2% is the downtown plan and 1% is community commercial. Those are the traditional community shopping centers. And so the staff in the Planning Commission have made a lot of changes to heightened density essentially since August. In August, we heard a lot of input. We went out, we had those meetings, we came back as staff and we as staff recommended 686 acres of density, reduced the planning commission in December, took it further and reduced 98 acres. And on Slide 51, the next slide, I just want to give a sense of what those are. These are not a comprehensive list of everything that's changed, but just showing in District one, it's things like Linden has changed and Seventh Street has changed. District 2/7 Street, Crafton Village, Historic District and Alameda Speech Fourth and Seventh Streets in the Convention Center in District three. It's been Redondo and Belmont Pier and Los Altos and Iron Triangle, seventh Recorder, Toledo, Bayshore and Studebaker in the Fourth District, Redondo, South Anaheim. Anaheim Corridor and the surrounding neighborhoods traffic circle in the surrounding neighborhoods Whaley Park, Bellflower and Stearns. We know that is the Sears site. This downtown shopping center has changed and the surrounding area as well, as well as Palo Verde District five, Bellflower and Carson, the Long Beach Town Center, Wardlow and Los Coyotes, Spring and Palo Verde Losing Coyotes in Spring. The Kmart site Spring and Clark District six, the Pacific Corridor, the PCH, west of Magnolia Pine and Willow and the Toddler Areas. District seven Springdale, California Heights, Willow Springs Park Area District eight. Pacific Place, Long Beach Boulevard, Atlantic, Paramount and South Street and District nine. Long Beach Boulevard. Atlantic and South Atlantic and Artesia. Atlantic and Cherry Atlantic. North and 91. Sorry, Cherry Avenue Atlantic is the paramount south street of Cherry and South Street. If we were to read all the changes, it would take a long, long time. Those are all in your packets. We've been trying to provide the maps, but I just wanted to give you a sense of that's what's happened to date. And we expect to hear a number of changes happen today. So with that, I'd really like to turn it over to Linda Tatum to kind of go through some of the community concerns. We've got probably about ten of the major ones that we hear. And we'd like to provide you some information of what we are hearing and how the plan addresses those. So with that, I'd like to turn it to Linda Tatum, our planning bureau manager.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Tom. I'd like to just first acknowledge that we as Tom mentioned earlier, we had an extensive series of community outreach efforts, and the staff took it very, very seriously to to listen to what the community was saying. And what we've done is we've heard you and I'd like to address some of the concerns that you've heard that we heard in the outreach process and then to talk about how some of those concerns. Will be addressed. The first one that we heard and probably one of the more significant concerns that we heard at every single meeting was the issue of parking. The reality of the situation is that the parking the parking in the city is actually addressed in the zoning code, but it also works in conjunction with the land use element. Parking requirements are specified by a land use. They're not necessarily based upon the location or the zoning, but generally they're based upon the particular type of land use activity that occurs on a site. And I'd like to just summarize that for you for for residential in particular. And you can see in this example, as it turns out, parking does vary for residential based upon the location because we have some very unique zoning areas in the downtown plan is one of those. And based upon the transition to a proximity proximity to transit, the parking is the least that's where we have the least required parking in the downtown area because you do have immediate access to high quality transit. That requirement is 1.2 spaces in the Midtown Space Midtown Corridor plan. That's along the Long Beach Boulevard corridor. That number does go up. You still have access to transit. It's a little bit lower because you have access to transit, but it's not as as high as it is when you get away from the transit. Again, you can see in the transit oriented development quarters and again, that would be along the the Long Beach Boulevard corridor where it's within the Midtown specific plan. That space requirement goes up to 1.75. And then for all areas of the city, the parking requirement for a typical two bedroom is 2.25 parking spaces. So the good news is that as new development occurs, it is always required to provide onsite parking now in this city because a lot of the development that has already occurred in the city occurred at a time when the zoning code didn't require parking. There's a lack of parking in a lot of the neighborhoods. And we heard that loud and clear. And again, what we're saying is that as new development occurs, they will provide parking and that those new developments will take some of the some of the the stress off of the parking situation because they will park at least for themselves. I'd also like to acknowledge that the city's public works department is constantly looking at and implementing additional ways to address parking. We know that some of the efforts they've recently implemented include some changing, some streets, taking away the parallel parking on the street, and providing angled parking that increases the available parking. They've also established preferential parking districts in some areas at the request of those specific neighborhoods, and they've also established metered parking in some of the business districts. Again, a way of turning over the parking spaces to address and to try to mitigate parking as much as possible. I'd like to talk about another concern that we heard. We know that the state is very active and aggressive in terms of trying to pass state laws that do affect local governments and how they regulate development, in particular housing development, because Tom mentioned that this state is in a housing crisis. So the state is constantly trying to try to force local government to to make it easier to to develop housing. One of those bills is SB 35, and I'd like to just summarize what that law requires. This was passed last year, and it was really designed to to streamline qualifying projects, multifamily projects that are affordable. The the central tenant or the central requirement is that is that development projects that are affordable must meet certain, very, very specific and stringent standards in order to be eligible for a for that streamlining process. And when they do become eligible, they must still comply with the height limit that would be established in the land use element . There is no provision in SB 35 for a project to exceed the this the standards that are established in the land use element. The other thing is that it the SB 35, it actually requires the city to approve a set project ministerial fee, which means the city doesn't have any discretion on the project. It must be approved consistent with whatever those the existing zoning and development standards are for that project and they are not subject to secure. And that is a part of the state's intent to just make sure that projects are streamlined as quickly as possible. And the other significant component of 30 SB 35 is that it allows a project to to proceed with reduced parking or no parking. However, in our experience in the city, it is rare to have a project even when they can come in with no parking. We have not had any projects, residential or otherwise, come in without parking. It is just not in the development's best interest to not provide parking. So I'd like to talk about another one that you've. We heard of. It's called the Density Bonus Program. That's another state law. It's been around since 1979, and it essentially allows a developer of an affordable housing project in exchange for setting aside a certain percentage of the units as affordable. They are allowed to get concessions from the local government, and those concessions can range anywhere from it can range from 5% or 35%. It really depends upon the level of affordability for the project and the number of units in the project, and they can ask for concessions in the way of parking. They can ask for a concession for a reduced setback, a taller building, a higher building, a smaller unit, less open space or additional height. However, in no case can they actually come in and get an automatic 35% increase in height. That is typically negotiated as a part of the review of the development project. And it is extremely unusual to come in and have a project go. Even a typical project may exceed the height and go one additional story, but it's highly unlikely that you need to go anything more than one additional storey in compliance with the density bonus provisions. And just to give you a little sense of the history here in Long Beach, even though. Even though the state law has been in effect since 1979. Between 1983 and 2017, the city has had only 18 projects that come in under a density bonus, and we've had only one project since 2012. So the next one I'd like to talk about that we heard a lot of feedback from the community was regarding infrastructure and the need to make sure that as new development occurs, the infrastructure is in place in the community to support those projects. And the most significant way that this is addressed is actually through the payment of impact fees. Any new development project, whether it's a commercial project or residential project, is required to pay fairly substantial impact fees. Those fees cover the costs of upgrading the city's roads. They also cover the costs of police, fire, water, sewer and school facilities. All of these impacts are paid by the developer on a project by project basis. And the other benefit of those impact fees is that as the city collects property taxes, the property taxes for new developments are assessed at a much higher rate than those older properties that were developed under the Prop 13 or since Prop 13 went into effect. And the other thing to note is that thanks to the voters of the city last year, measure measure A was passed and that was a bond to substantially enhance the city's infrastructure. And that's everything from roads to sewer and water, in addition to the impact fees. Another major pretty significant concern that we heard probably as much as is parking was the issue of traffic. And I'd like to just acknowledge that traffic is is not really a local phenomenon. It is a regional phenomena as the city sits in a region. And even if you're not coming to the city, people are driving through the city. And as growth in the region occurs and economic, economic activity occurs, traffic will continue to grow and that will occur whether or not the land use element is adopted. I just want to highlight that when the city, like in our city, we have approximately 70% of the city's residents actually leave the city to to go to work. They're employed outside of the city. And it's things like that. Jobs balance, jobs, housing imbalance, where you having to get in your car to drive outside of the city that could contributes to the additional traffic. And I mentioned earlier that new development is required to to pay for traffic improvements. And when we did the ER on the project it showed, as we well knew, that traffic would continue to increase and again that traffic would increase with or without the land use element. Ways to address reduction in traffic is providing new jobs locally. Also providing other goods and services that people use on a day to day basis is providing that locally so they they don't have to necessarily drive so that they can walk to those services or that they can drive to those services closer in the city rather than having to leave the city. And other ways that the city can actually reduce traffic are through other measures to such as having mixed use development projects. When you have a mixed use development project, you can have a residential project, residential project above ground for commercial. And in theory, you could live and work in the same building and would not necessarily have to to get in a car to to have access to services. Also, that's what occurs primarily in our downtown, where you have a lot of residential, but you have also very easy access to not only jobs, but you also have have access to transit. So we'd like to suggest that while the land use element does never does not envision a future without cars, it is not planning for a future without cars. It does include a land use pattern that will facilitate having easy access to goods and services. It actually promotes different modes of transportation. It doesn't assume that everybody's going to drive their car, but it envisions and it promotes people not driving cars and being able to walk, walk to their jobs, walk to services, or take a bike, take an Uber, or use the public transit that's available here in the city. Another issue that we heard was about the planning horizon. Tom mentioned earlier that the general plan is a long range document. It is required by state law to be long term. The state law recommends or suggests a 20 year time frame, however, that 20 year timeframe. While it's really typical and common for most cities to plan for a 20 year timeframe, that is not a hard requirement. However, we think that it's good planning practice. We think that it makes sense to plan for a 20 year timeframe because when you plan for a land use plan, you can also make your planning in conjunction with your other infrastructure facilities. The city has master plans for sewer and water and even master plans for its roadway system. And all of those are long range planning documents. And because the planning, the land use element in the general plan works and in concert with those other elements of the cities, the city's other systems, it really makes sense to look at all of those on a on a cohesive level. So planning for a 20 year timeframe for your land use element, it really does work in concert with your other infrastructure master plans, and it just makes sense to look at a longer term plan. The other rationale for looking at a longer time period is that, as you probably know, this process has been a very lengthy process. It's a fairly costly process in terms of the special studies that are needed, in terms of the community outreach that is needed, and just doing the staff work that it takes to get the plan done. So it's a costly process and that's the other basis for having it extended out or over a longer time period. So the point is that regardless of the time frame that you establish in your general plan, your plan really should be reviewed regularly and updated when it's appropriate. We know that our plan was last updated in 1989, and that is really too long of a time period to have a plan go without being updated. So we're recommending that the 20 year timeframe and. What you'll see included in the plan is a requirement or a an opportunity for the city to review the plan annually. There is a requirement in the administration of the plan that has has the staff to come back to the city on an annual basis and present to the Planning Commission and City Council, kind of the status of the plan, how much housing has been developed under the plan, and other key matrices that show how the plan is proceeding and at every opportunity for the annual review. It's an opportunity for the city council to to determine if there are updates to the plan that are needed. So a couple of other concerns. We heard about the design of the building. We heard a lot of concerns about privacy. Neighbors who live in single family residences or even two story residents were concerned about privacy and people looking into their backyard. We heard we heard that that's a concern. And what we've not talked about a lot, but we've touched on is that the land use element works in conjunction with another document called the Urban Design Element. And the purpose of the urban design element really is to encourage buildings that that actually step down to to match the adjacent buildings in the area. It essentially looks at graduated development intensity. I think you've heard us talk about ensuring that there is transitions between higher density uses and lower intensity neighborhoods. So all of these concepts are considered in the urban design element. And the goal and the objective of the element is to really look at neighborhoods and land uses from a much broader perspective, to look at them from a 3-D perspective, not just the the building itself, but how the building looks, how it's situated on the lot with the idea to really make sure that residences privacy are respected to the extent possible. To this point, we have policies and standards in the urban design element that addresses how the two buildings adjacent to each other, particularly of different densities and intensities, how the windows align so that you avoid direct line of sight into your neighbors windows. We also look at things like other building elements and ways to to screen the adjacent uses. And we can do that through things like landscaping, access to where the positioning of the site of the building on the site, where the front door is located, where the parking is located, and other other design features to minimize privacy issues. So the other one is how we manage height and making sure that we look at height appropriately. That was a really significant concern that we heard. So what I wanted to talk about really briefly is how the the urban design element accomplishes transitions between the different land uses, and it does it through a variety of tools. Some of those include step backs, looking at the overall quality of the site planning and also buffers between land uses. And that's done through looking at the various place types. Each of the place types that is that are identified in the plan have a series of of different standards. And what you'll see in the urban design element is that it's really designed to respect the situation or the location in which it's located. We appropriately want to make sure that as you transition from land from one type of land use, like a single family neighborhood into an apartment building, that those issues are being addressed. We look to make sure that the taller buildings are on the corridors and the lower scale buildings, of course, like a single family residence that they're on the the local residential streets. So again, we pay attention to things like the height of the building, like the massing of the building, and, of course, the building intensity. And I mentioned other things like measures that really produce a very thoughtful, well-designed building. And we look at that on a site by site basis. So it's not just something we look at on a broad scale, but on a property by property basis. Okay. A couple more just good neighbor policies we encourage. We talked early about this but encouraging buildings that step down to match the buildings.
Speaker 2: You can see.
Speaker 7: In this sketch here, it gives you an idea of how that's accomplished. You can do it through the the setbacks, the distance between the building from an adjacent building on the lot. There you can see the garage of the adjacent building, how you have a setback there. And you can also see how the rear of that building is stepped down. So that's just one example of tools that we use. But again, we talked earlier about landscaping. You can do things like landscaping to screen the building and you can also use window placement. Again is another design feature. And that's just again, we are very sensitive when projects come through the review process to look at the detail on all of these things. Cracker boxes, how we realize and acknowledge that the cracker boxes that happened about 20 or so years ago, they were absolutely a mistake on the city's part. Those those properties were a zone in a very, very short timeframe. And there was very little design that occurred on those buildings. What I what we're here to say today is that the the land use element and the urban design element that we just talked about features in both of those documents will assure that the cracker box phenomena will never happen again in the city. And what I'd like to talk about are some of the things that are specifically in the both the urban design element, the land use element, and, of course, in the city zoning code that will address those issues. First of all, they now have parking standards. We know that many of the cracker boxes that were built were built without adequate parking. So, again, new development that comes in under this land use element would be required to provide parking on site. They would also be required to provide appropriate setbacks again, based upon the the location of the site and what's around it. They would also be required to provide appropriate open space, both private open space for each of the units, as well as common open space on the site, and also just an appropriate level of design review. The city has a site plan review committee that reviews in great detail all of the the design features of the building, the architecture of the building, the building materials and that site plan review committee is comprised not only of the planning staff, but the Public Works Department who looks at a project for traffic impacts. We also have the police department who looks at the buildings for security and design design ways to have the design of the building prevent crime. So it's a very well-thought out and a very comprehensive review of all design features. And most importantly, the idea is that in single family areas, it's most important that we protect single family areas, and we want to make sure that there is the opportunity for for growth, for residential properties everywhere, and that where we do have multifamily developments that they're compatible with the adjacent land uses around them. Non-conforming properties. We talked about this one a little earlier. I think you've probably heard the term, but legal non-conforming status is a status that's created when a project is built. If it's built according to code at the time it's legally permitted, it can become legal non-conforming if the code changes or if one of the development standards in the code changed. And because of the age of the city, we have a lot of properties that were built, but they are no longer conforming either because the code, the zoning has changed and it's no longer permitted or one of the standards have changed. So the standard of legal non-conforming properties is that they are very strongly, highly protected by by law in the city's code and they may be continued or maintained as long as they are maintained and not abandoned. So once a structure is built, if it has a legal non-conforming status, it's protected. And at no time could the land use element or any other city ordinance or document require an existing legal non-conforming structure to conform to the to the land use element. So even if the land use element is adopted and it changes the standard, any existing legal non-conforming structures are protected. However, the reason you do not want to create a land use element that creates new legal non-conformity is because several things happen when a building becomes legal non-conforming. First of all, it automatically devalues the property because property values based upon the highest and best use. First, it gets a lower property value. Second, because investors in a property need to have a rate of return or a certain amount of return on their investment. There's not necessarily an incentive for them to invest in the property, to maintain it or to keep it up to the character of the area in which it's located. And we would very much like to see all property in the city well-maintained. And when they become legal non-conforming, they tend to be blighted. And we see we've seen in many, many cases where they just suffer from disinvestment. So we'd like to not create additional opportunities for non-conforming properties. Tom talked a little bit about overcrowding and I think we're running down here. Overcrowding and the impact on business from overcrowding. We talked about 12% of the city being overcrowded. And what that means is 12% of the housing units in the city are have more than one person per bedroom or per room of the structure, and that excludes the kitchens and the bathroom. Current overcrowding is unacceptable. It deteriorates. It leads to a deterioration of the quality of life in the neighborhood, not only in the house itself, where it occurs, but also to the general neighborhood. And it also, we've found that it affects the quality of life of residents who live in overcrowded conditions. It affects health generally, health, safety and welfare of those individuals. It also leads to parking issues and it also it contributes to deterioration in areas where there's overcrowding. So we'd essentially like to minimize the amount of overcrowding that occurs by providing additional units and redevelopment of areas where there is overcrowding actually leads to additional opportunities for housing . And we talked earlier about it addressing the parking impacts as well. So I'd like to address one last concern and I'll turn it back over to Tom. Is the loss of we've heard concerns about the loss of council authority. There has been a suggestion that by adopting this land use element that the city, that resident or the city council would lose the authority over development projects. I'd just like to be clear that the land use element makes no changes to the current level of City Council review of any development project. The zoning code actually lays out how the development process works and that is not being changed. And there are several levels of development review for a project and it really depends upon the scope of the project and the intensity of the project and where the project is located. But I'd just like to just briefly summarize, it could occur at the staff level of it's a ministerial project, which means only a building permit is required. It's typically done at the staff level, but it could also be heard by the zoning administrator, which is a public hearing. It could also be approved by the the Site Plan Review Committee, which is an interdepartmental review of all all of the city's reviewing authorities. It could also be approved by the planning commission or lastly, by the city council. And many projects actually have to go through several a couple of levels of review. For example, you can get or you can be required to have a site plan, review approval, as well as a planning commission approval. So what I'd like to say is the other factor related to the the level of review authority is also about the the program. e.R. We've heard concerns that adoption of a program er means that any development project will no longer be subject to sequel. And that is this absolutely not correct. Any project that is reviewed or approved under the land use element would continue to be subject to sequel requirements because even the EIA, even though it generally and broadly entitles the type of project it cannot look at and anticipate the very site specific impacts that would occur on a very specific location. So projects that get approved through the land use element on a very broad level would still be subject to sequel, and they would still be subject to all other, the other existing and current levels of staff review. So I'd like to oh, let me just give you one example here on a site that was could be a gas station that would like to convert or transition to to a commercial use. For example, that site would be required to do a phase one analysis or what we call the on it would be the sequel workup. It would include looking at the soils potentially because of the potential contamination, but it would also be subject to looking at potential traffic impacts. And depending upon the height of the building, it could also be asked to do a shade and shadow analysis. All of those would be standard requirements for a part of the square process for any new development. So with that, I'd like to conclude my comments and turn it back over to Tom to just say that we've heard the concerns. We feel that the land use element and the urban design element, as well as the city's current code and development review process, address the concerns that we've heard. But we're we are continuing to listen to your concerns. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much, Linda. So I know that was a lot of information. This is a complex topic and it's we've had a lot of people really following this. So we wanted to spend some time, you know, kind of assembling the major questions, concerns that we hear out there. We've answered some of these in writing. We wanted to put these also in a PowerPoint. This PowerPoint will be available to everybody. It'll be on the register as part of the meeting minutes. So if anyone wants to go back and refer to it. And so I want to talk a little bit about the next steps and then we'll wrap up and we'll get to public input. So really what we're doing here tonight is an important night, but there's going to be a number of steps to the land use element even after tonight. So what we're here tonight is we as staff are recommending to you a series of maps, and we know that the council is going to be proposing some changes. And and we as staff support those. And and this is really a policy document that you as a city council needs to be comfortable with because it is the vision for our community. And so we're hopefully tonight getting those revisions and recommendations on the latest maps and policies and design standards. Then we will start the EMR process. We will draft and circulate the updated air there. It has been in the air with lots of information, but this will be updated to reflect what you've decided on tonight. And and for the approved land use element and the urban design element, we also have a separate planning effort that will begin shortly thereafter about climate adaptation and action plan, and that will be our very first climate change policy document. We will then start with the zoning and the zoning is going to take several years to do the first step. The zoning is really granular. It gets down to parcel by parcel and so and block by block. And so the uptown zoning implementation will be the first pilot that we do where we're implementing the general plan. Updated North Long Beach. That's going to include extensive community outreach to guide development and land new standards for the neighborhoods. And then we'll do citywide zoning implementation so that we expect to be about a five year time frame. We're going to use the uptown implementation results to develop the zoning districts and how we do community input and outreach and conduct all the technical, technical analysis and studies to inform those districts and requirements. And so we've reached the end of staff report. I do want to thank everyone for their patience. And what we're going to do now is we're going to receive public testimony. We'll turn it over to the fire marshal who will help us guide having everyone come up and give their thoughts. The City Council. Then we'll have an opportunity to discuss the maps district by district for any changes. And then we would recommend adopting and approving those revised maps and direct us to start recirculate the air. And so with that, we will turn it back over to the mayor.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much. We're going to go ahead and begin the the the public comment part of the hearing. Just as a reminder, our fire marshal who's here is going to kind of guide the the the roads are going to speak first. And just as a as a reminder for folks, the council will be addressing a variety of of ideas that they have within their own district. So that will happen. And so I know that a lot of the comments might be reflected in some of that. And so I just encourage us to be certainly everyone gets their time, but the more expeditious that we can be, the better. We do have some folks that are outside. We don't have a huge group outside, but there is a group outside. I want to make sure they have an opportunity to speak as well. And so if you're outside, you will get a chance to do public comment. Also, I can just ask, are some of our members of our fire team, I do see about ten open seats, maybe, maybe more. If there's some folks that want to come in, we're welcome to bring them in as we go. And if you're able to make room for those as you speak. All right, if you want to head head out, you're welcome to do that as well. So folks that are on the outside can be in. And that's really up to you, your decision as well. And so with that, we will begin the public hearing on the public comment piece, and I'll let the fire marshal begin lining folks, folks up.
Speaker 4: Whoever wants to speak in this room, stand up and then we'll just line up up the stairs here. All righty. Good evening, mayor and city council members. I'm Robert Fox and I'm the executive director of the Council of Neighborhood Organizations. You probably all have met me. I want to thank, first of all, the council for listening to us in the community. Particularly, I want to thank the mayor who's been very helpful and allowing us to have roundtable meetings for every council managed district. And we did get a sense of each council district. And it was great participating with the council members on that. That being said. We've sent copious notes to you from those meetings, so I hope you all had time to review those because we specified it for per person's dialog. You know, we didn't change anything. We took really accurate notes on that. That helps, I think, give you a sense of each district in our statement about what we would like to support. Number one, we realize that probably this is not going to be received and filed. So we have to move forward in a comprehensive and a strategic manner. Kono would like to support the mayor's vision. He's very specifically outlined it as developing the downtown of the city of Long Beach and perhaps along the blue line up to Pacific Coast Highway at first. And we've had a really good run at the downtown development and we support the idea of the City of Long Beach being a great city, particularly in the downtown area. So if you want to build the Emerald City, we can call it the Sapphire City were totally in support of that. So because I like the blue lights, I don't know about you guys, but the blue lights work. That's really great. We've heard from some council members that perhaps we should do a five year plan rather than a 20 year plan. It's nice to organize a very long vision. But, you know, 20 years ago, as was pointed out, we didn't have the Internet, we didn't have Amazon, we didn't have cell phones, for God's sake. So our lives have changed so significantly and it seems like history is accelerating. Time just goes so quickly and our technology changes so quickly. So when we're setting a plan for 20 years, it may be an overreach in terms of practicality. So we'd like to suggest, going along with one of our council members, that maybe a five year plan is appropriate or less with which we could we adopt and review . If we are going to do that, we suggest that the land use element would be smaller in scope rather than larger in scope. And we can do that today with every count semantic district, you know, asking for downsizing or, you know, height reductions as appropriately asked for by their constituents. So I think we can work with each other on that, and I hope that we will come to that dialog together if we are doing a five year plan, I don't think it's possible to put a moratorium on the neighborhoods, but I'd really like to support the mayor in doing the downtown research.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 5: Mr. Fox, can I have one more statement?
Speaker 4: We'd like to suggest that the Architectural Design Commission founded by the mayor, we understand that staff will do all the review, but we'd like to keep that. Like the Planning Commission goes to city council and then you vote on it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Please. Good eating. Jamal Los Altos. What a difference seven months makes. I would like to thank the mayor for his vision in making sure that the neighborhoods and the residents were heard. And I'd like to thank our Councilmember Joe Super now, who knows everything that is needed in the fort. Thank you very much. I just want to mention a few things about the staff's presentation and the neighborhood's kind of rebuttal to some of the stuff, because I went to every single one of the meetings lasted as long as all the meetings. So a couple of things I noticed Tatum, we asked her in the meetings about the vision of equity and affordability and the economy, and she specifically told us her and some of the other presenters in the town halls that the Lou does not address affordability. That is basically up to the developers on what they're going to develop. And I know the mayor has mentioned, you know, he's he knows their market rates. You know, we're going up all over downtown. The other thing is the incentives for it, for affordability are basically the the state incentives. The other thing is about the traffic on the air. The draft does say if the blue is put in, there will be worse traffic will traffic get worse without the Lou? Yes, but the air draft, the air specifically says and it lists the it listed all out what's going to happen at which intersections. And also the last thing I want to talk about real quick is the the impact fees she the development staff did acknowledge in some of the meetings that yes, this is a one time impact fee and it doesn't cover salaries over a long period of time, which is why we don't use the port or the on the coastal money for, you know, for police and fire and things like that. But so I just wanted to make sure that when we're talking about the development speak, that we have some issues with some of the things the way they did. And the other thing is they constantly are saying inside family neighborhoods, there's no impact. However, our neighborhoods are everything adjacent to, across the street from and all of those single family neighborhoods. And that was our issue, was the development going in around and next to we understand that the founding neighborhoods that the development wasn't supposed to be inside. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Melanie Speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Tell everyone I didn't prepare a speech today, but I just like to thank personally councilmember pearce. Councilwoman price, councilmember supernova has mongo the mayor and vice mayor richardson for attending our roundtable, especially the mayor for helping us arrange them. I'm seeing these signs that say I support an inclusive.
Speaker 4: So so do I in support an inclusive value. But the neighborhoods don't feel like.
Speaker 8: They're included in the process. And that's the entire problem.
Speaker 4: When we I think it was in the.
Speaker 8: Fourth Council District meeting, you said that this was the worst rollout.
Speaker 4: The mayor said this was the worst rollout. Was it ever or. Right.
Speaker 8: So and then you said, but the leadership has changed. Well, I understand that. And a lot of people we like Tom and we like Linda, but we still don't feel like we have we're a part of the process. It's still the same. You know, we've kind of feels like it's an imposition.
Speaker 4: So I think that we could use this as an opportunity to.
Speaker 8: Really work on our community outreach as an example.
Speaker 4: And the eighth District Ray gave.
Speaker 8: Which organized some people.
Speaker 4: Together, and we put together a map on Google Maps. It's interactive. You can actually see what is there currently to compare it with what is.
Speaker 8: Proposed to be changed on Street View. I mean.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the problem is that we started from a plan coming.
Speaker 8: Down on to us instead of something coming out of the communities.
Speaker 4: So I'd also like to I just want to submit this map to.
Speaker 8: The Councilman Austin, because this is this is a changed. This is what the people from the eighth District wanted.
Speaker 4: And the actual, you know, the the word document.
Speaker 8: I think Ray will also submit that. But this is just a visual example.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: And you can give that to the to the caucus here. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good afternoon. My name is Carrie Sharpe.
Speaker 5: I'm a 33 year member of the fifth District. And thank you again, mayor and council.
Speaker 2: And I want to quote from today's press telegraph.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Eric Garcia from your article. We all know that Long Beach has mostly built out and that our neighborhoods like Los Altos, which is my neighborhood, Wrigley Bluff Park, make our Nate, our city great. We are committed.
Speaker 2: To.
Speaker 5: Keeping them residential and suburban. I'm holding you to your word, Mayor Garcia. I'm hoping that the council does as well. The Fifth District has a very successful and very symbiotic relationship with our four commercial corridors and surrounding community residences.
Speaker 2: And they are easily at least.
Speaker 5: 95% in.
Speaker 2: Occupancy.
Speaker 5: I'm losing access to these through additional traffic and losing.
Speaker 2: Access to any of these.
Speaker 5: Well, just like water, be a path of least resistance. What will lead us into Lakewood.
Speaker 2: Shopping centers or down to Miles, down to Orange County? We really don't want that to happen. We have a very.
Speaker 5: Fragile relationship between our commercial corridors and our community. We also have nowhere to build in the fifth. We have very little blight. I know.
Speaker 2: We're lucky. I'm sorry. We are lucky.
Speaker 5: There are very few empty offices. There's less than three empty lots. Destroying businesses to build residential units is just wrong.
Speaker 2: Any official that puts money before people does not have a place in Long Beach. Council members, please. Thank you. Council members, if you and your heart and your head have at least 1%, 1% that say, I wish I.
Speaker 5: Could have done one thing. I wish I could roll.
Speaker 2: Back one procedure in this process and said, maybe I just wish I had another chance to have a little more outreach. Then you have a flawed product.
Speaker 5: That is coming out in the way of a loop map. Just 1% of you that says it's not ready. Then please, I urge you reconsider.
Speaker 2: Roll it back. If indeed that is not going to be the case, I'm asking for a second possibility. Would you please consider putting the rest of the city that is still in chains into a more appropriate time? And going forward with the.
Speaker 5: Lou in the projects.
Speaker 2: That have already had approval from the Planning.
Speaker 5: Commission, the city.
Speaker 2: As well as yourselves. That's another option. And finally, at the very, very least, I urge.
Speaker 5: You and beg you, please do not put this in 22 years worth of project.
Speaker 2: Please take a five year with an option to modify them and whenever we need to. I know it's a lot more work and Miss Tatum was quoted by that in the Long Reads report. I know that, but it's worth it to get it right. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. One thing I.
Speaker 2: Just want you to.
Speaker 5: Remember. Long Beach can also me. For those of you that are going to have to be voted.
Speaker 2: On this year and into.
Speaker 5: Year, Long Beach are.
Speaker 2: People who live at the beach.
Speaker 4: With very long.
Speaker 2: Memories. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Carelessly in my address is on file and you're a hard act to follow. So I did send in a letter on SB 35 and a clause that says that under the streamlined process, a developer must build to the highest density allowable in that land use designation. And I did find in our elderly two or three different places that could be used to define the highest density allowable. I did hear the answer that once again, the place types are going to rule. I sure hope that's true, and I hope that we don't confuse it by having multiple places that someone could argue with what the greatest density is. The premise of this entire project to me is flawed. The math. The math in it that we're going to add housing units that only works to solve a population problem if the population is stable. If we pile more people on top of people. And we and we're going on. And the only way it works is if they don't multiply otherwise in the next in the next time frame, we're going to have exponential growth. So the solution to me is not a solution. Density has negative impacts. And you went over them very well. You did. Here is traffic, parking and crime are the three I hear the most often. And then the infrastructure issues of sewers, water, gas, electrical, police, fire and schools are also brought out there regularly. We can build up or we can build out. That's another option. The assumption that people want to live here because they were born here I think is also flawed, that people want to live where they work. Well, maybe they do, but there's other things, other pressures. There's people like I know that I moved here because my family's here. I was working by L.A.X., so I did that nasty commute for ten years because my support structure is here in Long Beach. That's why people live where they live. People live where they live because one of them works at L.A.X. and the other one works in Orange County and they pick a spot in between. So making an assumption that we have to create units because everyone who lives here or everyone who works here wants to live here is just not right. Our mobility element that we're going to give up cars, work, bike and bus, I mean, that's ridiculous. You know that. The weakness in this is that it is not enforceable. You know, so putting that up as a solution is not realistic. We need project level ideas and we need to deal with with the traffic issues. I do want to speak for I don't know if I have time on this, but I do want to speak for one moment on the relationship. We would like to see that when we have someone that we've elected, that they're going to listen to us, that when we say we don't want density, that you're going to remove it.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: I'm going to be very brief here. My concern is by adding this density without the appropriate infrastructure in place. It's going to create huge problems for the city of Long Beach. I was raised in San Francisco, lived there the majority of my life. It is a mess over there. You have the best transit in California and people still drive their cars everywhere. If you live 40 miles outside of that city, it takes 3 hours to get to work. And people don't park their cars because you have good transit. Some people can't take public transit. Some people don't want to. It's still a problem. And right now in Long Beach, where I live in the fifth District, you can drive down Bellflower Boulevard and run into 30 potholes. And this is after Measure eight. So why why are those things? They're not being fixed now. How are they going to survive high density? I don't think they will. So it's a concern for the people who live there. Smart growth is nice, but not if it's not smart for the residents, the people that have to live with it. And we do. So please listen to our concerns. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker. And just as a reminder, please. Please say your full name at the start. Just for for the record. And I appreciate the length of your of your comments. Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Well, that was my wife, Danielle and Diana Ramirez. Yeah. And I'm Dave for the mayors. So. Mine's going to be really short here the first, second, third. No engagement, no eye contact from any of the people here. It's like they're going through the motions, like they're down here reading and, you know, instead of listening to the people , you should have eye contact. We represented all you people as citizens of Long Beach. You're here. You're here to represent our benefit of living in the city. But there's a lack of engagement. I mean, I'm a businessman. I work for my company 35 years. And any time we have a meeting like this, there would be eye contact engagement. But one, two, three, super. Now he look sometimes. Stacy, Roberto, every case. You know these two guys. But it's to me, it's ridiculous. It's like we're here doing some kind of go through the motions and that you're not really want to hear the real concerns of what's going on here. So I'm done.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Sherry Kropp, and I'm the superintendent for Los Alamitos Unified School District. I'll be really brief because I can see there's some pretty urgent topics in your chambers tonight. So I realize the voters have spoken and they have passed measure and then for medical marijuana. But it has come to our attention that there is one being planned 0.6 miles from Los Alamitos High School, which is.
Speaker 0: Mama. This is this is only on the public hearing that's in front of us. It's not on any other items.
Speaker 2: I appreciate that and thank you. I'll be.
Speaker 0: Back. Okay. Thank you very much. No problem. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: I will not be brief. I will take my 3 minutes. Good evening, Honorable Mayor, City Council members. My name is Michel Molina and I appreciate the opportunity to speak before you tonight. I'm an active member. Of the Long Beach community, having worn many hats as a long time resident of both the first and the third districts. The property owner, business owner, former educator, member of the Board of Governors of California State University, Long Beach. And I also serve as Commissioner on the city's Economic Development Commission. However, tonight, I address you on behalf of the downtown Long Beach Alliance board of Directors. The downtown Long Beach Alliance is a nonprofit organization that represents the business and property improvement districts in downtown. And while the organization's focus is on downtown, which is currently zoned under the downtown plan, I'm here tonight because we're all impacted by the housing crisis. With this in mind, the board of directors approved at our February meeting to actively engage the city on the potential negative outcomes of not planning for adequate housing needs. After reviewing the findings presented by Beacon Economics, an independent economic research firm, the Housing Needs Assessment Report produced by Beacon, evaluated Rina housing projections and found that the current use maps as drafted did not adequately address the roughly 28,000 housing units needed. Moreover, while Rina projections focus on population growth and overcrowding, they did not account for workforce and job growth within the city and our surrounding communities. Taking the missing factor into account, Beacon's forecast of needed housing units significantly increased threefold. For this reason, the land use element debate, which has largely been framed as a housing density issue, must also be viewed in terms of economic impacts on the vitality and livability of Long Beach for the next 20 years. Last year, City Council approved the Economic Blueprint ten year vision for economic growth through the city. It was a forward thinking document that sought to create an inclusive economy for all. However, without hopes of housing to support obscene job growth, these policies and recommendations outlined become irrelevant because the city will not adequately planning, will not be adequately planning for employment growth. As our president and CEO Craig Cogen wrote in Sunday's Press Telegram. It's imperative we utilize this opportunity to plan for all of our future housing needs. We have an incredible opportunity to plan for a future that includes all segments of our community. I trust that tonight each council member will contribute to a citywide perspective on solving the housing crisis, allowing for reasonable compromise that does not impede on our current quality of life or prosperity of future generations. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is David O'Neill. I'm a longtime resident of the city of Long Beach. I've also voted in every election since I was legally old enough to vote. I would initially like to state that I'm against increasing the City of Long Beach's density, especially in the city's fourth and fifth districts. I urge you to receive the land use element and file it. On June 28th, 1983. Former members of this Planning Commission. Succumb to the rhetoric of housing advocates and help put in place some of the most disastrous regulation changes this country's this city has ever seen. Excuse me. In the decade that followed, according to the Long Beach Press telegram, the Long Beach Police Department and the United States Census Bureau, the poverty rate had risen 69%. Gang activity increased, property values had dropped, and the violent crime rate had had risen to a whopping 112%. Many proponents of the land use element have attempted to dismiss these inconvenient truths by pointing out that it's irrelevant, since no new construction can take place within residential areas and building standards will be improved. My reply to them is that moving this exercise in poor planning from two doors down to only a block away in my case and increasing the quality of the structures is of no comfort whatsoever to those of us who are raising young kids. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. Diana Logins. I've only got a couple of these, so I'm going to try to show you these pictures. I hope you can see them. This is a prime example of a beautiful craftsman that is overpowered totally by a three story cracker box. This is exactly what happened in District two, District four, and some of the downtown areas, unbridled development. This is the kind of thing that happens. And then I will echo the last speaker where along with a huge amount of density and this is why it's going to be so important that we don't overdo this because you have crime, you do have trash, you do have graffiti. It just goes on and on. I know I lived in District two and I moved to District five to get away from that. I spent 20 years as a neighborhood watch captain. I had my life threatened. I had my car vandalized. I could go on and on and on, trying to clean up a neighborhood that was overly dense with cracker boxes, very, very concerned about what that density can bring. I'm not saying that density brings up for everyone. That's just not true. But at the same time, it's the propensity is there. The statistics are there. You just have to pay attention to what happened 20 years ago. And, you know, this thing, this hugely increased density, that's what it's going to create. So I urge you to to. It's okay to I mean, it's fine to grow, but let's do it responsibly. This is I don't believe that this value is a responsible measure. And it does need to does need to be adjusted and done responsibly. So I hope that does happen. Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. James. And the speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Marlene Simonds. My home is on 518 Walnut. I'm a third generation owner and a native of Long Beach. I'm also secretary of NABA, a North Alamitos Beach Association. This is second District neighborhood bordered by Alamitos, Cherry, fourth and seventh. We Inaba understand the need for housing both affordable and market rate. We understand the city needs revenue. For example.
Speaker 6: Now that brick and mortar.
Speaker 2: Retail is shrinking. But this plan has shown in the December latest map is a heavy handed paintbrush. It paints all the streets and never the same as if our neighborhood is comprised of all tear down homes. For the past decade, our association has worked to beautify and keep neighbors safe, especially on Nebraska and Walnut, where many of our homes have been carefully restored and cared for by owners. These trees are now targeted for four story height in the latest plan. Mainly tonight, I'd like to make the case for keeping walnut between fourth and seventh in at least the east side of Walnut, at a minimum, with its small lots at the minimum height of the maximum three storey height. While that is also one of the narrowest streets in the city, if you look at the December L we map walnut between fourth and seventh is proposed for four story, but it's a maximum three storey height to the north and south and east adjacent neighborhoods, all shown as pale yellow for founding neighborhoods. Even on seventh Street, west of Walnut to Orange and fourth. West Orange proposed site has been reduced to three, while that between fourth and third is three storey two farther south. Okay. I know it'll be difficult to see this from where you're seated, but this is photo shows five adjacent restored homes on Walnut. We call it bungalow row. Our block looking east is designated as a founding neighborhood, except the block on Walnut, which is now designated for four story, which becomes a destruction zone. But tonight, I'm also seeking to ask you to take into account Nebraska Avenue's homes as part of NABA as a three storey height limit. But my main plea tonight is to reconsider walnut between fourth and seventh. At a minimum, the east side, making it a three story height. So it matches the adjacent founding neighborhoods, matches the three story corridors at fourth and seventh right there, and stays a valuable part of a traditional founding section of homes. I thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Appreciate that. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Darrell Golden. I'm a long term resident of Long Beach. I live on the west side and I'm also the current president of Westside Homeowners Neighborhood Association. With that, growth should be slow. The land use element does not give a limit on where we are going, how much growth. It just seems that we need to produce approximately 2300 new units a year to keep up with growth. But where is the limit? You know, if we have a 20 year program and if you see that if you multiply to 20 by 2 to 3, you write around 90,000 units in 20 years. Is that enough? Where is enough with each additional resident? It includes more pollution. We don't even know where our pollution levels are. How is the negative impacts of growth or not clearly identified to the limit of the 20 year plan? So the plan is incomplete. The premises are not sufficient to make a good decision, in my opinion, and I'm not going to take much of your time . But I just wanted to make sure you understood, Stuart, that we have to have a limit. It's just like a bathtub filling up with water. At some point it will overflow and we need to know what that is. As the residents of the city, we need to know where our limit is, what can we do within that limit? But once we reach it, we also know what we have to do and we have to plan to that limit to a soft landing. I contribute the last 75 years of the economic developments in this country, the slowing down from the great buildup of World War Two to bring this country's economic situation to a soft landing in Long Beach, need to plan for the same thing. We have borders all around us. We have ocean at our back and everything else is boarded. So it only growth can happen. Here is up. Do we want to eliminate single family residence? No, I hope not. That's something I like about Long Beach. The basis of a single family, residential neighborhoods. Everything else is at stake. Right now, we don't know where we are going. We've taken a trip with no destination. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next week a please.
Speaker 2: My name is Candace Mead. I live in Wrigley. I'm against Chloe. Welcome to the selling of Long Beach. This, for you is about profit, not people. It's about destroying neighborhoods and our quality of life. The heights in these maps destroy our privacy.
Speaker 9: In the sanctuaries.
Speaker 2: We call home to sell you shortens our already shortened life spans, especially those of us who live in the diesel death zone. All for a developer's buck. All for a developer's buck. City staff reported housing vacancy rates have risen and continue to rise substantially. In your materials. Census stats indicate families without children are increasing. We saw that tonight and families with children are decreasing. Long Beach residents do not need this density. The value has nothing to do with affordable housing. Even city staff has iterated that IT neighborhood meetings. The lobby.
Speaker 9: Is being marketed as just.
Speaker 2: That affordable housing for your kids. Following the data trends, it will be more expensive housing and it won't be for your kids. If you have any. Famed architect Frank Gehry recently talked about housing in our area. He said In the commercial realm, you don't see a lot of good work right now. Most of the money for commercial development in L.A. is coming from China, and it's very overpowering. It doesn't have an esthetic mandate that comes with it. It has a commercial mandate, period. It's short sighted. But most of these buildings are quick built, resold and turned over. So there's no sense in the culture today of long term ownership or pride. Gary said, I think it's unethical when you're building things like that. You're creating space in places that affect the lives of many people, and yet you don't have a sense of responsibility to the.
Speaker 9: Nuances or feeling.
Speaker 2: Gary talked about humane environments, buildings with humanity and scale and love in them. The humanity before you tonight, encouraging you to preserve the feeling that they have living here. Is right before you. Frank has some advice for politicians and developers. Well, I think they are ethically responsible for a better built environment. I don't think they see it that way. Everything is against it because nobody cares. They should take the time to understand what is available, not just let people come in, but third rate developments that make the city uglier and uglier. I don't think elected officials think about that. Not only does this luy ruin neighborhoods and take away our quality of life, it is blatantly, environmentally and socially unjust. Despite the changes in the maps, the yellow youI is literally waiting for my neighborhood and me.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next week please.
Speaker 2: Gentrification. I think that's what.
Speaker 6: This elderly is about.
Speaker 2: We'll be building housing and developments in other areas of the city so that we can move low and moderate income residents to these new developments, leaving open the more valuable area of downtown to the developers and the investors to make more high income housing. I hope that if that come just true, that we on the long term, we will hold.
Speaker 6: Everybody who is responsible for.
Speaker 2: That accountable equity. That's the buzzword. I'm calling for information equity. If Mr. Modica can talk about the decrease in the acres of density, why are we not given the information of what the increase in the acres of density are? I deserve and we deserve information equity. I want to know what the increase in the acres of density are on the Louis in August and what they are currently that you're voting on. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please come forward.
Speaker 4: Hello, Joe Weinstein.
Speaker 10: President of citizens about responsible planning.
Speaker 4: Caap. We sent you a letter. I will summarize some of our concerns. Our prime recommendation is not to change the existing land use element until you can prove to the public that. The changes will be improvements. Now, you heard the last speaker. After all this hullabaloo, we still have no direct comparison maps. Just maps showing the new but nothing to show the old. In other words, we do not know what the exact proposed changes. That shouldn't be too hard to produce, but it hasn't happened yet. So for the time being, you should just keep the present land use element which has served despite all the changes that were mentioned. It was it was noted that the community is concerned about what will homeowners, residents be able to do about new developments. It was not correctly stated that our only concern is about sequel violations. Our concern, which was not mentioned, is what is the impact of the new state legislation. We have to know a little more about that.
Speaker 10: Before we can say this.
Speaker 4: Proposed new land use settlement is such a great idea. But the big problem with the land use element that has been proposed is that the premise is totally faulty, as a previous couple of speakers noted. It's hard to say this is this an unwelcome truth? But you cannot plan for ever more density and ever more population in Long Beach or for that matter, anywhere on Earth. And call it sustainability. Pretend that you're a sustainable city or that you're aiming at sustainability. What you at least have to do is with every new measure that will allow increased density and population, you are putting in an equally compelling measure that is going to discourage long.
Speaker 10: Term.
Speaker 4: Population increase. And unfortunately, we haven't seen that yet from Sacramento or in this alleyway, but that is a requirement. Otherwise, this whole thing is really an attempt to fool ourselves into disaster because the. The population problem. It's more than just a matter of emitting more greenhouse gases and making the climate bad. Extra population increases every kind of stress on earth, finite systems and extra population means ever more misery when those things fail. More details in the letter that I sent you. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Daniel, president of Bixby Park. I also work in downtown Long Beach, lived in Long Beach six years. I'm not sure what city I'm in, though, tonight. I thought this was a city that embraces diversity. I thought this is a big city with a big international port. One of the most diverse populations on earth. But listening. I would think that I live maybe in Pasadena or Irvine. I actually heard someone from the so-called Council of Neighborhood Organizations say, Let's emulate Pasadena, let's emulate Santa Barbara. Are you kidding me? You can put those two cities together and you still get about half the population in Long Beach. The wealthier, they're smaller. It's totally inappropriate to compare Long Beach to Santa Barbara and Pasadena. I think that comparison shows just how out of touch some of these folks are. I'm not sure if they've been, you know, west of Cherry Avenue in 20 years. You know, reasonable people reasonable people can disagree about how high a building should be in a commercial quarter. Three stories. Five stories. Should a go over here? Should go block that way. Okay. We can disagree about those things, but the rhetoric has been so dishonest from this group. I've been told things like this. No kidding. Busses are not mass transit. How upside down do you have to be to tell somebody busses are not mass transit? Okay. I was told that. Hey, we speak for the majority of the city. Well, 60% of the people in the city a renters. I was at one of these forms. I saw any renters in the room. A couple council staff raised their hands in me. Nobody else was a renter in the room. I had somebody tell me, Oh, it's three people sharing a bedroom. What's the big deal? And then 5 minutes later say, I don't want to walk two blocks every time I park my car. So, you know, I walk two blocks every time you park your car. So somebody should have three people in one bedroom so you don't have to park too far away. This should really go without saying, you know, parking not a human right, not a constitutional right. And let's say when we talk about parking, let's be honest, what you really mean is you want free parking on your street in front of your house. Yeah, right. But guess what? Excuse me. I'm speaking. Thank you. I'm speaking. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Everyone gets a chance to have their.
Speaker 4: Parking is not a human right. Your ocean view is not a human right. And to live in the city that you had when you were 12 years old is not a human right.
Speaker 5: Housing is a human right.
Speaker 4: And so I want to ask this council, please adopt the L'ue. It needs more density, not less. Look, population increases. City does not grow. Do the math. That means more density. There's no other way to do that matter than building a wall around the city. If you don't pass it tonight, you're kicking the can to the next council. So I just would ask you, this is not the majority of the city. They're the folks who maybe have are lucky and can be here tonight. But 60% of people are renters. They have an interest in density. Please speak for them and pass the you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Our next speaker will be from up top in the right short.
Speaker 0: Yes, ma'am. Hold on 1/2, ma'am. We want to make sure Mike's working. Is it working? Okay. Let's let let's let let them try it and see if it works. Let's watch it. Pass the mike over and see if it works. I can hear a little bit. Go ahead. Try it.
Speaker 2: My name is Barry.
Speaker 0: Okay. Here's what we're going to do. I'm going to go on the more speaker's road that you're working, Michael. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: My name is Raymond. I'm from the fifth District. I'd like to thank my councilwoman, Stacey Mango and the great staff at Development Services for for just doing a great job under the very tough circumstances. And everybody has done a great in returning a lot of my emails and helping me educate some of the residents. Okay. District five is a little bit different. I there's a lot of complaints that are going back and forth, but we are one of the districts that that was led later, districts that got entered into the city. And we have the luxury of getting some of the lessons learned and making our district a little bit differently so we could avoid some of the mistakes that were made in the other older districts. And I think we've done a good job. We got to kind of a hub and spokes way that we do things where all of our stuff that that we need is within a half a mile to a mile of where we where we go. So we're very happy with that. And that's one of the reasons why everybody's saying no density. I am not for having any additional density in the as it stands in my district, but I do know that is perfectly fine in other districts. I would like to. Yeah. No, I mean, if they want to if they want to do it, that's fine. I mean, that's what I'm saying. If they want to do it, fine. It should be. My recommendation is having each of the council members decide what they want to have, because I know that there's some issues on on Atlantic and in Long Beach Boulevard, you know, and we need to help that area. But one of the things I want to do is make sure that the council people are they vote for their own districts. One of the things I also noticed is that place tight boundaries on the maps. They keep shifting and I like to have it completely around the entire shopping center. The another thing that I like to have is the see here, I can throw that one out. There's a there are some additional elements that are relating that are going to be related to transit. And I think we're going to have them later on today. And I'd like to also have the city work with the with the Long Beach Transit start to try to mitigate some of the the things that are that are that could happen, the additional density. It could be massive. It could affect all actually the whole city. So those are some of the issues that we have. We've also had some issues with with outreach. I know. And I don't want to get into that sticky wicket there, but we really need to start working on that. I only got about 19 seconds left. I don't want to make this thing too radical. I'm very confident that Stacy Mungo's looking after our best interests, and I'm very confident things will go well with all of your districts. I wish you the best. Bye.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: My name is Peggy Kozlowski, and I live on ninth Street, just on the fringe of the Craftsman Village Historic District. I read the mayor's press telegram article today, and.
Speaker 2: I want I have a few quotes. One is, quote, If we don't act, the.
Speaker 9: State will act for us. Well, I don't think anybody wants that.
Speaker 2: The next part.
Speaker 9: I that caught my eye was.
Speaker 2: Quote, I have been a strong advocate of building.
Speaker 9: More housing up and down the Metro Blue Line corridor, especially affordable housing for seniors and working families. Well, I hear about affordable.
Speaker 2: Housing from everywhere, from Lou, supporters on Facebook to bloggers to the Long Beach progressives.
Speaker 9: Everybody's talking about it. But you know who isn't talking about it? The developers. And I looked at the density bonus. Only only one use of it since two 2012. The developers don't care about affordable housing. And I'm going to guess that it's because the tax incentives are dwarfed by the.
Speaker 2: Profits they can get from charging.
Speaker 9: High rents.
Speaker 2: I was at a.
Speaker 9: Class consciousness event last week where a young Cambodian man said that many in Cambodian.
Speaker 2: Town are resorting to homelessness because the rents keep doubling and tripling and.
Speaker 9: Doubling again. And I don't know if that surprised anybody. So my question is, is, is it going to happen or are we just.
Speaker 2: Going to keep strongly.
Speaker 9: Advocating for it? The second quote I wanted to refer to was. No one in the city, especially not me.
Speaker 2: Wants to see paraphrasing.
Speaker 9: Buildings built without adequate parking or infrastructure. I'm going to spare you my.
Speaker 2: Examples of parking problems.
Speaker 9: In my neighborhood. I'm sure you've heard everything by now, but let me just say that parking is.
Speaker 2: A continuing, absolute.
Speaker 9: Nightmare in my neighborhood. And. Okay, it's not a right. This is Southern California. Everybody is in love with their cars.
Speaker 2: Again. A lot of the people who are.
Speaker 9: On the other side like to write.
Speaker 2: Us off as.
Speaker 9: Aged, landed.
Speaker 2: NIMBY gentrifiers.
Speaker 9: I admit I am landed. I live on a narrow street with those little matching Spanish bungalows. There are quite a.
Speaker 2: Few of them around Long Beach. I don't even.
Speaker 9: Have a backyard, so I couldn't be a NIMBY.
Speaker 0: And thank you very much. Thank you very much, ma'am.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Hi, Mayor Garcia, council members. My name is Lisa Vernon. I live in the third district and I don't live in I live near eighth and seventh. I'm sorry. I'm nervous. I live near seventh Street and Redondo and it's very diversified. It's not what the gentleman was speaking about. I live among the cracker box houses that were built in the eighties, and I also submitted some pictures. I'd like you to look at my views from my master bedroom and from my spare bedroom looking into windows. Two stories up, not three year and four and five and six and seven, but two stories up. And they can see in my room. And I also want to thank the council and the mayor for meeting with us.
Speaker 2: I spoke with.
Speaker 6: Susie Price and we spoke.
Speaker 9: About some of the areas on the newer maps, the DEC maps, and there's an area that stood three stories and I like it looked at and made to if possible. I have that map with me I'd like to hand in also about the man who spoke earlier in the overcrowding comments about the overcrowding. It says one person per room, not three people per room, the 1.5 people per room. My sisters shared a room when I was growing up. I'm middle class. I grew up middle class in the Bay Area. I came down to Long Beach to go to school. I stayed. I went back once, decide to come back and I'm here for good. I love my house. I put everything I have in my house. I live around traffic and parking and all the other issues in a dense neighborhood. I like my neighborhood. I'd like to keep it the same. I know we have to grow, but please grow slowly. Please make sure that we have water in our aquifers.
Speaker 6: Which I heard are depleted.
Speaker 9: And that's a real issue because if we don't have water, we can't share. We can't share a parking space. I don't I don't I really don't understand the loo. I got to the conversation a little late. I'm learning. It's complex. It's not about affordable housing. For those of you who don't know, 10% or less, as I understand, is about affordable housing. So please don't think of us as the enemy. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: I like your Hunger Games. I'm not sure that's a Hunger Games pin or not, but it looks like one. Oh, okay. It looks like. Look.
Speaker 9: It means think more in Latin. It's Ponce.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I felt like I was in The Hunger Games. So the thing is next. The next speaker. Please get the mic working. I believe so. Okay, thank you.
Speaker 2: But try this again. My name is Mary Kessler. My husband and I have made her home in Long Beach for the last 43 years. And we see that our city has some peculiar problems. And one of them, of course, is water. As the last speaker said, I think, sure that everyone on the council will tell you that that's only going to get situation's only going to get worse. The last thing we need.
Speaker 5: Is to bring more people in to distribute that water more thinly than it has been distributed in the.
Speaker 2: Years we've lived here. I've been through several droughts, but in the last droughts, we didn't have to compete with the delta smelt for the water.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's. It's the last thing in the.
Speaker 2: World we need is to increase.
Speaker 5: The population right.
Speaker 2: Now. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Put on my specs so I can say good evening, Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Michelle Aaron Eckhoff. I am the co-chair of Craftsman Village Historic District. And Daniel, if you're still in the room, you got me fired up because Crescent Village Historic District was established in 1992. It is one of the oldest historic districts in the city of Long Beach. It sits in the middle of one of the most dense areas in the city. Check your facts. Its its boundaries are seventh to 10th streets north and south and walnut and orange, east and west. It is diverse. I represent my community and all the communities around me. NABA AOC seven They are diverse. I do not live in a secluded neighborhood. Our neighborhood has a. And an excuse me. We are a neighborhood of homeowners and renters alike. Our neighbor has dedicated over 25 years in transforming our area into a safe and pleasurable place to live. I have in my hand petitions signed by 200 of the residents just in our historic district. The petition is asking our council to protect this historic neighborhood by limiting the height of new development on seventh and 10th streets between Alamitos. A little bit out of our neighborhood and a cherry to a maximum of a maximum of 2 to 3 stories. And to put in place a parking requirement, which it sounds like maybe that might happen as part of the club for two parking spots or 2.5 as before per unit. And by the way, these signatures are homeowners and renters, not just homeowners. In conclusion, Craftsman Village is not opposed to new development. In fact, we think new development new development will add a breath of fresh air to our 100 year old neighborhood. But development needs to be thoughtful. It needs to be respectful to the scale of the surrounding community, as well as the architectural heritage of the historic Seventh Street and 10th Street corridor. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next week, please.
Speaker 2: My name is Louise Ivers. I live at 1837 East Sixth Street. The podium just went down. And I might say that I live west of Cherry Avenue, and I also live in a diverse neighborhood. And I really resent some people saying things to us like, we don't want any development or any people of color because we live in a neighborhood that is dense already and has many people of color. So I represent the North Alamitos Beach Association and I live in Council District two. And while the Planning Commission has made some significant and beneficial changes to the land use element in our neighborhood, and I am one of the really fortunate ones who lives in the two block area that is still zoned for single family homes. The rest of North Alamitos Beach is still slated for four story apartment. NABA, which is our neighborhood association, is requesting that the height of future buildings on Walnut, Nebraska and Almond Avenues between fourth and seventh Street be lowered to two stories. And that all these narrow residential streets contain rows of turn of the century cottages and craftsman bungalows, the new estates that North Alamitos Beach as a, quote, founding neighborhood, unquote, and that historic buildings and the character of neighborhoods should be preserved. Yet our neighborhood will be subjected to some of the worst destruction in the city if four storey apartments are constructed throughout it. I am a survivor of the mid 1980s cracker box development, which nearly run North Alamitos Beach neighbor hopes that the city council will allow us to preserve our unique multicultural area by keeping the height limit in our neighborhood at two stories. In addition, I ask that the mayor appoint an architectural design commission that would oversee future developments throughout the city so that there will not be a repeat of the hideous cracker box developments looming over single family homes. New multi-unit buildings need setbacks from existing one storey structures, as well as gardens and green spaces to mitigate their density. And of course, I read all the signs that were up here on the screen, and it does say that the land use element encourages these types of construction, but it doesn't require them, unfortunately. How can you encourage a developer not to build a box? It didn't happen last time. The land use element does not specify that developers build affordable housing, and the cracker boxes did not have units for low income residents. So denser and larger in apartments, apartments will only displace more of those who live below the poverty line. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, members of the city council and all my neighbors in all nine districts of Long Beach Beacon from fifth District. And I would like to request that you receive and file the L'UE for a number of reasons. First of all, I'm one of those dreadful NIMBYs who grew up with privilege that you've been warned about. I'm actually a kid from the housing projects of New York who, like a lot of other people in Fifth District who are homeowners, worked three jobs and went without in order to have a better home. When I talk to people on the streets before this came to the city council, I was hearing again and again, Wow, I don't want my kids.
Speaker 5: To go through what.
Speaker 2: I went through growing up in a dense neighborhood. I talked to a man from DICKERSON Gardens. I talked to a number of people who had taught school and had to really go without and sacrifice to get into this district and afford to be able to live in that area without a lot of density. I've noticed that with the elderly. Correct me if I'm wrong. Low density is currently 18 houses per acre. Yes, that's two and a half times as many houses as we have right now in Long Beach. We currently have seven houses per acre. Just think about right now where you're sitting. If suddenly another person and a half came in, crammed right on top of you. That's kind of what would happen. Now, we lived in fourth District before we moved to fifth about ten years ago. That had been increased in density by the growth of several condos before we left. Every day there was a helicopter overhead. Gunshots in the distance were a regular daily occurrence. I got threatened on the street for the offense of walking past somebody that no offense to anybody who's different from me in any ethnic way. I didn't happen to wear the same skin color that they did, and I would be anxious not to have that happen again. I would also love not to be robbed at knifepoint again, as I was when the density increased in the Los Angeles area, which was all about gentrification, by the way, as opposed to finding housing, which I would have to agree is an important consideration because unfortunately I have yet to see a developer who builds a house out of the goodness of his or her heart to accommodate people that do not have housing. That doesn't happen. Maybe, you know, some developers that do, but I don't personally know them. And the other concern that I'd like to raise here would be that of eminent domain, because sooner or later, if a developer thinks they can come into your city and they can build and make money, they're going to start looking at your property and say , Hmm, let's see if I can get that person to move out of here. And if I can't convince them by saying, Can I give you X for your house?
Speaker 5: I'm going to court and I'm getting an order and I'm saying you're going to move whether you like it or not. Thank you for listening.
Speaker 0: Thanks so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: I don't know where that's going to go. Okay. Well, I haven't been here in a long, long time. Good evening, Mayor. Good evening. City council members. I think I know most of you, and I hope I hope you come to a good decision for all of us. My name is Maria Norvell. And my address is on record. And I'm the vice president of Wana, which is the Wrigley Area Neighborhood Alliance, and I'm representing Wana. And my president, John Greenwood, is behind me. Eric. I was raised in Long Beach and I have always been a seventh district resident. We bought our home in 1970 in the Wrigley area. It's time again for me to come up and speak and tell you about Wrigley. Also, I have to talk about a former councilman that was always there for me. Thank God for our former councilman, Ricker Bensky. Shortly shortly after he was elected in office, he put a moratorium. Everyone and all those cracker boxes that were being built after they destroyed many, many Spanish beautiful Spanish homes in Wrigley. If he were alive today, he would be right here with us. Now, the people that live in those cracker boxes from Cedar Chesnut Eucalyptus and Magnolia Avenue. They have to come and park their cars on Daisy. There is no place to park on their street. They have no one. They have more than one car. The neighbors that live on Daisy can't even park in front of their homes from hill to PCH. Some of them have to park their cars on their front yards. They have asked me to come to help them if I could. I don't know what I can do, but I hope you guys can help them because they need help now. Now you want to put more density in our neighborhood. We don't need five, two, three storey high buildings on Pacific. Why do you want to take away our privacy? I also wonder if there was any explanation from Sydney city planners as to why they thought it would be acceptable. To have five, two, three storey buildings looming over single family homes. If Gore Verbinski was alive today, he would be standing next to me. Even if he was the sole vote on the council, he always took care of his constituents.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr.. Appreciate.
Speaker 2: Lastly, I wanted to thank you, Mayor, for having the round of meetings for all of us.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much, Marie.
Speaker 4: Appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 2: All right. Okay. Hold on. Let me have that. Okay. All right. My Michael.
Speaker 0: The screen. What?
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of the city council. My name is Joan Greenwood. I reside at 2091 San Francisco Avenue in the Wrigley District of Long Beach since 1986. I thought it was been a long time since I've had to come up here and speak about a land use issue in this city. But but we have been discussing it among the water members since October of 2016. And the three words I would like to leave with you are. Maintain, evolve, transform, maintain. Wrigley, as one has two of the most diverse precincts in the entire country. We have no majority in Wrigley. We welcome all in Wrigley. It was designed with a diversity of housing, stock, single family, multi-story neighborhood serving commercial corridors of high quality. That's what we want as a founding neighborhood. What I don't understand is why founding neighborhoods and contemporary neighborhoods somehow fit in the same place type. They do not. So we want to maintain some of the unique characteristics of Wrigley. We want the land use element to reaffirm the equestrian overlay in Wrigley Heights as part of our cultural heritage. Second of all, evolving areas. Yes, Wrigley Village is evolving along Pacific Avenue. Willow Street is evolving. Again, a commune, a neighborhood serving walkable areas that serve the people who live in that district. When you build these high density, mixed use buildings, tall stories, the developers want chain groups going in there. They're more expensive and the local people can't afford it. Now, transformative, transformative place types are those like we have for downtown Long Beach and to a certain extent, North Long Beach. Let's focus our resources on those two areas and not transit oriented development in Wrigley. Wrigley and the Blue Line are not ready for transit oriented development. To do that right, you need approximately 50 acres of property. Otherwise, it's just overcrowding. We need to retain the area around the Willow Street Station as community commercial. That's our only supermarket in the area. That's where we have one of our two banks, which I stood in line behind ten people to use three ATMs on Saturday at 130 in the afternoon. We need these to stay in our neighborhood. And up at Wardlow, the same thing they want to put in high density residential. Well, we already have. That's where our senior housing is. That's where our convalescent homes are for our ill seniors. We would.
Speaker 0: Appreciate that. Okay. Just before our next speaker. So like like we do it all of our meetings with this many folks, we've got a bunch of folks outside and folks here, we've got about 5 hours of public speaking, stuff of public comment if everyone speaks and I know we want to have a chance to hear the council , so we're going down. We've had over 30 speakers. We're going now down to 2 minutes and we'll continue every one or 2 minutes. That's what I of the clock ago and then we'll go from there. I want to make sure folks from outside get a chance to speak. I will say there are some of you that are out there that I know have about 3 minutes worth of stuff to say that you really want to speak. And you've talked to me before about this. So I think you know who you are, but everyone else. 2 minutes, please. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Mayor Garcia, members of the council.
Speaker 2: And city staff. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm Brandi Claudio. I'm the executive director of the Los Altos Family YMCA. And I'm here in the fourth District, and I'm here on behalf of our 31 member Board of Managers.
Speaker 6: YMCA of Greater Long Beach Board of Directors with 47 members.
Speaker 2: And in addition to a representation of those individuals, there have been over 30 letters that have been sent to council, along with 143 signatures on a petition supporting our wise position to gain height zoning equity with our neighbors. After having served our community for over 50 years, our Los Altos.
Speaker 6: Y has every intention of continuing to do so.
Speaker 2: In years to come. This is what the community has told us that they want. The proposed L'appui maps on Bellflower between Atherton and Cal State. Long Beach offered drastic changes from 2 to 4 stories. The Why Rascals Property and the Corner building on Bellflower and Atherton are all currently zoned it to the proposed Louis Increase the Rascals property in the corner and the corner lot to four and left the way it to this height discrepancy makes no sense from a planning standpoint as unfair, unjustified and the inequality.
Speaker 1: Left our at a.
Speaker 2: Disadvantage. All our why is asking is to be treated equally with their neighboring parcels. We support the most recent changes which.
Speaker 6: Put all three parcels at three stories.
Speaker 2: This resolves in an inequity issue. We hope that this body and deed supports equity and.
Speaker 6: Fairness with the why matching the adjacent and corner parcel zoning height.
Speaker 2: We are great.
Speaker 6: We greatly value.
Speaker 2: Our councilman super NAS supportive.
Speaker 6: Our why as we have worked.
Speaker 2: To gain equity with our neighbors. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: First, thank you to everybody that's here tonight. It's really great to hear all these different opinions and views. I'm also with the Los Altos YMCA and thank you to the mayor and the member at the city council and city staff as well. I'm also here for the YMCA. My name is Lance KENYON. I've been a board member at Los Altos for about 20 years. I was born in Long Beach. I've lived. Here my entire life. I grew up in Los Altos y as a child, and my three children also grew up in the Y and experience the positive impact the Y makes on the community. Importantly, the Y has conducted a comprehensive professional marketing study which showed overwhelming support through the throughout the community for the Y increasing programs and services in the community. The proposed currently proposed L use MAP, which increases the height to four stories for the adjacent properties and leaves the Y at two stories is unfair and unjustified.
Speaker 11: It puts our Y to.
Speaker 4: Disadvantage of trying to provide the programs that the community has requested. So we're asking to be treated equally with our neighboring parcels. That's all we're looking for. We understand changes to proposed to be proposed tonight will do so. I hope that's the case. We hope the Council supports that. Equity and fairness with the YMCA matching those those adjacent parcels. Thank you for your consideration support and thank you to Councilman Supernormal for supporting us in hearing all our discussions.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please. I'm something. This, but that's fine. Good evening, esteemed council. Well, the mayor is absent, but I want to thank him for the roundtables and the beautiful letter that I received thanking me for my participation. What I want to impart on you all today is the gravity of the decision we're making this evening. You are all aware what this has to do with our future and really what's going to happen one way or the other on your decision. I am the president of the Alamitos Beach Neighborhood Association, and I'm here representing this beach area. The proposed density of density isn't really necessarily the problem. It's really the height and threat along this beach with the 16 stories on the north side of ocean and the improbable situation that I found myself in, the parking.
Speaker 4: Leads to.
Speaker 8: What I can only say is a disaster. I don't mean to be dramatic, but try finding parking in my neighborhood at late at night. It is impossible. What I'm asking for is language to protect parking in the future. I know it isn't there, and I know that it's supposed to be two spaces in residential areas.
Speaker 11: But we are facing a crisis over.
Speaker 8: There and further development at the low rate that it is now stands to crush people's spirits, as it were. Furthermore, I humbly request that you limit the height on the north side of ocean. The discussion we had earlier about not.
Speaker 4: Dramatic shifts in height, the 16 stories, the four.
Speaker 8: Stories on the map is appalling. We can't have monoliths dwarfing these four story units. And finally. Just know that my community is counting on you to make the right decision. And we really appreciate the time and energy you've taken to making our community a better place. Thank you so much and goodnight. Thank you. Speaker, please. Hi, I'm Gregory Moore, second district resident.
Speaker 4: There's a lot of demonization we're hearing about density. For anyone who doesn't know, the most population density in Europe, for example, is Amsterdam. And if you've ever been there, low crime, really nice place.
Speaker 8: So density is not is not inherently the problem. It's what we do with it. And I just I know this is an incredibly complicated issue.
Speaker 4: There's just one aspect of it that I'd like to touch on. In the presentation, we saw that the goal for new residential rate building is 1000 a thousand units per year. That we're not we're not there, but that in the last 2016, 2017, we've seen.
Speaker 8: A pretty.
Speaker 4: Substantial jump in that. And in the presentation we saw that the biggest bucket to use the term that Mr. Modica used is for the.
Speaker 8: The high height, the expensive kind of housing, which is almost double that of low income housing.
Speaker 4: One thing we didn't really hear much of is a number on the.
Speaker 8: Vacancy rates in what's being built.
Speaker 4: And I think that one thing we that it's if there's a lot of really expensive things that are being built and then we have.
Speaker 8: A 50% vacancy rates.
Speaker 4: I think it would be and I don't know that that and I'm just pulling that number out of the air. But one thing that was briefly mentioned was that we do have some.
Speaker 8: High vacancy rates and I hope you have the exact.
Speaker 4: Numbers not only of the vacancy rates of new units are being built, but vacancy rates by the type, because I'm sure that the lower income units are.
Speaker 8: Have a much lower vacancy rate. And that's the kind of that's those are the people that I hope.
Speaker 4: Don't get overlooked.
Speaker 8: In this process.
Speaker 4: And that might be a way to also maintain maintain a sort of steadier growth is if we put some kind of cap on the expensive units that are being built so that we can kind of gradually, more gradually.
Speaker 8: Move into to the growth that is we need as a city. That's an international city. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Mr. Moore. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, council.
Speaker 1: Members and mayor. My name's Christine Pettit.
Speaker 2: I'm a resident and homeowner in the Wrigley neighborhood. I say homeowner not because I think that it is important, but because it's something.
Speaker 6: That is used a lot to signify value in our city.
Speaker 2: But I do want to just remind folks that we are a majority renters. And a lot of the folks that I work with and advocate.
Speaker 1: For are renters.
Speaker 2: And I'm the executive director of Building Healthy Communities Long Beach. I've also been told that the message of those of us who support, who are generally supportive of the land use element is too smart. And I just want to say, I don't know what to do about that. We listen to facts.
Speaker 6: We let our position change over time. We have conversations, and we haven't seen a lot of that from folks who are saying no.
Speaker 2: In fact, a lot of us have wanted have have.
Speaker 6: Actually held back from speaking because all of the misinformation that's out there and demonization of people who are generally.
Speaker 7: Supportive.
Speaker 2: Of the land use element.
Speaker 6: But I felt like I had to be here tonight speaking.
Speaker 2: And so, you know, in general.
Speaker 6: We believe that building healthy communities, Long Beach, that we need a.
Speaker 2: Long range plan that puts forth a vision for Long Beach's future. We're opposed to decreases to density that were put forth by the Planning Commission, but we don't believe in trickle down density. We think that it's really important that density is coupled with inclusionary zoning and protections for affordable housing. And we do not want to see the displacement that has come along with the downtown plan. We also think it's unfair and.
Speaker 6: To our city's detriment to only increase density in already dense areas. Maintaining neighborhoods the way.
Speaker 2: They are today.
Speaker 6: Keeps.
Speaker 2: The discrimination and discriminatory.
Speaker 6: Policies that created these inequities intact. And we we're just here to partner with you as we move forward, because we want this to.
Speaker 2: Be a meaningful plan. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Ms.. Pettit. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, counsel. My. My name is Bruce DeMello, live in Lakewood Village. I'm the president of the Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association. And you've heard of the bag woman? Well, tonight, I'm the bag man. And the reason I'm the bag man is we've got two big issues in Lakewood Village. And I'd like to thank Stacy Mungo for working with us on these issues. Parkview Village is a commercial area that the developer is trying very hard to get that to a mixed use situation. And it's been a community commercial for 70 years approximately. And and so I put out ballots just neighbors. If they'd put out ballots just asking if they supported community commercial or if they wanted to support mixed use. And so in the bag, I've got these ballots and they've come in so, so fast. I haven't even been able to counting process entering my computer. I've done a lot, but I haven't even done them all. And then the other important issue that we have in Lakewood Village, we've got 166 apartment buildings that surround Lakewood Village. And I gave you a packet. Each of you should have a packet that includes pictures of what happened in West Chester when single family homes that used to have a montessori school right behind them where they built a five story apartment. So the other thing we're asking for is to keep our apartment buildings, our 166 buildings, keeping us two storey and keep our community, you know, the nice community that we have in Lakewood Village. So I appreciate your support and that. And again, these are all the ballots for both the park view village keeping it commercial and in keeping our our apartments two story.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you so much, sir. Appreciate it. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Council members. I am Steve Stingley. Can you raise us a little bit? 4715 Screen Middle Road. I echo what Bruce says. I'm a 40 year resident of Lakewood Village, and there's a single page with my name, Steve Stingley, on the top. You all have that. Now I apologize. I apologize. Can you raise a stand a little bit? I apologize that there's an edit because of a change that was made recently. But to echo what Bruce said. The apartments, the Hunter 66 and Lakewood Village. And by the way, Lakewood Village is part of Kd5 Stacy's area. But all the apartments in City five are in Lakewood Village. They're on Lakewood Castle and Bellflower. There's 166 of them. Most of them are one or two stories. One of them is three. The Louis says the maximum height is for all one. 66 is now three stories. We're asking that to be changed to two and we coordinate this with Stacy. The second thing is, as far as Park View Village goes, you've probably been to the post office. Sarah Willows Great restaurants, pound ramen restaurant around Carson and Lakewood. Nice places. Well, it's a quaint area there. There are one or two stories, Bruce said. There are two story commercial, but the owner developer has this idea. He's got it. For two years we've been working on a big master plan, a huge plan. What he wants is mixed residential, and he would like to put 300 to 500 apartments in that area as mixed use. We absolutely oppose that. The current arrangement with two story commercial is excellent for Lakewood Village. It maps into the feel the personality of Lakewood Village. The current alien elements. Define Parkview Village as a two story commercial. We're asking you, please keep it that way.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you so much. Next picture, please.
Speaker 2: Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Staci Mango and the rest of the council. My name is Laura Brewer. I live at 4417 Greenwood Avenue. I came to Long Beach as a one year newlywed with my husband, Chuck. I worked for five years for minimum wage. Chuck and I worked our tail off. We saved our money. We. We did everything ourselves. And we ended up being able to buy in south of Conant, our first starter home. We did the same thing for eight years and were able to move then to Lakewood Village. The reason we did that is we wanted to be able to afford a backyard, a safe neighborhood, a suburban lifestyle where our kids could walk to school and we would get to know our neighbors. I actually delayed having kids ten years in order to get that. I want to encourage the young people in the room that you can do it too. It's not easy, but it can be done. Everyone in the room has a similar story. I have three questions for the council. I don't think I'm going to get to them. One is more better. I don't think so in my neighborhood. But if downtown or there are other areas that work for them, then okay. Second, what is good for Long Beach? I think each council district needs to decide. In Lakewood Village we want to storey commercial. We want the apartments to remain the same so that we can keep the neighborhood the way it is. The third thing is, who do you listen to? Developers, state officials, political parties, special interest groups or your constituents? Remember us? We're the ones that voted for you. We voted for you because we wanted you to make decisions that were in my best interest. Thank you. And we will all know soon how you vote and who you're listening to. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Good evening. Mayor Garcia and members of city council. My name is Adam Correll, president of the Long Beach Commercial Real Estate Council. And we're here to share our support for the land use element with empirical data presented in the recently published Beacon Economics housing report. We are in the midst of a housing crisis. The LOO also provides more opportunities to create housing for teachers, students, families, seniors and our children. The LU provides the opportunity to invest and more importantly, reinvest in our business corridors. We encourage you to support a 21st century city and embrace opportunities for young people. Which brings us to a good point. I'm going to quote President Connolly from Cal State Long Beach, which I put which we pulled from one of our recent social media posts referencing the Lewin Housing quote, This is our biggest challenge. We must have housing for teachers, students and staff. Let's get to work to save Long Beach. End quote. Say yes to the loo. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 11: Hi, Mayor Garcia. Council. My name is Mike Clemson. I live in the fourth district.
Speaker 4: I want to say that I think the people opposing the land use.
Speaker 11: Element is a group that's primarily motivated, motivated by fear of the long loss of the Long Beach of.
Speaker 4: Their childhood. I think it's a group motivated by the fear of new people moving to the skies.
Speaker 0: Everyone gets a chance.
Speaker 4: To speak the privilege they enjoyed moving into their neighborhoods. It's a group that sees every challenge that we're.
Speaker 11: Facing as a society, from climate change to.
Speaker 4: Affordable housing and chooses to ignore them. The land use element is what climate change action looks like. The it's what addressing affordable housing looks like. At best, this is a moderate policy that begins to address these problems, but goes nowhere near as far as we need to to deal with them. But there's an ecosystem of fake news and conspiracy theories that support this belief that they are under siege, and it only fuels the resentment and grievance as they descend further into their next door bubble. Well, you know, that's how you operate in the world without facts that you can't support the land use element unless you're a chauffeur . Developers that somehow multifamily residences in the eighties cause a nationwide crime epidemic, and that the laws of supply and demand don't matter. And that where we're worried.
Speaker 11: About more about street parking than we are about people.
Speaker 4: Living on the street. I believe, in fact, and the.
Speaker 11: Facts shows that housing affordability is a real problem.
Speaker 4: For the majority of our city. I believe in.
Speaker 11: Science, and the best science shows that building more housing brings the cost of.
Speaker 4: Housing down. I believe in inclusion, and real inclusion means welcoming people into your neighborhoods and giving them a place where they can live. And I hope that the city council is able to pass a land use element.
Speaker 11: That lives up to the values of our city.
Speaker 4: And doesn't give in to the fear mongering and conspiracy theory, that theory that's driven this process so far. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Clemson. Next speaker, please hold on 1/2. I want to make sure that everyone that speaks deserves respect for their opinion. And so just the side comments and stuff. Please, everyone gets to speak. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. My name is her Linda Chico. I am the filled deputy for Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn. I am also a constituent of the city of Long Beach and a homeowner. The supervisor has asked me to make a few remarks on her behalf. The County of Los Angeles and the city of Long Beach have enjoyed a great partnership in our efforts to increase affordable housing opportunities. Last year we saw the grand opening of Emmanuel Place, a city county partnership that completely restored a former church and transformed it into a 25 unit community for formerly homeless seniors. When the city recently proposed an innovative mixed use development of 95 units of affordable housing featuring a public park space and a YMCA supervisor, Hahn was happy to commit $1.5 million of the fourth district's housing fund to make that happen. As you know, the Carmelita was built in 1941 and located in North Long Beach. Has the historical distinction of being the first public housing development in Los Angeles County. It is also the county of Los Angeles's largest development, with a total of 713 units, of which 558 are family units and 155 are dedicated senior units. It spans 64 acres with numerous facilities, including two community centers, family resource and learning centers, recreation center and award winning seven acre sustainable urban garden and large open space for residents to enjoy. Although there are no immediate plans to build additional housing at the Carmel Leto's, Supervisor Hahn recognizes the city's vision and fully supports its recommendation to increase the density at this location. This would provide a future opportunity to increase affordable housing in that region, in that region that desperately needs it. Supervisor Hahn is also looking to assist existing property owners. The county has partnered with the city of Long Beach. Oh, I ran out of time. Yes, really? Okay. Well, Supervisor Hahn offers her support and will continue to work with the city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Michiko. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Hi. Good evening. Honorable mayor, vice mayor, councilmembers city staff and my fellow residents. My name is Megan Kerr. I'm a Long Beach native Lifetime resident. Proud a strict eighth district resident and a homeowner. I say homeowner only because I own a home on a street that is adjacent to a major transportation corridor. I am directly impacted by the proposed land use element and all the.
Speaker 1: Concerns of privacy that others.
Speaker 9: Are speaking of. I stand here in strong support of the land use element. As originally written, it was thoughtfully and professionally drawn up and designed to address the housing needs, economic and community growth of a diverse city that I love. For the next 20 years, as I stated at the Planning Commission meeting, this plan was last updated when I was in high school and now my youngest child is set to graduate from Poly High. It is long past time we address this important issue. Some others have and will speak more eloquently than I. About economic development, the housing crisis. The need for more housing. So I will not duplicate those thoughts. Out of respect for your time. I would like to speak to a point that Mr. Modica brought up in his presentation. I am here is a private residence, but I do have some knowledge of our school district. In my opinion, part of the magic of our USD.
Speaker 6: Schools is that a large percentage of our teachers.
Speaker 9: Staff and administrators live here in Long Beach. Of those teachers and staff, a large portion are of and close to retirement age. As we hire more teachers and staff for Long Beach Unified, I want them to be able to live in the city that they serve.
Speaker 2: That means we need new housing at price.
Speaker 9: Points that they can manage. And Mr. Modica referenced that in his presentation earlier. Because we know that community port.
Speaker 2: Support is critical to students.
Speaker 9: Success. When you see your teachers and administrators in your city, it matters. I want that opportunity for the teachers who will continue to teach in this district. I urge this Council to support the land use element as originally drafted. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Mr. Next Speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, honorable mayor, vice mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Andy Kerr and I am a resident of the eighth District. I am also the fourth District representative on the Measure H Citizen Oversight Advisory Board for the Measure H tax that was passed by voters last March in response to the homelessness crisis. And I'm here today to voice support for the city's efforts on the land use element. As far as voicing my support for a visionary and effective Louie, I commend Mayor Garcia for your opinion piece in the Press Telegram today. I can't really make the case any any better than the reasons that you cited in your article this morning. But in light of where we are this evening, I have three main concerns. I think we've we've fairly established that we are in the midst of a housing crisis. And my question is, are we responding in an appropriate way that that would be in response to a crisis situation? Have we allowed special interests who are not personally experiencing this crisis have a larger influence in reducing the original capacity of addressing our short term and long term needs? And that leads me to my second point. Money alone is not going to solve the homelessness crisis that we're in. We were able we were blessed to get voters to approve Measure H last year, but we may just be treading water if we don't address this housing crisis. The problem of 60,000 people without a home in L.A. County and our failure to plan in the past has helped get us where we are today on this issue. And then my third and final point is the question of what is the economic cost of not acting? I also come to you as a business leader. I work as a CFO for a company that employs 90 people in the region. I would ask you to don't let people like me who are lucky to own a home here in Long Beach. I've lived here for almost 50 years. Don't let us kill the golden goose. Think for my kids, for my young adult kids. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, Mr. Kerr. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening on Barbara Schuller. I live in the 2200 block of Grand Avenue. I hadn't planned on speaking, so this may not be as put together as I would like, but I did want to make a couple of comments. I'm listening to all of the presentations and the comments. It strikes me as interesting the difference that's being laid out between overcrowding and high density. When I grew up, there were four of us in the bedroom and every single one in that household grew up to be constructive. People who who supported systems, who are responsible and good citizens. And I don't know that.
Speaker 7: Just throwing up a lot of I-beams and cement is really going to.
Speaker 2: Solve a lot of the problems and issues that our city is faced with. There is nothing in this to support affordable housing.
Speaker 7: There's nothing to.
Speaker 2: Encourage the development to address that problem. I currently live on the 2200 block of Grand Avenue. It is a street. The whole street is small ball sized duplexes. Each unit is less than 900 square feet. But it is a wonderful family neighborhood. We are all one story. We have yards and it's very affordable and is very desirable for people. Having three stories.
Speaker 7: Is not going to.
Speaker 2: Necessarily mean that there's a good neighborhood to raise good citizens. So I think that a lot of the comments have pointed that there could have been better transparency in terms of what the loo really does get us and what it doesn't. And I just.
Speaker 7: Want to throw those comments.
Speaker 2: Out there. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor.
Speaker 6: And council members. My name is Pamela Rice. I reside in.
Speaker 2: District five south of Kona, located.
Speaker 6: Behind the parcels, the bow tie parcels.
Speaker 2: And there were some changes made in the last meeting of the Planning Commission that changed that parcel area into mixed use from park from commercial. And I'm asking that that be returned back to commercial only. Is it now back to commercial? So my concern is that if the L'UE is passed as it is today, that.
Speaker 6: That particular area would then be vulnerable because the white area or the distance between the businesses and that residential area is about enough to to move a truck through. And that means if there's any kind of residential areas placed in that small little parcel, that they'd be able to look into our backyards.
Speaker 2: I'm not against growth. I think it's important we need to be considerate.
Speaker 6: But into the areas that we're living. When you're placing apartments right there on top.
Speaker 2: Of single family living areas, that it's not taking that into consideration. It would also remove.
Speaker 6: The appearance of the city that or that particular area, the characteristics of that single family living.
Speaker 2: And we're just asking that you take that into consideration. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Pryce, my name is Elizabeth Keeney, and you guessed it, I'm in the third district. I request the council just.
Speaker 1: Direct staff to implement a master IIR rather than a program IIR.
Speaker 2: For the elderly.
Speaker 1: And recirculate the air based on.
Speaker 2: The changes since its inception. Program IIR embedded in the elderly takes away the ability for the public to have representation on future projects. Under the Louie, there's no way to identify environmental impacts for a yet to be proposed development.
Speaker 1: And the current program EIA are embedded in the Louise states set an air.
Speaker 2: Quality esthetics and traffic can't be mitigated to insignificant levels.
Speaker 1: By having the program air.
Speaker 2: Embedded in the Louis. This allows economic issues to override the need to mitigate the drafty air has not been recirculated as the maps have changed in the Louis and this is effectively eliminated standing required in the Sequa process. All decisions are therefore left to staff. A master air provides for a tiered approach that also can simplify planning and reduce paperwork while still allowing for review of future individual projects via council and planning. Please request a master rather than program, air and recirculation.
Speaker 1: Of the air based on the.
Speaker 2: Changes so that the public can have standing in impact as the general plan becomes reality. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much, Nick Speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Mark Helmick. I'm a resident of the seventh District 3952 Rose Avenue, Long Beach. Let me tell you a little bit about the city of my youth. It is not Long Beach. It's a midwestern hamlet far, far away called Kirksville, Missouri. There are Midwesterners from Iowa that moved here. There's a battleship that remembers the good folks of Iowa. I came to Long Beach because it reflected somewhat my value set. I worked hard. I raised two kids in this town I built. I didn't build them. I bought two houses and refurbished both of them. I bought the ugliest one on the block twice because I believed that Long Beach was a great place. It represented my values. Now I hear that we're going to preserve the neighborhoods as a museum. Am I a relic? I don't see on the l'ue there may be a speck or two, but what the l'ue seem to be lacking are some plots of land that can be developed into single family neighborhoods, similar to the one I moved into in my house was built in 1937, not in the eighties. Long Beach might be Iowa by the sea. It attracted to me for its values. But here's the deal We have no obligation. Long Beach has no obligation to any other than your own. I'm a transplant, but I love it as my home. You have no obligation to future residents in in the Louis presentations that I saw. Your own numbers say that 60, 70% of Long Beach doesn't work in Long Beach. They work elsewhere. So what then is the obligation to what? How's the workers of the other communities? We housed their overflow masses. That's what density represents to me. We're trying to increase it for no apparent reason other than we want to. But you got to put a little perspective on it, too.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Thank you very much, sir. One more minute. I can't. We got to we've got to keep going south of Los Angeles.
Speaker 4: I'll let you get.
Speaker 0: The last, last sentence.
Speaker 4: Los Angeles has a density of 8500 people per mile. Long Beach has 9348. We have a greater density than Los Angeles.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate it. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Good evening. My name is Liliana Noble.
Speaker 2: I live downtown. I'm here on behalf of the North.
Speaker 9: Pine Neighborhood Alliance.
Speaker 2: We do not belong to Kono. We're going to grow. And. Putting up a wall. It doesn't work for Trump and it ain't going to work for Long Beach. We will grow. We are renters. We are majority renter. I'm not a renter. But in.
Speaker 9: My neighborhood.
Speaker 2: 80% of the people who live in.
Speaker 9: My neighborhood are renters.
Speaker 2: And that is true is a heck of a lot of the neighborhoods around town. Homeownership is a myth for the young people that I work with. They do not have. They just don't have the jobs or the opportunities to deal with individuals, single family, home ownership. So we are currently majority renters. And we have got a shortage of affordable housing for the people who live here right now. Even if we put up a damn wall. We still have thousands, thousands of residents who need affordable housing. What we need is not the l'ue that's in front of you right now. What we need is an employee that will set the vision for affordable housing for the people who live here right now. What we need is an employee that will say no net loss. I agree with some of the comments. I'm sure they don't trust developers. We need a vision that says you will build affordable housing. You will not displace the people that are here right now. And that's the vision that's going to lead us forward. And it will continue to keep us diverse in terms of our ethnicity and our income levels. We have a right to this kind of a future. We there's a wonderful future that people are living out in the suburbs on the east side. But that ain't the reality for the majority of the folks who live here in Long Beach. And I hope that you will not make decisions based on your little individual districts. We are a city and we need leadership that we haven't had here previously. That's why we don't have an elderly right now. We need you to lead us collectively, citywide, with development that will put this affordable housing wherever the heck we can put it. That will increase mixed use so that we put people in apartments near where they can shop and catch a ride and be an economic motor in our city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, everybody. I envy you, your patients. And I just want to commend the city staff that have been really graceful.
Speaker 9: And.
Speaker 2: Facilitating throughout this entire process. You all deserve raises. Yes.
Speaker 0: They do. Everyone, guys, everyone, please. Come on.
Speaker 2: My name is Karen Reside. I live in the First District and I'm one of those poor people that a lot of people.
Speaker 9: Don't want in their neighborhoods.
Speaker 2: The only difference is my skin. I live in a high rise. That is 17 stories on the corner of Pacific and Seventh Street. Surrounding us are two story apartments, single family residence, multiple story buildings, and we all just get along just fine. We have a wonderful neighborhood. So height is not the defining issue. Change is a defining issue. And I'm really sorry that people can't look.
Speaker 9: Further than.
Speaker 2: Their own particular needs and uses when we need to be looking further out. What is the city going to be like in the future? Are we going to continue to redline where people live? Which is part of what? This plan could be depending on how it ends up being. I live in a building with 200 other seniors and some of them don't have mobility. They want to have services close to their building and accessible. A lot of people want to not have that. And my discussions with the developer, that's what his intention is. Seniors also don't drive, so they don't need as much parking. And as Mr. Medicare's report indicated, we are all getting.
Speaker 9: Older and we're going to be.
Speaker 5: More.
Speaker 2: Also, 42% don't speak English. Where are they tonight? Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: We're going to go back up top.
Speaker 0: Sure. We have someone to back up top.
Speaker 2: Hello? Can you hear me?
Speaker 0: Yes. Where? Where are you?
Speaker 2: Okay. Hi. Good evening. Okay.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Yes. Please say your name as well. For the record.
Speaker 2: You can hear me. Okay. Hi. Good morning. My name is Luiz began, and I come here to ask this council to reject land use for affordable housing in Long Beach. If you're going to want to fight for a freeway going towards the ocean or El Segundo.
Speaker 7: You'll see. To the right side of the right side is.
Speaker 2: Wilmington Avenue exit. There are rows of affordable housing that L.A. city for the homeless and for those with with low income. Although this L.A. city had good intention of providing affordable housing for the community, I can tell you that no one wants to live there due to drugs, crimes, gangs and fear of being assaulted. When the government provides affordable housing to people who cannot afford the income to rent or buy a home, it brings with it.
Speaker 7: Individuals behavior.
Speaker 2: That is unpredictable and can cost lives. It also brings with individual who has no investment in maintaining the property or pride because they know that government is on their side. They may have thought that it will be the government who will do the upkeep of the property. The Wilmington Avenue exit proved that. What I'm saying, those homes many years ago had values and today it has become a crime area because of land use for affordable housing. So we fully use the you before you use the land for affordable housing. I would like it to be built next to your home and if you live there one year.
Speaker 7: You can tell me that you enjoy.
Speaker 2: Living next to affordable homes. So in front. So if you like to see trash in your front of your home, then I will vote on your side. I cannot imagine affordable housing and empty acres in the White House long, so I can't imagine affordable housing in my backyard. So before you build close to me first, build it next to you. I worked hard to find a place where I know I can feel safe at night. I work hard to know that that when I walk out of my house, my environment.
Speaker 7: Is.
Speaker 2: Safe. Thank you very much. Thank you. Reject land use for affordable housing.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much, ma'am. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor. Jorge Flores. I lived in the community for 38 years. So I know homelessness is an issue that we all want to tackle. Nobody wants to see anybody in the streets. You know, we understand how that happens. It happens gradually. It's just someone just doesn't decide to get on drugs or or fall apart. So being 38 years across the street from the mission, I was able I've been able to observe. Why is that? Why are there so many homelessness around the mission, but not in the mission? It looks good from the outside. But not in the inside. Something was beckoning me to go inside. So I went in earlier, as some of you folks saw me with my friend Ricky, who was going to the mission daily to go eat. He's reforming to start coming out of a gang activity, gang infested area. We're both trying to help our area and we're both learning today. I'm learning a lot, too, to listen in. The language of the heart is in the House today. So I want this is what I saw and this is what I'm asking for, Mr. Mayor. And all of the council. I'm asking for help because these are the things I've seen. I've seen the problem of homelessness. It's broken up the mission. This is what I saw. I have come to ask for help to find the solution immediately. Okay. Party and policy aside, might divide as leaders. But one thing unites us. Misery. And. Oppression. This is what I said. I said I will look for the poor. I am the poor. I said I will work for the Disenfranchized and the Disenfranchized. I said I would like for the oppressed. I am the oppressed. I saw ingrained would be white supremacy bullying. Serving food. Welcoming. Only that welcoming only went when when the people and the people that don't live around the mission come. They make a blessed, you know, like the old saying that everything that glitters is gold.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Oh, here I go.
Speaker 4: Here I go.
Speaker 0: I just. Last sentence.
Speaker 4: Please. Okay. I saw broken gays and transsexuals reduced to perform sexual acts. I saw bullying of broken men of color and brown and black.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Yeah, yeah, that's all. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name's Art Panetta. I'm from the city of Lakewood.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 0: We speak into the mixture of appreciating friendly neighbors.
Speaker 4: Born in Long Beach, my children, born in Long Beach went to school in our Long Beach schools. We shop in Long Beach. Long Beach is right on the border of of our neighborhood. And we have a particular bottleneck area that's Los Coyotes, Studebaker, Road, Cars and Street. So an intersection there that has a level of service grade F right now. And. There's accidents. There's near misses daily there. Hey, with the land use element coming in, I would like to address the town center area, the town center acreage. If you look at all the place type maps would account for 2700 units of the 7000 units that Long Beach is requiring for the land use quota elements. So that's like one third. Not a lot of attention has been given to town center because frankly, most of Long Beach residents don't even border Long Beach town center. But Lakewood is right across the street. Right across the street, Carson Street, which only has one exit out on the Carson Street from that community. Then we have the four lane bridge, which is two lanes in each direction that goes over the San Gabriel River to that intersection I'm talking about, which Long Beach has historically not put left hand turn signal or traffic control. There's been accidents. There's been deaths, all kinds of problems. There's high stress. A new high school there, Long Beach High School. McBryde.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your time, sir.
Speaker 4: Quite an issue.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you for your time. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello, ladies and gentlemen. My name's Roy Bennett. I live in the fourth district of Anaheim and Examiner, so we just finished paying off our house. We've lived there for 24 years now. 24 years. I've lived in the same house with my wife, and we bought it as an investment. Yeah, we want to live there. I'm a native Californian. I had a 17 year stint in Saint Louis, Missouri, and there is something in Saint Louis that you should know about. And that's high density, high density buildings. There is the Pruitt-Igoe high density, high rise buildings that were built for lower income. And this was right after World War Two. And by the mid 1950s, they were tearing them down with dynamite. The whole idea of putting a lot of people in a very small area, high, high density living in a multi-story building, these buildings were, I think, about 13 or 15 storeys high. Granted, that's not the scene you're planning here, but high density living. This is this thing that people move out of New York City for. They don't want a lot of extra people here. I don't I'm not thrilled with the mandate handed down from Sacramento. I, I don't understand this. We don't I'm sorry to sound snobby. I don't think we need more people here in California, and I don't think we need a little long breather. We only take three minute showers. You can only water twice a week. What are we going to do when the thousands of more people here have not? The brownouts and the blackouts, we had those a few years ago.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony, sir.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much.
Speaker 8: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Laura Selmer, a resident address on file. I have cut a three minute pitch down to two. I hope you'll let me go over if I can. Background. I was awarded the county. I was a foster child. My own crumbling family was on welfare and living in low income housing, low income and painful, familiar with the disadvantage and the infinite gulf between poverty and great wealth. I share this untold truth about myself to eliminate any notion that I am ignorant of socioeconomic disadvantage. I know it very well. Tonight, I'm a speaker with a design. B.A., MBA, LEED, AP. My city. My career spans. Design, marketing, defense, banking, construction. I'm no stranger to the real force of big business money. I studied this l'ue you cover to cover. I urge you to receive and file. First we were told. Just look at the maps. Just look at the maps. You know, of 39,000 people in Long Beach are colorblind. They can't tell anyway. And now they're laughing and stop and stop. Okay. But the document is what you're approving. The document, 75% of the document is a marketing pitch to big business investment funds. If you look at this, the underpinning of this work doesn't pass the sniff test. 1.5 people in one room in a bedroom is severe overcrowding. It needs light. We need to look at the data.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 2: I would just one last sentence.
Speaker 8: For one more sentence, go for.
Speaker 2: The great economist, Beacon Financial. He is a consultant for the construction industry to the state of California. This housing crisis with severe overcrowding is something we need to question. And I thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Receive implies that.
Speaker 8: We thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Seven More Sincere Language Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach Branch. The latest ailments puts two different bodies of organized capitalism against one another. On one side, we have private developers, the only current source for capital and expertize needed to increase the much needed supply of housing in the city. On the other side are small, local, medium sized landowners who wish to maintain their local monopoly over low income housing throughout the city. Both parties act as engines of displacement by exploiting this city's lack of tenure protections and a social safety net. With regard to the value itself, the city manager and planners spent an inordinate amount of time developing this plan, only to see it upended and publicly undermined by the mayor. The mayor did this in order to appease that explicitly racist land owner organization so that he can guarantee that no serious challenger faces reelection. None of the suggestions provided by the A.L. forces should be considered as valid valid policy proposals. They represent reactionary, short sighted interests that benefit a tiny fraction of the residents of the city. Conor gripes about density, quote, increase in crime and every dog whistle talking points should disqualify them from any serious consideration in this debate. We need statutory protections to guarantee a large and increasing supply of affordable, equitable housing for everyone looking to live in the city. The federal government is obviously not interested in providing and protecting this right to housing. So the mandate falls on local governments to strengthen something they cannot do with addition, without additional requirements on developers to provide these units. Density is inevitable and necessary as all rent control and includes inclusionary zoning. Housing is a right and not a commodity. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 8: Thank you. 90 seconds next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and members of council.
Speaker 0: My name is Rich Steines.
Speaker 5: I live in the Lakewood Village neighborhood of the fifth District. And my my address is on file. In my opinion, it is unfair that you are actually taking public comment before no active motion.
Speaker 4: Is being brought to the floor. Residents who came here tonight.
Speaker 5: Cannot speak directly to any changes to the Louie that you may pass. This in itself is not a transparent process. We should be having public comment after a motion is made and any substitute motions and amendments are brought forward.
Speaker 4: So whatever you do end up approving tonight, it needs to be brought back so the public can have the opportunity to comment on your plan.
Speaker 5: Before we end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on an e.r. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Please. My name is David Donovan. I live in the fifth district. Lakewood Village. You have my packet?
Speaker 3: It's.
Speaker 4: Council member Stacey Mungo. Thank you for getting. One of the two advertising signs removed from Lakewood Plaza, a public park. Now, please insist that this beleaguered public space be included in the Louis. The Parks Landscape Plan was approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission in October 2006. Council member l Austin I icon property unviable. So I'm your constituent to the proposal. You supports four storey apartment buildings for the grassy knoll behind single family homes unviable. That is not acceptable. Please restrict any future buildings on this grassy knoll. No. 2 to 2 stories. Only with the exception of a three storey senior housing building located behind our property. This neighborhood is one and two storey homes. The three storey building behind our property result in major loss of our backyard privacy. I repeat. Restrict any future buildings on the grassy knoll to two stories only. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you, everyone, for your time.
Speaker 3: My name is Andrew Carr. I live in the second district.
Speaker 4: I heard a comment tonight about overflowing.
Speaker 3: Masses and it reminded.
Speaker 4: Me of a poem that you all were probably taught at one point in school by Emma Lazarus. I'm not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, with conquering limbs astride from land to land here at our sea, washed sunset and gates shall stand a mighty woman with a torch whose flame is the imprisoned lightning. And her name mother of exiles, her beacon hand glows world wide Welcome her mild eyes command the air bridged harbor that Twin Cities frame keep ancient lands your storied pomp. Christ, she was silent and lips. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these the homeless.
Speaker 5: Tempest tossed to me.
Speaker 4: I limp, left my lab beside the golden door. I think it's a shame that the executive director of the Council of Neighbor Organizations began his test, began in fact, started this night by speaking a minute over his time, which I think is disrespectful, given how much of a voice he's already been given in this process and by given how many people want to speak tonight. I also think that him and his fellow supporters have had multiple points, hijacked this process, disrespected the staff, the city, have insulted directly and how it has been rewarded. The mayor grants him a private conversation in which he agrees not to run for mayor in exchange for some private mayoral roundtables in which Robert Fox Hand selects who gets to attend in order to make further changes to this document. I believe this entire process has, unfortunately, and I don't believe it any bad will. I just think it's bad policy and bad politics. But I think it may be this entire process privilege. Homeowners and renters have not had a voice, and I urge you to file this entire managed element and start over and include renters in the process. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony.
Speaker 4: Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is John Apple Quest. I'm from the fourth District and I have other interests in Long Beach. You know, like Solomon, I know that you're going to have to end up splitting the baby because, you know, we do need some housing because there are young people that will need housing in the future . Unfortunately, with aspects like rent control that are coming in, that might turn everything into condos. Um, but the one point I want to point out that I heard from the staff tonight was, is they want an annual review after we've settled whatever, we've settled here and we could be back here again next year. I would like to propose that we change that to review after five years, and I would like you to consider that. So at least I could get a little bit of rest in between these meetings. All right. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Lynnette Firenze. And the biggest issue in the overall location of the high density place types and heights, which are still heavily concentrated in the central downtown area. The city is the center area has the worst air quality. We have the diesel death zone expansion of the 710 in the VNS facility, we had the least amount of open space, as little as 0.26 acres per thousand has compared to the zip code. On the east side is 19.1 per thousand, the shortest life expectancy in the city of up to seven years. Highest crime higher density equals higher crime. We have most of the parking impacted area and based on the staff report estimates over 8000 new units in the central downtown area without any mitigation for parking or any new roads.
Speaker 6: Yet the majority of the highest density, unlimited density.
Speaker 2: With heights of 5 to 10 stories and very substandard parking are located in the central and downtown. Even though parking is not regulated by the LAPD, the density the elderly.
Speaker 6: Permits greatly impacts parking.
Speaker 2: State regulations for TOD supersedes city requirements and for affordable and new senior.
Speaker 6: Rental housing units. The parking is as.
Speaker 2: Low as 0.5 spaces per unit, so there were two projects that were approved in the summer of 17, a couple of years ago, I'm sorry, a couple of months ago at.
Speaker 6: 1795, Long Beach Boulevard, 101 affordable units and one manager's unit on an acre with 77 parking spaces.
Speaker 2: That means 26 or 25 parking spaces will be built with no parking. So we've got a quarter of the units, 25 out of 102 with no residential parking and no guest parking. Another project around the corner at 1836 Locust Avenue. 48 affordable units, 40 parking spaces.
Speaker 6: Once again, eight new residential units without any onsite parking, no guest parking.
Speaker 2: So, in fact, all new development is not required to provide parking. Please keep this in mind because it does affect the.
Speaker 6: Density and quality of life in our neighborhood. A couple other issues.
Speaker 2: I have.
Speaker 6: Is in the front end.
Speaker 2: Zone. We still have three areas that are thank you are women.
Speaker 8: Thank you so much for your time. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi, I'm Belinda Watson and I live in the seventh district and my focus to all of you is the unintended consequences. And I know that probably before all the other concerns, when all the other decisions were made, for example, to put the blue line through Wrigley area, I pretty sure at that particular time we can forecast into the future that because that blue light went through our neighborhood in Wrigley, that because of that now we're considered high threat or transit district and we have to have a high density. That's an unintended consequence because on board the road there is one building which is a senior building that's multiple storeys and I'm pretty sure that's in other areas as well. It's an unintended consequence that because that one building is there, that is the justification to put other large buildings. And so the only cause and an unintended consequence is that your decision today is going to be the reason why it's okay to increase density even more in the future. So we have to look at intended consequences. And for I've been reading in the newspaper where I was a renter. I decided that I didn't want to be a renter anymore. And I bought a condo and then I bought the condo and I bought a home and my home is in the Wrigley area. All renters eventually may become future home owners. So when we're attacking each other, we're attacking ourselves. So the homes that we are building is for we need renters, every need homeowner and we need to respect. What the needs are of both. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's Tom Stout. I live in the Wrigley area and this is my neighbor.
Speaker 10: She just spoke for me.
Speaker 4: I don't know. It looks.
Speaker 10: Like it's you know, from past experience, it's density.
Speaker 4: For dollars.
Speaker 10: It's pack them and stack them. It's happen. And, you know, we have.
Speaker 4: Mr. Winer up.
Speaker 10: In San Francisco who, you know, we had one on the West Coast, but now we have a.
Speaker 4: On the East Coast. Now we have a West Coast winner. And I don't agree with much.
Speaker 10: Of what he says, you know.
Speaker 4: So I just don't know if we really need all the.
Speaker 10: Density. I mean, people go, well.
Speaker 4: You're a homeowner.
Speaker 10: Well, I busted my ass to be a homeowner. And I'll be honest, I own more than what they're paid for because I worked a number of jobs to get one. A lot of people do go to college, they graduate, but they get a degree and some useless study that they enjoyed. You know, that's why you're working for minimum wage. Get a skill, learn a trade. You know, you know, I'm 72 and I still go to pick apart and get greasy because that's the kind of cars I'm old. I like old cars also. I like my old house and I don't want a big building close to it that's going to look down on my. Less than well-kept backyard. As you told me, I couldn't even have my easy up.
Speaker 4: In the driveway 80.
Speaker 10: Feet from the street because it was against city code.
Speaker 4: Wow.
Speaker 10: 80 feet. Who in the hell notice do you use?
Speaker 4: Google Maps? So I'm against that. Look, I was poor when I grew up. I'm not rich now. I mean, I'm comfortable.
Speaker 10: I do have a teacher's pension. I work as a teacher and.
Speaker 4: Charge for 32 years. Why don't I live in Torrance? Because I couldn't afford it.
Speaker 10: Reason? I have my house. I got a deal from my girlfriends, and I bought her house when.
Speaker 4: She moved to Alaska. I don't know why, but she did. Well, I do know her family.
Speaker 8: As much as I don't want to cut you off.
Speaker 10: Okay. You know, this this meetings have been sort of contentious, so I thought I let out a.
Speaker 4: Little.
Speaker 10: Bit. Thank you for that. It's getting dry. We're all neighbors. We all have our own opinions.
Speaker 4: And thank you. We don't always agree.
Speaker 8: Bonus time for humor. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Vice Mayor and council members. My name is Diana Coronado and I'm here on behalf of the Building Industry Association. The BIA is a nonprofit trade association representing 1200 companies employing 100,000 people. On behalf of our membership. I would like to express concern to the recent down zoning in many areas of the general plan. Instead, we recommend that the city strongly consider the extreme lack of housing in its planning efforts. Moving forward with the down zone planned is simply repeating the mistakes our region has made for decades and will ensure that the housing affordability and homelessness crisis is continue to worsen. This will lead to an even greater strain on the city's economy. And furthermore, we support the city's efforts to produce housing of all types. Between 2014 and 2001, regional data projects Long Beach housing demand to reach 9487 new households, according to residential permit data. Long Beach permitted 1150 units from 2014 to 2017. This means the city must produce an additional 5838 units for 2021 to achieve its housing goals. Abandoning the areas which had been previously identified in former plans would have met housing goals and would have gone a long way to help me have the city meet those goals. Additionally, new housing will have immediate and long term positive benefits for the city of Long Beach. This includes.
Speaker 2: Quality jobs.
Speaker 1: Government revenue and economic stimulus. The construction of homes is one of the largest sources of job creation. We want to thank the council members and staff for your hard work on this plan thus far. And we hope that you consider these comments today. Thank you so much.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi. My name is Sheila Levin, and I'm from the fifth District. And I think there's a lot of hysteria about not enough housing. I'm in real estate and I work.
Speaker 9: Mainly.
Speaker 6: On property management and.
Speaker 2: There cycle's real estate cycles. And we're building, you know, there's all this high density going up everywhere, but soon there will be a cycle. It happens. It's happened throughout history. It will happen again. It wasn't that long ago when we had a hard time finding renters. It wasn't that long ago at all. And why isn't anybody talking about that? It's everybody's hysterical and it's all for nothing, because soon you're going to have a lot of vacant units. And I'm already seeing it.
Speaker 6: I deal with.
Speaker 2: Multi single family commercial and we're at the tip right now. And soon things are going to change and there's going to be a lot of units that are vacant and the rents are going to have to come down and they will just like in the past at least they will stabilize, but they will not continue to go up like they're going up now. Just look at history. I'm totally against density. I do live in the filth and I don't want to leave the fifth. But, you know, if they start putting up all these high rise buildings, you know, it's sad to say I'm probably going to have to go and I don't want to. I know what happens, you know, when a lot of high density goes into a single family neighborhood and it's not good. But just think of the cycles it's going to happen and just look at the history. Okay, don't put too many up. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Do I get a minute for levity? Just kidding. I gather it takes district first.
Speaker 2: I'd like to thank Robert Fox and Nick Rose and all the members of Council for bringing this out into the community. Without their efforts since last February, this would not this would have happened in a much maybe more reasonable fashion for you, but it wouldn't have been inclusive of the communities. So thank you to all of you. And Mayor Garcia, thank you for the roundtable meetings. They were, I believe, very successful. I think the very most important thing for me is losing control, losing our local control. I'd like you to stop and move forward in a shorter time span. I'd like you to redo the QE every five years to accommodate growth and remain in control of our city development. That will extend far beyond your time of service. A couple of the things, and I'm a little critical, but Mayor, I read the editorial today and I think fear and anger are the two greatest motivators. And I saw fear in vulnerable to lawsuits and loss of local control when this really has nothing to do with that. If we if we do it right and do it in smaller segments of fear. When you mentioned housing and homelessness crisis, those two issues are not a part of the Louie. The state law doesn't allow them to be part of their issues. And our false statements that I read where planners worked hard to create opportunities for modest growth across our city, that is a joke. I mean, it was serious density that was being proposed the first time out. And if it wasn't for your leadership, it may not have turned around. The other false statement was, if we don't plan appropriately, we can expect more homelessness. These houses are not going to be built for homeless people. That is another issue that that we need to take on as a city ourselves. And my 6 seconds. Oh, my God. Okay. Misleading impact fees do not add more police or fire. We have 183 fewer police than we did in 2006. In impact fees do not replace our sewer system. These state laws are to move more people. And yet, according to the UCLA study, 72 million fewer transit riders over the last five years.
Speaker 8: Councilwoman.
Speaker 2: I got it. Vote to limit the. You even have five years, please. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi, I'm Linda Sopel and my address is on file. I live in the fifth.
Speaker 9: District and I want to thank all of you for being here tonight and I know that.
Speaker 2: This is a lot and there's still a lot of people to go on. When we first found out about this and got handed those maps and went to my first meeting.
Speaker 1: You know, a lot of the anger.
Speaker 2: And fear really was because of how it was presented to us. It wasn't. And you don't even talk about the maps or what was actually being proposed. It was how it was presented to us as far as outreach to the community.
Speaker 9: That didn't happen until we raised holy hell.
Speaker 2: I have been as a lot of you know, I've been here.
Speaker 1: Many times to speak my mind about different.
Speaker 2: Things that happened with the city. But the meetings that we had at Veterans Park, at Golden Sails, the four meetings where we had over what I.
Speaker 9: Don't even know how many thousands of people came out. By the time our 3500 people came, others 3500 people that came, I think we had ten people that were for the Louis.
Speaker 2: Ah, that whole group. And guess what? They weren't all homeowners. They weren't all white. They weren't all on the east side. They were throughout the city. And I really have to say I was very heartened by.
Speaker 1: The.
Speaker 9: Participation in our city. No one ever.
Speaker 2: Asked me at any of these meetings, Am I a Democrat? Am I a Republican? Who did I vote for? They even asked me what district I lived in.
Speaker 1: We always knew is we cared about our city.
Speaker 2: Now I live in the fifth district. I'm not going to be affected by this that much. I will be by traffic. But I love my city and my neighbors will be affected by it. Other people will be affected by it, will change our city. So I'm one of those evil homeowners. I'm not lucky. I worked my tush off to get it along with my husband. We don't own property. I mean, we moved into our house when I was 40. Okay.
Speaker 9: I'm sorry. Young people are having a hard time buying houses. My parents didn't buy.
Speaker 2: Houses to a house till I was born.
Speaker 1: I was their fifth child.
Speaker 2: In the old days, you piled kids in rooms and you made it happen. Okay. And lastly, cause I know my time is up is I just want to say I sell real estate and I can sell two teachers a house easily. They are buying houses. It's a little.
Speaker 9: Incorrect to say people can't afford housing.
Speaker 2: I'm selling houses to young couples all the time, but they're doing it the way the rest of us did it. They're working their tails off to get there.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor. Garcia, city council members and staff. Thank you for listening to all of us tonight. I do want to piggyback on what my wife said about the outreach. I think the outreach would be so much easier if you put it into a utility bill. Let us know what's going on or we just have to be aware and we're not going away. Of course I say that every time I come up here, but I'd like to see one of you council members make a substitute motion tonight to make the life of this. There be five years or less, and it's important to review this. You can see the different, different sides to this. And we all have a point. We all we're all here in this city of Long Beach. We want to stay here. We love this city and we all want to help it. And we want you're our leaders. We elect. You make a motion to make it five years or less. Let us get involved and we won't be here again beating on each other. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: John Della, Tory, eighth district, eighth district, as well as some interests in the second district. You know, I was born and raised right here in Long Beach, been here 51 years. And I've lived in every part of Long Beach. I've lived it actually in the cracker boxes. At some point in time after high school. So I get what everybody's saying. And I just kind of like ask a first question for the councilmembers. How many how many of you guys actually work in the city of Long Beach other than your council job? Work in the city. So there's quite a few that don't actually work in the city. Right. So I think looking at the transportation, a lot of that, it's just it's a pie in the sky. I think we're trying to get there. And really what we have to look at and what you guys have to look at is what do.
Speaker 11: We want the city of Long Beach to look.
Speaker 4: Like? And we had one gentleman earlier. He wants us to be Manhattan in New York and high rises everywhere. And that's not the way City of Long Beach is. I think it is acceptable to expect that my grandchildren or great grandchildren can still live in the city of Long Beach and still somewhat see it the way it is. I'm not against mixed use. I'm not against affordable housing. I think that's one really sad thing that has happened. The land use element is not about affordable housing. It's really about what we want the city to look like. And it's kind of pitted the city against each other, which is never a good thing. I think there are options.
Speaker 11: I don't like the way it is set up at this point in time.
Speaker 4: There's just this broad swath pretty much coming up on the east side of our west side, Long Beach, going up Atlantic, going up Long Beach from the ocean up. And it's just three or four storeys and that's out without really looking at, hey, what should, you know, almost look at these things side by side. What can we do to make something in there mixed use? Because some some areas definitely come down in my neighborhood. Same thing. But do we need four or five storeys? I don't think so. So I just.
Speaker 11: Ask.
Speaker 4: That we revisit the numbers there. We stick to a five year. I think it gives us a chance to kind of look at where things are going. Just look at Michigan. It's one of those states where you can buy a house for a buck.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, nick speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, mayor council dan freeland, fourth district. The phrase five years has come up a number of times this evening. And the one time I heard it that really struck me was from staff, the recommendation that unfortunately, staff got it upside down, that we take five years of grassroots planning with the communities to develop zoning. I think that should come before the value. I think we should seriously consider what the neighborhoods, what the communities want of their living condition, where they live, where they've invested their lives, or where they must live because they can't afford any place else. Five years of studying, zoning and coming up with zoning that would be acceptable to all involved or the majority involved would be the best way to go. Affordable housing. The guys in my neighborhood, they're living in the park, can't afford a better bicycle or a better shopping cart. They're not going to be moving into high density or mixed use. I thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Theresa Santee. I apologize. I'm really exhausted. I really don't know how you guys do this. I'm a resident of District five and I have been since 1995. I grew up as a renter in Redondo Beach and moved to Long Beach as an as a homeowner. And I have to say, the transition from Redondo Beach to to Long Beach was tremendous. I noticed a huge sense of community from the first day. I mean, we bought the house and the realtor, we couldn't nail the sign on. So they got a neighbor over. The neighbor came over and gave.
Speaker 2: Us a hammer. And that didn't.
Speaker 1: Happen in Redondo Beach. You don't know the names of your neighbors. And it was and I don't know. I just love it for so many reasons. I serve on the board for the Long Beach Homeless Coalition, but I'm here primarily as a resident. I just want to go on record to say, you guys have a hard job, but I trust you. I trust you as a servant. So the city of Long Beach, I trust the planning commission. I trust the city council.
Speaker 2: Good luck.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, mayor and city councilman.
Speaker 4: My name is Donald Moore. I have been a resident of the fifth District for 32 years. I'd like to say thank Bruce De Mille for his comments on the Park View Project there. I believe that should be capped at two stories community commercial. Also, according to the Southern California Association of Government calculations, Long Beach housing has a shortage of about 12.4%. That's near the city with a lowest rating of 10%. This puts Long Beach number 46 on their ranking of A with other cities. The current ILI would allow for many times this present need over an undetermined period until 2040, leading to probable series of booms and busts and housing. If it is not properly timed and I'm not sure it will be. Our city's infrastructure cannot handle the proposed increases in traffic, parking, utilities and a quality of life impacts such as public safety, crime, pollution and noise. The City's master plan, etc., does not address our city's growing need for more and better senior housing. For example, if Long Beach really got behind this looming issue, our city could be the role model for the nation. We need to look at the type of housing such as senior housing, not just the number of housing we need to repurpose, not add housing. I'll have to cut this back because I had planned on 3 minutes. But anyway, Long Beach growth rate is well below the average. More than 80% of the cities of comparable size are growing faster. In 1990, Long Beach was ranked as the 32nd largest city in California, and now it is. By 2016, it was a number 39th. Yes, there have been more people coming in to Long Beach, but our building rate needs incremental growth.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 4: Okay. We need to do two things. Have a program for the immediate shortage, beginning about three years and a much longer gradual.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 4: For the anticipated rise in need.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Before you start my time, can Alana, can you shift to the left a little bit? There you go. Now we could see the time. Thank you. Hello, Mayor and council members. My name is Mona Eichner, and I'm a sixth district resident. And according to the staff report, I'm now classified as elderly. And I was quite surprised by that. Oh, my God. Anyways, I'll also note that the woman speaker before the last speaker, I agree with her. When Lee and I moved here, we entered into a community that we never had anywhere in L.A. So we love Long Beach . Go Long Beach. And anyway, this has been a really long, hard process. And Lee and I participated in those visioning events in the early aughts. And in that time to tonight, a lot of disappointment and compromising has taken place, especially in Wrigley. We still have more heights in our area that we like and have discussed them at the mayoral roundtable. Thank you. And sent our councilmember a list. Thank you. And with the hopes that tonight he will take them down or bring them down further, I already said this evening. I just want to say that Lee and I are not opposed to new development, but had always imagined Pacific and Willow that it would grow in a more grassroots manner, similar to Fourth Street and Bixby Knolls. And it is beginning on Willow, and it goes slow. And perhaps those these compromises that we've made will help that happen. We just hope we don't have a repeat of the AIDS problems and hope, if it does turn out that this is wrong, that you or future councils will not will act quickly and remedy the problem. So we can cut it cut it off before it gets out of hand. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: I am Jim Dagon from the fourth District, and thank you for having this. Couple of months ago, Jerry Brown told us we're in a permanent drought and the water snowpack was 39% of what they need. You can't do this without water. I mean, you know, it's common sense. And you have your 20 year program as a as a kid. My parents would always listen to the news on the radio. And every every time there was the the red Chinese and the communist Russians had ten year plans for growth and harvest and manufacturing. None of it worked. And you can't predict the future. And, you know, just think what you're doing. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. So just real quick. So, again, like like we do at the council, we've hit that second group of of 2 minutes. We're going down to 90 seconds now. Okay. All right. Speaker Hey, hey, hold on, guys. We do. We hold on. I let the hold on. What? Hey, guys, hold on a second. Let me finish. This is what this is what we always do. We have groups. If there's objection from the council, we can continue going on on 2 minutes each. If there's objection from the council, I'm following the procedures that we follow for large groups. And so is there any objection? Yeah. 90 seconds.
Speaker 5: Okay, Mr. Lee. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Lee Fukui. I live in the Wrigley area, sixth district. I'm a volunteer and activist and been involved in city matters for many years. I've worked side by side with many of you on many issues. This this process has evolved.
Speaker 4: Initially, I was very opposed to this.
Speaker 5: And I stated my concerns to my council councilman and both Council Andrew's and Oranga. And I appreciate.
Speaker 4: The roundtables that the mayor had.
Speaker 5: Because that was that allowed us to have a voice. And he everyone heard our concerns. And I think you've all heard the concerns of everyone here tonight. And I want to thank you. And I also want to thank the staff as well.
Speaker 4: I know it's a hard this is.
Speaker 5: A hard, hard, difficult issue, but I look forward to hearing.
Speaker 4: What you guys have.
Speaker 5: That conversation behind the dais. And thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi. Yes, I want to be quick. Thank you very much for all the time that you guys are giving. I just want to give you credit. There's a lot of voices here, a lot of people with a lot of different opinions. And I appreciate how much the plan has evolved from the first stages. I think we're going the right direction that everybody feels included. But I also support the five year alternative because I don't think we're there yet. I live in a neighborhood that's the intersection of the 6/2 and fourth District, and it's a neighborhood that most of the homeowners have been there for three or four generations. And I would say 90% of the homeowners are probably under Prop 13. So we have five generations living in a house. You have up to 15 people. It does make sense to allow an area like that to be able to infill and to build it back unit and to do some things with their property. On the other hand, I strongly feel that we could do this a little bit more organically instead of choosing traffic corridors that we could maybe bring the entire city up one story or something like that. And I understand that there are some restrictions in some districts like the airport and other things that impact. But it's also unrealistic that an entire household would be able to walk to work. For example, my career, I'm at a point where I may have to drive 3 hours if I want to advance to running a facility because there just aren't that many people in my role. So those are my opinions and just thoughts. And I appreciate your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, council members this. I'm Dina, member.
Speaker 5: Of Lakewood.
Speaker 2: Village, a neighborhood association that's in the fifth District Life.
Speaker 5: Lifelong resident of Long Beach. 24 year resident of Lakewood Village.
Speaker 2: And I strongly urge you to not deviate from the current l'ue a l'ue recommendation of two storey commercial to mixed use residential.
Speaker 5: For Park View Village. That's the corner.
Speaker 2: Of Bel Air and Carson. I attended both visioning sessions held by the property owner.
Speaker 4: Ben Efron, whose.
Speaker 2: Owns approximately 52% of the Park Village property. According to him, his vision he wants to put up to up to 240 living residents.
Speaker 4: Above.
Speaker 2: Four storey commercial units. He claims that that would be less crowded than if he goes to commercial. That is a ridiculous statement. And if he puts in residential, it will only have to put in one parking.
Speaker 4: Spot for.
Speaker 2: Every unit. Where will the rest of the car park? Simple on our streets, long story short. Lakewood Village is a great area and people enjoy the peaceful lifestyle it provides with the prospect of 500 more people crammed into four acres. That life story will be changed forever. We will.
Speaker 4: Wait. We will be.
Speaker 2: Faced with more traffic on our streets, less available parking to an already parking challenged neighborhood because of City College and all the apartments and the strain on city services. This is only a money grab by the property owner, the developer, and it will have a horrific impact on our village and it will destroy our community. Thank you for your time. I appreciate all of your hard work.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Please. My name is Rick Ivey. I'm vice president. Illustrious Neighborhood Association. One of the things we have is we have a smaller eighth district proposed place type map view that a number of citizens got together and worked on and we presented it to the mayor. It seems like we've got large swaths going up and down Long Beach Boulevard and Atlantic all the way down to the ocean with housing. It would be nice. Bixby Knolls is kind of unique. It's got first Fridays. It's a great area. If we had that section the eighth as a commercial corridor so that we can have something a little bit unique. As we go up up there, we've tried to have a commercial office medical corridor on Long Beach Boulevard and mixed use between Bixby and San Antonio might not necessarily facilitate that. Also, some of the office buildings around Atlantic and San Antonio would be nice to see that preserved as commercial. There's a number of other proposals for North Long Beach, and we'd appreciate you considering these. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hello. My name is Larry Tration. Just like at the Planning Commission when I got to talk almost last night. I'm really hungry and really tired and probably won't make sense. I'm I know that the city faces not just the city, but the region faces a tremendous housing crisis. There's according to the Los Angeles Times, 58,000 homeless people in our region. And so it does need to be dealt with, but there is a reasonable way to do it and an unreasonable way to do it, I think. And by the way, I used to work here, so hello to some of my old friends. I, I live in Bixby Knolls, a district driving down here this evening, coming down Long Beach Boulevard. I could see really there's lots of opportunity for development and Long Beach Boulevard south of Willow. It could use a nice development, but I think that three storey buildings on Atlantic Avenue and four storey buildings on Lambert Boulevard, I don't think that is the answer. And I was thinking back, you know, l one day, the last election cycle, you came by my house and you asked me to vote for you. I wasn't going to, but you talked me into it. I hope you remember that when you addressed this issue this evening. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Next speaker, please. Good evening, City Council. Mayor, I live in Long Beach for three years. I went from a condo in Second Street to a home in Lakewood Village in the fifth District. My wife has raised I was raised in Long.
Speaker 5: Beach and is now a teacher in the U.S..
Speaker 4: In.
Speaker 5: Long Beach School District and in the north Long.
Speaker 4: Beach area. We both live and work in the city of Long Beach, as do many young teachers that she works with. One of the major draw is to let.
Speaker 5: To let us to settle in Long Beach was the ability that we would be able to have a home and a piece of land. There's a great potential in our neighborhood. And this could be changed by a a.
Speaker 4: Unit being changed from mixed use.
Speaker 5: From commercial to mixed use. Please don't allow our neighbor to be changed and not allow our chance to develop and grow into.
Speaker 4: A good unit of land that could.
Speaker 5: Share and have a place for our children to grow old in. Thank you guys for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next week, please.
Speaker 2: Jennifer Wang, fourth district resident. Hello, Mayor. Councilman. So, Pranav and the rest of the city council members. Thank you for your time. I'm also an urban planner.
Speaker 9: I wish to acknowledge the work by staff in this process.
Speaker 2: However.
Speaker 9: The discrepancy of the document stating gradual height increase is problematic throughout the city. Single family.
Speaker 2: Homes will have.
Speaker 9: Unintentional peeping toms looking into their backyards because the height difference.
Speaker 2: Between single family and proposed.
Speaker 9: Four and five storey buildings. As it stands in the land use element, unless there are.
Speaker 2: Proper buffers where all the taller buildings with two storey buildings.
Speaker 9: Around single family homes to claim buffer is.
Speaker 2: Not true.
Speaker 9: I'm also a real estate investor. As an investor, I question.
Speaker 2: The quality of potential development because.
Speaker 9: There are not the jobs that are usually required for class-A rentals. Focus on economic development. Then you'll have amazing housing. I lived in San Francisco for eight years. All those housing didn't happen because of the land use element. They happened because of jobs.
Speaker 2: Developers need to jump through the hoops and pay to build excellent housing, complete with affordable units.
Speaker 9: Lastly, as a homeowner with a young child and I want to acknowledge my husband who's staying at home so I can be here, I have witnessed the increase of rentals in my neighborhoods and I want to see that continue. But we need better. Affordable housing units and better complexes. Thank you.
Speaker 0: So much. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Good Eve. Evening, everybody. Thank you very much, Mayor, for having the roundtable. I'm so happy I had an opportunity to express myself publicly or privately. I don't know. Anyway, my name is Laurie Enjoyment Live at 458 East Platt Street in North Long Beach. I've been very active in North Beach since 1996 and involved in redevelopment. We put together a strategic plan for North Long Beach. We did this over a period of six years. I know the area very well and I'm completely shocked by the Louis. It is completely contrary to what we had planned. We did not want this level of density. I don't know why it's there where it came from. We have four storey buildings encroaching on my little tiny neighborhood of homes built in the twenties. We have 600 square foot homes that we're going to put in four storey buildings. There is no room on Market Street. There are no room. There's no room in our streets for two cars to pass. I do not understand why we are putting in this level of density. It makes no sense. It isn't right. It isn't fair. And you know, if you want to give people a good living experience, you don't throw them all in a box and make it so dense that they can't hardly survive. It's already a high crime area. I want it to thrive and improve. We do not make need to make it more aggravated and more difficult for people to live. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor, for inviting me to the roundtable. I'm Colonel Sanders, president of College Triangle Neighborhood Association. And I want to begin by saying I grew up in Los Angeles City, so I understand what urban challenges exist. I can talk to you about Ramona Gardens and Maravilla and the consequences that spilled into the neighborhoods. I can talk like some. You come from poverty. You work hard. You get through school. You don't have any expectations. You're given an opportunity. You finally become a homeowner. And after many years and there's nine of you that represents 500,000 people. I'm I'm lifted by Robert Fox and the other community leaders we're branded where we've together as a city because we love this city. I think at our meeting I let you know there's a covenant, something we all believe in. Is there breach of that covenant.
Speaker 8: Or is it only a contractual.
Speaker 4: Agreement? Again, this is going to galvanize us in a way that the city has not seen in 25 years. And I think it'll really raise questions as to what is our trust level in our leadership. I surely hope that you do listen to our needs. If anything, it does invite at a grassroots level the people who are volunteering and making our communities better after the 1989 position to rise and maybe consider running. So thank you and reconsider your vote.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hello, I'm Linda Schall, and I'm a 20 year resident, District two. I'm in a high density building. I like high density building. I don't have a problem with that. The issue that we have heard, having gone to all the meetings, the mayor meetings, reading the entire land use element and reading the Environmental Impact Report and watching who showed up at all the meetings among you. And we really appreciate those of you who shown up to multiple meetings because you get an opportunity to.
Speaker 4: Really understand the things that you wouldn't.
Speaker 2: Understand otherwise, just as.
Speaker 5: I wouldn't have understood if I didn't go to other.
Speaker 2: Meetings and hear the issues of our neighbors. Simply put, this is not an issue where we're worried about not having affordable housing and how we're going to solve it. We need to solve affordable housing. We need development. But this is an issue where we're talking about trying to solve an overcrowding in housing, inside housing, by overcrowding the outside of the housing. And what we want a city, that city of quality of life and the ability to move.
Speaker 5: The ability to park.
Speaker 2: The ability to have friends over and to have each of you think about that as the overwhelming majority of the people who have come out have talked about the concern of overcrowding in our city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. City Council. We need to build. We need to grow. We need more housing. But if we move forward with this land use element the way that it is, we will be playing chess without the Queen. We will lose before we even begin this game. The truth is, crime is not caused by high density. It's caused by inequity. And inequity has been structural. It's been systematic, whether it's been gender, race, economics. And so the way same way that it's been systematic, in order for us to unravel that inequity, we have to be smart and understand that this land use element is the root and the foundation of equity. We have to deal with housing, but we also have to look at small businesses. We've got an economic blueprint that calls for inclusion, but we have not addressed how our small businesses are going to coexist in these new developments. The cost per square footage we have to address not only housing in homelessness. The truth is this land use element has no affordable housing, and it's going to have to split between subsidized housing. Section eight housing. There has to be thought process. The developers that.
Speaker 9: Want to play ball.
Speaker 2: Will play ball with Long Beach. We do not have to move the way they want us to move. And so what I ask and I sent some of you the plan is I ask that you ask city staff to come back with an equity piece that addresses also protecting our historic sites. We I'm president of VIP records and I'll wrap up mayor. We had to battle to save a historic.
Speaker 9: Site because of a.
Speaker 2: Lack of a proper land use element and ordinance. And those costs are inner cities a great deal. So I just ask that you consider equity moving forward. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Anna Kristensen.
Speaker 4: The.
Speaker 2: Long Beach Area Peace Network, has voted to oppose the land use element as presented and approved by the Planning Commission and presented to the Long Beach City Council tonight. We oppose the Alawi not because we are against high density housing. We are not against the elderly.
Speaker 5: Because we're afraid of poor.
Speaker 2: People moving in to the east side. We oppose the UAE for two main reasons.
Speaker 5: Number one, there is no.
Speaker 2: Guarantee in this land use element for low income and or affordable housing. This is going to be left up to the city staff. We believe the UAE is a way to gentrify some neighborhoods with no assurance of a low income or affordable housing in less prosperous neighborhoods or elsewhere. Building expensive housing will not lead to better affordability, just more displacement out of coastal areas. The construction of 4000 new units has actually reduced affordable housing in downtown Long Beach. The proposed we may profit.
Speaker 5: The developers, but it will not will do so at the expense of.
Speaker 2: Long Beach residents, both high and low income. Number two, the low cerritos wetlands have great cultural significance for.
Speaker 5: Local tribal.
Speaker 2: Peoples. We oppose the UAE because it includes the c separate rezoning of these wetlands, which are a wildlife sanctuary as well.
Speaker 5: It incorporates also a.
Speaker 2: Massive expansion of a hazardous industrial zone and in the low cerritos oil consolidation and.
Speaker 5: Restoration Project. Thank you. All right.
Speaker 2: Thank you for safe.
Speaker 8: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: My name is Rene Lawler. I'm a native.
Speaker 2: Of Long Beach. I live in the seventh District. My address is on file, as well as my many affiliations on. To save time, I'm going to say ditto to all of the many community leaders who have opposed to the elderly and who have been on record for many, many times with significant comments. What that does is it allows me as no surprise to most of you here to talk about a specific issue, and that is the equestrian zone. I'm sure if there was a raise of hands, many people would see that. I've spoken out about this multiple times. The equestrian zones are still committed. We're not on the map. We're still not on the map. When? When I got a response of asking why I was told that we are actually recognized and that the earlier we continue as a policy to protect and maintain that that's not the case. If you look at the matrix table on the the alleyway. We're not in the matrix table. Our zoning is not included. We, of course, can't speak for ourselves. Density does not work well with equestrian. Our zoning is a lesser density than found in and contemporary. There is more than just one equestrian zone. None of them have been recognized, including the only parcels we need to be included. Inclusion means every community in our community is not included.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: How's it going? My name is Jason.
Speaker 11: I'm under 30, so I think an underrepresented demographic here. But anyway.
Speaker 4: I just wanted to come out and let you guys know that I am in support of land use element.
Speaker 11: But I really is not as ambitious or as for forward thinking as Long Beach could be. I'd like to echo the need for affordable housing, but again, more density. Long Beach can be a world class city when you go to places that are world class cities Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, they don't have these types of concerns there. They're happy to have the vibrant density that dense, vibrant city life that density brings. I certainly do kind of counter what one person said. I am a city planner. I went to school. I got a degree I cannot afford. I could barely afford rent. And I definitely can't afford to own to own a home here. So that type of thing.
Speaker 4: I don't know, maybe, you know.
Speaker 11: Your mileage varies by person, but I just I'd like to speak in support of that. And I really strongly suggest that you go back and you be more ambitious. It's really important to keep in mind the gravity of the decision you're making tonight. It's not for a lot.
Speaker 4: Of the people in the room.
Speaker 11: It's for my generation. It's for the people that come after me. The majority of the people coming to California at this point in time, according to this Legislative Analyst's Office, are not actually coming here. They're being born here, their children, the future generation. California is losing more people than it's gaining, again, according to the State Legislative Analyst's Office. So keep that in mind when you make this decision and try to be involved as you can. Thanks.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hi. My name is John County. I live in the fourth district. I've come to the meetings in the city has mostly been tone deaf to what we've been saying. After the other meetings removed a couple of spots from the maps that got the most complaints. But you haven't listened to the rest of us. This plan, your prose will change your lives. I live near a community hospital. If it closes in the near future, which it might through having problems there in the small buildings around it were too close. We could be looking at hundreds of units without sufficient parking in an area that is already impacted. Many of the cars would be racing down my street in the morning at night to avoid the main streets. You keep saying we need to make more room for everyone.
Speaker 5: To enjoy the great city of Long Beach.
Speaker 4: But if you kill off the quality of life in the suburbs, parts of the city. We won't have the city we are here for. You haven't been listening to us. Your own planning commission has just told us developers can build certain units without a parking requirement. We all acknowledge the cracker box. Cracker boxes were a complete mistake. Building tall buildings and single family areas are wrong. The plan you propose has. The neighborhood surrounded by tall buildings. The high density creates problems. The plan will affect all the homes near them, even if not next to them.
Speaker 5: I came here tonight in hopes you will listen to us. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Clare Conti and my address is 4139.
Speaker 9: East 15th Street.
Speaker 2: I'm a middle class, full time working wife, mother and proud to call Long Beach my home for the past 33 years. We are where your traditional hard working Long Beach family. Two kids attending college in Long Beach, working part time, both living at home to save money. We live a couple of blocks south of Long Beach Community Hospital, I'm.
Speaker 9: Proud to say. My neighbors on.
Speaker 2: My block of 15th Street are homeowners and renters. Caucasian, Hispanic, Cambodian. African-American, straight. Gay, young.
Speaker 9: Elderly, married, single, divorced or widowed. You name it.
Speaker 2: We've got it. And we like.
Speaker 9: It this way. All. We all choose to live in this area because of the neighborhood, our neighbors in the surrounding area.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, over the past few years, we have experienced crime, increased traffic, congested every morning and evening, and parking in the area is packed and impacted daily. What you continue to propose for our surrounding area with all your so-called medium density housing, with its insufficient available parking, will radically change my neighborhood.
Speaker 9: If you build it.
Speaker 2: They will come. And not all from Long Beach. They're going to continue to move into Long Beach from areas outside of long reach, bringing with them their cars. I've made a copy of you for all of you indicating the location of my house. Thank you. Plan. Please take note of how your plan will be impacting my neighborhood. Thank you. Listen to the individuals.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your time. Next, speaker.
Speaker 2: Wilson. Where should I.
Speaker 8: Put this city clerk? Thank you. Certainly. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: My neighbor, she lives right across the street from me. My name is Judy Davidson. Bronchoscopy. I live on 15th Street, right across the street from her, and I'm in the fourth District. My concern is the traffic and the increase in traffic that I already see. The traffic element has not been updated, I understand, for about three years and in consideration we'd like to have that changed. We'd like to have the traffic. Have a traffic. Study that comes and creates and shows what this density growth is going to do. We need to have a report, a structural report showing what the traffic is going to do in our area. Also, we'd like to have an engineer update. We'd also like to include required setbacks. So in the future, Long Beach can have mass transit. There is a gentleman called. Peter Tilden. He is on KABC on the radio every day. He lives in West Los Angeles. He said the other day he had to go and make a presentation for Shaq. I think we all know who Shaq is. He lives in West L.A. He had to go to Hollywood. It's about an hour and 15 drive. I was up I worked up there. So I know the area well.
Speaker 8: Well, thank you for.
Speaker 2: Thank you. It took him 2 hours and 45 minutes to get there because of all the building that is going on in L.A..
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next week, a police. How's it going? My name is and I can say I am a.
Speaker 4: Resident of the sixth district. I live in the sixth district. I've been a lifelong resident there. I also live in reality, which, you know, the last couple hours. So it seems like the rest of the people in here, they don't. But maybe in an episode of The Andy Griffith Show. But I bring that up because living in reality and being a young person, I'm probably going to be alive in the next 20 years. So this directly impacts my life and maybe not the most of you. And, you know, high density is reality. You look at any metropolitan made major metro excuse me, you look at any major metropolitan market in the country and in the world. And high density is something that.
Speaker 8: City planners and new urban designers across the.
Speaker 4: Across the world are recognizing as inevitable. You know, 1980, the average home median home price in Los Angeles.
Speaker 8: County was.
Speaker 5: $95,000. And today in 2017.
Speaker 4: It's 600, it's almost 600,000. So this reality, you know, a lot of these and other stories of, you know, pull yourself by your bootstraps and taken ten years out of your life to save for your family. That's not a reality for a lot of the young people of today. And that's not a reality for your, you know, your children, your grandchildren. You know, it's very unfortunate that we're having people who aren't going to be alive. You know, the majority of the people are going to live with this is going to really impact. But the youth, we're not going to be allowed to be participating. Thanks very to.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 2: Something awful happened. I really I don't probably don't need it. Sorry.
Speaker 8: The clock hasn't started.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council. My name is Dani Sievers and I reside on this street in the third district. My home is located in the Bluff Heights neighborhood. The boundaries of the neighborhood are Redondo Avenue on the West, one through on.
Speaker 7: These fourth on the North and Broadway on the.
Speaker 2: South. My purpose in speaking tonight is to add to the conversation regarding the protecting of the 17 historic neighborhoods in Long Beach. While I appreciate the need.
Speaker 7: For increased housing, I do.
Speaker 2: Believe that the integrity of our historic neighborhoods are at a critical junction. The historic neighborhood of Bluff Heights and the other 16 historic neighborhoods would be so negatively.
Speaker 7: Impacted by.
Speaker 2: Additional structural highways that.
Speaker 7: Essentially.
Speaker 2: It would be destroying the character.
Speaker 7: Defining elements of our historic communities.
Speaker 2: Are Bluffs Heights Neighborhood has a map on our website that includes all of our contributing neighborhoods.
Speaker 7: I'm going to go ahead. I'm sorry.
Speaker 2: It's hard to skip around. I'm just going to make one final comment. In particular. I want to point out that on.
Speaker 7: Cordoba.
Speaker 2: Place, there's a small street that faces Broadway. It's a historic neighborhood is facing also that not very historic Taco Bell.
Speaker 7: But currently on Corto Place. The map shows it as being three stories. I hope that you could walk our neighborhood and see that we have only one and two story neighborhoods, and I hope that you'll be able to preserve.
Speaker 2: Protect the.
Speaker 7: Historic neighborhoods and make any adjustments that you can to protect not only my neighborhood.
Speaker 2: But the other 16 historic neighborhoods.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your time. So let's fix the mic next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. It's the first time I've ever addressed the city council. My name is Dave Shukla and I grew up in town. I'm the son of the fighting third. Thank you for your patience tonight. I'm here to urge you to do better with the outreach for the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. As you know, I'm a municipal climate policy is essential for the future of a city with our unique set of climate drivers and climate risks. As Paulie alum, University of California alum with an urban planning background, I look forward to working with you folks on how to do that. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Brian Darren.
Speaker 4: I'm actually from the first district in a Gonzalez's district.
Speaker 8: Also come from the second district.
Speaker 4: In the city of Long Beach. I've actually.
Speaker 8: Served on the Commission on Youth and Children.
Speaker 4: For the second District. And also it was Robert Garcia's I'm sorry, who is about Foster is no longer mayor, but also interned there. I have to say, this is a little bit embarrassing. I mean, it looks like.
Speaker 8: Most of the generation wants to keep us not building anything.
Speaker 4: Just look at it. We are $20 trillion in debt.
Speaker 8: We continue to kick the can down the road.
Speaker 4: We do not want to build. And this is a mistake.
Speaker 8: I don't come to these type of meetings.
Speaker 4: This is important that you build more. I don't care with these other homeowners who want to keep their neighborhoods historic, want to do. Let's be honest about some things. Yes. I'm talking to all of you. Let's be honest about a couple of things. We need to build in home prices are going up. This is important. As a loan officer in L.A. County, I see directly.
Speaker 8: How home values are rising crazily. Do we want to give that money to banks through interest, or do we want to build so we can have actual communities? It does involve density. People want to live here. That is a good thing. You know, I'm not some.
Speaker 4: Crazy Republican either. I'm a liberal Democrat. We need to build in Long Beach.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Okay. Meanwhile, so thank you council members for letting me speak in. Mayor before. She's not here today, but right now. But thank you for the speech. I know it's frustrating right there. Go for it. Oh, okay. Sorry. So I'm resident in eighth district. I've been here for past 14 years, and I think it's important that the young people talk about this issue as well. I'll admit originally and thank you, Mr. Austin, for letting me participate in a focus group for the eighth District closed session. And I said that I originally supported the new settlement, but and that's because I think we need a plan for the city, and I think that we need more housing. I think that's necessary. But I just I'm not confident in this specific land use element. I think that it has been mired by confusion and by stumbling by staff. And I'm not attacking staff. I'm just saying that I'm worried about the Laney settlement. And if this is going to affect my future, I shouldn't be worried as much as I am. I think that it should be a five year plan and a 20 year plan. I disagree with staff there, and overall, I think that we need a better version of this, and especially not one that is certainly going to be changed by the council and rightfully so. It should be more transparent and I'm just not supporting the nation as it is right now. So thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Donna Faye and I am the owner of romance, etc. And we just recently moved from the third district.
Speaker 2: To the fifth District.
Speaker 1: And my concern there is a development that's going to be affecting where I just moved, and they're talking about going.
Speaker 2: Vertical at that location with more housing. I don't feel.
Speaker 1: That it's the proper spot for it, but my biggest concern is if you decide that that is what you want to do parking.
Speaker 2: Parking and parking.
Speaker 1: It is a crucial thing.
Speaker 2: I left the third district.
Speaker 1: And my business, which was greatly affected by rents being driven up. I went up to about $16,000 a month and said Enough. I am now currently paying like hardly anything, 20 $500 a month. I have my life.
Speaker 2: Back, my family's life back.
Speaker 1: I.
Speaker 2: I actually can breathe. I have a day off.
Speaker 1: 15 years of no days off. And I work really hard. And I think that it's really important to know that.
Speaker 2: Building has to have parking. Bella Terra They built housing and parking.
Speaker 1: There's not enough parking. Now they're rezoning across the street and almost taking a building. For 45 years, the lady owned and making it not present anymore.
Speaker 2: And that's what's going to happen.
Speaker 1: In the city. We keep letting this happen.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, everyone. Mayor, councilmembers, staff, and all the people who showed up for this event. I am truly appreciative of the efforts that everyone has made to improve this plan and to try and have a vision for our future. But. There's one thing that I'd like the council to remember when you're deliberating on this. This will have the biggest impact of any decision that you will ever make in this office. The 20 year plan for the use of land will basically determine the fate of the city. And. 30 years ago when this plan was being considered by your predecessors, their primary concern was quality of life. And I know this because I was around then and I remember them saying that quality of life was their primary concern. I think that should also be our primary concern. But the difference between now and then is that it impacts even more people and the system is even more complex. It's going to take five years to figure out what impact this plan will have, and that's the time frame that you need. A 20 year time frame won't allow us to make course corrections, and even one year might not be enough for that. So please. Focus on what's doable in a few years. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Joe Peralta. I live in the fifth district. I live at 3048. Petaluma. I am 76 years old. For 54 years, I got up every morning and went to work. I have an insurance policy that would blow your mind away medically. Even doctors go. How'd you get that? Because I paid for it. No, I broke my appendix 715 to 17 years ago.
Speaker 5: Went to Memorial.
Speaker 4: Hospital. Four days later. They operated on me because of all the people in the emergency room. You are not prepared to handle all these people. And of course, there's little thing that I have as a hobby. I, at 15 years old, belong to the California Archeology Society. I know you know where all the earthquake faults are. Because the hospital that you're going to have to knock down. And you're going to be able to handle all these people. I don't think so. I don't think you've. Thought this out. You can't even handle what you got now. And by the way, I've been here so long that Eldorado Park as a kid, I used to feed pheasants.
Speaker 5: Corn.
Speaker 8: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for your time. My name is Lisa Cotto and I can't say it better than than somebody, the people that have spoken tonight, one of which I just want to back up my friend Mike Clemson, about an hour and 45 minutes ago said we we have to support growth. We will have more people, whether we like it or not. If we don't plan, we will just have more homelessness and higher prices and less affordable housing. I also want to back up what Anna Christensen said of Long Beach Peace Network regarding actually guaranteeing affordable housing of the new housing and preventing renters from being priced out. And I want to add that one thing I have not heard is mandating multistory parking, which is something that if we're going to have the density, whether we like it or not, we really do have to have multistory parking. Developers don't want to put that in because it's really expensive to put in. But it is something if you mandate it, they will they will do it. And also permeable surfaces for recharging groundwater aquifers. We have to think about the environment. We have to think about what a dry state we are and plan for that and something that is not so expensive to put in. We have to put in more trees to ameliorate the pollution, noise and heat island effect.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Next week at least.
Speaker 2: Hi. My name is Tanya Comerford.
Speaker 1: Thank you for your time.
Speaker 2: And I'm a homeowner.
Speaker 1: In the fifth District and I moved here in 2003 from my favorite city, San Francisco. And what attracted me here was the diversity. And right away I had done Peace Corps in Africa.
Speaker 2: And came here and started.
Speaker 1: Grass root organizing and community development. And so that's something that I'm very.
Speaker 2: Passionate about and. With all that being said, I am.
Speaker 1: For developing our community, but not sacrificing our community. And I'm not in favor of lieu in.
Speaker 2: Its current incarnation and hope.
Speaker 1: That you. I know you've heard this.
Speaker 2: It's redundant, but I'm here. Just want to.
Speaker 6: Reiterate.
Speaker 2: Affordable housing. I'm a fan of rent control.
Speaker 1: And just developing our.
Speaker 2: Community and.
Speaker 1: In a manner that works best for all.
Speaker 2: Of us. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. Hello, everyone. My name is Chris Stackhouse. And, um, basically, from the inception of the city of Long Beach, it's always been a suburb of metropolitan Los Angeles. Yet it's the 36th most populous city in the U.S., seventh most populous city in California, and second largest city in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, and third largest city in Southern California, based on unsophisticated cities, pretty large as it is. So my question is how much growth how much more growth can the city sustain? Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And it looks like our final speaker. Drum roll, please. Thank you for.
Speaker 2: My name is TVC, my baby.
Speaker 5: Thank you, everyone, for speaking. Everyone for listening. I work in the public within the city have been for over a decade and lived here much longer. I mean, someone, if not five people a week, they're moving to the city to their face. Talk to them about their stories. I thank you for your vote on the land use element.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And that concludes public comment.
Speaker 0: Okay. The hearing continues. So now as part of the hearing deliberations, we closed the public comment hearing piece and will be moving back to council deliberation and any action that the council would like to take. And we I'm going to make some a couple of general comments here in just a minute. And then what we're going to go ahead and do is each councilmember has some comments to make and is going to be addressing their council district individually. And so that's how we'll kind of go go through this process and we'll be starting with Council District one and we'll just just to make it organize. We'll just go down. And Councilmember, I want to make comments. We'll just go down all the way down until we get to the vice mayor. So let me let me just make a couple comments. I want to I want to say first is I do want to thank everyone that is here tonight and everyone that that was here. We had a very packed house, as you all know. And there's actually a lot of people actually streaming and watching this right now from their homes as well. And so just to everyone that that's been engaged. I do want to thank them. I also just think it's important to know that it's okay to have different opinions and a diversity of viewpoints. And I want to make sure that everyone's opinion is respected and everyone's opinion is important. And one thing that I believe is what regardless of one's position on the land use element, whether you are a homeowner or whether you came as an advocate for building more housing is everyone loves Long Beach and I reject this idea that somehow because you have a certain position, you don't love your community or you don't want people to be part of our community. And so I just want to make sure everyone here, my belief is that we are entitled to have our opinions and our belief systems. And I want to thank all of you for vocalizing what you believe here tonight and throughout the entire process. I there's a couple of people I want to thank before we go into the deliberations, because I think it's important. I want to first just start off by thanking the staff. Now, I know that they're getting beat up a lot in this process by the community, by the council, but they're also incredibly hard working. And I do want to thank you for if you saw the presentation, whether you agree with all the assessments or the assumptions the staff has made. They have worked very hard in this process. And I want to thank the staff for for their hard work. So thank you. Thank you for doing that. I also want to thank the Planning Commission, who also has gone through their own process. The chair of the Planning Commission is here tonight, which is Eric Produce CO, who's over here. And if you have been following the land use element process, the Planning Commission has been very engaged and actually made some significant changes as well as took public input. And so I'm very proud of the work that the Council is doing. The Planning Commission has had the the football, so to speak, this entire time and has just passed it off to us in the last couple of months. And so to the Planning Commission, thank you for your hard work and we appreciate the great work that you guys have done. I and I want to thank everyone that's come out to speak at any of the forums or roundtables or conversations. Now, there. There have been a lot of meetings have gone on for many years, but the intensity of most of those have really happened in the last six months to a year. That's when a vast majority of people have been engaged. And I want to say, just for the record and staff knows this. I'm often asked, was this process how was the public process? What are your opinions of it? To me, it's an easy answer. The city can do a lot better and we should have done a lot better in engaging the public. There is no question that that I believe and I think staff will be the first to share that. They have also learned some lessons in a process that is this big and how we can all do a better job of engaging the community in a way that's appropriate and thoughtful and that really listens and takes input. And so I do think it's important as mayor for for for me to let you know that there is no question that the city has learned from this process. And I think the staff and that's I include myself all the way down to all of our planning staff. I think that this your input has made the process better. Let me also just add, I think there were some comments and questions about who's participating and who's not and who's invited to things. And I just want to be clear. There have been numerous public meetings. There have been numerous meetings, have been roundtables. And I've met personally with a variety of different organizations. I want to begin to Robert and to Kono. I want to thank them for their engagement. Whether you agree with the positions that that that that the organization has put out or not, they engaged thousands of people in the process. And and and I personally and I've told this I don't agree with everything that that I hear all the time from some members of the group or Mr. Fox or anybody else. But you have to appreciate every person matters in our community. So the fact that thousands of people showed up with a strong opinion. I value that and I appreciate that. And I think that's a good thing for the city of Long Beach. I also want to say that the roundtables we had in one in every district, and those were people that were suggested, not just from Kono, but from every single member of the city council. Every single member of the city council suggested and invited folks to those roundtables. So this idea that there were somehow these closed groups is just false and untrue. They were open to to input from everyone. And in those roundtables, of which we had nine. I will tell you that I personally learned a lot. I listened. I, I really value what people had to say. And I also value when someone has put, whether it's their livelihood into their property, in their home, or whether they're putting their blood, sweat and tears to try to make a living to pay the rent every single month. Those voices all matter, and one voice shouldn't matter more than the other. They all matter as part of our community. And I and I appreciate every single one. But I also want to thank the other groups that came to the table. I want to thank building out the communities of which I met with all of them. And there and the housing advocates one on one neighbors. I see Moana and Lee in the audience. I think the three of us early on had some time with just the three of us, chatted for a while about the land use element , and I had a chance to meet one on one with many neighbors across the city. And I want to thank you for their time. I want to thank the students at Long Beach who also reached out and so many others that the land use process, as you've probably heard and are aware and the general planning process is a state mandated process. None of us woke up one day and said, you know, let's go through this incredibly difficult land use planning process. And because we love sitting in meetings for for five or 6 hours, we are rising to a mandate of putting a general plan in place. And the land use piece of that is what we're going through now. Now what that looks like, it can look very different. And certainly people have different ideas of whether we should be doing this or not. I have been one that I believe in. I support and strongly believe that we have to move forward and plan for the future appropriately and where and where we believe we can move forward as a city together. I want to say two things. There's two things that have come up, and one of which I want to mention today that I have learned also through this process how one a few years ago I've been and I've been an advocate for building in the downtown for many years. In fact, a few years ago, most a lot of folks said there was a terrible idea we shouldn't build one more unit of housing. And the building of a downtown was bad. We shouldn't build more housing. We push forward. We're building 4000 units in the downtown. And the one thing that's been heartening to me was out of this process, there has been a new citywide consensus that has been formed, which is that most people now believe that we should be building in the downtown. And that wasn't the case a few years ago. And so I am I am glad that the city has, in my opinion, come together and are now behind this idea that, yes, we can and should build in the downtown for new people moving in, for young professionals, for seniors, for students, for working, for working people, affordable housing. Just that whole mix. And that's been a consensus that is that has been formed. Have you also heard me talk a lot about building a opportunity for housing up and down our metro system? I support that, especially when it comes to affordable housing for seniors, which we're building much of. And tonight, I think you're going to hear some opportunities for modest growth in other places in the city, which you're going to hear from each of our council members tonight. But I want to I want to thank you through this process. I do believe that we have the plan that we should plan and plan for the future. But I also believe that Long Beach is also a built out community. And yes, we can build, but we can also only do so much. And when you're surrounded by cities on every side and water, we can do our part, but we will never. And I want to be clear with everyone. Those numbers are the state sets for us every year. The goal, we will never meet those numbers. We have. We haven't met them and we will never meet them because in my opinion, they are an unrealistic expectation of what we can do as a community. And so we will do our part. We will develop appropriately, we will protect neighborhoods and historic districts. But I just hope moving forward that we can work together as this process moves throughout the next few years, as the zoning piece is also communicated. And so I just want to thank all of you for your input. And I want to turn this over to the city council who will go through their recommendations. And I'm going to start with Council District one, Councilwoman Gonzales. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Yes, thank you so very much. This has been a really great discussion among all. But I also know that there's been a lot of back and forth, differing opinions, as the mayor said. And I'll start by saying that I want to thank everyone for being a part of the process, staff and community. My staff attended nearly every meeting, and I also put together a District one meeting among the leaders in in the downtown area and central area. So we were happy to have them a part of that. I appreciate staff as well. So a couple cleanup items. I'll have some notes to talk about and then I will also provide a couple late recommendations. So a couple cleanup items, first for District one for the current LLC map. So the first item is to please correct the maps to indicate that both shades of the purple blue within the Todd, M and Todd areas surrounding the Linden Roosevelt area, which is North Anaheim to PCH from Elm Avenue to Atlantic Avenue, that they reflect the proposed five storey height and not the ten storey height adjacent to it, which is actually the Midtown Plan. Number two, please ensure that Peace Park with which is adjacent to the Roosevelt Linden neighborhood, that it is part of the updated map for visibility purposes. So those are my two amendments to the current map. Now, I'll tell you, I'm a downtown council members of a very different perspective. And many of you who I've heard, you know, whether it's social media or what have you, a lot of you have spoken. Not not all of you. But I've heard a lot of negativity about my neighborhood, in my residents neighborhood in which I represent. And it's hard to hear that. I can't help but feel a little bit taken aback by it, because our city, I know, is absolutely better than that. And I understand the concerns. I get it. Change is very difficult. We dealt with that in downtown and it was very difficult even then for downtown was where we sort of expect a lot of high density to come in. But 95% of my district is spoken for with the downtown plan and the Midtown Plan. But I care about all of Long Beach because I have three boys at home. One is going to college. We just looked at Cal State, Long Beach. I drove around. I found, you know, there's really no place even for them to study outside of the city or outside of the school. I have a little three year old and an 11 year old, so I know that the needs for me as not just a council member, but as a parent are there. And I know we have to figure something out. So what we've done in the First District is we have actually worked specifically with when we're talking about needs such as parking, we're actually looking at localized parking plans for some of our most impacted districts are areas and I urge my council colleagues and I know that they will because I've heard from many of them within my my realm that we can that they that we will have to create that park. Lies park. I'm sorry. Localized parking plan. That's very late. For instance, we are looking at a preferential parking district in the Roosevelt neighborhood, preferential parking districts in the Craftsman neighborhood, as well as the West Gateway neighborhoods. And this is all despite what happens here tonight. So I think that, you know, we'll certainly hear more of that today. And I just want to include I just want to make sure overall that the we pass a fair and inclusive levy that is mindful of current thoughts and ideas while looking and planning for the future. As we've heard, downtown has in fact strengthened for the better. Due to our downtown plan, our median income levels are increasing with both market rate and affordable units that are offering a unique retail mix for our downtown residents. Have you been along Pine Avenue, which is where I live, actually with increased density. We have had businesses such as Pie, Bar, Romeos, Chocolates, Studio 111 that has offered us over 100 architects with very high income levels coming to downtown and our city's very first distillery Portuguese band. We would not have experienced this without additional units of appropriate housing options and strong a strong guide for good development. To add to this, our planning commission was provided with a great equity analysis relative to the value, and I want to thank building healthy community communities for bringing that forward and letting us know about that. And that was actually created by both development services and Health and Human Services. And it speaks to a multitude of equity issues. And one spoke to me more than ever, and it said, quoted in the analysis, Despite being the second most diverse city in California, Long Beach has one of the highest rates of segregation in the state . Allowing new housing opportunities only in certain parts of the city will continue to perpetuate and likely worsen the geographic, economic and racial divides that separate our city. So I just want us to think about that. And in the equity analysis, we also know that the western portion of our city is home to actually over 3000 units of affordable housing, which is about 60% of all affordable units in the entire city. And my district alone is actually home to over 1700 units of affordable housing. And with that, our public safety numbers are getting better. And even with that, we're growing exponentially as a as a district. So recommendation number one that I have for the city manager is to report back at an appropriate time interval to the city council via whether that's a study session or an agenda presentation to include a status update of how we are progressing respective to the L'ue decision tonight, whatever that might be, as well as our progress in meeting the dire needs of both of housing, both for market and affordable housing, but particularly affordable housing, as we should have an equitable plan that provides a guide for affordable housing citywide. I know we're coming back with some housing components next Tuesday, but I know that we're we're looking at that. But I just need to make sure we say that. And in addition, I know the report should also include any and all changes to state law adjacent to this issue relative to local planning, zoning and any threats to local control. SB 35 and 8 to 7 are pretty scary as well as funding opportunities. We know that with the dissolution of RDA redevelopment was a big help to a district like mine because we had a lot of blighted communities and provided a lot of subsidies for affordable housing and resources for blighted areas. Perhaps there might be more funding for these communities. So I'd like us to track and advocate our at our state and local I'm sorry, state and federal legislative committees for more funding resources if we're being demanded. More housing options. And then number two, which I know others will speak about, is a formalized community process. What I will say is that what I've what we've lacked here in the city, even being a downtown councilmember, a lot of our downtown projects and even our North Pine residents in downtown with a plan will tell you that the process hasn't really been as transparent or as seamless as it could be. And we know that I believe Conor's mentioned this as well, that a lot of our lists in the neighborhood are antiquated. Oftentimes, the council offices have to be the first line to be able to provide context to development services or to whomever to be able to outreach to those groups. And I think it's really important we have some sort of formalized process to trigger more direct community input, because that is very, very important. We don't want to let any development go without a full process. So with that said, I want to thank everybody again. I hope we can remain positive in this sense. Do you have any questions you are feel. Please feel free to contact my office. We've been through the process. Contact my residents in North Pine. They'll give you a long history of what they've been through. But I have full faith that my council colleagues have heard each and every one of you and that they're going to make the best decision for you tonight.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And then, Councilman, before we go to the next council district, we got action. Let me make sure the master motion is read. I know some people have it in front of them, but can Mr. Myers, can you just read the master motion?
Speaker 5: Yes, Mayor. The master motion is to recommend to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and confirm the proposed general plan, land use element and urban design element, place type and height maps and direct staff to update the program. Environmental Impact Report and increase appropriations in the Development Services Fund in the Development Services Department by $350,000, offset by funds available and may. Or would I suggest if the councilwoman for the First District wants to adopt that as her main motion, including the two points that she just raised. And since we're going to go district by district, each one of the districts could propose as a friendly amendment to the main motion, whatever is appropriate for their particular district. And then we'll have one unified motion at the end of the process.
Speaker 0: That's that's appropriate. And I know that there's already a motion on the floor by Vice me Richardson and Councilman Gonzales, which is the this motion. And we'll go and build the motion as we as we go. Okay. The vice mayor agrees with that. So we have that recorded for Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 6: Okay. As late as it is, I really expect a public comment to go much later. I am surprised. I want to first to say how much I appreciate all the civic engagement here by everybody that's here that's watching at home, how much I appreciate staff. I had the honor of attending two of the larger community meetings, and I know that those were tough moments for residents and tough moments for staff. And I think this is going to while we go through struggle, we always come out stronger on the other side. And so this is a learning moment, as the mayor said. But we are going to come out as a community much stronger for this process. And I think understanding where our touch points are to have conversations, I typically don't read my talking points, but I'm going to try to do that today so that I don't miss anything . I do want to address the fact that several people here mentioned that renters are over 67% are renters, are high percentage of the city, but we're not equally represented in the process. And I want to highlight that that's simply not due only to the fact that staff didn't reach out or that Kono didn't reach out or that our council officers didn't reach out. But it's rather a fact of what happens with poverty and the fact that you have multiple jobs, you have child watch issues. And so it really does determine who shows up. And so we've had this conversation with city staff not only on this item, but on other items in the past around how we do community outreach. And so after today, I really want us to as a city and I'll ask my colleagues to come back and have a conversation around what is the systematic way that we engage with residents, not only homeowners or those that are available, but renters? Are we working with our schools to do that engagement? What is the most cost effective way to make sure that we have everybody at the table and and not the few? And so while I really appreciate the neighborhood associations that were very engaged in this process and called me every day and came to all six of my community meetings as well as the roundtable, they still represent ten people, still represent a small segment of those that are in their neighborhoods. And so really recognizing how hard it is to have everybody's voices at the table and that us as electeds really have to consider all sides, not only those that show up to speak, but those that are not able to come out. And so I want to go back to what the mayor mentioned and staff mentioned. Why land use element, 28,000 housing units are needed by 2040. And while we don't see a path to actually reach that goal, I want to also highlight that something that one of my colleagues brought up to us. If we were divide that out by all nine council districts, that would be 3000 plus in each district in the downtown, we have the downtown plan conversation in 2010, which I supported the density in downtown, but I didn't support the process. And so really finding out that whenever we have density in one area, we need to make sure that we have community benefits with that. And what that looks like for each neighborhood is very different. And so recognizing that each councilmember up here today will will say what they need for their district, I think it is important to highlight that not all the development can be in downtown. So while it says 3000 in each district in downtown alone and between the first and second district, we're already building 4000 new residential units. And we're going to build more because we need to be able to phase that density out to the neighborhoods and make sure that it's not just in blocks in one part of the city. I want to highlight the fact that we have seen the impacts of pro-growth policies without community benefits. And I think that's where we're seeing right now when we have the conversations around rental increases and we see that we have every day, every week I have people call me my office, email us and talk about their rent increases or the fact that they got a 60 day notice without any repercussion. And so looking at our housing policies, while they're not included in the land use element, it's really important that we as a city tackle those before we get to the first stage of this land use element. And so I'll address that in my motion at the end. But we have to be mindful, especially when we're considering this citywide.
Speaker 2: Give me 1/2.
Speaker 6: My history also includes being an advocate for increased access to affordable housing, access to parking and cleaner neighborhoods. As a resident of Alamitos Beach, I've lived in historic Rose Park as well, and I work in downtown, have a great understanding of my district. And we know that zip codes have a greater impact on your life expectancy than your genetic makeup. My district has a six year life expectancy difference between 10th Street and downtown. Proximity to jobs, schools and neighborhoods serving resources can have a positive impact on life expectancy and overall health. I'm fortunate enough to have a decade of community organizing that gave me the insight to know how Long Beach residents truly live. In my ten years, I've had the privilege of being an organizer with the hotel workers, and that gave me insight to families like Romeo, who live in the second district, that have a wife that has cancer, two kids and a bunk bed in the living room. It gave me the experience of visiting George, a port truck driver in the First District, who it also gave me the experience of delivering Christmas meals this past holiday as a councilmember to residents in my district. All of these experiences were not just overcrowding. They all had bunk beds in their living room. They didn't have a dining room table. They had a couch and bunk beds. When we talk about overcrowding, it's not two kids sharing a bedroom. It's people living really in a tight quarter that has a huge impact on our education system, on the health and well-being of our children. And so it is our responsibility to make sure that we are governing and planning for those most impacted. So that being said, I have a couple of areas to clear up. I have a couple of questions for staff. I'm going to start with let's see, what does my district care about most?
Speaker 2: Parking.
Speaker 6: Talk about parking. I know more than anybody that our district is mainly a parking impacted area. I want to clarify for those watching at home and those here, we had two comments. One is that we have 2.25 parking onsite required for all new two bedroom developments. But it was also mentioned that SB 35 parking is not required. How in the city are we addressing this and how is there a way for developers to get out of including parking since we have it as a requirement?
Speaker 7: Thank you for that question. I'd like to start by just acknowledging that the the parking is a part of the zoning code. And we talked about how the zoning code works in concert with the land use element. Essentially, the the proposed land use element, with its encouragement of new development, will actually provide additional parking that doesn't currently exist because where there's either a home that doesn't, a project that doesn't have parking or a vacant lot, there is the opportunity to provide housing through that parking, through that project. So what I'd like to talk about is specifically the state law, SB 35 and one of its requirements that it will allow parking through that streamline or I'm sorry, allow development through that streamlined process and it does not require parking. So in those cases, what I alluded to earlier is that in this city, we have never seen a new development, even when they are not required to provide parking, actually come forward and not provide parking because the demands of the market, the demands of the the either a for sale market or a rental market will require the developer to want to provide parking as a benefit to their residents. And they can also get a better price for that project if they can provide parking. So even though SB 35 allows a project to go forward without parking, we do not think that we would see that we will not see parking or projects without parking. And SB 35 is also generally consistent because current state law for affordable housing projects and what we're talking about in in SB 35 is a process to streamline affordable housing projects. Current state law already reduces the parking requirement for affordable housing projects. So and in essence, we don't think that there will be a significant difference under SB 35 from from what we currently generally experience in projects today.
Speaker 3: And if I can add, there's two components of SB 35. They're important. And Linda mentioned one of them, which is affordable housing. So in Long Beach, you have to have at least 10% is our trigger for affordable housing to be considered for streamlining. And then also the construction has to be paid for through prevailing wage, which is something that the developer is going to have to make a decision. Do they want to meet those two requirements before they're even available to streamline? So again, we we think it's something that'll be out there on the books, although most of the development that we see wouldn't meet those those two categories.
Speaker 6: Great. So just to clarify very simply, it's 2.25, unless it's an affordable housing unit that would fall underneath SB 35. And then they would have the option to not include parking, but they would also have to have prevailing wage.
Speaker 7: That's correct. I would also just point out that there are other fairly limited circumstances where you could have reduced parking, and that is in a density bonus. I talked earlier about a density bonus project that would not necessarily have taken advantage of SB 35. Those projects the developer can ask for a concession on the the parking great. And so that's a possibility. And also you mentioned a very specific parking ratio. And in the slide we showed earlier, based upon the location, if it's in a TOD area, they get a very slight reduction in parking. There's also reduced parking in downtown because of the grant submitted to transit. But other than those, the vast majority of the city for a typical development project, they would be required to provide that 2.5 for the two bedroom project.
Speaker 3: And so, Councilmember, what we see is for the vast majority of new development, it actually is going to help alleviate parking problems. I know that sounds a little counterintuitive, but if you have a property that is not currently parked where everyone's parking on the street because it only. Had a couple parking spaces. If that redeveloped all of the parking spaces, it was 2.25. A two bedroom are going to have to park off streets that they're going to to create actual parking within their development that they pay for. And that alleviates the parking for the rest of the neighborhood.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you. And so I'm imagining my street. I live on Florida and you guys know Florida, it's packed, it's got single family and then it's got a couple of eight plex down the street and none of them have more than three parking spots. So this could be an area where we would have a good development, come in and actually create parking in our parking impacted area. So thank you for clearing that, clarifying that. I also want to highlight, you know, we are doing a lot of work on our preferential parking. I think Alameda speech is starting to I don't know if they're still here, but I think we're starting to gather signatures and start looking at that process in our neighborhood and try to do a pilot program and see if that works. And I know we have our parking study that's coming back sometime April, July, where we're going to be having those conversations about what else to do about this. So but this document itself is not the document to dictate parking, it is the zoning document.
Speaker 3: That's correct.
Speaker 6: I have another question. There's been a lot of conversations around historic districts and the question around what protections are in place for our historic districts. And I don't think I saw that in your presentation.
Speaker 11: I think you're a council member.
Speaker 4: So what we did.
Speaker 11: Throughout this process in terms of historic districts, of the historic districts, are noted on your maps. They're outlined in red. And the there is not a change in density whatsoever within the historic districts. So that was the starting point. So then throughout this process, we received a lot of public input, including from historic districts that are there in the second council district, Crossman Village, Rose Park, Rosa Parks out. And their concern was we had already said no change within their actual historic district. Their concern was what is adjacent to them. So then we went through with the Planning Commission, which had a very difficult job. So over the course of years we went through a process where we looked at streets like Seventh Street, where there there is a conflict that is an ideal street for our housing supply. It's a major bus corridor and staff's starting position was that that is a place for growth. But what we learned through the public process and the decision makers, the Planning Commission recommendation, was that that the tradeoff decision was that we needed it to value higher the concern of that adjacent historic district and look for other places to expand our housing supply. So we saw heights come down on places like Seventh Street, but then that doesn't mean nothing will change ever. On a street like Seventh Street, you could still do a three story building. So then you go into what's the companion piece to this, which is the urban design element, which has very specific policies about transitions, about landscaping. And so the difference between two stories and three stories, that's mathematically. There's no number in between the two, but it's it's still meaningful and important. So you're going to look at things like how windows are lined up. Can you push the bulk of the structure towards the major street, seventh Street in this case, and away from the historic district behind it? And those broad strokes strokes are outlined in the urban design element. But then we're going to go through this five year exercise to actually write the zone. What is this new mixed use zone that's not in our code today going to look like? And that's going to be an open community process, including representatives of the historic district. And we're going to hash out those details that we're asked about tonight. What is the exact set back? Because at ten feet or is it 11 feet? Is is it a 28 foot height limit? Is that a 31 foot height limit? And that's going to be different in your district than in a different district. So that's why we have to go through that that process geographically throughout the whole city. But that's the overall approach, and that's the journey that we've taken over the last several years for the historic districts.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you so much for that. I want to address I have a handful of residents in my district that brought up climate change. And there was a couple of comments tonight. And so I just want to address the fact that the city is undergoing a climate action and adapt adaption plan in trying to meet our statewide targets that aim to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Next Tuesday on the agenda, we do have a request to increase our budget for this outreach. And so I want to make sure that constituents are paying attention today, know that this is an opportunity for us to talk about what that engagement looks like. And so whether or not we have increased density or we don't have increased density, the fact is the city still has that goal of meeting those reductions. And it is, I think, a lot of people's belief that density does help lower that. And so I look towards density and some of the changes here to help us meet that climate action goal. And I encourage people to reach out to my office. I've asked staff to make sure that we work closely on this process, that we're part of all the community meetings and outreach as well to the conversation around affordable housing. So similar to the conversation around parking, I believe that that conversation is going to be said that it's part of the zoning process and not necessarily part of the land use document. I do want to remind my residents and a lot of other folks that while this is not a requirement for affordable housing, we as a city have already stated on May 2nd, 2017, we adopted 29 housing policy recommendations designed to increase the production of affordable housing. What we're already doing is looking at a document recording fee that was already passed. Local bond measures, a density bonus. And I do want to say, I know that in this 29 recommendations, the density bonus, one of the comments in there was to try to do more outreach on that. The fact that we've only had one development use that since 2012 is really shocking to me. And so making sure that we as a city on those areas that want density, like in my district, that we are including that density bonus and doing the best work to bring in developers. That might not be the typical folks we get on Long Beach, but from L.A. that are used to doing some of this work. We're also encouraging preservation. So I think looking forward to the next month, we'll see some preservation items coming up, modifying the housing trust fund and regulating short term rentals. I do have grave concerns that increasing incentives for development without requiring, preserving or creating more affordable housing will equal more gentrification for residents. And so with that, I wanted to ask some questions of city staff on timing for some of these housing items. For the citywide inclusionary housing ordinance, I know that it's currently in the RFP stage. Can you enlighten us on the process and timeline for that?
Speaker 7: Yes, generally it is done through the RFP stage. A developer has been selected and over the next 3 to 5 months the that the work of that consultant will be underway. And we would expect that by I'm going to say late summer, we should be coming back to the city council with some preliminary recommendations. But in the interim, what we'd like to do to keep the council in the loop is periodically provide to far from updates just so that you're aware of what's going on and prior to bringing back a full blown recommendation is potentially have a study session, we would like to ultimately loop in the Planning Commission and get their feedback. So it'll be going to the Planning Commission in a study session and potentially coming to the city council for a study session and or a council action. And we again think that that would happen sometime late summer.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you so much, Lynda, for that. I've got one more question. One of the other policy recommendations was to consider a one for one replacement in areas outside of the coastal zone. Is the city staff working on that right now?
Speaker 7: Is that a one for one housing replacement?
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 7: I understand that that is a. Policy, and I'd have to just confirm that with Patrick Ury. But my understanding is that that is something that his group, which is taking a lead on most of the housing policies that that something that they are they have underway.
Speaker 6: Okay, great. And I think we have something on the agenda next week on this. So I'll hopefully have some answers by next week on that. Okay. So let's see. I'm almost done, I think. Okay. Here we go. So I have my personal process outside of the community process has been six meet and greets. It has been the roundtable with the mayor and to the gentleman that made comments about us looking down earlier. I have a whole stack of comments from emails and letters that I was taking notes to try to make sure I captured and listening at the same time. So we get handed a stack of papers as soon as we sit down and as soon as you guys start talking. So it takes a little bit of multitasking. I know how frustrating it is to be in the audience and look up here and feel like people aren't paying attention because I sat in that seat for ten years. So apologies if it looks like we weren't paying attention. Know that I have been nothing but land use since I sat up here, so it's okay. So having had all of those conversations, having met with all of my community leaders, I do have several changes to our place type and height designations in several areas. And I want to say that this wasn't easy for me. I started off in the beginning with one vision of what I thought should be on Seventh Street and what I thought should be near our historic areas and really keeping in mind what we've done in the downtown and how great that's been, but also being mindful of those areas that feel like they take the brunt of a lot of things and being mindful of how white our streets are and what the health inequities are in certain areas in the district. And so I'm trying to reduce some of the density in some of the areas that feel like there's a higher poverty area and increase it a little bit more in the corridors that can handle it. That being said, we do have all these other from the zoning to the urban design that are going to help dictate. But I wanted us to be able to have a baseline and that it might not mean that we're going to have five storeys because the urban design does not fit with that. So I'm going to read these for our city attorney to make sure that we get them right. So excuse me for this fun part. I would please like to make the motion to change the place type from multifamily residential moderate to multifamily residential low along 10th street between Orange Avenue and Gardena Avenue and reduce the height limit from four stories to two stories. I would like to reduce the height limit from five storeys to four storeys for the neighborhood serving center corridor, moderate place type along Cherry Avenue on the south side of 10th Street to the north side of Seventh Street. I'd like to change the place type from neighborhood serving center or corridor low to neighborhood serving center or corridor moderate and increase the height limit. And this is different stuff from what we talked about. Increase the height limit from three stories to four stories on seventh Street between walnut and cherry and up to five storeys. Cherry to a bespoke. Change the place type from neighborhood serving center or corridor low to neighborhood serving center corridor moderate and increase the height limit from three stories to four stories on Fourth Street between Cerritos Avenue and Almond Avenue, as per the request of Neighbor. In order to reduce density in this area. I also to protect several existing three storey buildings. I would like to change the place type from MF R moderate density to MF R low density and reduce the height limit from four stories to three stories in the area of Almond Avenue, Nebraska Avenue and Walnut Avenue between seventh and Fourth Street. And I had hoped to have done that to two stories, but we already have existing things there. So we're going to do two, three. I want to direct. Okay. Hold on. I think that's at 1/2. Before returning to the zoning ordinance that we should vote. Formalized committee process. Guys, those are my recommendations.
Speaker 11: Those changes. Councilmember We got very clearly everything that we need to to reiterate your very first change related to 10th Street.
Speaker 6: I will let me go back up.
Speaker 2: Place type from multiple.
Speaker 6: Multiple family residential moderate to multiple family residential low along 10th street between Orange and Gardena and reduce the height limit from four stories to two stories.
Speaker 11: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: And just a clarification question for myself. One of those reductions was the reduction along Crescent Village is that this.
Speaker 6: Is around Craftsman Village to reduce the height limit there, that they have been.
Speaker 2: To.
Speaker 0: Two storey.
Speaker 6: Crown to two stories and not. Yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. All right. I'll try to get this through this fairly quickly, but I do have a presentation that highlights all of my changes in a map that I understand better than the map that was prepared in terms of the call out. So thank you to everyone who came out to speak tonight. Actually, I'm going to to tonight and those watching at home, one of the early speakers tonight and this is going off of Councilwoman Pierce's comments, but of course, I drafted mine before her, so I didn't know she was going to touch on this. But one of the early speakers tonight made a comment that implied because some of us were not making eye contact with him during his comments, we were not paying attention. Nothing could be further from the truth, although I understand why he may have felt that way. This issue has involved a great deal of public comment. His comments triggered a point that I think should be should be made regarding our processes, council members, and something that is often unknown or overlooked. When council members come to council meetings and on the nights when we have big issues like this, some of us come to the meeting with prepared remarks or presentations like I did tonight. When we get here, we receive a number of documents to review prior to our vote. They're actually sitting on this counter right here. We've never seen them before. We this includes comments from residents who could not make the meeting letters from residents and in some instances, demonstrative exhibits presented by speakers who are providing testimony who ask us to refer to their submissions during the course of their comments. I assure you that everyone at the dais is taking notes, whether electronically like I do or manually, with a pen and paper and incorporating what you are saying into our comments. As you will see in a moment, I was able to incorporate some of the comments we heard here tonight into my previously prepared presentation during your comments, which I will discuss in a moment. This is an important process, and we want to make sure everyone who tries to reach out to us, whether by email, text message, letter or in person, is heard prior to the vote. Frequently, what we hear or read at council is reflected in our final comments, amendments and our ultimate vote, as you will see here tonight. This is definitely not a situation that is even remotely analogous to a business meeting where you might listen intently for an hour or two or even three without simultaneously being asked to review additional inputs and information without breaking eye contact with the speaker. Trust me, everyone at this dyas is engaged for the entirety of our meetings and has spent hundreds of hours on this issue. Everyone, I am proud to serve with colleagues who have taken such care to approach this issue in a thoughtful and responsible manner, and for that they should all be recognized. I want to thank staff for their great work on this issue. I have a tremendous amount of respect for them. They are all, in my opinion, talented people who care deeply about the city. And any implication to the contrary is inconsistent with my personal experiences and those of my team. Having said that, I have to admit that this process could have been better. And certainly the maps that displayed the proposed changes were confusing at best. And I think staff can attest to the fact that I have repeatedly over the last few months asked for revised maps that have an overlay that show what the proposed changes are with an underlay, that show what the existing densities are. And for some reason, we were never able to receive such maps. I tried to recreate them in a manner that made sense to me. And I'll share those with you in just a moment. In regards to my district. I also want to acknowledge my council staff, especially my chief of staff, Jack Cunningham. They have been engaged in discussion in this discussion for over three years. Our very first Louis meeting was held in 2014 with Angela Reynolds, who came and spoke about CDEP and its its impact with the land use element . Back then nobody was talking about the land use element and a huge thanks to our neighborhood association boards. We've been meeting with many of them and I think they would tell you that they had a very fair process and that we engage them early and try to come up with solutions that were thoughtful and fair. I am especially grateful for those of them who shared with me their understanding that planning is essential and that they wanted to assist with making recommendations that took into consideration the needs of the entire city. Those conversations made me truly grateful to call those folks my neighbors and part of my village and community. They are the reason that I chose to live in this city. Thank you for coming to the table with a broad view of the growth of our city with reasonable compromises and a vision that takes into account what is inevitable in terms of growth for our city. Land use planning is a core function of all cities. Long Beach's 1989 land use element now needs updating. The city wide plan sets limitations for important variables in terms of what types of buildings and land uses are appropriate for each particular area of the city. Updating this plan is one of the most important responsibilities local elected officials have. It is essential to plan for and accommodate changes we know are coming in the future. In my opinion, the option to say no to planning is not a responsible option. We can modify the proposals, make changes, shorten timelines, allowance, allow for review processes and engagement. But we cannot escape the task of planning. Planning for the future. Reading the literature, looking at the impacts is what we are required to do as public servants. And that's what sets us apart from residents who don't bear a fiduciary duty to think about the future of our city. Unfortunately, updating general plans all over the country, not just in Long Beach, can become political and combative and result in serious misinformation that can lead to reactionary or short sighted decision making. We can't change the flaws from the past process. I certainly wish we could, but we can be smart and thoughtful now that we have identified some of the deficiencies and the opportunities for outreach and community engagement. An updated Louis is meant to address population changes, mobility trends, housing needs and encourage reinvestment in areas that have stagnated with dilapidated properties. This this necessity will orient allowable development for decades to come, making it an essential document for the city. This is being done because our city has and will change, and we need to change with it. I thought some of the changes tonight that Mr. Modica referenced in his presentation this evening were interesting, not because but because of so many parallels. When we tell people that we are going to have self-driving cars in the near future, people in my district I don't know about your district sometimes laugh, but I am sure if someone told me in 1989 when we adopted this plan that the Internet would be a place where anyone with access could go to get information on just about anything in a matter of seconds, or that no one would shop at big, big box stores anymore because a company called Amazon would have a drone drop off the items at their home, even in their home on the same day that they placed that Internet order, I would never have believed it. It would have seemed way too futuristic for me. But now I drive a car that drives itself in rush hour and in free flowing traffic to work on a daily basis. Being thoughtful and pragmatic about the future is how we create smart plans that put our city in a good position for future decades. Every indicator shows that cities throughout the state will be seeing population increases in the coming decades, and accommodating for those people who will be living here is not a luxury. It's a responsibility. The Louie is not just about the people we know will be moving to Long Beach in decades to come, but also about better managing the . Who already live here and their needs as they grow into adults and then into older adults. Population growth is part of any healthy city. It's positive. Ignoring that future, ignoring the certainty that every indicator is pointing to, may be politically easy at times, but does greater harm to our city in the long term and the generations that lie ahead. The conversation about the future of our city is important, and I want to say that I support the Louis with the number of changes that I plan to make in just a moment. I have worked with my residents for over three years, holding meetings, taking inputs on walks and drives with them, offering solutions. And I believe that they have had a great impact on where this plan is going to end up. And by the way, I typed those comments during the meeting tonight because your words and your comments were incorporated into these final comments, as they should be, because that's what public comment is all about. So in terms of the the changes that I see for the third district, which is really the only district that I can speak to as that's the one I've been most engaged in. We've conducted a number the the list here shows the meetings that we have asked staff to present to our community regarding the land use planning and the technical elements of the land use plan. We also put out two surveys ourselves to our residents to get feedback. The two primary areas of concern for our district have been, and I think most of the city parking and traffic have been the primary concerns in regards to parking. I think some of the things that are very noteworthy and stuff highlighted them in their presentation, but I want to highlight them again here is that the zoning code addresses this issue. A two bedroom development would require 2.25 spaces. The parking must be on site, which is a really huge component in the third district because we have so many parking impacted areas. The reason we have so many parking impacted areas is because we have a lot of multifamily developments that were built at a time when parking was not required and so there is no onsite parking . And so when we have a new development in the third district, we will now have onsite parking which will alleviate at least for that complex, the parking. When a building is rebuilt or added upon, it will require parking for traffic. I think that we need to reimagine our transit in terms of how it will be used, for example, in the third district. Most of my residents are not riding the bus. However, as I talk to our older, aging adults, I find that if we were to have busses that were more like shuttles, for example, that could take them to, you know, smaller shopping areas. I do believe that big box stores are a thing of the past. We're not going to see a lot of those in the future years, but we are going to see a lot of mixed use developments that are going to be more walkable. And I think smaller shuttle type services will do much better in areas that are parking and densely impacted, like the coastal zones in the third district. For example, let's take the peninsula hugely parking impacted area, very densely populated. People are not going to ride a bus to get down to the peninsula. But if they had a shuttle as an as an option, then they might ride the shuttle and park in the parking lot and the shuttle would have less of an impact on the residents. So I really think we need to have better engagement with Long Beach transit in terms of what kind of transportation we're going to be offering and make sure that it works. A huge bus doesn't work for every neighborhood and it doesn't work for every resident. A small shuttle might. Traffic optimization and an efficiency plan is needed, and that's one of the recommendations that I'll be making at the end. And we need to have developments that create walkable communities. When I talk to our aging adults who are looking at retirement and living in the city, they realize that they're going to want to be able to walk. So mixed use development in those areas where we have a lot of big box shopping centers right now. Turning those into areas where they can walk to get their basic needs is something that seems very appealable, appealing to them. Okay. So I want to start off with in the third district, we recently passed the CS Sep plan and this area I've highlighted in here and actually zoomed in on it. It's the area that's depicted in the maps by the horizontal line block lines. This particular area over the course of the next 30 years is going to already offer a lot of additional housing stock in the third district that we didn't already have. So in terms of taking our share of housing and the necessity for for density, I think the third district that's well on its way and developing potentially market value housing and workforce type housing in this area over the course of the next 30 years. So I'm very proud that my colleagues join me in supporting passing the Scissett plan, because that is part of the entire landscape when we talk about density. We have several. Listing buildings in the third district that are actually very tall or high buildings for the areas that they were built in. We have some seven story buildings bordering park estates. We've got some very high buildings bordering Bluff Park. These are were all built not by variances, but at a time when density and height standards were higher. So they were actually built to the code at the time. If we were to lower do much more lowering of these heights in these areas, then should these buildings become dilapidated and demolished, they cannot build back again to that level. They have to build at the new level, which means they'll probably never demolish some of these buildings. And I'll talk to you about how that is relevant in areas like Bluff Park. So let's talk first about Bluff Park. On the westernmost part of Bluff Park, we have seven four story buildings. This is the area around one sparrow and Broadway, one sparrow. And second, we have some very tall buildings there. My the staff's recommendation was to increase heights to five stories at that location. That's just something that is not acceptable to my community, nor to me. So we will be reducing the recommendation for that area to three stories. This will be a non-conforming use, which means should those seven the four story buildings choose to once they become dilapidated, it's probably unlikely that they will demolish and rebuild because they'll only be limited to three stories. But I think given the historic character of this neighborhood, this change makes sense. The the red dots, as was mentioned earlier, the red dots represent the historic zone. So the motion on this particular item would be that the heights within the Bluff Park Historic District along Broadway be limited to two stories. The second motion is to Bluff Park would be to reduce the height in the MFR dash area, bound by one pair of Second Street, Kennebec and Ocean Boulevard that we reduced from five stories to three stories. All fronts. They all properties facing Broadway will be limited to two stories. They can be mixed use, but they'll be limited to two stories. And we believe the mf r dash l aria as proposed by staff because that's currently a multifamily zone within the historic district. So that's Bluff Park. Moving on to Bluff Heights. We will be asking that quarto place be reduced to two stories, as was recommended by one of our residents. Actually, many of our residents, again, in the area where we have the red dots, we have a historic district. So we asked to change the place type for properties within the Bluff Heights Historic District near Third and Coronado to FC and which has a maximum height of two stories. I'll also be showing when I talk about the Redondo corridor next a recommendation that I have in regards to the Redondo Corridor for the Redondo Corridor. The motion would be to reduce heights in the NCC area along Redondo, south of Colorado, to three stories, fourth stories from Colorado to 10th Street in Bluff Heights on the north side of Redondo will be asking that where the property backs up to a historic property. He was limited to two stories in height. Belmont Heights. Okay. We'll be requesting here that. We'll be asking to reduce the height to NSC. NSC Dash L to two stories on fourth Street. Reduce the height. Fronting Broadway to two stories south of Broadway to three stories except for properties fronting Euclid, which will remain at four stories. And Belmont Shore. Okay. We'll be requesting. And 1/2 here. Just look at my notes here. We'd like to reduce the height along Ocean Boulevard and the mf r dash l area east of Prospect to two stories. Everything west of Prospect already has several three story buildings, so that will stay with the staff's recommendation of three stories. But the majority of ocean, as you can.
Speaker 2: See.
Speaker 11: Councilmember, if you could advance to the next slide.
Speaker 9: Sure. There we go. The next slide. Slide. Okay. Park Estates. Is that what you mean by advance to the next slide?
Speaker 11: Yes, we were we were a slide behind.
Speaker 4: What you see.
Speaker 9: Behind our head of. Okay, so I'm on Park Estates now, which we're all.
Speaker 11: Together.
Speaker 9: Now. Okay. Sounds good. You heard enough about that. I'm not sure for Park Estates. We're going to request that the area read it for you. Exactly. The areas surrounding the Los Altos Plaza is currently proposed at three stories. We'd like to reduce that height to two stories, the existing buildings that are there. Can stay. We'd also like to reduce the MF R Dash L area at Atherton and Clark to two stories and correct the map to reflect the existing retail center as C.S.. There's also an area at the top of the map there in Park Estates that we'd like to have. It was the proposal was three stories. It's currently at two stories. We'd like it to remain at two stories. So we'll be asking to reduce the height there at the Iron Triangle. We're going to ask that we reduce the Bellflower PCH community commercial area to two stories. The other area there is is an existing three story building. So we're okay with staff's recommendation on that property just north of that. West of CSU will be no change there. We're going with staff's recommendation in regards to some additional changes in regards to CD3. Specifically on page 136 of the plan you list implementation program L, you dash M dash 94 to address existing homes in the designated open space area of Roses Dog Beach. The policy allows basic remodels but prohibits additions of any kind. I'm directing staff to amend that text to read as follows to address existing homes in the designated open space area of Rosie's Dog Beach. Balancing the needs of private property owners and beach visitors continue the zoning code provisions to allow basic remodels by right as well as additions up to 250 square feet for residential uses located within the open space place type. I would like and this is consistent with Councilwoman Gonzalez's request for a regular update. I had suggested an annual update, but I would like to hear from my colleagues about this by way of study session on the status of the Luis implementation and progress towards intended goals. The update should include any significant new developments. Any updates on state legislation regarding land use and housing? Updates on city traffic plans or studies. Updates on population growth or any data that we've received regarding the same contemporaneous to the creation of the Louis. Staff should prepare a traffic optimization and efficiency report or whatever other title that you want to give that to encompass a traffic plan on current as well as future traffic patterns and trends, and to identify ways to mitigate traffic congestion at major intersections. As part of the update. The zoning code as part of the update to the zoning code. City staff should consider increasing parking requirements for new developments and parking impacted areas. And that's just something we'd ask staff to consider. We'd like staff to conduct a historic resources survey. The scope and objective of which which should be developed in conjunction with the historic districts community associations and develop a community engagement and architectural review process that includes feedback from the immediate community members, either generally or through the selection of community association representatives for the impacted community to sit on the Site Plan Review Committee, which we heard a little bit about tonight. I think it would be important for us to have residents opining on the site review process. And finally, my so I guess item number one would be moving on or adding on to Councilwoman Gonzalez's request for frequent updates items two, three, four, five and six, which I'm going to make right now, would be friendly amendments on six would be to keep the land use plan as a five year plan and to reevaluate it at the five year mark.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, Councilmember. Let me move on to District four, Councilmember Superman.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 8: And for those of you watching this later, it's right now 10:30 p.m..
Speaker 4: I'm going to.
Speaker 8: Make my comments very, very brief. I'll pause for applause there. But I think if I spoke to this item, it might be construed that I felt that the public speakers here tonight did not cover the topic. I think quite the opposite is true. There's nothing I can add to what was articulated here tonight. The comments showed tremendous thought research. I knew this was going to happen because of all the emails we received that the residents have really taken the time to understand a very complex process. I attended all but one of the public meetings and. I thought the comments there were equally impressive. I think some would said it's been a long process. Yes, I think five months ago and one day was when I introduced the director general services on the stage at Whaley Park. I think a month before that I made my first public statement on the topic. So I promise I'm not.
Speaker 4: Going to comment on this, but but there was one particular.
Speaker 8: Speaker tonight whose comments I find so ironic that I want to mention that one of the comments was, I guess it was devices in that it tried to separate us. It was like an East versus West or something. The question was asked, Gee, have any of you ever been west of Cherry Avenue? Well, the irony here is the fourth Council district admittedly is very white and very diverse, but the eastern border is the Orange County line and it extends west of cherry. So the answer is yes, I've been west of Cherry.
Speaker 4: The other one was a.
Speaker 8: Kind of rhetorical question. Gee, all you all you folks want is to be able to park in front of your own houses for free. Okay. The irony here is.
Speaker 4: If you take the one mile stretch along Atherton in.
Speaker 8: Front of the pyramid, one mile between Palo Verde Avenue and Bellflower, I believe there are 15 residential streets perpendicular to Atherton and every single one of those is parking packed and it has a preferential parking district that's hundreds of residents on each of those streets who pay to park in front of their own homes. So I just want to put that perspective in place here. I'm going to ask Tom Modica to to read my changes. And I also, in addition to thanking everyone who spoke here tonight, I also like to thank city staff Tom Modica and Linda Tatum. I met Friday. We also met Monday. At City Hall. And I think Tom's final email to me was at 10:16 p.m. last night, which I couldn't read because I was in front of a community hospital conducting an interview for NBC News. So, so much for this part time job at city council. But, Tom, if you would, articulate those and appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember. I'll give a brief summary and Linda will go through the actual recommendations. So we were given a challenge by a council member supernova to really take a look at what can come down and what are some of the areas we've been listening, we've been going to the roundtables. It's clear there is a lot of concern right around the traffic circle in particular. There are some areas around the YMCA that we need to look at, as well as the commercial corridors and the current multi-use areas that are going to kind of line up with what we believe are going to be some of the discussions in District five. And so with that, I'd like Linda to go through each one of those and read those into the record as as the stats recommendations.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Tom. Thank you, Councilman. Super. Now, the first item is going to be at the location bound by Lakewood, Willow and the alley south of Willow and east of Lakewood changed the neighborhood serving corridor place type to community commercial at two stories. Change number two at the four properties at the Lakewood Stearns interchange, bound by the alleys on the northeast, northwest and southwest, and also bound by the transition by the between the commercial. We're going to change that. Likewise to Community Commercial at two stories. Item number three at Stearns and Los Coyotes intersection impacting the triangular commercial properties both on the northeast of the intersection and on the southwest of that intersection. Change the neighborhood serving commercial place type. And lower that designation to two stories. In the Northeast Traffic Circle area bound by Lakewood, the alley south of Rosita Street, Seminole and PCH reduced the neighborhood serving moderate density.
Speaker 2: Area.
Speaker 7: From four stories to neighborhood serving commercial low density three stories. Change number five in the multifamily area bound by Lowe's, Coyotes, Clark Park, Jimeno, Atherton and PCH. This is near the in the traffic circle area. Reduce the multifamily moderate density from four stories to multi-family residential low density at three stories. Change number six for the Vons Shopping Center in the outer traffic circle area found by Zunino, Atherton, Los Coyotes and Park. Reduce the place. Type from four stories to community commercial at two stories. Change number seven for the multifamily area in the outer traffic circle bound by Termino, Mendez, Jacinto and Lakewood. Reduce the height from six stories to multifamily residential low at three stories. Change number eight for the neighborhood serving commercial area bound by Grand Terminal PCH in Wilton. Reduce the height from four stories to neighborhood serving corner commercial. I'm sorry, neighborhood serving corridor. Low density at three stories. And lastly, number nine at Atherton and Bellflower. Modify the height to be consistent at three stories across all of these community commercial properties on the east side of Bellflower. And that concludes the changes.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Concern for Superman staff for the District four recommendations. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 6: Thank you. This has been quite a process. I want to start by outlining a little bit about what drives my friendly amendments today community engagement. And I did this against staff recommendations sometimes as I started hosting community meetings.
Speaker 2: Well before.
Speaker 6: The maps were scheduled to go to the Planning Commission. And the thoughts were that it's not really appropriate for council members to get involved until the time at which they can make a mark on those recommendations. And I disagreed with that because I really felt that it was important to unite the voices of the Fifth District. And for us to take the time to sit down together and prioritize, because the process was not outlined before it began. And so because of that, we didn't know what the next turn would be. And so we had to know together what we prioritized. So I met in small groups, in living rooms and coffee shops and restaurant patios, and I've hosted large groups in cafeterias and pizza parlors and community centers. We handed out we brought maps from all the different versions, and we handed out little arrows for people to prioritize what was most important to them and and voiced their concerns about different areas. Along the way, there were a lot of individuals who unfortunately had been fed misinformation along the way. And sometimes when individuals hear misinformation and they get scared, they react in ways that can be hurtful towards others. And I'm very thankful for those who came to meetings angry and. Just enrage that by the end. Often we were talking about how we both shared common visions and how we both rolled up our sleeves and bought the ugliest house on the block and what it was like to buy a home as a young person and grow into it. And I feel like there was a lot of opportunity to find common ground. I agree with Nick that the process could have been if we did it and knew where we were now, that we would be in a better place. But part of the process was growing with the voice of the community. And so I think that we were able as a community to kind of design that process as we went. And I think Conor was a part of discussing what the strengths and weaknesses to date were and where we went from there. So I'm going to start with adding a request for staff instruction that provides a transparent process that protects our neighbors and gives opportunity for stakeholder input in the future. On page 59 of the staff presentation, we talk about the five year check in, and I know that Councilmember Gonzalez talked a little bit about that and Councilwoman Pryce talked a little bit about that. I hear both the desire to be firm, to protect us against developers and the state's desire for interference in our communities, and the desire to have the check in points for our community, to have the input and make corrections should they be necessary. So what I would like to propose is two parts. So we have a committee called Economic Development and Finance, and this committee and the work on this committee that I chair has really been a driving force for our revitalization of some of our commercial corridors. For the first time in the history of the city council, our committee actually can have access to data that can help us make good decisions. And I remember when I was first elected to the city council, I sat down with Mr. GROSS and said, You know, we really need the data related to sales tax revenue and property tax revenue and we need a BI corridor, we need a bi district, we need. And he said, Well, that's illegal. And I said, Well, good thing the people behind this dais with five votes can change that law. So let's talk about what we need to do to give the people who make the decisions on behalf of a half a million people data to drive their decisions, not just whims of a lot of people shop here or a lot of people don't shop here. What's the data show? And from that, you now see in our committee a quarterly report that demonstrates what corridors are growing and what corridors are struggling. The vacancy on my side of town is at an all time low. I'll include some of those numbers in my email to the community tomorrow. We were able to see some of the areas that we were lacking and be able to see that the data showed that Fifth District residents weren't eating in the restaurants on the side of town, that they were running across that little imaginary line to the city of Lakewood or the city of Los Alamitos. And to respond to that, we've had more restaurants open. We're adding more restaurants at the Long Beach Town Center in buildings that didn't even exist before. And so to do that, we have to protect the community commercial that has come together and and started to thrive. When we have brought people to the district and they make these large investments in these commercial corridors and we need to protect those investments. And so while I get criticism about the desire for community commercial, the discussant discussions come after the criticism from the critic being surprised that when we were elected the vacancy rates were much different and the revenue from those corridors was different. And the reason that the revenue was important to look at is because when a business is selling. To 500 customers a day. They're not as profitable as if they sell to 600 customers a day. And if they are selling to 600 customers a day, that's an additional 20% of neighbors that are getting access to something they want closer to home. And that's important. Sure. So I've worked hand in hand with the business owners to create and grow businesses and grow business associations. Since I've been elected, we have over 760 new businesses just in the fifth District. That's new businesses. And that's 2000 new jobs. And those are along Spring Street there, along Lakewood Boulevard there, along Clark Avenue. We're getting revitalization of the Clark Avenue property, which everyone said would never get revitalized under that zoning. It's absolutely getting revitalized under the exact same zoning. And the tenants who were there are some of them are returning and others have found other properties adjacent on Lakewood Boulevard. And so we're really excited about that. I would like the transparency to come in the economic development report that we receive on a quarterly basis. I would like there to be some opportunity to protect ourselves from discussions that we didn't know were being had. And what I mean by that is it seems as though through this process we've heard from developers that they didn't feel it was important to meet with the community and that instead they went directly to development services to share their ideas on what they wanted to develop in our neighborhoods without really talking to the neighborhoods. And so I'd like an additional page added to the EDF agenda. And when these developers are engaging in a certain corridor, I'd like those corridors to be listed. So there's always a transparent process of who are in these dialogs. And the reason this is important is one of the reasons I think that there's been so much distrust of this process is that people felt left out and duped by discussions that were had so much so that at a community meeting, a developer said that city staff instructed them not to talk to the community. And quite honestly, they don't take instruction from city staff. You're an independent person with an investment and you make the decisions that you think are important to keep your customers. And so we need to create and bond those relationships because we want our develop. We want our commercial corridors and landlords and their tenants to be successful. And to do that, you have to have open dialog. You have to hear what those residents want. So with that, my my presentation is much less high tech than Councilwoman Price. I brought some additional documents, so I'll start my comments as follows. We'll start in Lakewood Village. So for everyone at home, this is Lakewood Village. And I'm going to make. Three. Three substantial changes.
Speaker 2: And.
Speaker 6: Four substantial changes to Lakewood Village. First, we're going to talk about Lakewood Boulevard right here. I would like to reduce the height limit to two stories along Lakewood Boulevard where it's currently shown as MF Carlo at three stories. This includes from Del Amo all the way to Norse way. Then I'd like to talk about Norris Way. Please change the place. Type at the North. East corner node of Lakewood Boulevard in Carson Street, where North Sway intersects from nickel to community, serving commercial and reduce the height to as it is today. Two stories. Three. Please reduce the height limit to two stories along Carson Street. Where it's currently shown as mf r l at three stories. This includes from Norris Way to Faculty Avenue and from Clark Avenue to Viking Way. I believe the entire Carson corridor has some opportunity in the future for. Reorganization and some better parking. A lot of these landlords talk to me that they don't even have places to park when they go collect their rent and other things. So we need to talk about what we can do along the corridor to be more conducive to both the residents and the land owners. And so I will welcome a future process where we can all sit down as stakeholders and discuss how we can resolve the issues that exist today and what kinds of opportunities Carson here and all the way up can can have. Because even as you get closer to McBride, we have some serious parking impact that has come upon us because of decisions of a district that they don't have any requirement to involve the community in. Their process of deciding that a K through eight school or a six through eight school becomes a high school. And that's a huge impact and change on neighbors that we also need to discuss. And the school district when I was in high school had 99,000 residents and today it's somewhere around 60 something thousand. And so as they make these decisions on these other properties, similar to the properties in my district that are being turned from institutional to commercial, now, the old post office, we want to have a community dialog about what the future could look like. That's only three. I have a fourth on that one. Item four. I'd like to reduce the height limit to two stories along Bellflower Boulevard. It's currently yellow with a three. I'd like to reduce the limit to two stories on Bellflower Boulevard from Viking Way to Arbor Road.
Speaker 2: Where.
Speaker 6: It's currently shown as MF RL at three stories. One of the things that I think is important is a number of individuals talk today a little bit about Parkview Village. It's currently two story commercial. I don't know what information continues to be out there. It's been two story commercial for months and my office still gets calls asking me to turn. It took a two story commercial, and so I'll do my best to continue to provide the information to the community via the newsletters. And these are all little snippets that we've included in prior newsletters, but. The the misinformation and demonization saying the Council on Mongo didn't do something or did do something. I mean, I hope we can all agree on checking the city website and looking at the facts. Okay. Number five. So number five, as a community I've worked very closely with and not a lot of their members have attended meetings, but I've talked to their past president and other members of the community. Many people don't know that this little node along the six or five freeway 20 years ago was promised. A sound wall. And for the last 12 years. It was reported incorrectly by Metro as a sound while in the city of Lakewood, and not until I was elected and started pursuing this aggressively. Was Long Beach ever going to get what it was promised? We have since pulled in more than a quarter of $1,000,000 in planning for the future of this community. And I think that it'll really be a vibrant community. They actually have onsite parking. However, the challenges in this community are that they've they were allowed to in the past have offsite parking. And so a lot of these residents don't have enough parking. I'm going to have one change to that. This is change number five. I'm going to have the height reduced to the two two stories at the Spring Street Southeast node about bounded by the six or five freeway in Coyote Creek, where it's currently shown as MFA. And at four storey, the heights in there are very interesting and varied, but I think that this will at least give them a comfort for today. And as we move forward with our sound wall pursuit, I know and I'm confident that we can talk through how to fix some of their parking issues as well with potentially the removal of one of their tennis courts. Item number six. Actually six and seven. So this aligns with council members, super or not, I really want to thank Councilmember Super now for his work. A lot of us share areas across the border and one of the considerations in land use is how you have to have consistency in certain areas to meet certain requirements. And so I appreciate Councilmember Super joining me in this important change. I would like to change the place type on the southeast corner node of Lakewood Boulevard in Spring Street from Newcastle to community commercial and reduce its height to 4 to 2 stories and change the place type on the northwest corner node of Lakewood Boulevard and Stern Street from NSC L to community commercial and reduce the height to two stories. So that'll take care of those. Next is the town center. The town center, something we've all talked a lot about. The town center was designed in a certain way on purpose. You're not supposed to be able to get in and out quickly. It actually provides some security for the community. I've worked hand in hand with the Star over the last year to find opportunities to reposition and remarket some of the vacant space. They've entertained offers from gyms and other things that add a more consistent week day option for visiting. There's also some opportunity on some empty property that's been there for a long time that a lot of people call our office and asked to be a park. It can't be a park. It's not under our lease at this time. But the landlord, who is an out of state property management company, has agreed to develop that vacant area into the restaurants that the community has asked for. And we have some really exciting interest from a lot of local restaurants. So I feel really confident that for now, well, in the future we may want to look at what the town center could look like based on the successes of the commercial restructuring we're doing now. I'd like to change the place type on the southwest corner node of Carson Street and the 65 Freeway, where the town center is located from an ACM to community commercial and reduce the height to two stories. I believe there's some opportunity to re-envision this area with the community as we see how this new commercial develops. The amount of interest we've had from commercial because it's along the six or five freeway is remarkable. And the data that we've started to look at related to who shops say this Lowe's versus who shops at the Lowes on Bellflower and why they're two completely different markets and why you can have two of the same stores so close together is really something interesting for us to look at because this center is a commercial driver where we are able to pick up revenue from our surrounding cities. And so that's a really important component of picking up your sales tax leakage from other cities. Number nine. Number nine, I'd like to change the place type in the northwest corner. Note of Spring Street and Woodruff Avenue from NW ACM to community commercial and reduce its height to two stories. I've had a lot of talks with neighbors out their doors. I'm specifically in this community discussing and understanding the challenge of this area and the traffic of this area. We're looking at some protected left areas already to relieve some of this. And I'll talk a little bit about infrastructure in a minute that'll help with some of these concerns. And finally, I think the most exciting named community at many of our discussions is what we call the bow tie. And I would like to change the place type on the southwest and northeast corner to nodes of Louis Cody's diagonal and Palo Verde Road from NCC to community serving commercial and reduce the height to two stories. There was a little bit of talk today about the frustrations that people have as they drive across the city and some of the infrastructure needs and repair needs. And I want to thank my colleagues, because this council is the first council that was willing to do a report and a study of how much need there really is . It's easy to say we're fixing things here, but until you take an inventory of the total needs of what you have to to plan and prepare for and pay for. We didn't know that the fifth District, the day I was elected, had $40 million of outstanding street repair. You add on top of that the needs of our parks and our infrastructure of our libraries and the infrastructure of our community centers. It had never been discussed, and one of the things I'm super passionate about is ensuring that as we come and work towards equity of park programing and equity of library services and equity of all those things, we also have equity of the infrastructure of our communities. And I really appreciate my colleagues that we've taken a stand together. And I'm. Just so proud and thankful that we have decided to move forward where we are prioritizing the distribution of repairs based on need. It has not been done before and shame on us for having. Let it get to a point where a new group of councilmembers had to come in in mass to be able to build the relationships, to vote, to support the city as a whole, because that is a big part of being an amazing city. And so I am humbled to work with so many of these colleagues. I really, really appreciate your support of me. I know throughout the process so many of them were asking, how are those community meetings going? And we we had a lot of dialog about our ability as a city to design an input process. And the council meeting we hosted at McBride High School several months ago. I had an agenda item about the standardization of community input requirements and the standardization of how the the Council and the city must use certain tools to communicate to the community. Because if you don't have a reliable place where you know, you can always get the information then. You'll go to next tor.com and you'll believe the craziest things about me that are just not true. And so we need to have legitimate, consistent communication that are factually correct. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is councilmember defenders.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank everyone for staying around here. We're very close to that 12:00 night and I know everyone will just turn into pumpkins after that, but I'm going to try to get this done before then, because the fact that we have things that we're very concerned about, especially with this new land element , and I think everyone should be very concerned about it because I think it will be a benefit not only to themselves but to the city in which we live in. I first of all, I would like to thank and acknowledge the residents and the stakeholders who have advocated on behalf of their community throughout the process. And I want to thank you for your input, because we do we certainly did hear you. And I want to thank the planning staff and the commissioners remaining diligent and looking ahead. And thank you again for that also. As many of you might recall, I submitted a letter into the record on December the 11th, the planning committee, you know, in the hearing. This is my letter. Here is my letter. Echoed, echoed the residents concerns and outlined several new height reductions for the sixth District. My staff and I walk the neighborhoods surrounding Anaheim, Pacific and Atlantic, knocking on many, many doors to get community feedback. The challenge of overcrowding affordable and the lack of economic opportunities in Long Beach are citywide issues. What should be shared the responsibility across the city district. And I'm prepared to do my part tonight. So what do we do when people speak against only height and density in their neighborhood? We promise that it is our desire to see more housing, both market rate and affordable, built across Long Beach and to adopt a policy such as an inclusionary housing ordinance that will support community diversity and mixed income housing. Housing clearly necessary to provide seniors, homelessness, reentry, population and other numerous groups. Tonight, I speak on behalf of those unable to attend this hearing. The single mothers who worked two jobs to support their families. A man who has to choose between paying for the groceries and keeping the lights on. The three families cramped into a two bedroom apartment and the people sleeping in their cars and storefront entryways. In our parks, we cannot continue to put our fears ahead of someone else's suffering. Nor can we continue to be immune to what is going on around us. Overcrowded housing. Increase in homelessness. Unaffordable rent should not be acceptable for our city. We can do better. That being said, I have a few minor changes that are necessary to be successful in the district as a community for years to come. Here's my change. For the record, I'm Pacific Coast Highway between Pacific Avenue and Cedar. I am requesting that the o d low density be extended along PCH from Pacific to the east side of Cedar Avenue, and that the height be increase from five stories to seven stories. Additionally, I would like to expand the SC minus M area along PCH northward by two parcels from the west side of Cedar to the west side of Magnolia. And finally, I would like to announce as well as part of my commitment and to the record, to work with the regular residents and the city staff in conjunction with Mayor Robert Garcia and local stakeholders to create a vision and a specified plan to the Rigley village in the future. This plan will create Wrigley, the village that we as a community has dreamed of. We in the six districts a great increase density with midtown specified plans. And we have gone further and increased density across the district in other areas. And I believe that in the future we may find that this plan did not do enough to in other areas of the city. So in saying that, I would like to use this as a quote. When you talk about the compassion is not allowed to be losing. When you do, a passion is not about losing. It is about deciding that the other person has just made it just as much right to be as happy with the end result as you do. So I tell you, with our district here in the sixth District, most people think only about the crowdedness that we have there. You guys, a lot of you look at we in the audience, we don't have many people here speaking up on what they would like to do because that's the type of situation I have in the sixth District. But I think what we know, what we have to do, we must build. But in building, we want to make sure that we take care of those individuals who are not able to speak up for themselves tonight. And I want to thank my staff very much for the hard work that they did on this item. And thank you again for listening and.
Speaker 0: For good councilmember. Next up is going to be Ranga.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor, for passing the baton. Thank you, Judy. And I want to thank my fellow council members here for their comments. Very well-put, very thoughtful. And I certainly agree with some of your adjustments into your into your land use element plans, because, you know, your district's best, just like like I know mine. So I want to thank the community for coming out today and sharing their thoughts. Obviously, it's important that we listen and we incorporate some of your ideas. I don't have a whole lot of changes because a lot of the changes that I have that are in the land use element for the seventh District have been taken care of. We did it individually. I met with community representatives from each of the areas. We incorporated some of those changes into the maps that are presented today. But I do want to share a little bit of the chronology so that we can you better better understand I don't have the overlays such as my my colleague did, but I can give you a little bit of a summary. We had we met with staff several times to talk about some of the concerns, whether the original maps, one of the original proposals that I heard at one time was no height limits. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Slow down. We got to have some height limits because there are some areas that would not be recommended to have no high limits where we would be building developments that would be above five stories, seven and eight and nine stories going to have that. We also had some pop ups, and I want to commend staff for their availability to hold informational meetings and participate in community pop ups, where we had some focus groups and people came in and shared their ideas. So in talking to the residents and talking to start to staff, we made some adjustments along the maps as we as we talked about the changes that were there. For example, on the Wrigley and the Wrigley Del Mar and Wrigley Heights neighborhoods. We covered a whole quarter mile radius around the World Station, which was previously identified as a transit oriented development place type. And we change that now to reduce it to a neighborhood, to a fountain, contemporary neighborhood. So it's a it's been reduced. We also met with staff to identify in the West Palm Beach area to identify portions of Santa Fe that would be reduced from neighborhoods during development to found in contemporary place types. And this will much better work with for that for the West Palm Beach and the Santa Fe Corridor. Also concerns about the neighborhood residents in the California Heights area. We change portions of the industrial area just south of Wardle and east of Cherry, and we changed that from industrial to O'Neil Industrial to reflect neighborhood good service regarding air pollution. So we lowered the intensity of the industrial to industrial to new industrial and also to reflect the impacts that they would have in the historic district, which is which is kill heights. Also in the cafeteria, we changed the Cherry and Wardlow shopping center from a neighborhood serving mixed use to a community commercial. We also looked at and heard residents concerned about the Heights Long Beach Boulevard. And so we are just at the maximum height for Long Beach Boulevard between the 405 and San Antonio Road to a consistent five stories along that route and provide a height transition to the rear of those buildings better but the neighborhoods to three stories . We also reduced the height limits at the Springdale. Rates project from multi while with multifamily but from five stories to three stories. And we adjusted the area at 33rd and cherry, which is close to and attached to the California Heights neighborhood from industrial to neo industrial as well. And then we changed the designation of the areas near Wilshire Spark Wellsprings Park to Neal Industrial. So we've been able to do that and we did it before the plans went out so that so that once our residents got to see the Met, it was something that we already had worked on and we already had come to agreement in terms of what we wanted to have there. Another area that, that that I need to our staff is that it's been brought up that when you look at zip codes and we look at the impacts that the so typical to have in terms of public health and air quality. West Long Beach has had well, the seventh District has 1.6 acres of open land per 1000 residents. So this begs the question about this development, these these Alawi plants. And are we looking at a county for additional greenspace as we go along with these were these plants.
Speaker 11: Thank you for the question, Councilman. The question is regarding as new development comes in and certainly the west side and central Long Beach is significantly poorer compared to the east side of the city. So understanding those facts that the question is how do we provide adequate open space to the residents? So it's a multi-pronged approach. So the first is the design of the project itself. And there are we have policies and as part of the review process as well, making sure that a new building, whether it's a small apartment building or a big apartment building, has onsite amenity space. So that could be a roof tag. That could be an exercise room, that could be a play space at the ground floor, making sure there's onsite amenity space. So that's on site. Number two means making sure that they pay Quimby fees. So Quimby fees or park fees that every new development in this city pays. And we have had success. It's not actually us. We just collect the money and then we have the money over to Park Rec and Marine. And while we haven't been able to do brand new huge parks, we have been able to do small parks throughout the park, part of the city where we utilize underutilized lots or maybe were able to acquire a property that's being sold at auction. So what we're trying to do is provide a mini space onsite as well as expand our park presence in our park, poor parts of the city which are central and west Long Beach. So we are very conscious of that issue and there's actually a specific policy and the land use element in front of you which directs that the city, as they're doing their capital planning and as they're there planning, that we apply resources not exclusively, but give priority to those areas that are underserved today as we create new green space and other investments in our community.
Speaker 4: Thank you for that update. And I'm glad that at least you are looking at it. And I think it's very important for us to look at the equity issues in terms of parks around the city and especially we're not talking about the seventh District. So I have a few changes, not many to add to this. I would like to direct staff to reduce the height on the south side of Wardlow from the four, four, four five freeway going west to the Metro Blue Line for properties in the transit oriented development, low density place type from four stories to three stories on the following properties to 50. West Wardlow Road to zero two. Wardlow Road 150. West Wardlow Road 100 East Wardlow Road. And then there are some properties here with no addresses, but I can identify them as RPN 7204014025. RPN 7204014024. APRN 7204014013. AP in 720401412. AP in 720401414011 and Apne 420400906. And I also want to limit the height for an ACL place type on Locust Avenue to two stories. We like to limit the heights of MF Bar L Place type below lottery rules park at two stories, limit the height on Spring Street to three stories and maintain heights to south of California Heights, the historic neighborhood at no more than three stories. So those are my recommendations. Obviously, if there is more clarity that needs to be made certain to give up.
Speaker 11: Control, then we have most of your motion. But I'm going to ask you to repeat. You talked about the properties on Mortlock Road and there were a number of apps and thankfully we don't need to repeat any of that. Then you moved on to Locust Road and if you could start.
Speaker 4: There.
Speaker 11: And go through those one more time so that we make sure we.
Speaker 4: Reflect.
Speaker 11: Your direction correctly.
Speaker 4: To limit the heights on Locust Road to two stories. Okay, limit the heights of Los Altos Park right below Los Lunas Park to two stories. I live at the height on Spring Street to three stories and then in the Heights area, maintain the heights at no more than three stories.
Speaker 11: Okay. Now I have almost everything other than and when you say maintain the heights at three stories and how heights is there is the heights historic district has a two storey height limit because it's single-family it's.
Speaker 4: The it's the area across from the south south of Wardlow Road, directly.
Speaker 11: South of Castle Heights, I believe right under said.
Speaker 4: Which is the business corridor basically I think you see. Thank you. And that's all I have here. There's a pause. I like to thank the residents of the seventh District. We're still here. The champions saying here to 12 teeth.
Speaker 8: Talk to me in Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. So I'll go. I want to also thank staff. I want to thank the members of the community who've been engaged in this process from the very beginning. And obviously it's been a long process. This is an awesome city and I want to thank my colleagues for their work on this as well. This is has not been an issue that any of us has taken lightly. Clearly, I want to just say that I got a good night's sleep last night in preparation for for tonight's meeting. And so I'm glad that you all are still with us. I want to, first of all, address the process. I'm going to have a few questions and then go into the motion for changes that that I'd like to see in my or my residence. I would like to see. First of all, I would like to address the process that we went through, considering the maps for the eighth District after we hosted the final citywide community meeting on Louie in October in the parking lot of the North Police Station. And it was one of the largest meetings of the four meetings in the community. I stayed there throughout the meeting and listened to the comments of my residents and many others who spoke at that meeting. I watched a planning commission meeting in December, listened to many of the public comments there, including some of the residents who have also spoken at the meetings in October. I've heard many of some of the some of the residents speak on multiple occasions on this issue after the Planning Commission voted to forward the elderly and urban design element to the council, and it was announced that it would be coming to the Council in March. I wanted to reach out to a diverse range of opinions and backgrounds from my district to get their thoughts. And I'll go into that. Later, I wanted to make sure that our outreach was broad and inclusive of communities and people that I did not have a chance to hear from, from previous community meetings, public meetings. I included a series of focus groups. I conducted a series of focus groups over several weeks with dozens of residents. Those included groups of teenagers, seniors, young adults, empty nesters, their business owners, community, commercial property owners, realtors, city commissioners and residents from about every area in the eight district. And during those focus groups, we had some great discussions. Many said that they learned viewpoints and learn things that they wouldn't have otherwise considered prior to understanding at Ulu and Dewey. And most were brand new to to to the Dewey process. Didn't even know it how the process worked. I wanted to be sure to listen to voice voices throughout my entire district and not just those heard regularly at community meetings, which I do appreciate those comments as well. We promoted transparency through our newsletter and shared information on the land use element numerous times in my office's newsletter. I've had the maps available in my office for review from our constituents in my field office, and I've invited folks on several occasions for their input and comments. We had an open door policy and so much so that that I heard from drop ins from from people in the third district and fifth district and fourth district who dropped in my office in Bixby both to to see the maps. To view the maps themselves. And to even offer comment. I also drove throughout the entire district looking at what was proposed for each corridor compared to what is currently there. And I engaged in conversation with neighbors on the street and even in our coffee shops as I normally do. I spent the weekend looking at the land use element in 1989 and reviewing that. And I can just tell you that it was it was striking how similar some of the comments and issues were 30 years ago and they are today. And I know Councilmember Rex Richardson will go into some of the the disparities that we are going to try to avoid this evening with the decision moving forward with the maps, particularly in a district. In my I can't say that I will. Many of the heights have been reduced along the corridors from what it was originally proposed last August, and I've listened to the comments of my constituents over the past several months, and I'm prepared to offer some additional modifications this evening based on the feedback and consideration, considering the multitude of opinions. Now, as a council member in a district representing a great constituency, my decision making processes are inclusive, balanced and consistent, and they have to be Long Beach. The city has been often characterized as a tale of two cities, and I think some of that was was characterized just tonight in some of the comments. It can also be argued that the eighth District is a microcosm of that description as the most as it is the most diverse district in a city. I believe in every way and definitely the most economically diverse in the city with the only country club and the largest subsidized public housing development in L.A. County, they are literally within walking distance. This diversity brings diverse interests and needs and a great responsibility to plan the plan for the future. My district is trained, changed dramatically just during my short six year tenure on the council, and I'm realistic that changes will continue over the next two decades. Let's keep in mind that some areas see the l'ue is as a as a problem or something scary, as a scary document. And other areas of our city can view this l'ue as an opportunity to actually improve the quality of life and economic development in neighborhoods. And then their neighborhoods have always welcome change and investment in my district, and I'll continue to do so. I believe complacency is never the answer, and the easiest decision that anybody can make sane is to say no. That said, I do have a couple of quick questions because I haven't heard any any mention and little mention has been about the founding and contemporary neighborhoods and the changes that will happen to those areas and to staff. So are we factoring in any potential new the potential new accessory dwelling units and residential areas as part of our new housing stock and the count moving forward?
Speaker 11: Thank you for the question, Councilman. So, yes, we did account for accessory dwelling units, including the ordinance that took effect a couple weeks ago here in the city of Long Beach. And we do estimate they'll be about 100 accessory dwelling units per year during the next couple of decades. So while those units are very important to the 100 families each year, that will have an additional housing choice, they don't represent a significant enough increase in the housing stock to, I guess, be statistically significant. But they're they're certainly very important to the individuals that are going to be housed and they are factored in. And that change will be occurring modestly, but will be occurring in our single family neighborhoods.
Speaker 10: So as I look at the map, it's pretty yellow in my district. That's correct. I would say most of the areas. And so looking at that map and I'm going to go some place with it. The next question is, are any of these neighborhoods, are they currently zoned under the current Dewey adopted in 1989 for for two story and areas that are one story homes.
Speaker 11: So our existing land use element doesn't have any height limits. It doesn't actually have very much detail about a lot of topics, which is part of the problem with the existing document. But the existing zoning ordinance which implements the plan does apply a two storey height limit on those single family areas today, regardless of whether there is a one story or two story home in those areas.
Speaker 10: So from planning staff, is there an expectation that with the new height limitations in these contemporary neighborhoods that there will the neighborhoods will actually add heights over the next 20 years? Do you expect to see a different type of phenomena?
Speaker 11: So certainly there will be homeowners that will remodel and add to their homes. We don't expect that phenomenon to change significantly as a result of this proposed action. And when you talk about I think there was a reference to sort of a two foot. An allowable height that's really going to come into play in a very small number of circumstances where you have a vacant lot or you have something that gets demolished and someone builds sort of a more contemporary home and it might have a different roofline than what we see in a historic home. But that's something that you might see on a block or two or three or 12, but not something that's going to change the character of those neighborhoods broadly.
Speaker 10: Well, so so much has been focused on the the the corridors and the transit corridors, obviously. And I didn't wanted to go there because I think I'm trying to make the point that just because it can happen doesn't mean it will happen. My next door neighbor can build a 2/2 story on their home.
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 10: So we know that they will.
Speaker 11: We know from the data, from the accessory dwelling unit so far, we know from development data throughout the city, most properties, the vast majority of properties will not develop because there is an existing improvement in the owner of that. Existing improvement wants to continue operating that that the owner, whether it's a home or an apartment building, an office building, there's a number of different factors they think about. And it's not just maximizing potential development, especially when you have an existing development. So what we're trying to do is create sufficient capacity knowing quite well that most properties will not redevelop. So on a given corridor you may look at a map and it may say five stories or four stories or three stories in it. It provokes a response. But that does not mean that there is going to be a five story box on every single property of that block. It means there is an opportunity on 1 to 3, however many may occur over time for those properties to redevelop and to go through the process, including the review of the design.
Speaker 10: I really appreciate you explaining that because I think there's there's just an emotional no reaction to when you see entire blocks and corridors colored in, you know, lavender or pink with high heights on them, that that you know, I think the reaction is that this is the way it's going to be throughout this entire corridor. And I just think that that is unrealistic expectation.
Speaker 11: That is absolutely unrealistic, yes.
Speaker 10: One of my questions, I think. Is there anything in the U.S. or the design side? I'm sorry to design standards that would guide a minimal size for a particular development. For example, a corridor is proposed three or four storeys, but the existing buildings along a block are one story. If the property owner on the block with the 25 or 20 or 50 foot wide property wanted to develop a three or four storey building under that under these proposed maps, is there anything besides the proposed height limits that would guide what would be allowed for that development? Again, what I'm asking is, are we are we opening a door for cracker boxes to be along corridors?
Speaker 11: No. So there's two ways we deal with that. The first is in the land use element and the urban design element. So within the urban design element, there's a specific strategy. It's identified as strategy number 14, and that addresses transitions. But that's not just transitions between different zones or different place, types of transitions between all the new development, between higher and lower heights, between residential and other uses. So transition doesn't mean the development can't happen, but it means you may have a step back, you may have a wedding cake approach, you may have a buffer area that's landscaped. So that's sort of number one, and that's policy built in the plan. But number two is how we actually implement and we implement through the zoning code. So in the zoning code today and what we will do going forward is we look at lot size and lot width and we do what's called a graduated approach. So in order to maximize your height or your density, you cannot do that on a small lot. You need to acquire a 20,000 square foot lot. It needs to have significant width to it at a 100 200 foot of width. Okay. So that's number two. And then we have in it an additional safety valve for the example you brought up, which are what I would call the very small lots. So if you have a lot that's less than 50 feet and width, in addition to all your other entitlements, you have to get what's called a narrow lot entitlement and that's a specific site plan review approval. Looking at that specific issue about not creating sort of a funky shotgun design due to the nature of the small lot and it's really meant to encourage either that development did not happen on that particular site because not a good site for development or for them to explore acquiring an adjacent site so that they can do a higher quality development and not just use the small lot. So we have those safety valves in place to prevent exactly that poor quality that you're asking about.
Speaker 10: Okay. So clearly our design standards are going to be more important than ever moving forward, and that's it. I know we are engaged in a plan called the Uptown Plan and for most of Uptown. I want to thank the several community members who I have recommended to work with staff and hopefully the process is open to anyone who wants to be engaged in that process moving forward. And so that plan, can you explain how that will drive this?
Speaker 11: Absolutely. So we know it's a big city and we know every portion of the city is different. But we know also that there is a great amount of need and opportunity. And the uptown area, which is a large portion of Council District eight and also includes Council District nine, the post mayor's district. So we worked we acquired grant funds from Sky. And what we're doing is a comprehensive community vision process and then writing zoning regulations for the uptown area, looking at commercial corridors and industrial areas and areas of change. So we've just started that effort. That's a year long community effort with opportunities for every community, organization and every individual to be part of that process. And that is step zero and step one of implementing this land use element, because that's where we're going to start. We're going to start in uptown and we're going to work with that community to partner with them and make sure they get their vision for that community realized. And then we're going to take those lessons learned and apply them as we move into other parts of the city after we've we've completed that work. And in your district and the vice mayor's district.
Speaker 10: I thank you for explaining that. I will say that I've heard the term unintended consequences regarding the elderly and moving forward, and certainly we want to avoid that. But I would say that the best way to avoid unintended combat consequences is to actually have a plan. And I think. We need to move forward with a plan this evening. But that said, unintended consequences come with just about every policy that we engage in as policymakers. We try to be reasonable. We try to be smart and and bring in as many stakeholders as process in the process to avoid that. And so, with that said, I am prepared to make just a few adjustments. Bear with me. So. And before I do that, I did want to just just get some clarification. The the multi-story, multiple family, residential, moderate density I'm sorry, neighborhood serving centers or corridor moderate density definition that doesn't just include housing or mixed use housing, does it?
Speaker 11: No. So that designation, which is a mixed use designation, allows for a mix of uses. So you might have a apartment building, you might have a traditional retail one story retail center, you might have a mixed use building in those areas where more height is allowed, where you have ground floor retail and you have residential above, you might have an office use. It's flexible within a full range of uses, basically uses that are not industrial in nature.
Speaker 10: So like I said, most of the focus has been on housing. But this land use development or land use element can also improve economic development in certain corridors with office space and companies like laser fish. Correct as a multistory.
Speaker 11: So so thank you for that Councilmember. And, you know, we may have spent a lot of time in the presentation talking about housing because there were a lot of public questions about housing. But accomplishing the city's employment goals and expanding employment opportunities for all Long Beach residents is just as an important and big part of this plan as the housing related goals.
Speaker 10: So I wanted to go there because I am looking at this from the lens of also hopefully creating economic development and jobs in our community as well. And that when I say I welcome the investment in my district, I welcome that type of investment as well. So I'd like to make a motion to direct staff to make the following changes to the maps in my district. I'd like to add to this. For the neighborhood serving place type along Long Beach Boulevard, from Cher Park to the northern edge of my district, please reduce the height from four stories to three stories along Market Street between Long Beach Boulevard and Lime Avenue. For the area currently shown as Neighborhood Services Place type with a four story maximum, please reduce the height to three stories. Additionally, within that same area on both sides of Plymouth Street, east of Long Beach Boulevard, over to Locust Street. Please change the place type from neighborhood serving to multi-family low density place type and reduce the height from maximum to a maximum of three stories. Along Atlantic Avenue from Lewis Street to South Street at the northern edge of my district. Please reduce the height maximum from four stories to three stories. Also, please change the place type for this eastern portion of the Neighborhood Service Center corridor from Lime Avenue to Harlem Olive. For residential properties only, remove this from neighborhood serving place type and make it founding and contemporary neighborhood place type with a two store story height maximum . For those existing commercial properties along market. Please keep those in the neighborhood serving place type. Along South Street reduce the height limit from four stories to three stories, from dairy to Walnut along South Street, east of Paramount. Please change from in contemporary to multifamily moderate with a four story height limit. Along Orange Avenue from 52nd Street to South Street. After reviewing the existing build conditions with staff along the corridor and considering that there is already various apartment complexes existing, I believe it would be best to continue allowing multifamily housing opportunities there. Therefore, please increase the height to three stories and change the place type on both sides of Orange Avenue from Jackson Street to South Street. Two multifamily residential low density south of Jackson Street down to 52nd Street. Please make that neighborhood serving corridor a low density place type for the northeast corner of Orange and 52nd Street in the same area along Market Street from Orange Avenue to Lewis Street. Given the existing mix of commercial and multifamily development, please change the place type from founding and contemporary to neighborhood, serving low density with a three storey height limit. For the area bounded by 52nd Street, Mountainview Longest Boulevard in L.A. River, which is currently proposed at multi-family with a four story maximum. Please revise the map to reduce the proposed density from four stories to three stories. Just look for the area near Dooley School on Long Beach Boulevard. Have a few changes. I'm directing staff to reduce the height in the two multi-family place types on both sides of Long Beach Boulevard, just south of Dooley School, from four stories to three stories. Additionally, west of Long Beach Boulevard, between Delamar and 49th Street, please reduce the heights to a two story maximum. I am directing staff to change the place type within that area between Peace Street and Del Amo to go from a multifamily to a found in a contemporary neighborhood. The remaining should stay multifamily place type for the parcels where existing multifamily developments exist today at the location of Rosarito School, north of Los Altos Park. Please reduce to two story maximum and change the multifamily to founding and contemporary place type. Along San Antonio Drive, just east of Bixby Park. For the small portion on the other side of San Antonio, there's currently proposed that Neighborhood Service Center. Four Story High limit, please. Reduced to three stories heights. North of San Antonio, where the alley behind Trader Joe's, west of Elm. An alley west of Atlantic from San Antonio to Freeland State Street. Please change the place, type to multifamily, and reduce the height to a three storey height maximum. Along a Long Beach Boulevard from Bixby Road to southern side of San Antonio. Please reduce the height limit from four stories to three stories for both the neighborhood serving and multi-family place types there. Maintain Long Beach Boulevard, a four story high limit from size San Antonio, just south of 44th Street, and increase the height limit for the property at 43 Long Beach Boulevard to seven stories. And that is an existing seven storey building. On the western side of Atlantic Avenue from 45th Street. Halfway down the block along Atlantic, where existing residential developments ends and commercial uses begin. Please change from neighborhood serving to founding and contemporary neighborhood place type with a two story maximum. And lastly along Atlantic from 51st Street to market, reduce the proposed high limit from four stories to three stories. Those are my changes. I want to thank the staff for your indulgence. I want to thank my residents for their their input. I did take into consideration to the process that I wasn't invited to in and the map that was presented earlier. And with that, I would just say that, again, the guide for my decision making in this process was, number one, transparency, but consistency and balance. I don't think the 1989 process was as consistent and balanced as we are today when it comes to the eighth District. There was and there's people who have been around a long time have talked about the differences and the dichotomy between how north of the Alamo is treated versus South the dilemma. I have sought to be consistent with my approach all the way through the eighth District instead of being a tale of two districts. We're going to be one consistent district. Thank you very.
Speaker 3: Much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And, you know, being District nine, you are typically the last to speak. But thank you all who are still here. I don't know if the firefighters are here, but they did a great job. The fire marshal with that, you know, let's give him a round of applause. I'm not there anymore. But with the public comment, the fire marshal did a great job. Thanks to everyone who's paid attention, this process, I know there's still people at home watching this process because they're texting me. So. So thank you all for engaging. I know we have a diversity of opinion in our city, and that's democracy. And we have to, you know, politics, all parties and all that. The saying all politics is local, right? Is your neighborhood. All right? I own my neighborhood. I'm proud of my neighborhood. And I would I would be just as engaged and concerned as you. So I won't paint you in broad strokes. Our community is very diverse, and the same goes to the points of view. And I hope that you don't paint certain areas of town in broad strokes either. So it's a dialog. I want to start. I want to start. And what I'm going to do is because there's you know, there's a lot of people here who I don't know that they have the right picture of of North Long Beach. So I'm going to start by describing and introducing you to District nine. So it's a great community. It's a community with a lot of investment taking place, $250 million of public and private investment taking place right now from the newest, largest, most modern library in our system. The Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library are our most modern and largest fire fighter station, our city fire station 12 $130 million investment into Jordan high schools modernization with the measure K improvements. And just this past weekend we broke ground on the Halton Park Community Center, which is the only community center project that we're really proud of. Almost 100 years in the making community and a project funded by measuring, we are home to very historic manufacturing space. For example, many people don't know that we built Teslas in North Long Beach. We've got to see. The only Toyota plant west on the West Coast is in District nine in North Long Beach. We've got a bunch of aerospace supply chain manufacturers like Weber Metals and other facilities right here in North Long Beach. We're a bedroom community. Someone here spoke and mentioned the neighborhood who was triangle as a neighborhood where I owned a home eight years ago. Who is triangle that's 77% homeownership and who is just it's some of the highest levels of home ownership in some of these precincts and census tracts across the whole city, 77%. So it's a great community, but there are changes that need to take place. You've got outdated land use on corridors. Most recently, we had a conversation here City Council about outdated motels. City Council has done a lot of work about overconcentration of liquor stores, blight on our corridors, vacant lots and things like that. That all signal that we, the neighborhoods and the business corridors, they don't they don't they don't match great neighborhoods, lack of investment, our business corridors. So frankly, we're about the business of change in North Long Beach. And we have to be. Because some things need to change. We're not lucky enough. Someone said the term lucky. We're not lucky enough to just say no or no change. That's not a luxury that we have. There are some things that need to change. I want to thank Councilmember Urunga for bringing up the open space issue. The data tells us what is it that in north and west Long Beach you have one acre per thousand, one acre of open space per thousand people in population in north and west Long Beach. In other areas you have as much as 16 to 17 acres per thousand people in the same city, one acre per thousand, 16 acres per thousand in the same city. And so the point there is that and there's and frankly, there's, you know, you've got other issues needs to be addressed. Like, for example, there's, you know, Colin Powell Elementary School. It's surrounded on four sides by industrial and trucking. You don't have a single bank in the entire district, a lack of retail. You've got two freeways that contribute to poor air quality. And. And the original maps had some of the highest density levels outside of the downtown take place there. Frankly, increased density shouldn't be in the places, shouldn't be placed in areas that are least equipped to support healthy lifestyles. Health has to be the lens that we look at this from. We shouldn't look at the areas that are most overburdened, least invested in infrastructure and say, let's place the most density there. It doesn't make sense, but there are opportunities. And you either I do support and I'm very proud of, for example, new industrial place types. I think this is brilliant. This encourages cleaner, more modern industrial uses and allows us to address problem sites. For example, there's a 75 year old oil refinery in North Long Beach called the Edgington refinery. Most people know it as Paramount Petroleum, but it hasn't been Paramount Petroleum for three years. It's been closed down. This change allows us to facilitate the types of investment that looks forward and leans forward, looks at things like e-commerce, cleaner jobs, clean tech, allows for an emerging economy, allows us to think about this industrial space in North Long Beach, not as someone you want, somewhere you want to avoid, but rather an opportunity for investment like we see happening at Douglas Park. That's the kind of investment and industrial that we need to be talking about. It will help to set a new design standard in our city. And so I completely support that. I want to say a few things about history because there is some context here. So, you know, I came across this article and I won't say how I came across it, but it is this an L.A. Times article of December 13th, 1990. It says Multi-story housing issue touches off debate and is talking about Long Beach, L.A. Times. And what's interesting is it quotes the mayor and the planning commission and it says here, Anthony taught us, taught? Yeah, taught us. Twitter is Tortorici. 1990, I was in elementary school at a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission. You hear that joint meeting? So the conversation wasn't just council district. It was citywide, a joint meeting of City Council Planning Commission. This week, Long Beach officials. City officials must stop shoving high density housing in the center of town where parks and schools are already overloaded, where there is little community resistance. That's what the planning commissioner said. Our land use policy has turned into a political document that promotes economic segregation toward a reset. We've got to break that pattern. That was 1990. Then you had elected officials at the same meeting quoted here saying politicians risk being voted out of office if they don't listen to their constituents. If you put high density here, people like Les Robins or Ernie Kell will not be here long. They acknowledge the political realities of this issue. That was almost 30 years ago. Now, what was the result? Now, this is of that way of thinking is here are documents. These are documents pulled from the 89 land use update talking about two adjacent neighborhoods, North Long Beach and Bixby. This one's paramount and South Street is actually a neighbor. The map incorporates the neighborhood I live in here. And if you look at, you know, sort of in Bixby Knolls, it says design controls and architecture compared. This is a summary summary of neighborhood description and analysis. In Bixby, notices are architectural conformance. In the Bixby Knolls neighborhood should be considered mandatory. New infill developments must reflect the low residential scale which predominates. Material colors, textures must be conforming or compatible with surrounding buildings. Now, let's look. Less than a mile away. And the neighborhood that I live in. Design. Design controls and architectural compatibility. It says no significant, significant architectural styles are present in this area. Architectural conformance should only be mandatory with respect to scale. No standard whatsoever for development. 1989, this was the standard in 1989 and 1990. I'm not going to call the red line, but I'm to say a lack of focus and attention on certain areas of town. And we know we've seen the evidence. This is almost 30 years ago. This is a school system, this systemic institutional problems that we need to address. That's what it is. And we we have to look forward. What was consistent then and that's changed now is that there was a significant lack of engagement in that area then, and it's different now, but it's an example of when you don't have a seat at the table, you end up on the menu. We hear a lot. This is an example. That's not the city. That's not the kind of legacy I want to leave while I'm here on city council. We can't make decisions based on political fear. We have to think think about what people are going to look back and say 30 years from now. So, so, okay. So we talked about the history and I'm going to sort of narrow it down now. So there are some there are some some things that we should talk about now that's not kicking the can down the road and that are smart and our conversation based on dialog and reason rather than and quality of life, frankly, rather than fear. So I'm going to have some broader recommendations and I'm going to have some more district specific recommendations. So, one, I thought, Councilman, also going to say this point, I'm going to say this. If you look at the ten people on the dais, six of them got here for the same reason, education. Six people on this dais out of ten got this location, came to this area for education, whether it's college, frankly, whether it's Cal State, Long Beach, Cal State, Dominguez Hills. And we're a city that places a real focus on education. That's important. We talk about college promise. We talk about all of these different things, but we need to do a better job planning and counting for education. You've got areas like Colin Powell K through eight academy surrounded on four sides by industrial and trucking. You've got no community college presence whatsoever in North Long Beach, an area that needs career, technical education and a focus on higher ed. And it's the presence of 100,000 residents, a fifth of the city's population you've got. So what I'm going to ask for, in addition to what we do tonight, I'm going to ask staff to recommend the staff take a look at where we let staff take a look at the feasibility of establishing an educational element in our general plan. And so, by the way, this isn't a new idea. In fact, Hayward, California has an education element. This is a copy of Riverside, California's educational element. Fullerton has one. Plano, Texas National City, California. Carlsbad, California. A number of cities have this, and the purpose is to look at strategic and innovative partnerships that we do have establishes goals and policies to improve education and learning opportunities for all residents. And the goals can address early childhood education, access to child care, school performance, reputation, school facilities, amenities, college education, education to job, job, jobs, pathways, lifelong learning and libraries. So we do a lot of education, but we got to do a better job. And I think it should be a part of our planning efforts to plan for where our students going to go to school, where are they going to live, where higher education people going to live. So this is sort of separate, but I think it's come out through this issue. So. So, yeah, so that's one recommendation. Secondly, I support the conversation that came out that said maybe we shouldn't look at 20 years. We should look at a shorter period like five years. I support that. I support the annual updates, the planning commission biannual. I think Councilmember Gonzalez mentioned biannual or every two years at city council and council members can you know, at any point request that that planning commission update come to the city council at a study session. I support these things. But one thing I do want to add into this recommendation, when we do the update, when we do this update, we should take a look and report back on through an equity lens that looks at and this is similar to what Councilman Gonzalez talked about. But I want to talk specifically about investing into outreach into historically low participating groups, which include students, low wage workers and renters. And frankly, if we can, single parents, because they can't get down here to participate in these things and they have a lot of needs. So those are my broader recommendations. Finally, we'll get to District nine recommendations. So I followed this process when it was staff driven, then when it was in front of the planning commission. And, you know, I made a commitment to my residents that when it finally arrives in front of city council, I'm going to go engage every one of my neighborhoods. And that's what we did. So we broke into clusters. We broke Long Beach Boulevard into Starkey College Square, Coolidge Triangle and Longwood Association. We had three meetings there. We had brought all the neighborhoods along Atlantic Avenue together so that the Forest Park and Highland Park and thank them for coming together. And we talked about the changes on Atlantic Avenue. We brought all the neighborhoods together on Artesia Boulevard and South Street, which are Ramona Park, Hamilton, Grant Collins, the Collins St Francis Andy Street area, everyone around South Street, RTC. We brought them together. We went to the Mingus Pizza. We had pizza and and we worked it out and we talked about every single corridor. So I want to go through some of these some of these changes. So first, there's going to be a question. So what we did was essentially to summarize what we did was we recommended we fixed where there was misplaced density. We preserved neighborhoods. We addressed this issue of corridors not being congruent or reflecting the neighborhoods. We modernized our industrial space. We expanded commercial community commercial because we have a lack of banks and actual retail and commercial, and we place density in areas that make sense and help us achieve a public policy outcome. So the so I have one question and then I have some recommendations. So one with our Mr. Koontz, with our Uptown plan, there was a lot of conversation about in areas where it makes sense, portions of Artesia Boulevard Place, portions of Atlantic Avenue. Can we require that the ground floor to be exclusively retail on the ground floor?
Speaker 11: Thank you for the question, Mr. Vice Mayor. And I feel like we spent our quality time together at midnight, so some day we're going to.
Speaker 8: Mop the floor. After midnight, we're going.
Speaker 11: To have to do this meeting in reverse order from nine but down to one. But yes, so we have the opportunity, actually a unique opportunity. And Councilman Austin, in your district for the uptown process to come up with very specific regulations and we absolutely can require ground floor commercial uses. We want to make sure we get those uses correctly. Obviously, we don't need more liquor stores in your and CTA, but what we do need is what's missing, which are high quality restaurants, basic services, basic goods, banking for people to get. So we want to get that mix right. And it's it's not about what I think are, quite frankly, what you think. It's about getting that community feedback, which we don't have yet. But at the end of that process, we'll be able to to make those decisions.
Speaker 8: So, so just to be clear, because it's important that they ask this the ground floor and Atlantic, that's a focus to make it sort of our main street for uptown. We can require ground floor to be activated with retail. Absolutely. Thank you. Okay. Here are my changes. First, reduce the maximum height along Long Beach Boulevard corridor from 70th Street or the northern city. Limit down to Victoria Street to two stories. Revise the map to change the place type at Artesia Boulevard, west of the 17 Freeway from and from east of Atlantic Avenue. Intersections to both sides of Cherry Avenue from multifamily. Residential. Moderate to multi-family. Residential low. And reduce the height to three stories. So that's one particular portion of Atlantic Avenue where it doesn't make sense to go too moderate. Revise the map to change the place. Type at Artesia Boulevard, east of Atlantic Avenue, intersection to both sides of Cherry Avenue from neighborhood service serving center moderate to Neighborhood Service Center low and reduce the height to three stories. Revise the map to change the place. Type on Artesia Boulevard from cherry to Paramount from neighborhood serving center moderate to community CC community commercial and reduce the height to three stories. So this is the area adjacent to the neo industrial and really close to the freeway where we couldn't do housing anyway. So we're going to take that down and make it community commercial. Revise the map to reduce the height at Artesia Boulevard from Paramount to down to now the avenue from 5 to 4 stories on the north side and from 5 to 3 stories on the South Side, consistent with the Ramona senior apartments that have just been built . So we're going to have consistency on Artesia Boulevard on that portion. Revise the map to change the designation of properties along Atlantic Avenue, south of Artesia to 59th, from south of Artesia down to 59th Street from Neighborhood Service Center. Moderate density to neighbor now see low density and reduce the height on Atlantic Avenue between Artesia and 59th to three stories. Revise the map to change the place. Type at the eastern side of Linden Avenue from Harding Street to 59th, from neighborhood serving center moderate to most multi-family residential low and reduce the height to two stories. Reduce the height along South Street, west of Atlantic, from three stories to two stories. This is the area that's heading into default park. It should gradually, as it becomes more, you know, single family and park space, it should get lower. Reduce the height along South Street, east of Atlantic Avenue to Cherry Avenue from 4 to 3 stories. Revise the map to reduce the height to four stories at South Street, east of Cherry Avenue until Paramount Boulevard. It makes a lot of sense there. There's no single family residential, and there's some spaces that we need to redevelop in that area. Sort of old chop shops and things like that. On the east side of Cherry Avenue, from 2/5 on the east side of Cherry Avenue to 59th Street, revise the NSC, NSC Moderate designation of five stories to neon neo industrial at 45 feet in height justification there it's all industrial is industrial corridor. So we want to make sure that this is consistent with the neo industrial that's all that area. And then finally at South Street, east of Downey Avenue, where it's currently proposed in moderate five stories, want to change the place, type the community commercial. And the reason why is that's one of the where we have a retail shortage that's one of the only large shopping centers we have. You know, that's where L.A. Fitness, the new Starbucks and things like that are. And we want to we don't want to take away some commercial space that is an opportunity for retail. So those are my changes. Thank you very much. And that is the motion.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay. I would I'm I'm guessing it's the longest motion in the history of the city of Long Beach. I mean, it has to be. So I want to I do want to thank everyone I know. I want to turn this back to staff. And there may have a couple clarifying questions just to make sure that we have the motion correctly. I know that also before we vote, I want to make sure that Mr. Modica can also explain just from a timing perspective, I know that when the public can expect a kind of a full list, hopefully tomorrow, what the motion was, and then I know you have to work on some new maps as well. So can we go over your clarifying questions in the process?
Speaker 3: Mr. MODICA Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So we're almost done, I promise.
Speaker 4: So we wanted to.
Speaker 3: Clarify something that we heard a couple of councilmembers talk about was loud and clear. You want to be able to have some ability to have some regular reports and also to do kind of a major check in around five years. We want to make sure that we don't set a five year planning horizon because that would mean your general plan would expire and we would be out of compliance with state law. But we do hear loud and clear, you want to come back at five years. So we would suggest having an annual report that we would send to the Planning Commission and the Council detailing some of the things that are happening. And we have the data points here. Every two years we would come. Back and do a kind of a full on look. I think I heard that as a suggestion, and then we would set a target date for within five years for a major revisit of the general plan. The general plan would stay active until you've changed it. But at five years, we would really look at that to see do we need to open it up or can we keep going the way that we would? So if that if I'm not sure who to ask because there are a number of people mentioned that. But if that's the will of the council, we would include that is the motion.
Speaker 0: Be the make of the motion is basically Richardson. I do believe Councilwoman Pryce and Customer Gonzalez both had parts of that. So if we're okay with that as the of the motion.
Speaker 9: I'm okay.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry.
Speaker 9: I'm dying over here with my throat. I just want to clarify and ask you, Mr. Mota, to clarify that. When we do make a change, it's there's a several year process that goes along with it. And that's why that's why you're suggesting this five year check in. So it's not like we can come and tweak it and then it's effective the next day. Can you talk just a little bit about that? But that amendment is fine with me, absolutely.
Speaker 3: So that's part of it is this is a long range plan and it does take a long time to do the community outreach, to do the goal. Setting this plan to get to the day we are today took us 13 years, so we wouldn't want the next one to do 13 years, of course. But if we are setting a five year horizon, we need some check ins to know how much level of work do you want us to do in those five years? So we've got some time to plan for that too, and we'll do that during our kind of every two year check in. And then if you decide to really make wholesale changes, then you need to do the IR process and all of those lengthy can outreach and make sure that we're doing the community outreach correctly. So thank you for the question. I do want to mention.
Speaker 4: Before.
Speaker 0: You go to the we had one last question because from Durango on, if you could clarify, Mr. Modica, and then you can go into the kind of the schedule. Mr. RINGA.
Speaker 4: Thank you. During the commentary, there was a reference made to the equestrian trails and that there hadn't been anything appearing in the U.S. regarding that. Could you clarify?
Speaker 7: Yes, certainly. Councilman Urunga, I can speak to that. She mentioned about the the horse overlay zone. That overlay zone has been in the code for a number of years. It is still active. It is still effective. It is a very specific area and it identifies locations where in development standards for the keeping of horses. And what we also did in the land use element to supplement and to strengthen that what's currently in the zoning code is to have a policy that just recommends strengthening and maintaining that horse property. So there is no intention in this plan for that to go away. It will still be. It has been in effect for a number of years and it will continue to be a fact once this plan is adopted.
Speaker 4: I just for the record, I just want to read what it says on the page. 145 Under Westside and Wrigley Land Use Strategies Policy 11 it says respect and maintain the equestrian uses within Wrigley Heights and promote shared use and maintenance of the area trail system.
Speaker 2: That that is correct. Correct.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce, did you have another question?
Speaker 6: Report back, Mr. Modica, in the amendments there was included an equity report. Could we make sure that that is also included in the two year revisit?
Speaker 3: Yes, certainly. I did want to add there was a number, a number of things that were asked for us to do some additional research and feasibility. So we'll be looking at that for the ones that are easy and makes sense. We'll do those right away. For the ones that take some more timing or require budget or other things, well, they are a process and we can certainly talk about those in the one year or two year or you know, I don't think it'll take us five for those, but the one or two year.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Mr. Motor, just to continue your report.
Speaker 3: Yes. So where we go from here, so we understand now the main motion has been made and all of the changes so we as staff will be putting together for tomorrow will have a list of kind of everything that we've heard from you and that all that's in the motion right now. But we'll have that available. We know you're going to get public questions about what exactly happened and and that will all be written down.
Speaker 4: We hope to have that.
Speaker 3: As soon by tomorrow. And then that will all get translated into maps. So we will be creating another set of maps. We know everyone's a visual learner, a lot of people are visual learners, so everything will be in maps. We expect that to take about a week. And then again, we're really still kind of kicking off this process. While this is a big milestone now, we need to go back and do the air. Now that we have a program that you've set for us, that'll likely take about a year and you will see this again in about a year after we do the investment. No analysis to make some final determinations after you've seen the Environ. Take the.
Speaker 0: Time.
Speaker 3: Yes, sir.
Speaker 4: I heard you a year and a day. Got it. So and with that, I think we're good.
Speaker 5: We're good. All right. We're good, sir.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, there's a motion and a second on the master motion on the floor to adopt all the changes that were made individually by each member of the city council, as well as the staff recommendation, which is a two part recommendation, as it was read by the city clerk on both the the agenda item and also the funding to do the the second phase. Mr. Mason, miss anything?
Speaker 3: You are there.
Speaker 0: Okay, Members, go ahead and cast your votes on the motion.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you much. In case. And I want to thank you all for for being here. Believe it or not, we have a council meeting to start now. So we're going to continue on with the council. And I appreciate all before for coming out. And with that, we're going to move on to the council meeting. First item is actually a consent calendar. Can I can I get a motion any second from the consent calendar? | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and confirm the proposed General Plan Land Use Element and Urban Design Element PlaceType and Heights Maps, and direct staff to update the Program Environmental Impact Report; and
Increase appropriations in the Development Services Fund (EF 337) in the Development Services Department (DV) by $350,000, offset by funds available. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03062018_18-0200 | Speaker 0: Okay. There's a motion and a second to continue. Is there any public comment on the item that was pulled from the consent calendar? Seeing none, please. Members cast your votes. Motion carries. Item 16, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Prosecutor recommendation to use city prosecutor department budget savings from FY17 to increase appropriations in the city prosecutor department by 24,978.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And he, a mr. Harper was actually not feeling well. He wanted to actually stay, but he asked that we please support this recommendation. There's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment on this? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. We have item 17. I'm sorry. Public. I thought I did public comment. I did public comment. I didn't know Mr. going to do it. He did. Yeah, I think I did too.
Speaker 4: No really I.
Speaker 2: Ask to comment on.
Speaker 0: Okay. I thought I said if you want to comment, but let me let me let me go back and say anyone public comment then on the city prosecutor.
Speaker 4: See, I told you what. Public comment.
Speaker 0: Oh, you start with a general public comment. Oh, got it. That's that's that's what we were both talking about, different things. So before we go to item 17, let's see if there is a public comment issue. We had so much of it today. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to use City Prosecutor Department (CP) budget savings from FY 17, increase appropriations in the General Grants Fund (SR 120) in the City Prosecutor Department (CP) by $24,978 and in the General Fund (GF) in the City Prosecutor Department (CP) by $24,978 for the transfer of funds. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_03062018_18-0215 | Speaker 2: Who a code enforcement. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 18.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Austin Chair State Legislation Committee Recommendation to approve the recommendations of the State Legislative Committee from their March six meeting regarding SB.
Speaker 2: 827.
Speaker 1: And AB 21910.
Speaker 4: Unicorn.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Kathryn Austin, do you want to give a brief report?
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 10: So the state lands committee met earlier today. We brought back an item that was originally on the the council agenda a few weeks ago, A.B. 827, which is viewed as a an affront.
Speaker 4: To local control on many levels.
Speaker 10: We we held off on a decision a few weeks ago at the request of the author.
Speaker 4: That.
Speaker 10: He was going to make amendments to to the bill. And he asked us to hold off on voting until those amendments were made.
Speaker 4: Those amendments.
Speaker 10: Went into print.
Speaker 4: Actually yesterday. And they don't look like the anything that that the city of.
Speaker 10: Long Beach can support at this time for for many reasons. Primarily, it infringed upon our local control. And so the.
Speaker 4: State led committee took a vote this afternoon to officially oppose.
Speaker 10: HB, SB 87.
Speaker 4: As well as instruct or a lobbyist in Sacramento to to watch that bill very, very carefully.
Speaker 10: And make sure that.
Speaker 4: They articulate our strong opposition. And so with that, I would ask that the city council support.
Speaker 10: The recommendation of the state large committee on that bill.
Speaker 4: And there was another bill.
Speaker 10: Regarding researching.
Speaker 4: O'Donnell's bill to research shark activities along our beach.
Speaker 10: Beaches right now, which is very important.
Speaker 3: As well.
Speaker 10: Just so we love a unanimous council support of our state ledge committee's recommendation.
Speaker 0: Catherine Bongiorni. And your second.
Speaker 6: I just want to say that I really appreciate the process. I know that oftentimes things come to council where amendments are expected and there.
Speaker 2: Can be a rush to approve or reject or support or don't support.
Speaker 6: And so I really appreciate that the council took the time to send it to State Ledge and that we went through the process and opened the door so that we could at least have some possibility of support from the state. It's unfortunate that Senator Wiener wasn't able to make any recommendations that met our needs, but I really want to encourage this Council to stick to processes that go through committee for all state and federal legislative items. And I really appreciate Councilmember Austin, the chair of the committee, for his work in supporting this process that I felt very passionate about. So strong opposition to these bills.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. Super. Now.
Speaker 8: I just like to weigh in and thank Councilman.
Speaker 4: Austin Alcala for his leadership on this.
Speaker 8: I think we learned so much more about Sacramento going through this process and it was very helpful. So thanks for leading this round.
Speaker 0: Is there any public comment on this state large item saying that please cast your vote?
Speaker 5: Exactly, because I'm sorry, the motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we're going to go ahead and do the any second public comment period. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to, subject to prior review and consideration by the State Legislative Committee, approve the recommendations of the State Legislative Committee from their March 6, 2018 meeting regarding SB 827 (Weiner) and AB 2191 (O'Donnell). | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0141 | Speaker 1: Okay. Okay. We also have two fairly quick hearings that we have to do. So we'll do those before the agenda items and they should go by pretty fast, the first hearing. Madam Clerk, can we please read that hearing?
Speaker 2: I am one is a report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an entertainment permit with condition on the application of On the Rocks Bar and Grill, located at 5755 is Pacific Coast Highway for Entertainment Permit without dancing district three. And it does require an an oath works. Of those wishing to testify, please stand up and raise your right hand. You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the court now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God
Speaker 6: . Thank you. Mr. Modi could take us away.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Vice Mayor, for this item. We will have a staff report by Bret Jaquez, our business license officer. Good evening, honorable vice mayor and members of the city council. Tonight you have before you an application for entertainment without dancing for on the Rocks Bar and grill located at 5755 East Pacific Coast Highway, operating as a restaurant with alcohol in Council District three. All of the necessary departments have reviewed the application and have provided their recommended conditions as contained in the hearing packet, as well as the police department stand ready to answer any questions council may have. And that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Do we need to go to the the applicant before we go to public comment? No. Okay. Any public comment on this item saying none. We're going to close it and bring it back behind the rail. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 3: I think there is someone who wants to speak, but maybe he didn't know. Sir, are you here to speak on the side?
Speaker 6: No, he's on the next time answering questions. That's your on the next item, I believe.
Speaker 4: Oh.
Speaker 3: Next item. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. I ask my colleagues to support this item. This has been a very welcomed addition to the third district in terms of a business. They're responsible business owners. And my family and I visit there often and have found them to be very cognizant of the issues and the surrounding community. So I'm grateful that there will not be dancing here because that probably wouldn't be appropriate for this location. But I do welcome the live music and wish them the best things.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Mongo.
Speaker 5: I'm very excited to have this joining the Long Beach area. A lot of the neighbors actually in the fifth district used to drive to their other location. And so we have taken up a new love for the third district in that many of us go over there and visit. And I've been so fortunate as to also run into other council colleagues and enjoy the food there. So if you have not had the opportunity to visit, please take the time to go to On the Rocks Bar and Grill off of PCH if they receive approval tonight, which I hope they will.
Speaker 6: Thank you, members. Please cast your vote. Every.
Speaker 2: Councilman Andrews motion carries. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of On the Rocks Bar and Grill, 5755 East Pacific Coast Highway, for Entertainment Without Dancing. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0142 | Speaker 2: Councilman Andrews motion carries.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Hearing number two, please.
Speaker 2: Hearing item choose report from financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing and grant an entertainment permit with conditions on the application of Uptown Bar and Grill, located at 2421 East Artesia Boulevard for Entertainment Without Dancing District nine. It does require an.
Speaker 6: Vacuous overview of.
Speaker 2: You, and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.
Speaker 6: Thank you. This year starts presentation.
Speaker 1: So for this item we will also have a short staff report by Bret Yuka, served by business license officer. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. Tonight you have before you an application for Entertainment Without Dancing for Venus Entertainment Inc during business hours. Uptown Bar and Grill located at 2421 East Artesia Boulevard, operating as a restaurant with alcohol in Council District nine. All of the necessary departments have reviewed the application and have provided their recommended conditions as contained in the hearing packet, as well as the police department stand ready to answer any questions council may have. And that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Is there a public comment on this item? Okay. Sing. No, we'll take it back behind the rail. So I'm making the motion here and just to give a little bit of background. So this space, this space was I think it was called Flamingo Gentlemen's Club, something like that years ago. And so this operators stepped forward years ago, released the the, you know, gentleman entertainment permit in exchange for becoming a restaurant and bar. And so they've they've done it done well, but they need to, you know, sort of in order to thrive, make some tweaks. So I'm supportive of the conditions that are here. And so I'm going to support the item tonight. This recommendation, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: I'm with you.
Speaker 6: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 5: I'm excited that this bar owner is also trying to lift up a bar in my district that's been having some challenges. And so I look forward to supporting this tonight.
Speaker 4: And a future item in in.
Speaker 5: The fifth District where she'll be able to do.
Speaker 4: The same thing.
Speaker 6: Thank you, members. Please cast your vote. I'm yes. Wow.
Speaker 2: Tasmania Mango Council member Andrews. Motion carries.
Speaker 6: Thank you. And will take up consent.
Speaker 0: We did.
Speaker 6: We did consent. Great.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. We have completed the two hearings. We're going to go ahead. Right into the the regular agenda. And so, Madam Clerk, if you can, please start by beginning with item 22, which is the commission appointments. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of Venus Entertainment, Inc., dba Uptown Bar and Grill, 2421 East Artesia Boulevard, for Entertainment Without Dancing. (District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0161 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. We're moving on to item 21, please.
Speaker 2: Item 21 is a communication from Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pierce, Councilman Austin and Vice Mayor Richardson. Recommendation to add language to the state and federal legislative agendas to support legislation that improves working conditions for port truck drivers, requires city attorney to explore options to support regulatory enforcement efforts and request to harbor and Thailand's Committee and the law meet Harbor Commission to hold hearings on the trucking crises and misclassification of employees at the ports.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. I mentioned at the state of the city earlier this year that we would be taking up this issue in this year because it was very important to the success of our port here in Long Beach, as well as our port complex. I want to just begin by, of course, thanking the council members that are have already signaled support of this item, and that includes the Councilwoman Gonzalez and Councilwoman Pierce that represent the Port of Long Beach and the two chairs of our both federal and state legislative committees of where this issue is currently in front of and where there will be significant debate on later this year. We're probably all aware that we have an amazing port. In fact, to 2017 was the best year on record for the port of Long Beach when it comes to cargo. We're really proud of the incredible work investments that have happened at the port. We were also aware that there currently is billions of dollars under construction right now at our port complex, and this includes the amazing bridge that we're building to welcome the larger ships. This includes our new rail projects that are going in across the port. And this, of course, includes infrastructure projects to ensure that our amazing workers at the docks, those that are working the docks, those are coming in and out of the port, have the infrastructure to do their work and to move goods in and out of our ports. It's also true that about 40% of America's goods, so 40% of everything that we're wearing or go to when we go home and see in our homes comes in and out of the ports of Long Beach in Los Angeles. So they're incredible engines of economic activity this year already. The port is off to a great year and may even break some more additional records. And so there's no question that the port economy will continue to boom. We are at a at a point, though, that both port leadership industry experts agree that we do have one major unresolved issue at the port that needs to be fix. And that's the current trucking system that we have at our port complex. The current trucking system that we have, quite frankly, is unsustainable. We have long wait times that force truckers to work long hours and limits their ability to make adequate number of trips per day to make a living. That also hurts those that are trying to get their goods from here across the country and certainly those trucking companies as well. And it's important to note that there's actually a lot of great trucking companies out working at the port. Some of them might be here tonight. We have some great both large and independent trucking firms in this industry that are doing a great job of moving goods and supporting their those that work for them every single day. But we also have a situation at the port where there are many trucking companies that, quite frankly, are taking advantage of the workers. It's important that good firms have the ability to put to pay appropriate wages and that they not be undercut by others who are not paying their employees properly. It's clear to me and to many others that truck drivers at the Port of Long Beach are often misclassified as independent contractors, which results in them working poverty level wages and denies them the protections guaranteed by state and federal laws. Now, the California Labor Commissioner has recently received more than 900 complaints regarding misclassification of truckers at the ports and upheld more than 500 claims and has awarded millions of dollars in fines and restitution at the ports because of this very issue. The Commission has fined companies millions of dollars for misclassifying and underpaying truck drivers working at our ports. Our truck drivers, who are working incredibly long hours and who are trying to feed their families, deserve the dignity of a living wage. USA Today on this issue and other outlets have published numerous stories in recent months which detail some of the abuses that are going on in the trucking industry and describe the working conditions for truck drivers in really poor and poor ways. We probably all read these reports. And again, I want to reaffirm that this we are not talking about all trucking companies or all independent truck driving firms. We are talking about those that are they're really taking advantage of their workers. I personally have had a chance to meet and talk to many of these truck drivers and their families firsthand. Many of them live in Long Beach. They are our neighbors and they're working hard every single day to move goods in and out of the port. The city of Long Beach in the Port of Long Beach are booming and we couldn't be more proud. It's time that we work with our state and federal counterparts to identify the urgent solutions needed to address these issues, and that will allow our hardworking truck drivers to move our goods in and out of the port, make a living wage, and have basic worker protections. This I. Tonight, we'll do three things. The first is it will align our language so that our both our state and federal legislative agendas will support legislation that is has either been submitted or is about to be submitted. On this port related issue of misclassification, there is already legislation in Congress that we probably are all aware of, and I've asked the federal alleged committee to please take that issue up. And as early as the next day or two, there will be major state legislation in front of us in Sacramento that addresses this issue directly. And I'm also asking our state legislative committee to also please take up this issue. Those committees are headed up by Vice Mayor Richard Richardson and Councilmember Al Austin. I'm also asking in this request to request the city attorney to work directly with the California labor commissioner and the attorney general's office to explore options to support regulatory enforcement efforts. And I'm requesting our Harbor Entitlements Committee and the Long Beach Harbor Commission to independently hold hearings on this trucking issue. It really is a crisis and on misclassification of employees at our ports. I've been working with the city attorney to ensure that this item aligns with recent case law and some of the restrictions that both the Port of Long Beach and Los Angeles have due to cases that have been in front of this city, and, of course, that we're all aware of in the last few years. And so we've been working hand in hand on on this item. I want to thank the coauthors and the rest of the council for hearing this item tonight. And it is really time that we begin to address this issue for our truck drivers. And so with that, I want to thank those that are here, and I want to turn this over to a few people that want to add to that. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Yes. I first want to thank everybody for being here. I know it's been a long time coming. Discussing this issue on multiple levels, trying to figure out what the best solution is for Long Beach. And I really feel confident that we have a step in the right direction. I want to thank Mayor Garcia. I know his leadership in this and making sure that it came to the agenda and we had a chance to discuss this is very important. So I am the lucky one that actually sits on Harbor and Tidelands. I share that with my colleagues, Councilwoman Pryce and Councilmember Pearce. And so we look forward to engaging in those discussions and having a listening mode where we can listen but also collect data, as well as understand how the industry has changed and where the gaps are to make sure that we're recovering those. I have personally met with Councilmember Buscaino, who led the effort in L.A. H to Teamsters Local 848 396 to make sure that we're being comprehensive with this as much as possible. And lastly, I know that in about a year and a half ago when we discussed this item, we led an effort on the council to acquire about $700,000. And so I would like to make sure that we include that in this item as well. $700,000 that we designated for wage theft, education or something revolving around this whole issue of misclassification. And I would just like to make sure that we include that in this item and find a plan and create a plan on how we can utilize that money. And so with that said, I look forward to working with many of you and we'll see where we go from here. But thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Pierson.
Speaker 5: Yes. I want to thank the leadership of our mayor for bringing this forward. When I first moved to Long Beach, I recall my first getting to know Lane, who I used to work for was 27, and we were organizing around our ports, around the Clean and Safe Truck campaign. And so while that was just the beginning for me, I know that many of you in this room have been trying to fix our ports since they've been broken, which has been decades. And so I want to applaud you all for not letting up, for not letting cities or business tell you that there's not a way forward , because I know what the struggle is like daily. I've been in your living rooms and I've heard your stories. I've seen the bunk beds in your in your home and your living room floor where you're trying to feed your family on sometimes pennies. So I'm really excited to be a part of this council today as we hear this item. When I think about this item, there are three areas that I think of that impact. And one is for you, the driver and the daily impact it has for you, for your families, what it means for you guys to be away from home for so long for having that poverty sometimes not all the time. And for our neighborhoods. Whenever we think about our clean air, when I think about our port, I think about what an amazing spectacle it is to drive over the bridge and to see how amazing the goods movement industry is. And I've had the pleasure of also getting to go down there and take a tour and see how everything works. And it is one of the things that I love about Long Beach. I'm originally from Houston, where we also have a large port. And so I want to applaud those businesses, which I think the industry says is or are. Some experts would say that about 10 to 15% of our industry already is doing the right thing. They're already working to make sure that there's an employee status, that people are going home with a paycheck, that they can depend on that they're not going through. I encourage all of you to read the USA Today article that outlines some of the fear tactics that have happened, and that's from a third party that's not from a union organizer or from a trucking company, but real stories about what have happened daily in our ports. And so when we think about those stories in our ports, in the spectacle, that is it is an amazing asset for us to have in the city. I'm thankful for the port bringing forward grants to help clean up our air for moving as fast as they can on green technology. And it's time that we no longer put that green technology on the backs of workers. It's time that we make sure that we're investing in a system that respects you, treat you with dignity, and ensures that our infrastructure is going to be one we can all be very proud of. And so when I think about the last step, I think about all the strikes that have happened at our port and the fact that sometimes it's unsustainable and sometimes it feels like crisis. And sometimes we have ships that are sitting out there waiting for workers that can bring their labor forward in a dignified way. And so outside of the worker issue and what's happening in your home, I think it's really important that we as a city recognize some of the impacts that labor disputes have had. On our local economy. And I hope as we move forward to look at the different areas and I know that we have a lot of people playing are going to be hearing from stakeholders through this process. But I hope that we are able to get some data on what's happening today. How has the industry changed since we've started having this conversation and what are policies that not only at the state level and not only at the federal level, but what are we doing in Long Beach to say we're protecting our assets and our financial bottom line and that all workers in this city are treated with dignity and respect. So I look forward to the process. I hope that we can work closely and on a tight timeline to make sure that this isn't lingering. And I guess I have a one question for the mayor. Did you see this item after having all the stakeholder meetings coming back to this body with all of our reports?
Speaker 1: I do. I mean, I think there's a lot of a lot of pieces to the item. And so I think I think most importantly, I think we need to immediately support the kind of federal and state efforts with our partners. And I think most importantly, I think to have both the Harbor Commission, which is where obviously where they have direct authority over over the port and for our title, the Harbor Commission, to meet and then work with our city attorney on some on on ideas and language, but also the opportunity for the for our attorney to work directly with the labor commissioner, who has a lot of data that that that department also wants to share with the council.
Speaker 5: Great. Thank you so much. And congratulations on this next step in the long journey, guys.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to add my voice in support of this motion. And we know that sort of cargo doesn't move. Goods don't move without drivers and profits aren't made without drivers. But it's not fair to put profits on make your profits on the backs of drivers. This is, you know, across the country, in our state, this is the direction things are heading and now's the right time. So as chair of Federal Legislation Committee, we're going to take this up along with other items, because reality is there may be party change in November. And if it is, we need to be ready to move an agenda for Long Beach. If there is party change or leadership change in November and a Congress is more favorable to work with Long Beach on some legislation. So I think the timing is timing is is good. I concur with most of the things that my colleague said here, but I think this sends a strong message on behalf of Long Beach that this is where we stand, this is where we are. And we hope that that Los Angeles and other cities really take note. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next up is Councilman Orson.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much. And I certainly extend the support of this item as well. This this issue of our truckers and their classification as independent contractors versus employees has been a an issue, a contentious issue for many years here in the city. I think this is a great step forward. And I want to thank you, Mr. Mayor, for your leadership. I want to thank my colleagues for their support of this item as well. We have to sit, as our vice mayor, sent a strong message not only to Sacramento but also to Washington, D.C., that the goods movement industry here in Long Beach, in this region and nationally is very important to our overall economy. So much comes through our ports but also impacts our freeways. But at the end of the day, this is these are families. These are workers in their families that are that are that are impacted by injustices that are that are currently taking place within some some of the companies at the port also want to recognize those that are that are good actors and that are treating their employees well. I think, you know, we need to look at those as a as a model, but we certainly need to send a strong, unified voice that that employees, particularly in this critical industry and in our city, should be treated as employees, should be afforded the rights of employees in the protections of employees. And so I'm happy to support this item this evening and encourage my colleagues to do so.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Councilman Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. I think that your report was quite succinct and to the point. I've walked with some of these truckers in. In response to the bad treatment that they get there. They're like indentured servants. The way they're treated, they're asked to pay for things that the company should be paying. They're asked to work hours that are impossible and difficult to meet and that get them tired. At the end of day, their check is about a paltry sum that can barely sustain their families. So I strongly support this this item, and I'm glad that you brought it forward, Mayor. Thank you. Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So this is an issue that has been all over the news. In fact, NPR just did a story on it not too long ago. Might. And I support it. I think that's definitely something we need to stay on top of as a city and look at how the legislation is changing and make sure that our own efforts are consistent with that legislation. I'm wondering, as a friendly to this item, would it be possible for us to get quarterly briefings maybe at council or at the Titans Commission Committee? I'm open to either from the city attorney's office in terms of any legal updates on this topic, because California is not the only state that's dealing with this. This is really a national conversation. So I'm wondering if we could get, you know, a quarterly briefing or as updates become available, if we can get updates from the city attorney in terms of where the law is headed and what the courts have deemed acceptable practice.
Speaker 1: We'll add that to the motion. Mr. City Attorney, we're okay with that. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman. With that, we're going to go into public comment. So please, if you have a comment, please come forward. Good afternoon, Mayor. City Council. My name is Jim Danno. I live here in Long Beach. I come from a very unique position. I'm also a Teamster as well as a city employee. My whole life has been spent with working with labor, working with my hands. And it's interesting. I'm sitting here and I'm listening to how we're going to have fair wages. There's been injustice, treatment. There's going to protect our workforce. And yet I hope that the city council does the exact same.
Speaker 4: Thing.
Speaker 1: When it comes to public works and their own employees in this fine city. Teamster Brotherhood. Stay strong and you'll get what you deserve. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello to all the council members, the mayor. I sit here and I listen about that. And just then how, you know, people are not being treated fair and everything else. And I can understand that from a homeless point of view where you guys sit there and you say, okay, well, yeah, this system is not designed right or these people are being mistreated, but you continue to go home every night and still live your life like everything is okay. Yeah. Put out money to sit there and say, Oh yeah, we have civil lawsuits or we have claims of $5 million here or whatever. But then half the time we get swept under the rug, just like with homeless people. They mistreated they disrespected the courts in a real way that you are talking about. Your building is being filled by the riverbed where you pushed a lot of homeless people, too. So now the homeless people don't have anywhere to go where they're not being threatened or harassed by the city. These are people that used to be you guys, residents used to work at your offices and everything else, and you still turn a blind eye to it. I've been out here for a year, stressed out dog, had a miscarriage, got pregnant again, is still having got back into my housing. So for you guys to say that you are going to make so much of a big change in airports and everything else and it's just going to be so dramatic. I'm sorry to say you guys are just full of whatever with that. I mean, ya need to really start stepping up and stop covering up all the stuff that you guys are signing petitions or waivers for. 500 here, 700 here, a thousand here. Come on, now. But you guys can't afford to put homeless people in their houses or pay for these truck drivers. A real, you know, foundation. They're just working day to day. Don't know when they're going to be homeless. Your guys need to do a lot. Y are talking about building up long beach because it seems like it's all off the sweat of our backs and you guys get, you know, praise for it. Everybody have a blessed night. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Your best night as well. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Yeah, my name is Rob. Pete coming in the name of Jesus Christ. He's the only one that deserves honor to me, you know? Let me turn my camera around. So here we go. Okay. Yeah. So a Segway. And I've always said I agree with that. We've got to do a miracle for Americans. And you know my motto, Janine Price got a pierced got to go price days. Pierce goes price it prosecute Pierce so so the thing so you got to.
Speaker 7: Go.
Speaker 8: I know we on this this is good I was I was a truck driver. Hey. And I'm not against union Mr. Richardson or Mr. Austin because both of my parents, we got out of the ghetto to Carson because they had union jobs local 770. I'm just saying, you know, we mixed it up. So anyway, the thing is, is but when she says stuff scares me, I see all these other signatures on here. This is mayor. So Councilwoman Nina Garcia. Oh, Janine Pierce. Oh, I'm thinking hammer and sickle, man. Check this out. This all the stuff she said, straight pressure. You know, we don't want communism in Long Beach in America, red, white and blue. Okay. Now, that being said, as far as that truck with Mr. your anger wasn't a I lived it I drove trucks I own my own truck . Oh that the harbor of San Pedro if you don't make it with by 10:00 y'all man you through and everybody else going to Temecula and everything coming back $400 trips. You didn't had a pool and it took you 5 hours. So it's bad. But the reason why I so bad, most of the truck drivers in the companies I worked in, it was like three brothers, oh, one white guy and the rest. There are Latinos. But the Latino Americans were outnumbered because it was like 80% couldn't speak English. No, I'm not mad at them because if I lived in a nation that wasn't putting out more money, I'd be trying to come here, too. But we have to put Americans first. We got to do that. And it's real. Back in the truck when they talk that NAFTA stuff. Oh, man. The person that opened that owned the trucking company I was in, he bought 60 more trucks. He hired some people from down. And T.J.. Oh, look, we were getting the short runs. They were getting nice long runs after that. And then then all but one brother quit and then he got one brother left. And I ain't going name the company, but that's more than one company. So I'm here speaking for the brothers, you know, Black History Month. And hey, let's black people, let's get communism out. Long Beach, no direct controls driving black folks out. Remember that? And I got 19 seconds. Oh, black folks. Jeanine Pirro has got to go. We don't like communist black folks, like just want to be part of America. So I got 10 seconds, so I'm gonna say nothing bad today. Jeanine Pirro has got to go. Everybody else doing a pretty good job. You know, Jeanine Pirro has got to go 1/2.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Okay, next speaker, please. And good evening. My name is Leon Wood.
Speaker 8: I'm the interim pastor at Saint Mark, a Baptist church here in Long Beach. And I'm also the executive director of the Success and.
Speaker 1: Challenges Program.
Speaker 8: Here in the city. And I want to thank Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 1: The Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilmember Pierce for.
Speaker 8: Their championing.
Speaker 1: Of the motion.
Speaker 8: To address the inhumane working.
Speaker 1: Conditions of our brothers and sisters who are port truck.
Speaker 8: Drivers. This is the right step, and I think you're taking the right direction as a faith leader of the community. I believe the.
Speaker 1: Trucking companies that misclassify their port truck drivers as independent contractors in order to steal their employment benefits.
Speaker 8: As as well as avoid paying taxes on workers need to be.
Speaker 1: Brought to light and be brought to justice. Our brothers and sisters at the port do some of the most dangerous jobs in the United States. And yet being paid and not being paid in Los Angeles, living wage.
Speaker 8: They have to have in central insurance. They need all kinds of things that are needed as a secure employee.
Speaker 1: And they're not being given.
Speaker 8: That the workers are robbed of their wage and their dignity every.
Speaker 1: Day, going to work under unnecessary, life threatening working conditions.
Speaker 8: Because.
Speaker 1: Truck companies.
Speaker 8: Appear to be taking profit over lives, over human lives. If our soldiers risked their lives for their nation's safety.
Speaker 1: These port truck drivers risked their lives for our economic stability. If all the workers at the port stop working. Could you imagine what would happen to our economy? The crime of worker misclassification.
Speaker 8: Will make our ports less competitive than.
Speaker 1: Other countries. This will hold our city back from thriving and prospering like we have started and like we want to continue.
Speaker 8: So the Council of Long Beach, I asked you to take the complete leadership in our state like you've done in so many other things, to make sure that this continue.
Speaker 1: To go through and not be lost. Because I'm very proud of Long Beach and I and I appreciate the fight that you're doing for the everyday common person. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Next week across.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Reverend John Forest Douglas, and I'm the associate minister at First Congregational Church just a few blocks away from here. And I'm also a member of Clergy and Lady United for Economic Justice, or CLW. In addition to serving a church and in District one, I live in District six and I've lived here in Long Beach for five years. And for five years I've heard these stories.
Speaker 1: Of those who work and drive trucks.
Speaker 4: At the ports. These brave brothers and.
Speaker 1: Sisters have shared.
Speaker 4: Accounts of suffering, wage theft, being misclassified and enduring all sorts of injustices in the workplace. So I'm here tonight to stand alongside and bear witness to the stories of my brothers and sisters and to urge you, the City Council, to make our community and our port more just for those who work there. Our Long Beach port truck drivers are an integral link in the American supply chain, and yet far too many workers suffer wage theft and work in what USA Today has called indentured servitude. I stand in the tradition of Jesus who declared his own.
Speaker 1: Mission as one that would tell good news.
Speaker 4: To the poor and set the captives free. A few times tonight. Mayor Garcia, you have said that this is a trucking crisis. And I think that you're right. This is a crisis. It's a crisis. When a worker completes a day's work and isn't given the compensation, they're due. I think it's a crisis when hard work is devalued. It's a crisis when workers are misclassified. It's a crisis when our brothers and sisters have to work so hard just to earn poverty wages.
Speaker 1: It's a crisis when companies.
Speaker 4: Can be.
Speaker 1: So unethical and so immoral just to save a buck on the shoulders of the workers who are often poor. It's a crisis, and it's gone on.
Speaker 4: Far too long.
Speaker 1: And so a crisis demands action by those in positions of leadership. And I thank.
Speaker 4: You for the leadership that you've taken. And so I stand here today to ask you to begin to address this crisis by listening to the.
Speaker 1: Stores.
Speaker 4: Stories of the drivers heeding the call of our mayor and ending wage theft and misclassification.
Speaker 1: At our ports. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor. Council members in the audience. My name is Gustavo. We are, in my mind, a pot driver. And I'm here tonight. I took the day off today. I usually bring the love from Mojave Desert to the port with 22 wheels, almost £80,000. And we respect the life of all people. We have to take a lot of time, believe it or no. Two years to bring our wealth to the country and put something back for our families. I came today to say that I'm a still they call independent driver. We pay fuel insurance. Maybe I take Obamacare. And a lot of abuses. And behind me, there's a lot of truck drivers who actually got a scare. They panic to come over and express what is going on for the past almost 40 years. And I just simply say thank you for the leadership, mayor and council members. And I really appreciate it. And. It'd be hard for my wife, my family and all my co drivers. Thank you and God bless to everyone. Thank you, sir. Speaker. Good evening. My name is Rabbi Jonathan Klein. I'm the executive director of Clergy and Lady United for Economic Justice. Or a clue? Two of my colleagues just spoke before me and I wanted to make sure we heard from a driver before I made my remarks as well , because it really is about their story, their plight, their struggle. And I want to thank the council members on this panel, including Rex Richardson and Al Lawson, for making a statement of support for this motion. We've been supporting working people, including port truck drivers and other port workers for over 20 years. CLW works with hundreds of faith leaders all over Los Angeles and Orange counties. Thank you. For those who have brought this matter to the Council, the painful stories of exploited workers expose the greed and devaluation of life at the port, all in the name of profits. That's profits with the letter F. Workers have already engaged in 15 unfair labor practice strikes over the past four years, confronting the epidemic of poverty, wages, misclassification and wage theft that steels their futures and that of their families. How many more strikes before laws and their enforcement will protect these workers who feel ignored, devalued, denied their dignity. How much more pain in body and in spirit will we pretend doesn't exist before we stop these toxic employers? You're right, Mayor. Not all of them, but plenty of them who right now are breaking laws and exploiting those who bring them their profits with an F, their inhumane business practices show the ugly side of human nature. Faith leaders will forever worry about the fate of these workers, the plight of them, the working poor, just as the prophets did. And that's with a H. Mayor Garcia and esteemed Council members. I'm hoping for a unanimous vote. Please take the concrete action steps to hold trucking companies accountable for violating the most basic of labor laws. The laws that create a structure for our society that allow us to have a functional society. These laws must be observed, otherwise we end up with lawlessness. One rabbi taught. The day is short and the task is great. But the master of the house is knocking at the door. The time is.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 1: Will you commit to ending the wage theft and misclassification of workers in the port industry? Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Good evening, Councilor Max Nourse, Long Beach DSA. This is a moral issue and a moral crisis. I'm not going to get into the details. I think they've been addressed sufficiently. I think the problem here is that a year and a half ago, we met here to talk about talking about it. And now after a year and a half, we're talking about talking about talking about it. We're never going to act. The Los Angeles city attorney has filed charges. We know we're going to act. We're just going to we're going to sit around. We're going to wait.
Speaker 6: We're going to wait for the state legislature.
Speaker 1: We're going to wait for Donald Trump to do something.
Speaker 6: Let's be real here.
Speaker 1: This is these people are not making a living.
Speaker 6: They're literally in a position of sharecroppers.
Speaker 1: If we want a society.
Speaker 6: That's just for everybody, which.
Speaker 1: I think we can all agree on, let's see some urgency. It's great to talk platitudes.
Speaker 6: It's great to call things shameful, but show some urgency.
Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Andrew Mondo Hanno.
Speaker 6: I'm what? The Democratic Socialists of.
Speaker 1: America, Long Beach. I first want to say thank.
Speaker 6: You for bringing this forward. This is something these men and women have been waiting for for years.
Speaker 1: We are glad there.
Speaker 6: Is finally movement on the issue.
Speaker 1: However, we want to point out that while the discussion portion of this item speaks to the issues these workers are facing, we do not see a lack. We see we do see a lack of commitment to these workers in the recommendation itself. The last recommendation requests the Harbor Entitlements Committee and the Long Beach Harbor Commission to find solutions that protect the Port of Long Beach is priority interest. This should not be the end goal. This recommendation, rather, should find solutions that protects the daily lives of.
Speaker 4: The sanctuary of.
Speaker 1: These committed men and women behind me.
Speaker 6: But thank you, Mayor.
Speaker 1: Classmate Rex Richardson, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pearce and City Attorney Perkins. We will be following this closely and are excited for what's to come. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that. And just and just so you're well. So we worked very closely, of course, not just with the attorney, but also the coalition, a coalition of workers, even specifically on on that piece of the of the legislation as well. And so thank you. Next, people, please. Good evening, mayor and Council. My name is Holly Stewart. I grew up here in downtown Long Beach. And I think the thing that really strikes me about this whole issue is we call it our port and Los Angeles port, but our port of Long Beach, which means we are in many ways all of us responsible for what happens there. We can't blame trucking companies that don't follow the law. We can blame somebody else for this. We have to take the action. And our port commission and our council have got to say we're not going to run that kind of place in the name of Long Beach. We're going to run a place that is fair to workers, where workers lives are important, where their families can grow up and their children can have education because they can afford to live someplace where there is education and where they have the food in their stomach in the morning. So they go there to learn and we can do that. And you can help do it by making sure that this port that is our report, is run in a way so that every worker there can walk with pride, with with pride and with their family, knowing that they've now got insurance, that they've got health, they've got care, and they've got wages that pay you a decent amount. Way back when I was 20 years old and I'm now 78, I drove trucks for a while in two different states. In one state it was there were no unions. There was what was called a right to work state. And I got I think it was $0.65 an hour. Then I was over in another state where there was Union Teamsters and drove there. And all of a sudden I was getting about three or $4 an hour all the time. Now, $0.65, three or $4 doesn't sound like much now, but in 19 oh 60 or 1958, that was a pretty good amount of wage. So that's what we need to do here, is give people the opportunity. The people built this country. The companies don't build this country. The workers who do the work, they're the ones who build the country. And that's who we have to protect. And that is our job and your job as citizens and as our elected representatives. So thank you. Let's just get this done. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Anna Kristensen And I, while I am not representing the Long Beach Area Peace Network. I am speaking as a member of from the perspective of the Long Beach Area Peace Work Network, which is for peace primarily, but also for social and economic and environmental justice. And this week, you may have read in the L.A. Times that the federal government, the migra, the I.N.S., decided to wildly stab at blindly at.
Speaker 1: Wherever it could.
Speaker 4: Reach. In California, we are on the blacklist, as we know, for being a sanctuary state. And and so they went to workplaces over 100. The response of a local activist was to spend a few hours today at one of those workplaces that happened to be a trucking operation. Just so we're clear here, there's no request on my part or anybody's part to make this issue any more complex or difficult or challenging for our council to be in favor of than it already is. Having had the experience with our Claudius Law issue, where women were not apparently getting this much support, never mind about that. Anyway, more to come. What I will say is that it's important to realize that when we talk about employers that are good employers, we talk about workers that are hard workers, that this is not a fight between the two or between us as a community. Employers and workers are all part of our community. They all need to be protected. They all need to have the right to operate their businesses and make a living wage. And when when they become separated by a federal government who is on the on the lookout and on the way to divide us as a society and make it harder for workers and employers to get the job done, we need to be protective of that, too. So when our city sanctuary bill comes before you and even in terms of this bill, when you're thinking about it, when you're having your your conversations and your work, realize that all workers have the right to work, whether they . What do I want to say? They had that time, like our like our law enforcement does. They have the time to do the job for our city, for their families and our community. They do not need to do the job that people who seek to divide us have decided they can stop. So we don't we want we want their rights to be known and understood. We hope we can get the city's cooperation in informing everyone in the workplace what their rights are when it comes to protecting their workers and the right to work. And by the way, I will say that Janine Pearce is is facing a recall funded by disgruntled hotel businesses to the tune of tens of hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is not a grassroots movement and it is she is not in my way. Thank you for a comment.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Matt Houston and I generally. Resort to politics as a very last resort. That being said, I'm here representing Matt Houston for governor, Matt Houston for sheriff and Matt Houston for mayor of Long Beach. And the reason for that last one, oh, one more is California Dash Republic, not U.S.. California. That republic taught us. One of my ancestors was the president of the Republic of Texas and I believe is represented by that little star on your flag there. I believe he came over here and recognized y'all as a republic in order to make sure that y'all weren't taken over by slaves like a the next like the president of the the Republic of Texas after that, who was a slave trader anyhow. So my we need to talk we need to talk to the issue on the. Sure, sure. Yeah, I'm getting to it. Yeah. The what is connected the mayor thing is connected that both my both my bosses, my family are have truck drivers. So that's one commonality between both sides of the family. One thing is that these guys are pretty good at is organizing. And so I would like to I would like to suggest looking at things from a different point of view. I have experience working. I stopped an al Qaeda attack from on on the NFL Network. They're trying to get the credit card numbers. And I was there. And in so doing, I realized that the system they're using under underlying that could operate a credit union. So I think maybe a way to deal with it would be to combine something like maybe the the the teachers credit union, the Teamsters credit union, the police credit union, the fire department credit union together link it up with the NFL teams and make sure to take care of the gentrification problem. So we can we have to we have to speak to the truck driving issue, which is the issue in front of us. Well, that's. Yeah, that's what I think. That's so. Improve their working conditions and request work with the Labor Commission. I think improving working conditions if you do it financially by, by, by setting up a credit union network so that they can support themselves and support the city of Long Beach so that you don't have to do things like say we're not going to support, you know, low income housing anymore. That's the reason why I'm run for mayor. And you could do that by bouncing timeshares across the country, would work real well for Teamsters, you know, and then that way it could, you know, when there's an influx of of people from elsewhere, you can finance all that, finance the stadiums, finance the city and all that kind of stuff and take care of the Teamsters as well. That's my suggestion. All right. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, honorable council members, mayor and our friends, city staff. I'm actually here to speak on an agenda item later in the agenda. And Councilwoman Pryce asked me we bumped into each other upstairs and she said, Are you here to speak about the trucking issue? And I said, No, what trucking issue? But sitting here and listening to this, I am compelled to speak. So yes, I am sorry that I it took me a while to decide. I wasn't sure. Once again, my name is Vivian Malone, Lulu and I am a very proud port worker. I'm a member of ILWU Local 13. And listening to this argument, I would like to thank you for bringing this to the attention certainly of the city and the public. It is long overdue. Longshore workers have for many.
Speaker 4: Years been very.
Speaker 3: Frustrated at the delays that happen on the ports. We want to help our outside trucking brothers and sisters just as much as you do. And oftentimes our hands are tied. While it would be very easy to blame automation for failures and computers and long delays, that's actually not the problem. The problem has to do with logistics. The problem has to do with poor Manning, with not ordering enough workers.
Speaker 4: With a 24 hour port.
Speaker 3: System that shuts down while you've got warehouses. And I've written down some notes here as you've.
Speaker 4: Got.
Speaker 3: Chances independent.
Speaker 5: Workers and companies.
Speaker 4: Who manipulate the availability.
Speaker 3: Their Inland Empire distribution centers who closed Friday night and weekends. And there, you know, our port is open. I'm actually going to be at work later on tonight. I'll be working at the Port of Long Beach tonight. We are discharging thousands of containers, thousands of containers onto our docks. And yet the yard will only be open from 8 to 5. And sometimes they open on the evening will have dock work that will service truckers at night. But that doesn't happen all the time. And it doesn't happen at all the all the terminals.
Speaker 4: So the trucks will wait. Sometimes they do two loads per day.
Speaker 3: They get paid by the load. They get paid by the load, not the hour. We can have an outside trucker come into one of the ports at 9:00 in the morning and he might not get service until 2.
Speaker 4: P.m. because the computer.
Speaker 3: Will break down because the trans. Taylor Because there's not enough Manning because somebody else bumped him. So the logistics of it is what truly needs to be addressed.
Speaker 4: I know that my time is short, but I'd also like to call you.
Speaker 3: Attention to the beneficial cargo owners gap. Walmart, Old Navy, Nike. They control the costs at the warehouse and distribution centers. They are the ones who manipulate the outside trucking companies, who hire these truck drivers who deserve respect, who deserve to be treated fairly.
Speaker 4: And the IOW. We are more.
Speaker 3: Than willing and able to service them in a timely fashion. But we've got to work around logistics that are.
Speaker 4: Way above our pay.
Speaker 3: Grade, and the decisions that are being made have nothing to do with us.
Speaker 4: So good work. Keep it.
Speaker 3: Up. I commend your effort. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. These are the last two speakers. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Garcia, council members. My name is Louie Diaz, vice president of Teamsters Local 848 here in Long Beach, California. Local 848 proudly now represents more than 500 truck drivers who haul cargo on and off the docks of the Port of Long Beach , nearly all of whom work for companies that have determined that it's in their best business interests to follow U.S. labor laws, as you stated. These companies are being undercut day in and day out by companies like Nephi, Cal Cartage, XPO Logistics and International Intermodal Bridge Transport, to name a few and hundreds of others that are profiting off our ports, the people's ports, by exploiting mostly immigrant drivers. And these companies customers, giant retailers like Target, Home Depot and Amazon are aiding and abetting these lawbreakers by continuing to contract with them for drainage when they know without a question that they are illegally exploiting these drivers, often in violation of their own code of conduct. As was stated, nearly a thousand legal rulings of misclassification have been filed. More than $45 million in stolen wages ordered to be repaid. Drivers have taken to the streets within 15 strikes in four years, as was stated, causing major disruption to the port operations. Mr. Male Mayor and council members there is no need for additional studies or further investigation. These companies are breaking the law and failure to take action will only lead to more disruption at the ports of Long Beach. The jig is up. The time for action is now. Changes past due on behalf of Local 848 Principal Officer Eric Tate and every single member of Teamsters Local 848. Thank you, Mayor Council members for answering the call of the drivers and stepping forward to demand change. I support the motion on this agenda item. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker is for sergeant.
Speaker 4: With respect to workers and the port. And this this goes to whether or not you believe in God at all, whether or not you consider biblical history accurate or valid for these times. Read Revelations 18 and see what happens to the ports at the end of the age. See how God judges the ports specifically. See what He says about that. And the reason is because. If you are that rich and you're making that much money, God would expect you to look out for people who are slaving for you, who are bringing in your revenue. I noted at the 1933 earthquake, a big part of structure just fell in the ocean. And as I did history on what happened in 1933, I thought, why would God allow something like that to happen? Tonight as I heard this. I became burdened again. Because whether or not you're atheist, whether or not you believe in God, or whether or not you just believe you're running your own destiny. The creator of the moon has marked the date. And part of our issue is. We're defining people. With our eyes wide open. You know how easy it is for a trucker to get turned over on the freeway. How we cut them off. We cut them off at the pass. And the ports make billions. We make billions. And while you're sitting here, council people, all nine of you, whatever you decide, how will you vote? Understand when you vote. And if you vote for the wealthy, the counsel of heaven, which yet will make a decision, the counsel of heaven makes a decision irrespective to what you do here. They will say, is there justice, is there fairness? Is there equality in your distribution of wages that he has given to all of us? This is 2018. And this year will not be like the last few years that you have had to exist as a chartered city. One Nation under the guard of the flag you saluted tonight. Pay attention to how you vote. Pay attention. The clock is ticking on you now.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Assad. There there is a motion in a second on this. On this motion, I want to thank, of course, all of the coalition. Most importantly, I want to thank the truck drivers. And appreciate you guys continuing to advocate for such an important issue at our ports. And we look forward to this being the year where we really begin to address this issue in a way that's serious and that respects the dignity of your work. So thank you. And please cast your votes, members.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Thank you again. We're going to take item 23, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to 1) add language to our State and Federal Legislative Agendas to support legislation that improves working conditions for port truck drivers and addresses related issues; 2) request City Attorney to work with the California Labor Commissioner's and Attorney General's Offices to explore options to support regulatory enforcement efforts; and 3) request the Harbor and Tidelands Committee and the Long Beach Harbor Commission to hold hearings on the trucking crisis and misclassification of employees at the ports with the goal of finding solutions that protect the Port of Long Beach's proprietary interests. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0127 | Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you all for. Thank you all for coming out. Thank you. We we will go back to the item on on parks and so per the the other motion. Thank you, guys. Thank you, Dave. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you, guys all. So we will go ahead and go back to, I believe it was item C 21. No, I'm sorry. Yes, that item. I just lost it. Madam Court, can you read the item?
Speaker 2: Item 37 Report from Parks and Recreation and Marine Recommendations to receive and five Report on Park Equity in the city of Long Beach Citywide.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. I think we've we've had folks have discussed the item. So we are going to hear a staff report. Mr. West. Maybe that maybe not the 30 minute version one, but somewhere in between, I think. But we do want a staff report. I know you guys worked hard on this, so. Mr. West, merry night.
Speaker 5: So thank you, Mayor, and members of the council. We will try and get through this as fast as possible. And I apologize if some of the information is disjointed as we're going to skip around a little bit. Before I start, I do want to thank the members of the team that have stayed, the members of our commission that have stayed because they did put a lot of work into this item. And I really appreciate it, especially those who are woken up at the middle of the night to open a shelter for victims of a motel fire, a long term living motel fire in the middle of the night. So the staff is very tired and I appreciate them staying tonight. We're here to have the opportunity to present an overview of what we do. There was a report that was given on July 18th of last year that included a focus on one area of our programing tonight. As we began to gather the data needed to respond to the many questions and requests made that evening, it became very apparent that before a plan is to be proposed, it is critical that we first provide information that tells the entire story. Then you as a policy body can decide if change is needed. If so, what direction you would like to see that change take place and what kind of a plan you would like to be brought back based on the information provided tonight? There were a number of requests made on July 18th, and I recognize that our report that responded to each and every one of those requests also begs more questions before a final plan can take place. So our task was to respond to the requests that were posed, to look at the big picture research. Other agencies looking through an equity lens. Compare our current programing. And I believe the report that we submitted answered all those questions. That report also included input from four of our committees that from the Parks and Recreation Commission. We'll touch very briefly on Park Equity and what that actually means. And according to the National Recreation and Parks Association, it's ensuring all people have access to the benefits of local parks and recreation, no matter the color of their skin, age, income level or ability, and have access to programs, facilities, places and spaces that make their lives and communities great. Although equity is different from equality, both aim to promote fairness and justice. But equality only works when everyone is starting at the same point and needs the same things to succeed. And as we know, that's not the case in our very diverse community. So before we can establish where we are offering programs, it's important to look at a baseline of needs. So the map that you see is our 2017 Social Needs Socio Needs Index shown here as an aggregate of six indicators at the zip code level, which include poverty, income, unemployment, occupation, education and language. The darker the color, the greater the need for services. And it could also be said that those areas are also areas in our community where there's a lower ability potentially to pay for programs and services and where transportation and access may be a barrier. Throughout this presentation, then we will look at our programing and its distribution to those areas of highest need. The south, southwest, central and northern areas of Long Beach, as we've talked about, the majority of our programing falls into two categories free and fee based. The July 18th Report only addressed our fee based programs, which is largely our contract classes. It did not include any information on free programing, which is the vast majority of what we do and where the city's financial investment is placed. These contract classes are essentially individuals and small business operators utilizing our parks and facilities to offer programs and services to the community in lieu of operating a brick and mortar shop. So tonight, we're going to focus on those two programs. First, a little bit, though, about what we do. This last year, we served close to 1.4 million individuals in our programs and services. We offer a large variety of and a robust array of programs and services. From youth sports to afterschool, adult sports and enrichment for seniors. We take care of basic needs, such as our free summer lunch program, our year round meals for seniors, after school care during the most vulnerable time for children. Our enrichment activities and sports at home promote health excuse me, healthy lifestyles. So here are the free programs that we offer. Many of these are year round. A comment was made earlier that we only program three months of the year and that is actually incorrect. Our adaptive program is year round. We have afterschool programs, we have free aquatic programing that is running year round. We have our senior programs, year round. Teen programs are sites that are enrichment afterschool programs and our youth sports sets year round. These are not just drop in sites, but they are heavily programed activity sites. We have homework help, field trips, arts, music, dance enrichment and fitness programs for our youth. Our seniors have mobility and fitness programs, music, dance and arts, cultural arts, safety workshops, meals, financial assistance workshops, social clubs. Our teens get life skills, job readiness and mentorship programs just to name a few things. As we look at our free programs, part of the story that needs to be told is the locations where we have available for these programs. Our neighborhood, community and regional centers are the main fixed assets that we have at our disposal for programing. And as you'll see, there is not necessarily an even distribution of these assets. And as a city that is greatly developed without a funding stream for either construction or operation of new facilities, this is one factor that directs our program locations. One note that is important to make is that we have five regional centers that host a variety of activities. We also have one senior center which is focused solely on senior programing during the daytime hours. Some of these specialty facilities we also have in our community, in addition to the senior center, is our nature center, our homeland cultural center. And. And like without the specialty facilities, though, our distribution of fixed assets square footage is shown in the graph above. 64% of our facility space is in the southwest, west, central and northern areas of our city. Those same areas that have been identified by multiple studies and plans in our city as areas of need. For this report, there are four facilities located in Council District four. Two of those are included in what we call the central part of the city and the other two in the east part. In addition to our city owned and operated facilities, we also work very closely with the Long Beach School District and offer many programs in their facilities as well as local churches in the community. We've made a concerted effort to be creative, especially in areas where we are lacking our own facilities, to use other options and expand our abilities to serve the community. This is a breakdown of where we offer our free programing. Recall that we have about 64% of our facility space in the southwest, west, central and northern areas of the city. And we also have close to 65% of our free programing in those same areas. We also need to be sure to tell the whole story. We have many more recreational assets in our city besides community centers. And although these assets and amenities are often only located in one area of the city, they serve all of our residents. We have our beaches, bays, lagoons, marinas that offer unlimited hours of free recreational opportunities. And as mentioned earlier, our homeland cultural center that offers both free and fee based programs from cultural arts and performance activities to classes and events that celebrate our diverse community. Our nature center is also a beautiful oasis in a large urban setting that allows our residents to get away and unplug and connect with nature for free all together. In 2017, Primm offered over 111000 hours of free programing to our community. 65% of the hours of free programing were offered in the southwest, west, central and northern areas of the city, as those areas have the highest need for those services. In 2017, over $6 million of the general fund was invested in our preview, sorry, in our free programing. And that is the breakdown by Council District. So last year, 75% of our general fund resources on free program were spent in the southwest, west, central and northern areas of the city. So as you can see, the facility assets that we have directly correlate to our ability to offer programs and services and line up with our investments and hours of free programs. Skip a few slides. Here's a map of where our. Facilities. Our community centers and our regional sites are located. As we were asked on July 18th to overlay our programing with some of the current programs or plans we have the West, Liverpool, West, Long Beach plan, the downtown pedestrian masterplan and the six three plan. And again, if we overlay with the 2017 Social Needs Index, which again is income, population, health issues and other social indicators of need, you can see again that we're leveraging the city's resources greatly in the areas that are of need. So we're gonna look at our fee based programs, which is our contract classes, individuals and small business operators, and 51% of them are Long Beach residents. As with any business, they are driven by supply and demand. The operators want to operate where there's a demand and customers who will pay for their services, not unlike any brick and mortar business. A little bit of history and background during the 2007 and oh eight economic downturn, as well as the budget reductions of 2011 and 2012. A lot of our programing was discontinued and we regionalized some of our free programing so that we would have an economy of scale. Our regional centers have multiple rooms, and so it takes less staff to operate those facilities and we can get more activities in those facilities. As we looked to economize and move through a concerted effort, our programs and services to the areas of most need. We also looked at then how do we supply recreational opportunities throughout the city? A concerted effort at that time was made to offer additional contract classes in the east and southeast portion of the city so that there were recreational opportunities throughout the city. Oftentimes then we use the facilities for our contract classes where we do not have free programing because in the majority of our regional centers, the hours are taken up by free programing and we do not want to eliminate those programs. Here's just one comparison. During the July 18th Report, a comparison was made between fee based programing offered at the Small College Estates Park and Council District three and the large regional community center in Council District one. As was accurately pointed out, there were 50 hours of a week of fee based programs offered at colleges, states and none at Cesar Chavez. However, if we look at the free programing at those sites in 2017, there were only 810 hours of free programs at colleges, states and almost 4000 hours of free programing at Cesar Chavez. So when we look at the opportunities of the future to bring more fee based programs or contract classes to some of our regional sites, opportunities would generally be in the evenings or weekends as the weekday time periods are often filled with our free programing. The July 18th report asks that we and the Commission take a deeper look at leveraging our limited city resources and community assets so that we obtain a fair and equitable system that guarantees every resident the same opportunity to thrive regardless of zip code. As you'll see, our general fund investment for free programing, which is concentrated in our highest areas of needs, is almost 17 times what we devote to our fee based programs. The city's resources towards fee programs includes 65 full time and 661 part time staff supplies, marketing and program related costs . And this does not even include the substantial investment to clean and maintain these facilities. On the other hand, the investment towards fee based contract class programs covers the costs for one and a half dedicated staff and the printing and mailing of the Recreation Connection brochure and the $294,000 cost is completely offset by revenue. We were also asked to look at the capital investment by districts. So we looked at the last five years of major capital investment, and this includes facility upgrades, refurbishments, playgrounds, sports fields, enhancements and investments to the ranchos. And 70, 70% of that CHP investment has been in the southwest, west, central and northern areas of the city. This does not include Tidelands investments because Tidelands are restricted and can't be used throughout the city. However, most of the Tidelands funds go towards our specialty areas such as the beaches, Pier's Marinas, Lagoons, harbors and seawalls. And very little of tidelands goes towards park and park facilities. A lot of discussion centered around the way we activate our parks. So in addition to what PRM does, we have many community organizations and residents who pull permits on an annual basis each week to activate our parks. Last year, over 2200 permits were pulled for different types of activities. In addition, we continue to work with our community and our organic community based organizations, and we have over 100 current partnerships that also positively activate our parks. Last year alone, our youth sports organizations activated our parks over 142000 hours with positive play activities and opportunities from youth from all over the city. We do want to activate our parks. And as such, we work with our commission, and our commission has a fee waiver process that is an incentive for community based organizations to utilize our parks. The City Council has given the authority to review, set and waive park fees to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Last year, 70 requests for fee waivers were received and only 12 were denied. Those 12 were denied because they were unable to provide an access to the Long Beach community. There are several. Also, we were asked to look at the use of underutilized parks by waiving all or a significant portion of fees for community programing and events . The Commission felt very strongly that there really isn't a definition for underutilized parks that they could apply to the fee waiver process. There are several categories of parks within our system, some sort of large bordered geographic, broader geographic areas by design. Others are active with sports fields and facilities and restrooms and have parking, while some parks are meant to be passive and serve just the immediate neighborhood needs. So accordingly, our parks are utilized and activated in different ways. And as such, the Commission did not feel that there would be a logical way to make the determination of what would constitute an underutilized or low programed park. Taking a deeper dove. Deeper dove, though, into the question of fee based programing, which is one component of what we do. And again, these are generally small businesses, and the instructors often desire locations where there is an ability to pay PR and does recognize that there's a desire to move more of these programs into areas of the city that have not traditionally been successful in the past. And we have continued to look at ways to do that. Although the majority of the contract classes are offered in the east and southeast area, that does not mean we have not tried to offer them in other areas. Over the years, multiple classes have been offered, particularly in the Southwest and western areas, and have been canceled due to lack of registration, participation and interest. However, we continue to look for ways to focus offerings in these areas. First, we will continue our longtime practice of incentivizing instructors who provide activities in these parks by waiving the six or $8 administration fee per participant. This incentive means greater revenue directly to the instructor, and the instructor can use to directly benefit from that or potentially lower their participation fee, which is often the barrier for some residents in these areas. Also, all new contract class instructors are asked to start their relationship with the city by offering their classes in these areas. Some have been successful, successful doing this and some have not. As we keep exploring options, we have also conducted targeted outreach to our current instructors who live in some of the areas that have less offerings, hoping that they would be enticed by the convenience of offering their business activities closer to home. Another option to consider if the Council would like is to lower the city versus the business partner. Split of revenue. Currently, the city retains 35% of the participant fee to cover the cost of advertisement registration insurance. We could lower that to 30%. Understanding this would decrease the city's overall revenue by approximately $46,000. And ask the instructor then to lower their fees by 5%. Funding could also be added if the Council would like during the upcoming budget season to transition some of these fee based programs to free programing in lower income areas where the fee might be the barrier to participation. If this is the direction the Council wants to go in, additional staff would be needed to coordinate this new form of programing, including targeted marketing and outreach that is needed for the success of this type of programing. Finally, as was mentioned earlier, we have created in our testing an online survey that is going to provide greater data to us from our constituents as to the types of programs desired, as well as the willingness to pay, how far folks are willing to travel, and the threshold for cost of fee based programing. How we are testing this survey to make sure that the responses that we are getting give us good data and then we are going to be rolling that out citywide very shortly. Prem does have a very robust marketing program that includes all facets of social media, as well as the publications that you see here. And last year, over 700,000 pieces of marketing materials were distributed to the community marketing our programs. If more targeted marketing is desired, additionally, funding and resources would most likely be necessary to accomplish that goal. Finally, we were asked to look at program through an equity lens, and so we have done extensive research in this area. As you may know, the city is in the process of creating community wellness equity indicators through the Office of Equity and Evaluation of Programs and Services Citywide. This work will be finalized this spring through the city's newly trained 40 member community facility cohort, several of whom are from PRM and will engage the community in the development of policies and programs. Once completed, the Office of Equity and would look at the areas where disparities exist and work with city leadership departments and the community to design policies, practices and programs to address these disparities. Staff has worked with the Office in Equity and also done additional research to find other models where an equity lens has been used for programing and CIP resource distribution. We have only uncovered a few cities who have been doing work in this area. Minnesota and Portland and Seattle are doing some of this early work. However, they have very little data so far on outcomes. But for example, here is a minnesota model that could be something we use here in Long Beach. As you can see, funding is distributed based on community indicators. So it is again best to wait until those are finalized here in Long Beach. Of note is that also funding is distributed based on facility space and amenity location. As you have seen in tonight's very quick presentation. There are definitely some inequities related to our distribution of programing facilities in the city. However, changing the location of our facility assets is certainly not a short term option, and that's why we have outreach to the school district and other facility sites. So in summary, I want to thank the Commission for their dedication to the department and for staying and for their time and input on this presentation. I also, since this is my last opportunity, I want to publicly thank the women and men of the PRM team for their many hours of work on this report, but more importantly, their dedication every day to the members of this community and for the service that they provide. I believed it was important that you were provided a solid foundation of information from which to build upon your future recommendations to the department. The data in many areas speaks for itself and demonstrates that we have been on a good path. Obviously there's room for improvement and with greater investment in some areas, more can be done and the conversation does need to continue from here. Pierre M will continue to be part of the great work being done through the Office of Equity, and we will bring forth recommendations that may be necessary as a result of those outcomes. I do believe that an investment of over $6 million and over 111 hours of free programing is much to be celebrated. This has been a great opportunity to show the true magnitude of what we are doing. And although I cannot take credit for this great path as these accomplishments and these decisions were made before I joined the team, I have been proud to serve with the men and women who are making this happen every day in this community . That concludes my report.
Speaker 1: Where and I know that the the the the makes the motion of absolutely go to the public purse which will do but I just wanted to just you know to Marie, I know I've already told you separately, but I just want to again wish you the very, very best. And we're very fortunate to have had you. And you're just a fantastic addition and a great leader for the team. And just thank you. And we will we know you're not gonna go too far, but just appreciate the service that you did to the city. So thank you. So, please, if we can have the the public, please come forward and then we'll go back to the motion. Mayor Garcia and city council members. My name is Randy Zorn and I am the executive director of Partners of Parks. Partners and Parks is the 33 year old nonprofit that supports the Parks Recreation Marine by raising money for programs and facilities in the parks. Recently, the Park Partners of Parks Board approved a new strategic plan that has a heavy emphasis on supporting equity in the parks, including emphasizing programs for youth, teens and seniors. One of those programs that supports our mission is through the Youth Scholarship Program. Over the past several years, Poppe or Partners of Parks has helped low income families with registration fees for classes in summer and summer camps that are offered in the Recreation Connection catalog in order to be eligible. Families need to meet specific annual income guidelines of 125% of the federal poverty level. One year ago, we received a donation of $3,200 from the Long Beach Judicial Partners, and they are the management group that operates the Superior Court building. In addition, we received a grant from the Rudy and Daphne Monsour Foundation for $10,000. With these funds, we are able to provide scholarships to 52 low income children, with 13 of them taking multiple classes and or camps for summer 2018. We will be working with the ramp program in the parks to identify families in need and will support and fund nearly 100 children, doubling the number served from the previous year. Partners in Parks is working closely with Parks Recreation Marine on securing additional grants for teens and senior programs. The grants will target those community members with the greatest need by working closely with Parks, Recreation, Marine staff to meet the need for the safe after school activities and reduce social, social isolation of seniors. In addition to our focus on youth and seniors, Partners of Parks receives annually financial support of $38,000 from Signal Hill Petroleum for movies in the parks. The movies are held in every council district's parks, and there were 27 parks where the movies were shown last summer. Pop strength comes from the long lasting partnership we have established with Parks, Recreation and Marine. We will strive to augment city resources to serve all communities using the parks, but will continue to focus on those who clearly have a higher need. We believe that our efforts will continue to increase equity and access to all long beach parks. Thank you very much. Thank you, Randi and Randi, thank you, of course, for everything that you guys do. I remember when I met you when I was 17 years old, coming into Cal State, Long Beach, and you were in charge of my orientation. So I thank you for that and for everything you do now. Yes. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Yes, thank you. My name is Kathleen Irvine, 539 Daisy First District. Thank you, council members and mayor. I do want to say that I recognize that there have been a great improvements in the park since we first moved to the first District. When I first went to Cesar Chavez, it was basically a lot of kids rolling around on skateboards inside and scratching graffiti on the windows. And there has certainly been an effort by parks. I appreciate the data that has been submitted. But I think that as Councilmember Lina said, that we need a little bit more definition because programing is one thing. But if you are in the parks and see what's going on, it's really not enough to say there are free hours because what the children are doing or what the seniors are doing is not necessarily what I personally would call programing. One of the issues I had was a yoga class that was supposed to be for seniors this summer at Cesar Chavez. So a number of our seniors were very excited about the yoga program, and we went only to find that it was actually had been turned into a small children's yoga program.
Speaker 1: And the yoga instructor.
Speaker 4: Herself on her first day was told that this was what it was going to be, even though she'd been hired as a senior. So there's a big difference. And because of that, she wasn't happy and then the seniors weren't happy, and we had to walk across the lawn and do it over by the freeway instead of inside where the seniors were. So it was really a very bad experience, and she did not want to work anymore, even though she was getting paid. So that kind of thing, maybe it's going to take like more time or more programing or something. But that kind of thing is very discouraging to people who want to contribute, who want to teach. So I think that I would like to see a lot more definition about what exactly those many thousands of hours of programing entail. I appreciate the hard work that went into just gathering the data, and I appreciate all that the Commission has done for us in the past. They certainly supported many of our programs and we do appreciate what they've done so far. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Jim Dan. I live in the first district also. A couple of issues I'd like to address is one, again, going with the hours that are actually in the park and how you're counting those hours. Let's just take Cesar Chavez, for instance. There is any number of day. There's probably 15, 20 big guys working out maybe six, 7 hours a day. Are you counting each of those guys for every hour that they're pumping iron? That tends to be a little intimidating for the senior program when they try to go into the facility and then they're not really accosted. But there's definitely some intimidation factor there. A couple of issues with it would be is that that park, for instance, should be opened on weekends. Families in that area are working hard, certainly five days a week, six, sometimes seven days a week. If the park were open on the weekends when the family needs it the most, it'll eliminate a lot of the homeless situation. There's camped out on the back side. That might be something that could also be addressed. Mayor, you started the idea of a gateway garden. That was a fantastic garden. It still is to this day. It's the first complete ADA garden. Yet the park system has not addressed that and has not encouraged the use or programing with that facility at that park. And I don't want to keep bagging on, you know, that park. I think that the staff there does a good job with what they're told to do and the limitations of that. Case in point, there's been the cell shed improvements. The enlargement of the AMPITHEATER. We're trying to activate that through Shakespeare in the park. The symphony has partners with us, but yet a year later, we're still waiting for six sprinkler heads to be placed so that the grass that was provided by grants, not by parks from the district , can flourish. It's struggling. It's a year later. And, you know, we're not you know, we're drought still. So that would be something my note that should have been addressed a long time ago. Going to Drake Park. Drake Park can be so much better than it is. I think that the staff that's there does a great job. It's what it is. Again, I don't see how the numbers from the money applied to that facility. Councilmember Price, I know is surrounded by wetlands. Beautiful part. I work for the city. I'm in your area all the time. Not as much as Mr. Super Nice, but your area quite a bit. I'd like to see that if the money from the city is also going for that district park and tidelands money because it's surrounded by Tidelands also is it's kind of double dipping. Maybe some of that money can be pulled away from there. Since time the moneys would be applied only to Tidelands, which basically we're talking new restrooms and everything else as he built over there and could be diverted over to less fortunate. PARKS Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. D.A.. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi. My name's Mariella and I live in District one. I originally actually this topic came to mind from Kathleen about last summer. It had to do with the municipal band, and I remember looking at why we didn't have the municipal band play in our district, and that's how it all started for me at least. And what I ended up finding out was even though I.
Speaker 4: Just learned that there's.
Speaker 3: Programing year round, I was more of a participant during the summer. And from my experience, we as a mother of two toddlers, I was constantly driving to the east side for programing, for movies, at the park, for concerts and so on, so forth. And what I ended up doing was tallying up all the the calendar by district and so on, and found that three of the districts had 52% of all of those events on the 100 days of summer calendar. And so for me, I look at that data and it's really difficult to sort of reconcile how that data really shows what the experience is from this perspective of a district one mother or child or District nine or or any of the other districts that maybe don't see that the kind of programing that might be at Eldorado Park, Ride, Whaley Park, or that the concerts that you see in other parks, because from my perspective, I see that the numbers that map may have shown more like I think I saw in the youth programing district one had 4000 hours and then District five had or district I think.
Speaker 4: It was five had 10000 hours of youth youth park.
Speaker 3: Hour. So for me it's like those are the kinds of numbers that matter because it's impacting our children, it's impacting how whether a kids are playing. So, yes, we might have access at Travis Park. Was it 3000 or 3000 free hours? I can assure you that if from a experiential point of view that those kids are not get they're more like babysitting than they're actually taking a class that I would take my child to and learn and have a regular recreational activity that's of use and of purpose. So when we talk about equity, it's not just in the numbers, but it's also on the experience that you're providing this children's. From my experience, I take my children all the time, my two daughters all the time to the parks, museums and so on. And I can assure you that in my district, District one, those 3000 hours or whatever was a child says Cesar Chavez, aren't actual.
Speaker 4: Program hours.
Speaker 3: Of that provide the same equal type or I don't even know the words at this point but the same recreational and educational opportunities that I would see at a park on the east side. So I would challenge the the Council and Parks and Rec and I really appreciate all the work that's been put into that report, but I would challenge them to find creative ways to make it more equitable for children across all of Long Beach as opposed to just a handful that it feels like it is. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And we have three speakers left and then we'll close the speakers list. Yes. I just want to share a few things that I had seen from. First of all, the park system is one of my favorite things about this area. I love it. I've rehabbed my shoulder on some of the outdoor exercise equipment that's there and everything, but something I wanted to just share is that something that I'd notice was really good for community engagement with Park Systems and in other places that I've lived had to do with like a chili cook off or a or a barbecue type thing, obviously coming from Texas to kind of lean that way. But one of the things I would do is like have a have the police department have one, and they would kind of judge between the fire department, the police department's barbecue or chili cook off where that kind of a fun competition kind of thing. And then another thing that I had was in Austin was something called ERs birthday party and it was, you know, you were from the from Winnie the Pooh. It was like depressed and all that kind of stuff. Like another way for community engagement. I know if this is feasible economically, but maybe they have something toward the end of the month, a birthday party for everybody that maybe didn't get a chance to have their birthday celebrated and that kind of thing. You can engage with people, make sure everybody's connected and all that kind of stuff. Just some thoughts. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Honorable Mayor and city council members. My name's Kirk Davis. I'm a ninth District Council resident. I'm also finished serving a two year term as the co-chair of the Coalition for Healthy North One Beach. Working together with the Health Department in the Heal Zone and the Kaiser Foundation, we were able to put exercise equipment in and out and park. We also give free classes and yoga Zumba and we totally support the park program. When I first saw the report on Park Equity and I noticed you talked more about classes and programing, I live in an area of the city, a Hamilton neighborhood that has no greenspace. That is the area between Atlantic Cherry, Artesia and 72nd Street. There's no open space. There's no green space in that area. I've worked with Steve Neal and we've been working with residents in. And identifying areas that can be used for green space in our area, even just for our little for walking places, places where we can go out and walk your dog feel safe. We've also been looking at options and I hope the City Council can also consider it as joint use parks in with the school district in the schools for after school is out of session and on the weekends people will use some of the green space on the schools and it just shows that being able to sit in a green space, an open space that's not your house is healthy for you and have the fresh air, have the ability to exercise close to your house and really enjoy those kind of things are things that can really help us to be happy and to live longer. And thank you. Thank you so much. And our last speaker. Hello. My name is Angela on the piano. I was in the office working on this item with the wonderful staff of Councilwoman Gonzalez. And the reason I.
Speaker 6: Enjoyed it so much.
Speaker 1: Wasn't just because all of us.
Speaker 6: Were together working hours on this this item.
Speaker 1: But because it hits home for me. My six nieces and nephews have lived in central Long Beach.
Speaker 6: They've lived in North Long Beach.
Speaker 1: And they currently live in West Long Beach and they have never received any information regarding whether there were programs that were free at the parks or if there was any fee based programing at those parks. And it wasn't until I started working here where I actually connected them to these things. And the fact of the matter is the free programing that is offered, it is not really adding value to their lives. It's free movies, it's it's coloring, it's it's these things. It's not it's not.
Speaker 4: In.
Speaker 1: The east side of Long Beach, I saw I saw resume development. I saw a math development. I saw I saw reading like.
Speaker 4: Root.
Speaker 1: Things that would actually add value to their lives. And if it's if it's the fact that it's limited resources that's affecting that, then this city council needs to finally switch funding over to library services and parks. The time is over. You know, the police department receives 48% of the city's budget in I think it is 4.2% for library services and parks. That is unacceptable. Um, I wish and I hope for my nieces and nephews to one day live in a city where they can go to Admiral Kidd Park and receive help with their resume, receive help with math because I know they truly need it and but think thank you for all the work that you have done. Honestly, you are an amazing individual and I want to thank you for that. But there is disproportionally disproportionate.
Speaker 6: Funding.
Speaker 1: In this city, and we really do need to look at the way that we fund the parks and libraries.
Speaker 6: So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. That concludes the public comment. Thank you, everyone that spoke and returned back to Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 3: Yes. So I'm going to hit the refresh button here and I want to say thank you as well to Marie. And I know it doesn't seem like I'm grateful, but I am absolutely grateful to Marie and her staff. I worked alongside them even before being elected. And I know what a hard working group and team that you have on so many different levels, management all the way down to our park staff, whether part time or full time. I know that the work that they do, they love it and we are going to continue to support them. But what I'm asking here is just for support and I'm asking us to challenge ourselves because I don't want to put this out and everyone sort of roll their eyes and laugh and think, it's just us complaining because it's not complaining. It really is something that many of us are passionate about. You know, we have I've talked to you know, I see David here from the Park Commission. I appreciate it. And Randy and Karen and our residents from, you know, various areas. And what resonated with me in talking about, you know, the need for more park programing was that they said, you know, that's what we need. We need more programing. We need more opportunities for our kids to engage. You know, these are neighborhoods that many of you know, some of the students are eligible for, for gang activity. They're going to be either in a gang or they need some somewhere to go after school to support them. And this is what it does. But I think it can go a bit further. So I think what we need to do first, before talking about a plan to come back, I would like something to come back in about, you know, that six month time frame regardless. But I think first and foremost is we need to provide we need more data even more than we currently have, because what we have is just a current flat data of what we're existing, what is existing in what we're currently doing. But I would like data on that survey that we're that is online right now. It's a survey that basically asked questions to residents on what they want to see in their neighborhood. I know oftentimes, you know, we say, well, there's high unemployment in this area. We need resume workshops. Well, I don't know if our residents actually want that. They might need it, but I don't know what they actually want. So I think our, the, the data on the survey that we have would be good. I also think just some other touch points I talked about maybe a roundtable that we can sit and discuss, maybe a part commission meeting that we can take outside of a normal part commission location and take it to the communities that really want to see these programs and talk about, you know, what we can do to formulate a better plan for park program and activities. But, you know, many of our residents as well, you know, the ones that are actually activating the parks like Willmore and building healthy communities, they've been denied permits, they've been denied waivers for their permit fees. And I think that that's not a really good and inclusive and welcoming environment when they have to go to the Park Commission multiple times throughout the year for many of their events that they do on an annual basis. And I know the Parks Commission is just doing their job, but it's very cumbersome. These individuals are not just volunteers. They're working 8 hours a day like we are, and then they're activating our parks on top of that. So they're really the ones I can speak to my neighborhood. They're really the ones that are doing the work and activating our parks the way we really want to see them, you know, putting in summer concerts. Winton Willmore I saw the Willmore Group this past year. Welcome over. I want to say we had thousands of kids at Drake Park, thousands, not only the lighting was put up, you know, but the programed area was, you know, had snow. There were music elements for the kids. My kids went out and enjoyed. You don't get that. Otherwise, if we didn't if Willmore didn't do that, we wouldn't have had anything during the holiday season for these kids to go and just have a good time and enjoy their neighbors. So I give a lot of my gratitude to these community members. And if we can ease it a little bit better and make it a little more streamlined on the Park Commission side, if there's some barriers that we can, you know, lessen to be able to create a better environment, that would be great. One of them, I think, was included in here, and I really like to see that I had suggested originally a multiyear contract, you know, but I know that that might be a little difficult because there's so many different nuances that might take place. But we have community groups that I feel that have been vetted, that we know they've been in place for 20, 30 years. I think maybe we can give them a break in that sense in creating a multi-year contract and then also providing waivers to these individuals. You know, as much as we can, I don't know how that will affect our bottom line, but I think that there's room there to to explore what we can do with these specific groups. We also talked about promoting existing programing, and we need to push even more so in this in this equity lens, because right now we're printing and we're mailing out an awesome booklet. And when you look through this booklet, it's all Eastside activities, you know, and I have a child too, and I have to go to, you know, storytime or wherever. I have to go all the way to the Eastside, which I have a car. I can do that. That's no problem. But it makes it very cumbersome for for many of our residents to do that as well. And I think just being able to have other mediums in different languages, you know, of course we talked about that. But social media, there's awesome things you can do on Facebook to target certain zip codes so they receive information. And I think we can just do better on that side. And then I talked about the survey results. But if there's any other way to obtain information, as I mentioned before, I think, Maria, you mentioned or you gave us a report about a year and a half ago. It's in 2016, and it basically showcased all of the residents in our zip codes 90802 and 90813 that were attending some of these classes. And when you when we say that there's low interest in areas in some of these programs, I would have to disagree because a lot of these, if I'm looking at it over 63,000 90813 years and 9080 tours will say we're attending classes in 2016, which is great. That means that there is interest. We just have to sort of reassess to see where we can bring the classes and programs in our neighborhoods. And as we mentioned to just a close up, you know, the contract classes are just pulling the numbers. You know, we have in the Southwest and in uptown, we have the most facilities. We've said that in this in this in this report, we have the most facilities because the open space plan dictate dictates that our areas of need should have more facilities. And we do. But even with more facilities, we don't have park programing. And that's that's the issue here. Out of the contract classes, there are 41.7 districts. 41.3% versus 58.6% for two districts. I just think that there's, you know, something wrong there, considering we have the most facilities and our summer programing, our free programs, a lot of them are are a lot of them are in the summer. So that's three months. And so, again, I know that's I'm dumping a lot. I'm sort of saying everything, but I think I know where we need to reassess. I'm going to ask that in that six months, we obtain as much data as possible, survey results going out to the community. I'll I'll engage. Absolutely. Our partner of parks. I'll engage our community groups. I'll engage, you know, the Park Commission to sort of look outside the box, go to other areas, obtain that data, and then come back in six months and come back with a really good policy and plan where we can sort of reassess and shift. That is it. And I thank you very much again for all of your work. Murray, we do certainly appreciate you. And I know it's probably been my office that's given you the hardest time. But again, I just I really appreciate you engaging us and having the chance to sit down with you personally. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 5: I yes, I want to thank everybody that's stayed tonight and those that have stayed for other items. I really appreciate your efforts. And again, Maria said it earlier, but I know that you have put a lot of time and energy into this and just short term and Long Beach. And so I appreciate that and all the staff that are here that make our park so great. Thank you. You know, I I want to say I appreciate the data. I think that one of the challenges that's here is that, yes, it's not a one size fits all. And, you know, I want to take the responsibility and I'll ask, you know, my colleagues to do the same in meeting with my neighborhood associations. I you know, I've knocked on almost all the doors in my district probably four times now. Just as we do turn out for our budget meetings, we always make sure that we're going door to door, making sure that we're doing the survey with all of those constituents that might not know that it's out there. And so I you know, I have to say, I just had my briefing this week and the survey wasn't brought up. And so it's not a tool that we're using to push out. And I think it would be helpful to have that as a tool for the office outside of just city staff. I do want to ask, how are we working with the schools and getting that survey out as well? So as I said, right now we're testing the survey. It's out limited because we want to see what comes back and to make sure that we are asking the right questions. And so once we have that data back, that's when we will push that out. We will be asking all the council offices to distribute the survey via your emails, your listserv, your websites through the schools. So we'll be using all of our marketing avenues once the surveys are ready. Okay. I just thank you for that. It's helpful to to know that it is just a pilot survey. I also want to make sure that we're you know, at my next community meeting, when we have a roundtable of folks that we're identifying, this is a topic that we're talking about. I know that when you look at the resources in my district, we have underutilized parks, which I'm assuming in my district would be the arts park that's consistently locked Miracle on Fourth Street, which we took away programs. And so it has it listed as a community, not a community center, but something similar is also listed as a site because we do still do youth sports programs at Miracle. And Fourth, we do. Okay, so we've got Miracle on fourth and then it's not in my district, but it's next to my district, Crossman village. And so looking at those places, I know that I, Bixby sometimes were booked to the to the max and it's hard to get other classes in there. And we have high participation. And I know that we've had a challenge with getting programing in our passive parks or underutilized parks. I hope that out of this process, through the survey and through community building, that we can identify what programs that neighborhood needs because a kid can't walk from Fourth Street, where a miracle on Fourth Street is over to Bixby Park. And I think that's a challenge. And some of the equity piece is that you have families in these higher poverty areas that are working two and three jobs and don't have the luxury of driving their kids to the park for the day or don't have the luxury of paying somebody to drive their kids to the park for the day. And so it it does mean that kids might not go to the park if it's not something that's right next door. And so these neighborhoods serving parks, while it looks like there's no programing and that's fine from the outside, it's not okay for having our youth get the skills and the tools that they need. And so I'll take on the challenge on myself as well as on staff on how are we really engaging with residents and getting them meaningfully engaged so that it's not just about spending money on the West Side or central Long Beach, but it's identifying the right programs for that community in particular. And so I look forward to seeing this come back. I think that looking the studies that you guys are the cities, Minnesota, Seattle, I think it's a good place to start, which is what I was referencing earlier. And so I do appreciate that. I do want to echo the comments around. The fee waiver denials. I know I've had a couple folks come to us. And so having a real clear understanding, the statement that you made that they don't have a nexus to the Long Beach community was not true for those that came forward. Maybe it's because we thought they had enough money and they could pay for it. But these are a lot of groups that invest in our communities, that invest in our youth, and they're trying to do a service for us. And so I know that there's a balance in between covering the costs and making sure that services are available. And so any new opportunities that we can identify to make that more accessible for folks is really important. Again, I really, really appreciate you and all the team. I think that your programs are so wonderful in Bixby Park and I want to make sure that we have that same quality at the other parks in my district as well. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you to the staff. I really appreciate you. To get to the meat of it. Some of the things that I think would be valuable in the next version would be a separation between adult and youth programs, and then also a comparison to where the youth in the city live. In the nineties, when I was in Long Beach Unified School District, there were over 90,000.
Speaker 4: Participants and students in.
Speaker 5: Our schools. Today it's somewhere under 70,000. And so when you have a 20% drop in students, you also probably have a migration of where those students are. And I would also be surprised if we had any less programing considering the volume we have today. So I'd be interested in seeing that. I'm really proud that 65% of our free hours are offered at non specialty facilities. I think that's remarkable. And if the communities that have the programing want to provide input on the types of programing, I think that that's really valuable because when free programing is offered and not utilized and I'm not just saying on one part of town, but on my side of town as well, it could be better programs for the things that are important to the students. And so we definitely need that feedback. With 100 Days of Summer, I think it shows a skewed outcome because a lot of our council offices use one time funds to supplement that. And so I think it's important. Well, I can understand the perception that some areas have significantly more programing than others. Part of it is because our council offices have put up that money, whether it's for a snow day, whether it's for an additional concert in the park. So keeping that in mind, I think it's important that on Slide seven, it's a lot about being served. But I don't know that this could represent duplicated numbers.
Speaker 4: I'd be really interested to.
Speaker 5: Know our high utilization, and I've said this a lot about Eldorado Park. It's one thing to say we have 400,000 visits to Eldorado Park a year. It's completely different to say we.
Speaker 4: Have.
Speaker 5: 300,000 visits of people who come for one day and 100,000 visits that are broken out by monthly visitors, weekly visitors. And now with the dog park.
Speaker 4: We have some people that are there every single day.
Speaker 5: And so we need to know and understand our high.
Speaker 4: Utilizers of the system.
Speaker 5: And then better adjust for that. And then also what percentage of our utilization of the system is non Long Beach residents? Our sales tax and property tax dollars supplement these programs. And so I appreciate that some of our contract programs have a different price for a resident and a nonresident. But as we look at fee changes for the fall that come into this next budget cycle, maybe the same should be said of our entrance fees to.
Speaker 4: Eldorado Park and the Nature Center that those that are Long Beach residents should not be experiencing a fee increase.
Speaker 5: Where those that are coming to our park for a single day are feeling that.
Speaker 4: More. On Slide eight.
Speaker 5: I noticed that you addressed.
Speaker 4: The wrap.
Speaker 5: Program. Is that in.
Speaker 4: Partnership with the schools or do we apply as our own grants section?
Speaker 5: So that is in partnership. We utilize school district facilities and we put some general fund money into that, but it is largely grant funded. Thank you. I knew that it was a grant funded program for the school district, but I wasn't sure if we applied separately and were competing with the school district or not.
Speaker 4: On Slide.
Speaker 5: Nine, I think that it would be very valuable to see the number of participants by these areas. And I think it's great that you talked about facilities where free programs are offered, but a lot of programing is also offered in open space. And one of the things that I think that this definitely under under represents is.
Speaker 4: The amount.
Speaker 5: Of open space available for free programing and program programing as.
Speaker 4: Well. I see that. My district doesn't have the most space.
Speaker 5: I think that it's very telling to see that District six actually has the most square footage of available space. I think that that is a testament to the work that Mr. Andrews has done over the last 10 to 12 years to add additional space. But I think that.
Speaker 4: When you see this.
Speaker 5: And add on another set of sections for acreage or square footage of. Open grassed space or fields.
Speaker 4: Then you'll really see how underfunded the infrastructure of the fifth District is.
Speaker 5: Why a third of our trees in our parks are dead. Why all of the roads in Eldorado Park.
Speaker 4: Are in ill repair, while the facilities in our park system in the fifth.
Speaker 5: District are at an all time low. Because as infrastructure money was separated across nine districts, we were each getting approximately 12%. But that's not really fair. When 35 to 40%.
Speaker 4: Of the streets in the city and the trees in the.
Speaker 5: City and a lot of the parkland in the city is in one district. So then you wonder why in that district.
Speaker 4: When I was elected, it was so far behind in infrastructure repairs.
Speaker 5: And when you look at the $200 million infrastructure need plan that was presented in all of our first year of of of election in 2014.
Speaker 4: You'll see that because of the expanse of space, it costs more to repair. And it has.
Speaker 5: Been longer since it was repaired. So I think that it's important to also add that in because. Our side of town doesn't only serve.
Speaker 4: The east side. The east side goes all.
Speaker 5: The way up to the center. And when you look at the city, really, that the airport kind of.
Speaker 4: Serves as the hub of the wheel. And there services over at Wardlow Park and Pan-Am Park and.
Speaker 5: Others that are easily accessible from North or central Long Beach. And I think that goes to be said. And then I think that for the last component of my last question, it would be what free programs are currently being offered at the schools. I think that it's time we do an evaluation of the amount of programing. The Parks and Rec program and the tax dollars of the City of Long Beach provide on the school campuses versus the amount of programing that the schools provide in partnership to us. And I say that because we have done.
Speaker 4: When I say we, I mean you really it's all of you and the staff that have taken the brunt of.
Speaker 5: Of the reprograming of our park space for our sports leagues. And since we don't have the same types of reservation systems available, what you have is an equity not based on what the city is doing.
Speaker 4: We're equity.
Speaker 5: We're applying park rental availability equitably. However, when I read the reports on how many fields some of these leagues have, they are in a reservation system that is not fair and equitable.
Speaker 4: It's an online system through Long Beach Unified that's really based on your availability to be at a computer at the moment that the field's become available.
Speaker 5: Which then puts some of our our schools and our teams and a lot of our parents that are working parents at a disadvantage when they're also the coaches of these teams. So we need a better system. I'd love to see.
Speaker 4: A.
Speaker 5: An opportunity for us to put together a public private partnership or maybe it's just a public public private partnership where we would be able to manage.
Speaker 4: Those facilities and or throw them into the same system.
Speaker 5: That we're using to distribute parks, but ensure that they're.
Speaker 4: Maintained appropriately because they've made some investments.
Speaker 5: And finally, I think that. It wasn't mentioned here, but when I look at the infrastructure opportunities. I think that it's often important to know that when we talk about the capital improvement budget and you see where the money has gone and come from, and when you compare this project list to where a majority of the land is , I think that it just.
Speaker 4: Shows how underfunded the Fifth District has been.
Speaker 5: And I think that we need to have a plan to fix that immediately.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And I'm glad we were able to continue this this conversation. I want to just say thank you to Parks and Recreation and Marie for for the great work. Marie Knight, you've been great to work with during your your tenure here. And has your department has been completely responsive to my office. And so I just want to thank you again publicly for for your work, but also for your amazing team. The numbers don't I mean, I think I think the data here is is very clear, at least from my perspective, and has given me an opportunity to assess what we need to do to improve programing through programing or for programing in in my district. I try to try to come to this this council dais week after week and for the last five and a half years or so with a citywide view, not just, you know, what's best for my district, but what's best for the entire city. And oftentimes that makes that means making sacrifices and concessions because, you know, it may not make sense. I can recall just a few weeks ago, Parks and Recreation Marine brought forth recommendations to even cut afterschool programs in my district. And I'm looking at the data here and the free programs here. You know, it's I have zero afterschool programs in a district now. Had I known that had this information a few weeks ago, I may not have been so readily and willingly. I may not have been willing to to to to concede at that point. But I understood I looked at the data and the usage and the utilization, and it wasn't there because we have other amenities. I think also this this this looking at this from an equity lens and made it very clear that that some areas of the city were woefully unrepresented under programed in and in some cases underdeveloped. Over the last several years. I know I have focused on developing green space in my district and that has been the focus. And because of that, you know, I think we're we're looking at at least almost eight acres of new recreational or active green space available at Davenport Park and then Molina Park. I think we're going to have to have a real hard conversation if we're looking at being equitable, at how we program those parks moving forward. Because the data here shows that, you know, the kids in eighth District are or are last in all in every category. And so I thank you all for for bringing this this this this report forward, because it's going to really, really reinvigorate me in terms of making sure that we have equity for my district, we programs. And I want to also mention that, you know, we have parks where, you know, my my predecessor once brought forth a an idea to put a skate park because it was more equitable to put a skate park in and in an area of the district and, you know, ran into a buzzsaw because the residents didn't want that type of programing in the district. And so I think it's also important to understand that, you know, we assess and understand and have a good understanding of where our residents are and how parks are utilized because not every park is necessarily going to be utilized or wants to be utilized for for active recreation or programing. You know, they certain areas of the city that are that are that that would prefer quality of life and serenity. And I know we're doing a lot of work to to do that is particularly with our wetlands restoration project with the forest. And that brings me to exhibit E in the staff report the comparison when we look at major projects from FY 13, FY 18. Just can you can you help me discern how. We how? District eight in district nine, the first women's project is actually allocated or counted.
Speaker 5: So we took the total for that project and we allocated it evenly between the two exhibit E.
Speaker 8: So you allocate it evenly between the two? Yes, that's not right. It's because about like 90% of that project is in District eight. I mean, I'm just trying to help you balance the numbers a little bit so that that, you know, I have some questions with how we reach that, because if it's it's not a 5050 project , it's if you look at that, you know, I'm sorry, geography and it's late of the project. Most of it is is district eight before as well as project. So I was I had some questions about that. And then lastly, again, you know, I'm going to be reinvigorated. I'm I'm happy to to see more data come forward in the coming months. I don't know that that's going to tell us anything differently than what we have in front of us here today. This is very comprehensive, in my opinion, and gives me all that I need to to understand where we're going. I would just just implore upon my my colleagues, you know, we do know that we are and maybe we're moving forward with some some some tough budgetary times. And and, you know, again, I've you know, I don't know if it's it's I think we all have to to look at a city wide view and and and and understand that that, you know, there are nine council districts, but we have a responsibility to the entire city and and not just one district or our our specific district, if we're fighting just for for for resources or extra programing for for one district or two districts, that's that's going to put us in a space where I, I just think we're we're not going to going to agree. A lot of what I see here from this data has been played out in over many years. You know, and I don't I don't see necessarily that it's it's our Parks and Recreation Department has has work to to be equity an equitable in terms of the distribution of resources. I think it just kind of plays out the way it plays out with Greenspaces. But we do have some challenges. And when I look at senior programing, District eight has zero senior programs. Right. But District eight is actually programing senior programs through our district budget and through private donations. And we will be addressing that moving forward in budget cycles in, in conversations with our city manager in Parks Recreation Marine Department because, you know, where is my staff? Actually, my, my, my city council district staff is actually being utilized to, to to help run these programs several hours a week. Right. I'm starting to wonder whether or not that should be a park recreation Marine staff actually doing that. This is this is it's an area that we do need to address. And so it's late. My eyesight is going. I'm glad we had this conversation. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Arango.
Speaker 6: Excuse me.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Here's his concern, Belinda. No.
Speaker 0: He does say that.
Speaker 6: He got to scroll up. I don't.
Speaker 1: Know. Oh, you know what it did. Okay. Mason Richardson. Thank you.
Speaker 6: So. So I'll. I'll just say, Murray has been great working with you, and I think we didn't want to see you go. That's why we asked you to. We all hold you as long as we can tonight. But it really has been a pleasure working with you. And I wish you all the success. And Steve, you're going to have to pick up this conversation and keep it going because I don't think it's going to go anywhere. Lena, thank you for for staying on top of this issue. It's an issue that does impact all of us. And I like a lot of the comments because we're all learning tonight, and that's why data is important, you know, but Rome wasn't built in a day. So I want to acknowledge the progress here that the progress behind the dias and the progress that I do see in this report, you know, equity is making resource decisions based on need. And so, you know, when you see a zero, whether it's in this space of a contract class or afterschool programing, whenever you see a zero, no matter what district it is, we it should raise a red flag because there are people in that community need to be served. So in general, people with the least resources in terms of people, the least resources, in my opinion, should not have to travel the farthest for contract classes. So I do think we need to do more to make sure contract cases are rooted in the community, in communities that really, really need that one. Just bring attention a few things. So slide number 14. So you got on slide 14. Let's see what I'm there. Okay. Now I see pools as three, five, six, seven, nine. Are we talking about. Or we thought.
Speaker 1: Were pool were pools and.
Speaker 5: So those are city and school pools.
Speaker 6: Oh, city and school. Okay. I was going to say, I don't have a pool. Okay.
Speaker 0: So you do.
Speaker 6: All right. So, Jordan, you mean the Jordan high pool. Gotcha. Okay, now, what about this map on slide 19? I don't know if this is supposed to be a district boundary or not, but district nine doesn't go in. And Bixby Knolls that color?
Speaker 1: No, those.
Speaker 5: Are by zip codes.
Speaker 6: Okay. All right. That was a little confusing. Just wanted to clarify if all the numbers are skewed that way or what. Then slide 23. Okay. Actually, Councilman Austin brought this up. I was just curious how the 12 million was calculated.
Speaker 1: Well, correct that.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah. There's no problem because it doesn't. I mean, 16% isn't really an accurate reflection of the investment. I mean, you know, there's been a lot of. Yeah, we're very happy, very pleased with Highland Park Community Center, the investments that we're making. But this number just seemed a little bit skewed. So thank you for acknowledging that. And then what I'd like to see, you know, I didn't think I saw it, but just access to open space in general. I know that my district has 1.7 acres per thousand residents, whereas we have, you know, some dishes with ten. Right. And so Kirk, who spoke earlier, dressed like the need to place focus on the open space as for in terms of like park development. So as long as we can continue an equity conversation there and then I acknowledge the the conversation in the last few pages looking at equity based models, you know, obviously the angels in the details. But I like I like the fact that you, you know, you were brave enough to actually throw it in there that some people do program their parks based on equity 50%, you know, by one metric, 30% by another metric, 20% by another metric. And I'm okay with exploring something like that. And then finally, one thing that I think we should talk about should be a part of Park Equity is the.
Speaker 1: Way that our.
Speaker 6: Parks Commission is actually structured. It should at least have one district representative on each district should be on the park commission. That's something we should we should look at. We don't it's not based on district. We should have at least some voice from every single district on that commission. Thanks.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman lingo. Thank you, Mayor. The angel is in the details. Hmm. Never thought about that one before. Anyway, the devil's in the details. I mean, the devil manages. It's all the details are always tough to deal with anyway. And that's neither here nor there. It's getting late. That actually one of the things that that I look at in terms of programing is and it was mentioned somewhat by my I remember Gonzalez is is getting the word out it's getting that communication is letting people know about what programs are available at each of the parks. Yeah, I know I have a few of them in my part. Admiral Kid and Silverado, which are the two largest ones that have a lot of activities going on in here. But I think that there's also they're underutilized to a certain extent because there's not enough people there. I mean, there's there's a language barrier there. And that's why I'm always pushing the language access programs that we need to get off the board and start really implementing as an institutional wide type of program for everything that the city does. Because communication is is one of the most important things that we're about. And we don't get the word out to people about what we're doing for the city. They're not going to understand what's taking place, and people are going to misunderstand what we're doing and think that we're trying to be, you know, pull the wool over their eyes and and that we're not being transparent. That's not true. I mean, we're trying to be transparent. But if we had the right form of communication with them, the word is not going to get out. So I would love to see more of an opportunity about getting them getting the word out to our residents, especially in those parks that have a lot of programs that that they can be utilize, including those that are for a fee and making those also available in in areas where maybe the contractors may not want to go to, but they need to go to, because that's where the probably the need is. And whether it's the poor store or that's part of the contract, so be it. I know when reading some of these evaluations about why we have fee programs more towards the says because people pay well you know maybe sometimes we should look at a waiver or wait at the parks and recreation park and make the same classes available like the yoga class that we talked about earlier for poor seniors and making it more affordable for them so that they can continue. You to receive that type of service? Yes, a couple of questions. There were I was looking at the the slides here and nowhere in any of these slides that I see, Tanaka Park is Tanaka Park deactivated is not working anymore. Is it closed up with what's what's what's not the park or do you know where it's at.
Speaker 5: So I do. In Tanaka Park is a passive park, so we don't have programing at that park that's intended. We have multiple passive parks that did not show up in this report. Throughout the city we have 170 parks in the city. So many of them are intended to be passive and they're not programed.
Speaker 1: Okay. So that that would also explain then what the definition of a park with the the Christmas tree lane, daisy the day parade.
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 1: I could see that. Okay. I mean, that's basically it. I my my big peeve would be making sure that that survey that you got going out there is readable, that it's easy to use, and that it's also includes language access issues such as being able to have it in to garlic and mountain Hmong and. QMI The major languages that are that are present in Long Beach so that we could get a more accurate picture as to what communities of interest would have in it.
Speaker 2: Absolutely.
Speaker 5: And in the shortened presentation tonight, if it were.
Speaker 4: They longer.
Speaker 5: Presentation, you would have heard that we are working with our language access coordinator, city staff and looking at opportunities and options for the greater promotion of our programs and activities.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: And then finally, I do want to lend my voice to your congratulations and your and your new in your career change from Long Beach to Huntington Beach. So you're still on the beach somewhere.
Speaker 5: Staying at the beach.
Speaker 1: Good for you. And I wish you well and much success. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Spinner. Thank you. And let me echo my colleague's sentiments, Marie, thank you for your service to our community. You've done a great job. I'd also like to say to my earlier comments, this isn't the first stint Steve Smith has said, I'm sorry that everybody calls you Steve Smith at one point. Okay, I just made the mistake. He never told me that, Mr. Scott, is that this is not his first stint. I want to remind the audience that it's 1120, so I'm sorry if I'm stammering, but we worked with him as an interim before and he did a great job then. And I have all.
Speaker 6: The confidence in the.
Speaker 1: World in him doing this. My idea behind let's get this wrapped. Part of it is what I think Sir Winston called perfectionism leading to procrastination. I'm looking at the 100 days of summer. Come on, let's get it together before we hit this thing. So that was part of my motivation for saying, let's bring this back quickly, deal with it, work it out. I'd like to commend Parks and Rec staff. Just I just think you do a great job. I have a unique district in that I do go from the east side to the west side. So I think the way staff works at out, for instance, I'll tell you, Whaley Park was mentioned, we have exactly two municipal band concerts in Whaley every year. One of them is on a council meeting night, so I can't even attended. But we bring about the equity I'm sorry, equality in this and that. Stearns Park has a movie night and the Long Beach Community Band plays at that or is a part park the same? We just work it out and maybe my office funds a little bit of it, but I just think there are a lot of practical fixes we can bring to this. Also to Councilwoman Mango and her point about infrastructure, this is huge. Can you imagine if the fifth District still had the nature center, which is the fourth District now? She would have all that funding to worry about, too. So we put a lot of effort into that, and I don't think you can separate infrastructure from programing. I think I see the Supervisor Stearns Park up there. Thank you for being here so late tonight. All right. So we have a riff on the Stearns Park Community Center that has compromised. We may not be able to use the facility more. Okay. There goes programing because of infrastructure. So two cats, one woman, Mungo's point, you can't lose sight of that or you lose utilization of your parks. There's probably another point I made, but I'll defer. It's getting late. Thank you. Thank you. And to close up, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: I just wanted to say thank you to my colleagues. I know sometimes it's difficult to challenge our thought, like I'd mentioned, but I think that we're on a good path. We have a good discussion that we've had here and various different opinions. And this is absolutely a city wide approach, you know. Otherwise, we would have just had data for one district, but we had it for all. And if there's zeros in any of your categories, this is a chance for us to really, again, bring that forward as the new data comes back. So thanks again. I know everybody's been waiting for the next items to come up. And I just want to thank everyone for entertaining us tonight and appreciate that.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you very much. I want to, of course, think again of park staff, our Parks and Recreation Commission. I know it's David out there now. I got my glasses on, so maybe there's others that I just can't see. But thank you to all of them for their great work. And I, I just wanted to point out one piece of the presentation, which was the commission has done a lot of work on trying to get the fee incentives to go towards Long Beach residents versus, you know, folks from other communities. And you've done a lot of work on that. There's been a lot of improvement in the process. And so we want to continue and encourage you to continue that because I think that's really important that our our local taxpayers should be receiving the benefit of those free glasses. So so thank you for that. And please cast your vote for the receiving file. I think this receipt and file includes a report back in about, you know, 4 to 6 months. Right. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. I think we have 13 items left. So let's start with item 32. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report on Park Equity in the City of Long Beach. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0172 | Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. I think we have 13 items left. So let's start with item 32.
Speaker 2: Item 32 is report from Parks, Recreation and Marine and Financial Management. Recommendation to issue a permit to Shoreline Village for placement and operation of retail merchandizing units along in Rainbow Harbor and portion of the adjacent Shoreline Aquatic Park for a term of ten years. District two.
Speaker 5: Councilman Pierce I'd like to hear a staff report and then public comment, if we could, and then I'll make some awesome comments about how much I appreciate people waiting.
Speaker 1: Mr. West, Steve Scott, Mayor, members of the City Council, the item before you tonight is to issue a permit to Shoreline.
Speaker 4: Village for.
Speaker 1: The operation of retail merchandizing units.
Speaker 4: Or.
Speaker 1: Amuse along the Esplanade in Rainbow Harbor. Since 2007, Parks, Recreation and Marine has permitted retail merchandizing units on the Esplanade from the western edge of Shoreline Village to Shoreline Aquatic Park, as is a best practice for commercial enterprises on city property. We went out and did an RFP to kind of beat the bushes to see what was out there and available. We received a couple of proposals our selection committee ultimately recommended. Let's also, if we can, just a little bit less loud for. Thank you very much. Selection committee recommended Shoreline Village for their well-developed vision of the RMU program, a commitment to high operating standards and a commitment to actively pursue Long Beach businesses. I want to mention that in keeping with the city's business friendly environment, current RSU.
Speaker 4: Operators.
Speaker 1: Will have the opportunity to apply for and become tenants of Shoreline Village's offerings. In short, this proposed permit is for ten years with an option to extend for an additional five and would include up to 18 reviews use. That concludes my staff report. Thank you. Councilmember Pearce. Public comments at first.
Speaker 5: It's fine. I can talk and then we'll have Deborah. I just want to say how much I am excited about you all taking over this process. Hopefully the vision that you have implemented of Shoreline Village and that you're working with the full team on, one day this council will get to see and this is a key part of it. And so having a responsible operator that's there and making sure that we're engaging with Long Beach businesses is again, as we saw with the American Life Project, something that is a top priority for me, making sure that we have Long Beach businesses have a chance at being in our tourism zone so that we can highlight all the great things that Long Beach has to offer. And so I do want to hear public comment, but I want my colleagues to know that this is the area if you're driving down Shoreline Village and you see those kiosk there, this is that area. And I think that we've had the same operator for a long time. And so it's really exciting to have some new energy there and to have as many kiosk as we've slotted for this. So I want to say how much I appreciate your guys effort and appreciate you all staying. So I'd love to hear from you guys.
Speaker 1: If there's any public company, please come forward.
Speaker 3: Good evening. Hi, I'm Debra Fix in general manager of Shirley Village. And also joining me tonight is Sergio Gonzalez, assistant manager. Tonight, I'm asking you to vote to accept parks, Marine Parks, Recreation, Marine's recommendation to issue the permit to Shoreline Village to manage a Rito carp program at Rainbow Harbor. You should know that you'll be getting much more than an up to 18 unit, up to 18 carts. The permits allows you'll be granting access to a long, standing Long Beach partner that has been successful at managing a shopping center, attracting locals and tourists while creating a positive economic impact in the downtown waterfront. Yes, we will be placing the beautiful carts that you've been shown in the package forwarded to you. But more importantly, we will be activating an underutilized area of our downtown community. The Shoreline Village Management will carefully select cart tenants and schedule activities to make Rainbow Harbor an enjoyable, enjoyable destination for locals and tourists. I met many of you at community events and I believe a few of me, a few of, you know, have firsthand knowledge of my personal commitment to Long Beach and the investment the owners of Shoreline Village make in the community. With our free events and support of many Long Beach nonprofits, we regularly host. We regularly host events that provide both free entertainment for the public and buying opportunities for all price ranges from a hot dog to filet mignon. Creating a great economic development for dozens of small businesses showing their age has already expanded its footprint to the Rainbow Harbor by having permitted events such as zombie walk Mardi Gras hours and coming this summer, the biggest pirate fest on the West Coast. In partnership with local event planners, with the support of showing village ownership. I am active and I'm an active member of the Club DLP, a rotary of Long Beach and serve on local nonprofit boards. Currently, there are about half a dozen card operators at Rainbow Harbor that have in. Most of them have contacted me regarding keeping their business going with the new management. All current operators have first priority in leasing the new carts. They must be in good standing with the past operator and agree to the new management practices. Once it is determined how many carts will be available for new tenants, the next priority will be to pursue local Long Beach businesses. I have spoken with a few and there is tremendous interest. The plan is to showcase the best that Long Beach has to offer while providing goods and services sought out by the tourists and locals . Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. I wasn't sure if the other person was speaking. Perfect. That. Deborah, thank you so much. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Deborah and Sergio just want to say thank you so much. We were just there over the weekend and it was such a great environment and I can't even imagine what it's going to look like once this is all said and done. But thank you for all your work.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I want to, first of all, just congratulate you guys that you're doing great work out there. My one request is going to be, as you're bringing in some of the locals, if there's an opportunity to work with some of our local Long Beach branded retailers, whether it's Long Beach clothing or five, six, two, or any of the folks that are creating Long Beach brand clothing in the city. I love seeing people walk around with Long Beach hats and Lombard shirts and Long Beach sweaters, and I think we need to encourage more of that in particularly areas that are tourist havens and places where visitors go. So I just the be great to have as a as option for folks as well. So with that, please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And their last request tonight was to move up item 31 and then back to the regular agenda. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP PR17-042 and authorize City Manager, or designee, to issue a permit, and any amendments, with ABA Enterprises, LLC, of Beverly Hills, CA, and Gateway Enterprises, LLC, of Los Angeles, CA, collectively doing business as Shoreline Village, in Long Beach, CA, for placement and operation of retail merchandizing units along the esplanade in Rainbow Harbor and a portion of the adjacent Shoreline Aquatic Park, for a term of ten years, with the option to renew for one additional five-year period, at the discretion of the City Manager. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0171 | Speaker 1: Thank you. And their last request tonight was to move up item 31 and then back to the regular agenda.
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor, after accused myself twice on this commission.
Speaker 2: Item 31 is a report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation two received five report from the Commission on Youth and Children. Request City Attorney to draft a resolution repealing resolution number Sea Dash 282794. The resolutions of the current commission and draft a new resolution creating a nine member Advisory Commission on Youth and Families Citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Mr.. RUSSERT You have a short staff presentation on this. Basically, we had a 19 member committee commission, and now we have a nine member commission with two youth and seven adults. I think that the key thing is that these are recommendations coming from the commission themselves. So I believe that they've been working for many months on this and working very closely with Marie. Okay, great. Mr. Catherine Ashton.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Certainly. I'm happy to make the motion to support the recommendations from the Youth and Youth Commission. I think streamlining this plan makes a lot of sense, since it seems like they were having a tough time making quorum. I did have a question after reading this item for staff specifically regarding there are some bullets on the second page of the staff report that talks about the commission making efforts to promote current city initiatives that benefit youth and families. And it calls out the My Brother's Keeper program Building Healthy Communities and All Children Thrive. I know My Brother's Keeper program is a city program. Are we also just highlighting organizations or and I would just hate to send a message that we're limiting to certain organizations as well, because I know I was a couple of at least one one of the organizations reached out to me over the weekend and asked that they be included in this and they wanted to be stakeholders in the process for for youth activities.
Speaker 5: So, Councilmember Austin, that's a great question. Actually, the current commission, the way it is chartered, is very prescriptive as to what initiatives the Commission can work on. And so that was very limiting as as well as some of those initiatives are no longer here or in the city. So the ad hoc committee is suggesting and these are that's why the wording says such as it's meant to be inclusive and not limiting. So there are opportunities for other organizations in the community if they want to come forward. But remember that this is an advisory commission. So the commission won't really engage in activities with these, but they are there as an advisory body. So My Brother's Keeper is a city initiative and all children thrive as a city initiative through the Health Department. And Building Healthy Communities is a community engagement resource that we use. So these are just examples. But we want to leave it open ended so that the commission can look at other opportunities in the community.
Speaker 8: And thank you so much. And I guess my second question would be how do we streamline from 19 to 9? What is that, the mayor's decision making discretion? Or how do we.
Speaker 5: See the recommendation of the ad hoc committee? Is that all the current members of the commission that are in good standing, that means that they have met all their meeting requirements. They submitted the application process to the mayor's office for consideration on the commission. If there are more than the nine, which I guess seven adults and the two youth, and then there's a decision to be made and if there are less, then those other states can be filled through the normal process.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Brice.
Speaker 3: I support this item. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? CNN, please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Lucian Case. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from the Commission on Youth and Children (Commission); request City Attorney to draft a resolution repealing Resolution No. C-28279 for the dissolution of the current Commission; and request City Attorney to draft a new resolution creating a nine-member advisory Commission on Youth and Families. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0165 | Speaker 2: Lucian Case.
Speaker 1: 25.
Speaker 2: 25 is a report from economic development. Recommendation to execute all documents necessary with private property owners in Long Beach to identify economic development, project and share costs to implement the Business Corridor Improvement and Property Beautification Partnership Program on private property in an amount not to exceed $25,000 per property citywide.
Speaker 1: Give us a motion in a second or any public comment scene. And did you want to we have to do a very brief going to just go to John, very brief taking this address. I was going to get to that. So Mr. Geisinger report. Thank you, Mayor, and members of the city council. There's just a few things I need to read into the record as part of this presentation. As you know, on September 5th of 2017, the council approved a corridor improvement fund of $450,000 for three boulevards. And I'm trying to get my clicker to work here. This included it's buzzer me. Here you go. This included Carson Avenue, Pacific Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. The goals of this program were to improve property values, increase customer traffic, and help individual property owners, groups or associations of property owners located within the project areas. On a first come, first served basis, the preference for these projects will be given to those that have the greatest potential for significant economic impact in projects may include signage, painting, windows, awning removal of external security gates, lighting, landscaping or the development of business improvement districts, among other projects as identified by the property owners. As I mentioned, this is a one time $450,000 allocation from the City Council for 2018. But staff will be seeking additional funding sources such as the Community Development BLOCK grants for businesses that fall inside those eligible areas or matching funds from the private property owner if the private property owner offers that. Additionally, tonight, we're asking the City Council to approve the partnership agreement between the city and the private property owners with the following terms and conditions. This must be new work or improvements to the property up to $25,000 per property. The scope of work must be approved by the city prior to any work or project. Kick off payments will be made on a reimbursement basis. Contractors will be required to pay prevailing wage and contractors must maintain current Long Beach business licenses. One other note is that the partnership agreement may be used for properties outside the project area if funding becomes available for those projects in the future. Construction. That was my report. Sorry. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor, may I please speak out?
Speaker 1: I'm sure.
Speaker 4: I have a note from Mr. De Andrews who had to leave.
Speaker 5: To be in Sacramento in a few hours. He wanted to thank the staff for their hard work on this, and he'd like to.
Speaker 4: Ask specifically about the eligibility of the.
Speaker 5: Funds for the creation of the Property or Business Improvement.
Speaker 4: District on Pacific. And just I know that I'm supportive of this idea and I just want to make sure that the staff were supportive.
Speaker 1: And COUNCILMEMBER Yes, the we will be reaching out to business owners and property owners on Pacific and if they wish to aggregate their funds toward the establishment of a business improvement district, that would be considered eligible as well.
Speaker 5: Wonderful. And then last question. Will there be priority to projects.
Speaker 4: That have matching funds from the business owner?
Speaker 1: Yes. So what we're going to be doing is compiling a list and trying to maximize the amount of the funds by leveraging matching funds or outside sources. So absolutely, the projects where we can have the greatest impact would be those that we can actually leverage additional funding from the participants.
Speaker 5: My only last comment is before anything is spent outside of.
Speaker 4: The zones that were designated by the Council at the Budget Oversight Committee and the full council, and to note that it comes back to this body for review. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Please cast your vote. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary with private property owners in Long Beach to identify economic development projects and share costs to implement the Business Corridor Improvement and Property Beautification Partnership Program on private property, in an amount not to exceed $25,000 per property, as funds are available to support the program. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0168 | Speaker 2: Bush and Kerry.
Speaker 1: And 2727.
Speaker 2: A report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive and for the fiscal year 2017 year end budget performance report and increase appropriation in fund across several departments for various purposes to reflect final expenditures and carryover cleanup citywide.
Speaker 1: Mr. Message of Indianapolis. A quick report by our acting budget manager, Grayson and John GROSS.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor, and members of the city council. I'll be very brief. This is the 17 year and performance report for the period ending September 30th, 2017. The Jonathan Measure funds and Tidelands funds all ended the year with surpluses this year, and the recommended uses of the surplus funds are detailed in the report, including funding for the FY18 Adopted Contingent Appropriation and the General Fund for Council District Priorities, and then the Tidelands Fund to support Convention Center improvements in lieu of using Measure eight funds, which was also approved in adoption rate. The budget adjustments supporting all the recommended uses of the surpluses are not scheduled to be brought forward until mid-March. Should City Council or the Bosie wish to further review the recommendations for all other funds? There are no significant concerns and this concludes the staff report.
Speaker 1: There is a motion in a second saying any public comment saying none can come from among other kind of question.
Speaker 5: Mr. West, you'd mentioned some potential allocations of flipping the funds for sidewalks, so it's available now. Would you be able to elaborate slightly.
Speaker 1: Altering that over to Mr. GROSS? That's the council item two for the million dollars for sidewalk. Yes.
Speaker 5: Yes. So with regards to the.
Speaker 3: Talent fund, per city council action on F-18 during the F-18 adoption night, 1 million of the first available additional F by 17 year entitlements.
Speaker 5: Operating surplus was to be appropriated for.
Speaker 3: One time improvements to the convention center in lieu of using Measure eight funds for this purpose. So there are sufficient funds available to meet this contingent appropriation. And so this is included in the use recommended use of funds available.
Speaker 5: Wonderful. We look forward to those sidewalks getting started. And I, I see the public.
Speaker 4: Works director here is also excited to get the funding. So thank you very much. We've been waiting. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the Fiscal Year 2017 Year-End Budget Performance Report, and increase appropriations in several funds across several departments for various purposes to reflect final expenditures and carryover clean-up. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0170 | Speaker 1: Item 20. Item 30.
Speaker 2: Item. There is a report from Human Resources. Recommendation to Adobe resolution approving the 2017 through 2019 MRU with the Long Beach Lifeguard Association TDY.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion to seek any public comment.
Speaker 3: Councilwoman Price I just want to thank our lifeguards who stayed for the whole meeting to be here. Thank you for everything that you do. And and we appreciate it very much. You're very much a big part of the public safety continuum. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Rangel. Anything to add to this? No, we're just excited to bring it to conclusion. Craig, we're now we're at 1010 of our 11 for 11. Now, this is the right. This would be 11 for 11. Congratulations to you guys, actually. So very excited about that. And thank you. Graduation to our lifeguards. And please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Price. Motion carries. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the 2017-2019 Memorandum of Understanding with the Long Beach Lifeguard Association. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_18-0173 | Speaker 1: Thank you. We just did 31, so we're moving on to 33.
Speaker 2: Item 33 is a report from Parks Recreation, Marine Financial Management Recommendation to execute amendments to contracts with Azteca Landscape and Merchant Landscape Services for grounds maintenance services citywide.
Speaker 1: There's a motion in a second. Is there any public comment? I'm sorry, was that public comment up there for this item? No. Okay. Then please. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 5: I just hope that everyone knows what a big deal this is and how hard Parks and Rec worked to put in some measures where when Azteca doesn't perform properly, there are penalties and responsibilities and accountability. And we had a time when we were first elected where they would clean up an area and then.
Speaker 4: Literally drive their truck across our fields.
Speaker 5: And so those things won't be possible anymore. And we're putting in accountability.
Speaker 4: And measures that the former council before us did not have for us to be able to execute. So I'm really, really proud of the staff and I know how much time it took for you guys to accomplish this. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute amendments to Contract No. 33071 with Azteca Landscape, Inc., of Ontario, CA, and Contract No. 33259 with Merchants Landscape Services, Inc., of Santa Ana, CA, for grounds maintenance services; extend the term to August 31, 2018 with an option to extend for a period of three months, at the discretion of City Manager; and, increase the aggregate contract amount by $1,932,666, plus $966,333 if the optional three-month extension is exercised, for a total aggregate contract amount not to exceed $9,663,330. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02202018_17-0563 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: 38.
Speaker 2: Item 38 is report from Councilman Andrews, chair of the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee. Recommendation to approve naming a social hall or kitchen at the Cesar Chavez Community Center in honor of Mrs. Ruth Ricker.
Speaker 1: Can I get a second, please? Any public comment on this?
Speaker 3: Mr. Mayor, can I say something?
Speaker 1: Yes, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So I want to thank Councilman Andrews for entertaining this. I know we were back and forth whether to call the program, which we know is temporary or a social hall. But I she was an incredible African-American woman, and I think we should absolutely name the social hall after her. So I support that motion. However, I do want to ensure that I believe there's needed repairs in that social hall. So if we can look at those repairs and find out what those repairs are and find a timeline for them, because we'd like to make sure it's done correctly in 30 days. That would be great.
Speaker 1: We certainly will do that.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And there's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Wishing Karis.
Speaker 1: Thank you. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve naming the Social Hall or Kitchen at the Cesar Chavez Community Center in Honor of Mrs. Ruth Ricker. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02132018_18-0115 | Speaker 0: Thanks again to the Assistance League for recognizing Children's Mental Health Month. So we're move along with the agenda. Let's go ahead and here have our have our hearing. I don't want to, number one.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation under the record. Conclude the public hearing. Declare ordinance amending various sections of Title 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to unattended donation boxes read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution to submit a request to the California Coastal Commission to certify an amendment to the certified a local coastal program citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And no oath is required, so I'll hand it over to two staff. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We have Linda Tatum, planning manager, planning bureau manager, and Carrie Tai, current planning officer. We're going to be conducting the presentation tonight for us.
Speaker 4: And we also have the project planner, Anita Gold's Garcia as a part of the presentation team. Kerri to I will start off the presentation.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the city council. Before you tonight is a zoning code amendment for unattended donation boxes. Thank you for the clicker. Sorry about that. So I'm going to start out by explaining what is an unattended donation box. And so you may have seen these around town. There's a picture of one up on the on the screen there, but it's basically a nonpermanent container that typically accepts donations. Most often they're textiles, you know, used clothing, shoes and books and the like to be used for resale, recycling or distribution for a variety of purposes because they can be run by different kinds of organizations. So the background is why do why why all of a sudden is this being presented as a new ordinance? And over the past couple of years, our code enforcement department has reported public nuisance related to issues like trash, graffiti, loitering and general blight. As a result of these boxes, basically the unpermitted and unregulated placement of these boxes results in something to attract a destination to drop things off. And as a result, the there's been occasions around town where this has become a code enforcement issue. So in April of 2017, the City Council established a one year moratorium for the use of unattended donation boxes for the purpose of creating regulations and amending the municipal code in order to responsibly permit this. So the proposed zoning code amendments are necessary because these boxes are not specifically addressed in the Long Beach zoning code, and therefore right now there are not a permitted use. As a result, we have no way to permit them and so we're on the way to fixing that. One of the elements that's part of the discussion is that these unattended donation boxes are actually entitled to First Amendment protection, and that's because they represent a way for the public to express in part through donations what their beliefs are, what their belief system is. And so therefore, they they are a little bit different from just a your everyday land use. They do have some First Amendment component. The purpose of the zoning code amendment is to recognize unattended donation boxes as a permitted accessory use. And I'll talk about that in a bit with specific development standards and criteria to minimize any potential impacts because of their First Amendment protection and the need to somehow permit them responsibly. Or what staff is proposing is what's called ministerial review. Ministerial review is contrasted with the discretionary review in that there is the level of certainty that something can be permitted once it is consistent with established criteria. So the first component of the proposed zoning code amendment is the actual definition that staff is proposing. The introduction of a definition that describes generally what these boxes are, and it's meant to be general. So that encompasses a variety of, you know, configurations that they could have, but they would be they're unstaffed and there are drop off boxes, containers, receptacles or a similar device that's used for soliciting or collecting donations of clothing or other salvageable personal property. And we also included in the definition a language that differentiates these from the beverage container recycling operations, because those are separately regulated by the state. And we wanted to minimize any confusion between the two. These would be permitted as accessory uses in commercial zones as well as institutional zones. They would not be permitted in any residential areas or industrial areas, for example. And the proposed development standards include having to obtain a land use permit for the box, and that will allow the city to verify the proposed development standards that are in the in the draft ordinance. One is that the there can only be one unattended donation box every 1000 feet, and that is to prevent the proliferation of these boxes. They also cannot be placed on any vacant lots. And that's why they have to be an accessory use. They have to be in addition to something that is already on that property. They also cannot be placed in areas required for parking spaces and landscape areas, dry bills, loading zones, etc., or walkways. And lastly, they do have they will have minimum set back in visibility. So they can't block corners, cannot. Create blind areas and also must have a light source nearby so that they are not placed in dark areas. The the development standards also cover.
Speaker 2: That.
Speaker 3: The container themselves. In other words, they must be constructed of durable, waterproof materials. There are size limits, so the maximum height would be six feet with a maximum size of 25 square feet, and that's generally five by five. Also, there has to be a locking mechanism and there are maintenance requirements to ensure that the area around the box isn't is maintained. Signage is also required to be posted on the box in case the a member of the public or any any kind of enforcement official needs to contact the operator or agent or a property owner or agent of that box. So just to go through the background, the planning commission at their January 4th meeting forwarded a recommendation that the City Council adopt this ordinance along with a negative declaration. Both the negative declaration and the public hearing for the Planning Commission were circulated for separate public review periods, and staff did not receive any comments with regard to the negative declaration or the Planning Commission hearing. The City Council hearing subsequently, subsequently was also separately public notice. We did receive one comment from a person who commented that the property owner information should not be required to be posted on the box, and with that the Planning Commission should go back to the Planning Commission did forward a recommendation to the Council and so tonight the recommendation is to enact the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the negative declaration and approve the zoning ordinance amendment for regulations for unattended donation boxes. This is also accompanied by a local coastal program amendment for these regulations to be implemented in the city's coastal zone as well . That concludes staff present presentation and I can address any questions you have. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Mr. Vice Mayor. Just for clarification, this item would require two votes one to adopt the negative declaration and approve the ordinance, and the second one to adopt a resolution forwarding it to the Coastal Commission for its consideration.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. So that concludes your presentation. We'll go to the public before council deliberation. Is there any public comment on this item on this hearing? Seeing none. We will take it back behind the rail. So we'll start with Council Hooper now. Thank you and thank you for that staff report. Great job. Just as a point of clarification, I think the public perception is that these boxes are for donations to the needy. And the problem here is that a for profit organization can set up one of these boxes. So it's a double whammy. Not only do do the folks donating here, it's not going to the source they think it is. You're actually taking items from goodwill and others who would collect them otherwise. So I'd like to ask our assistant city attorney, Mike Mayes. This is the best we can do in terms of regulating this, in your opinion?
Speaker 2: Casselman Supervisor Yes. And what we did is, as Steph alluded to, as Kerry alluded to, there was a case in 2015 from the state of Michigan where they struck down an ordinance that basically banned these types of boxes because they discriminated as but the ordinance discriminated on its face as between charitable and nontraditional solicitations. Then subsequent to that, in 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, which governs California, upheld an ordinance that was adopted by the city of Oakland to regulate these boxes. So to the best of our ability, we use the Oakland ordinance as a model, but drafted it in a way that it was a little bit more protective. I thought of Long Beach interests, so I think from a nuisance standpoint. So I think we've done the best we can.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you for that. That's all I am. Thank you. Councilman Price.
Speaker 4: Thank you for the staff report. I think these changes are very welcome. My question is, in regards to enforcement, what are we doing about the blighted containers that are there? Who who is going around and identifying how we can get rid of those? Councilwoman, there is not a proactive effort to go after those that are in the right of way. However, as with any code enforcement action, whenever there is a report of a project or a a particular box location that has blight graffiti overflowing, that is an appropriate activity for our code enforcement staff to pursue. And we will pursue them as we have in the past with any that have come to our attention. We have proceeded pursue those aggressively and do is it possible to add this is one of the features on the Go Along Beach app? I we can certainly pursue that because I know we have graffiti and I know we have dumped items. So there are categories that are, you know, collaterally related to this. I wonder if we could just have this and then those, those notices would go to code enforcement as opposed to public works. We will actively pursue that option. Great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 3: I had a lot of the same comments as my colleagues. I was going to ask, do we have a logo or I mean a sticker where we could advertise our Go Beach app on trash cans or on these stand alone so that somebody, if they were overflowing or had graffiti, you could say report to go beach.
Speaker 4: Staff is not aware that there is a decal or sticker that you can slap on, but we can certainly investigate that as well.
Speaker 3: I've been in conversation with Public Works about a couple of our locked Ben ideas that we're rolling around with some of our areas and that is one of the things that we'd like to ask for. So and moving forward, if there's any way where we can publicize our Go Beach app on these items would be fantastic and perhaps I missed it. Are there fines associated with them not picking them up and and emptying them?
Speaker 4: They they would be the standard fines that are identified on the code for any land use or code enforcement violation. So there wouldn't be fines that are specific to this particular type of activity.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 3: So at the thousand feet, I think people often forget how close 1000 feet is. And so I have a question related to how many could be within one shopping center, because that is a big concern to us.
Speaker 4: The regulation is based strictly on the distance requirement. It's not based upon a shopping center property because as you know, a shopping center can be any any size. There's no limit on the size of a shopping center. The strict criteria is 1000 feet a distance from an another bin.
Speaker 3: But if this council chose, we could state that if a shopping center is less than this size, they can only have one. Certainly because I have concerns, the Long Beach Town Center was specifically designed to make it difficult for traffic to leave quickly as a safety measure so that it would be less of a target for criminals to break into cars and a very difficult escape route and so on and so forth. And it's worked very effectively. However, if the town center were to say put in for or the shopping center off of Spring Street and put in two or three their large shopping centers. And so my concern is that the aggregating of them and the traffic flow in and out of these centers, are there any regulations related to their distance from a driveway?
Speaker 4: Right now there is no distance regulation. However, there are some very specific standards that discuss where they can't be in relation to other required components of a project such as they can't be in a required parking space, they can't be in a required setback area. So again, the location is determined through the permit process. Staff examines the location and determines that there are no safety or visibility issues before issuing a permit for a specific location. That would certainly be taken into consideration.
Speaker 3: Well, I would feel more comfortable if we were able to take another week and bring this back again, where we would put in some kind of regulations that would limit the number per shopping center and or the distance required between a driveway or an inlet or an outlet. And so those would be my recommendations. But I'm open to hearing from my colleagues.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 5: Thank you. My question was regarding the 1000 feet and permit limit within for the unmanned donation boxes. Quick. I just just was curious to know how the 1000 feet would be enforced and and if if and how would would unpermitted YouTubes be be dealt with 1000 feet?
Speaker 3: Sure. Councilmember Austin. So in terms of the enforcement, if I understand the question properly, it's that if a member of the public or somebody were to report a box that did not was not he either was either permitted by this ordinance and not complying with the terms. In other words, they move it or they're not collecting the donations in a regular enough manner that is resulting in in a mess. Basically, they would contact planning and code enforcement. They would contact development services, and then we would send out the traditional without the notice of of violation. It's like a warning for us. We don't cite them because we give people the ability to rectify the situation first, and then it would go down the regular channel whereby if it wasn't cleaned up within a certain time and then citations would begin and then the citations increase and eventually it ends up at the city prosecutor's office . And that's the standard enforcement tool. But it is it is by complaint. And then if it were a box that is out there that was not permitted and then somebody called in, they could possibly come in and permitted under the new ordinance if they met the location and setback criteria. But if not, they would certainly have to remove it. And again, it would go back into the same corrective action pathway that the city has.
Speaker 2: And Councilwoman Mungo, just to clarify there, we already currently have a provision in the draft ordinance that I think would address your concern in regard to driveways. There's a specific section that says that you DBS shall have a minimum setback of 20 feet from the public right of way and five feet from any property line or meet the setback requirements of the underlying zone which ever is greater. And in addition, it requires that no UDP be within any landscape, parking space, driveway or walkway, handicapped accessibility, route building and grocery, egress, easements, trash enclosure or waste disposal areas or the public right of way. So they clearly would have to be set back at a minimum of 20 feet from a driveway area which typically traverses the public right of way. So we do have that in there. And if the will of the council was to bring this back with additional changes, we probably wouldn't be able to bring it back next week , but perhaps the week following that, to give us a little bit more time to to clarify it. And as Carrie pointed out, the moratorium would remain in effect till April 11th. So we do have time.
Speaker 3: Well, I really appreciate you making the mention. I guess I only think and this is my quick hand drawing on the back of our mayor speaker's list. But while the entrance to any area might be maybe only the 20 feet area, there's really a circulation of traffic that goes in and out of this area. Same with the facility that has Grounds Bakery. Same with the facility. There's so many parking I'm sorry, there's so many shopping centers that have a natural flow of traffic. And if they were even to put somewhere way back here off the main street, but in this like circle flow and people are getting in and out of their cars to put things in, I just worry there's already cases of. Issues related to traffic flow. And while we would hope that each different shopping center would want to not put it there, I think that sometimes there's only certain areas that would even be available. So I'll leave the friendly to Councilmember Superman. I see that he's queued up to speak as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Sabrina. Okay, Councilman Ralston.
Speaker 5: So, yes, I defer to a little bit of my time to Councilmember Mongo. Thank you very much. I did have a question regarding the permit fees. I'm not sure that was addressed here. And what would those be for these of these receptacles?
Speaker 4: I'm sorry. Permit has the permit fees of that permit fee. We are still in the process of determining that, but it will be a fairly meaningful I'm sorry, minimal, probably within a couple of hundred dollars. We're still looking at the actual approval fee for this effort.
Speaker 5: And so is it our discretion to set such fees or is there very legal kind of guideline for that?
Speaker 4: Well, there is essentially any fees that we establish in the department. They're generally cost recovery. And after having looked at the process for review of the applications, we think that it's going to be equivalent to the review of the same permit or some other equivalent ministerial review, which would be a an hour or so of a staff time. So we're looking at something around a couple of hundred dollars for this this fee.
Speaker 5: So don't we want to factor in graffiti removal and code enforcement and all of those other services that may be impacted by proliferation of under the man?
Speaker 4: I think that in considering the fee that we're considering, it's actually the fee for the review and the approval. All of the code enforcement activities would be covered by a citation that would actually cover the costs of cleanup or other fees. So we truly are only looking at the fee for us to process the applications that staff reviews.
Speaker 5: All right. Thank you so.
Speaker 4: Much. All right. And if I may, Vice Chair and the concern regarding Councilwoman Mango's request for this to come back in a couple of weeks, she had recommended next week and we would need additional time to prepare a staff report and get it through the process. And I just wanted to point out that we don't have a meeting on that February 28th, and we have a firm agenda on March six for the land use element. So the soonest that we could come back with this item would be March 13th.
Speaker 0: So just a question. Is there a mechanism? I mean, can we insert this language? I mean, how many times is this ordinance need to come back to the city council anyway? First reading and second reading. So after this hearing, we would already have those. Does this count as the first reading or we still have two additional reading?
Speaker 2: Mr.. RICE Mario, this would not count as first.
Speaker 0: Reading, so it already needs to we make a change here and then just make sure is reflected in the first reading.
Speaker 2: No, because this type of a change is not an easy kind of change to make. We need the very precise language to insert and think it over and see how it would actually work and bring back a recommendation. But so even if we brought it back in March, we would still bring it back well in advance of the expiration.
Speaker 0: So the next question is, was there no evaluation of like traffic or some approve some sort of a provisional or conditional approval that that we have as a city council to approve, say, multiple in one site? Do we not have that mechanism already built in to the ordinance?
Speaker 4: He was the proposed ordinance does build in the ability for an applicant to request a second burn at a site. Okay. So that's already in there. I understood the request from Councilman Mango would be to consider. I'm not clear. She can probably articulate.
Speaker 0: The goal was to get less correct. Right. Less than more so which.
Speaker 3: Would be a greater.
Speaker 4: Distance separation that she's ask us to consider. And I think we're still waiting for a specific direction in that regard.
Speaker 0: Can we give it some more specific direction now?
Speaker 3: Yes. So from from my point of view, I'm not trying to have less of them per se. But what I don't want to have is multiple locations on a single site site. So if, for instance, the shopping center wants to have two different competing bins, I actually don't even mind if they're next to each other instead of having them at two different locations, blocking traffic in two different places on the same site. My bigger concern is not a thousand feet apart. My bigger concern is having four locations or two locations on a single property that both have potential for blight, potential for trash. Fake issues. I would rather have them all consolidated. And so I think what Vice Mayor Richardson was asking is, as they come up one at a time, will there be an opportunity for the expertize of the district to have a little say in that, whether it's the expertize from the traffic engineer or the expertize from whomever knows that area similar to a copy.
Speaker 4: And I let me just explain kind of the thought process for our staff in recommending or at least considering the additional or the second been at one site. The idea there is if the volume of activity at any one bean is overwhelming just based upon its convenience and people just like it, we wanted to make sure that there was less of a potential for blight by having two bins. Right. And if if you're comfortable with the recommendation, I think what staff could do is to limit it to no more than two bins per site at a maximum, regardless of a combination of no more than two bins per site or the 1000 square feet, whichever is less. So that we kind of cover the bases, if what I'm hearing you express is that you don't want more than two bins per site. And I think your concern regarding, I guess, traffic concerns or the like, we think that the current regulations that are specified in the ordinance that the city attorney read out will address any concerns about traffic. We don't think that this has the potential to affect traffic because again, the staff review will take care of that. And looking at this very detailed list, and I think we would also just as a matter of course, make sure that it doesn't have any visibility issues or traffic traffic conflict issues.
Speaker 3: So I do like your recommendation. I'm very comfortable with that. I also like the staff process and I hope that in the first few that are approved or reviewed in our area, that we have the ability to at least learn what types of locations and accesses and positioning they're looking for. Because in my experience with these, I have seen some terrible things and once they receive a permit, going backwards is is very difficult in some cities. And I know that we're.
Speaker 2: A very.
Speaker 3: Large city and I don't want our communities to have to be facing these issues for an ongoing basis. So thank you for the recommendation. I appreciate it. If Councilmember Soup and other make of the motion is open to it, then I think that that would be a great step. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Mr. Boehner. Okay. I just want to make sure where we are on the friendly, are we coming back some time with this or.
Speaker 4: My understanding is that with the the revised motion or the language to limit it to no more than two bins on any site, that there's not a need to come back, that this could proceed to a second reading at whatever the next council meeting is.
Speaker 0: Yeah, I'm just not comfortable with that motion. And to your point, Ms.. Tatum, if one is very popular, we'd locate a second. I would argue if one's very popular, then that's not the right vehicle for that spot. It shouldn't be an unattended bean if it's if it's going to have to be emptied every hour or something like that. So I think the spirit of the ordinance was we were trying to prevent over proliferation. And if we put in the ordinance, we allow to per location, guess what? They're going to max. That out is my fear at every single location. So I'm perfectly open to bringing this back sometime in March if we want to get this out a little more. We have time. Mr. Mays, I think you said we don't have to actually have the final reading until April, so I'm good with that.
Speaker 2: And Councilman Super on the ordinance as it's currently drafted would clearly allow an applicant to apply for more than one per site. So if that is something that the council wants to remove, we certainly can remove that. We could also impose a restriction for a large mall, for instance, that let's say the expanse of the mall exceeded a thousand feet. We could say that. And assuming it only has one property address or one opinion, we could limit it to one per apprehend so that for the large malls you'd still only end up with one rather than two.
Speaker 0: Okay, that sounds perfect. So if council by mango is fine with that, then good. We can do this tonight. Okay. Thank you. So, just to be clear. Are we going to come back with another hearing?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 0: Linda saying no city attorney's and.
Speaker 4: Deferring to the city.
Speaker 2: Attorney. We'd have to bring it back because that's not the kind of language we can insert or nothing.
Speaker 0: We can tweak tonight. It's we have to do an actual.
Speaker 2: Yep, we'd have to bring it back. Trust me, I'd rather do it.
Speaker 0: Council members. And you accept. That motion. Just want to be crystal clear. Yes. Okay. So so there's no further comment here. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 4: So one. | Ordinance | WITHDRAWN
Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Table 21.32 in Chapter 21.32, and Table 34-1 in Chapter 21.34; and by adding Sections 21.15.3155 and 21.51.294, all related to unattended storage boxes, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02132018_18-0124 | Speaker 0: Okay. So we're going to do the consent calendar minus item number 13. Is any public comment on the motion saying no members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Item 13, please. Craig back.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Vice Mayor, Member City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to address this item. There is a a incorrect date listed on the council letter and just wanted to read that into the record so we make sure we have the correct date. The council letter is for an easement right of way connected to 4951 Oregon Avenue. In the staff report, we talk about when the secret document came forward and what's listed as May 9th, 2017. That was a mistake by staff. That was actually the date that we brought forward the track map for the development project. The actual secret document came forward in November on the 10th in 2015. So we wanted to read that in the record to make sure it accurately reflects when the secret document was approved so we can move this item forward. That concludes that report. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Fantastic. Thank you. Any public comment on this item saying no members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilman Urunga. Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to grant an easement deed to Southern California Edison at 4951 Oregon Avenue, for the installation of electrical equipment. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02132018_18-0134 | Speaker 1: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. Thank you. Number 17, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Price Councilmember Super nor Councilman Andrews Councilman Austin recommendation to request the city manager and city attorney to draft a bicycle chop shop ordinance.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Price.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much. I want to urge my colleagues to support this item tonight. Bike thefts are a major problem throughout the city. And in looking at the bike theft data from all of the four divisions of our police department, it's clear to me that bike thefts are definitely underreported citywide. That's especially true in my district. One of the things that we have found and let me go through some of those numbers. So in East Division in 2017, we had an average well, we had about six between 6 to 22 bike thefts a month during the calendar year and west, there was about 1 to 3 in north , 1 to 9, but usually it hovered around 1 to 3 and in south between 1 to 10. If you talk to the residents at community meetings, it's clear that bike thefts are much more prevalent, especially along the ocean and our business corridor as well. We encourage bike and pedestrian activity. It's it's really important. I think if we're going to be a city that's promoting bike infrastructure, that we do everything that we can to deter bike thefts, but also to penalize those who might be using stolen bikes as a method of currency by creating bike chop shops. So that's what this item is about. We have found that there's a clear problem throughout our parks, our beaches, our sidewalks and our parking lots with multiple bikes and bike parts strewn about. It wouldn't stop. This particular ordinance would not stop anyone from working on their bikes individually or take doing emergency maintenance in public. But for those who are dismantling and selling multiple bikes in public spaces, this ordinance would make such activity illegal. Applied with similar this. This particular ordinance should be applied with similar logic to the ordinances that we have that don't allow the dismantling of cars in city streets. You can't remove, for example, the transmission of a car that's parked on a street the same. The same should apply with multiple bikes. It's important to note that this particular ordinance would not affect any illegal business operations who conduct programs in public or permit bicycle related events, including swap meets and any established bike repair stands, of which we have several along the coast in the second and third districts. I ask for the support of my colleagues on this item. This is a problem that I think our police department is seeing more and more of when they are out in the community, especially when they are in places where there appear to be abandoned items in the form of encampments there. You always know when you're going to be coming up upon abandoned items because you'll see bike pedals, bike frames, wheels, things of that nature as you walk up to an area that seems to have a lot of abandoned property. So I ask for my colleagues support. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Sabrina, thank you. And thank Councilwoman Price for bringing this item forward. I'm happy to sign on to it and support it. And for all those who email us and call us and tell us, you know, we used to have a bicycle licensing program locally. Yeah, we will definitely do that. We will have community events, probably. Councilmember Price and I will do one together. We share a two and a half mile border and that will be the spirit of this is let's get these registration numbers on these bikes logged in and give the police a hand in solving these issues. Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. We've actually been working on a similar item with staff as well. This item. To be clear, does not address increasing the number of registrations, does it, Councilmember?
Speaker 4: No, not particularly. But I did bring an item about three or four months ago asking for a bike registration program to be reestablished in the city.
Speaker 3: Great. I have a lot of questions and ideas around the bike registration program, so I think we can work with public works as we have been and PD on ensuring that we we have legal operations, that we are trying to certify them and encourage them to do an increased bike registry. I also wanted to ask let's see 1/2. This item came up fast, which I like. Can somebody from staff describe to us what happens whenever a bike is picked up, whether it's in pieces or it's a stolen bike that we retrieve? I'm not sure if that's PD or Commander Griffin. Thank you.
Speaker 0: I used to live there and Craig bang on. Okay. I.
Speaker 3: Signed up. That's what it means. Good evening. Sorry about that. We're trying to clear it up here with Mr. Beck and myself.
Speaker 2: When we, the police department.
Speaker 4: Take bikes, we take it into storage, and it's held for 30 days until somebody can.
Speaker 3: Claim it is basically what what we do for.
Speaker 4: Storage and.
Speaker 2: Bike parts would be the same. It'd be.
Speaker 4: As abandoned.
Speaker 2: Property.
Speaker 4: We would take it.
Speaker 3: For that reason. And so what happens after 30 days?
Speaker 2: It usually goes out to auction.
Speaker 3: To auction, yes. It's I guess one of the ideas that came up in my office was, is there a program where we can have these bikes go back into a youth program like L.B. Capp or something like that, were able to get these bikes into youths hands that might be disadvantaged and not have access to a bike
Speaker 2: . So there is the bikes 90800 program that has had an opportunity to utilize some of the unclaimed bicycles.
Speaker 0: The program has been gone for at least five years.
Speaker 2: Yes. So that was a program that was done in the past. Right now, we do work with some of our partners to deliver more newer bicycles. There's a great partnership with local bicycle shops where they deliver bikes to some of our elementary school kids and our middle school kids. It's a fantastic program, but right now we don't have the connection for the collected bikes going through a specific program where you're actually teaching youth how to build bicycles and bicycle safety programs. And then at the end of that, they actually have a bike that they've worked on.
Speaker 3: Seems like a great program we should try to put together. I know that's a bigger item than this, but I'd like us to just explore what we could possibly do to reconnect that, and we can do that in some staff meetings over the next couple of months. Yeah, I think that that's that's it for now. I think whenever we come back with the bike registry item that we can work together to make that productive. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Austin. Yes, I.
Speaker 5: Am firmly in support of this item. I want to thank the councilmember price for for bringing it forward and happy to sign on and support. We witness this type of activity happening all the time. I live next to a park and I see these these actions happening. I can only wonder where these these bicycles are coming from. And I think, you know, by putting some sort of conditions in place, I like the fact that, you know, disassembling and multiple bikes in public is, you know, I think I think that's an obvious, obvious sign that there's something something awry there. And this gives our officers a little bit more to to work with in terms of tools. I am concerned with with obviously, the the Prop 47, because I don't know that that, you know, the bicycle therefore reaches that threshold for for a real crime. And so maybe you want to speak to that as well.
Speaker 4: Sure. So the individuals who are disassembling the bikes wouldn't actually be charged with bicycle theft if, in fact, it was proven that they stole the bike and the bike's value was $950 or more. It would be a felony. It would fall out of Prop 47. But if the value of the bike is $950 or less and the individual is charged with bike theft, so they're caught in the act of stealing the bike or they've admitted to stealing the bike. Or there is a witness who comes forward and says they stole the bike. So the police have some indicia of criminal activity that it and it's the bike is under 950, then it would be a misdemeanor. This particular ordinance as as it's requested at this time and again, this is going to go to the city attorney's office . They're going to do some research, hopefully on best practices and other cities that have bike chop shops, what which ones would pass constitutional muster, etc., and it will come back to us. The actual request right now is that it be penalized as a wobbled let, which means it could either be an infraction or a misdemeanor. And the whole point of that is not really to punish people per se, because as you've said, we're not looking at a crime that reaches the threshold where this person is going to get any sort of custody time. I mean, even for a misdemeanor, 180 days or less, the L.A. County jail is releasing people on the same day, whether they received one day or 180 days. So we understand that this isn't something that's really looking to penalize. However, if an individual is charged with assembling or disassembling bikes, running a bike shop, chop shop, then the individual will have the opportunity to hopefully go through the process where now we're going to have clinicians in the jail as part of our new efforts with the city, and that person could be linked to services. What I have found with bike. Chop shops, and certainly not everybody who operates a bike chop shop is addicted to drugs. I'm definitely not saying that. But what I have found is in talking to individuals, reading multiple police reports, is that bike parts are stolen or sold as currency for drugs. That's the common most frequent currency for drugs. And so if an individual has a substance abuse problem, then hopefully we're able to get them in the system and root them to services as a term of their probation. So as a term of probation, they would have to do some sort of diversion program or have a stay away order from the place where they were storing the bikes, or see the clinician go to L.A. County Health Services, whatever the case may be, to get the services that they might need.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And so my my hope and the reason I'm supporting this is I hopefully deter that activity in and to deter thefts in the future. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. And yes.
Speaker 2: I want to thank Councilwoman Susan Price, because the fact that I really realized the enforcement of this ordinance could aid and possibly reduction and recover stolen property. And thank you again for this item.
Speaker 0: But thank you, Councilman Durango.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I also want to express my support for the sale of my I've been seen as I drive around Long Beach that there's always this assembly of individuals around some bicycle. And I was wondering what was going on. And, you know, every time I pass by there, I see an exchange of bicycles taking place and tubes and wheels and all that kind of stuff, you know. So I was I was somewhat amazed that they were doing that. They were so brazen, actually doing it in parking lots of liquor stores and markets. And so I'm glad to see that this ordinance coming up. I want to commend the councilmembers for putting this forward and I totally support it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I just had a question for PD. Do we have the numbers or stats on how many of these bike thefts are actually associated with with drug situation ers?
Speaker 4: Yes, ma'am. We do not have those numbers. The majority.
Speaker 2: Of the time that we're.
Speaker 4: Responding to these bikes, they're not reported stolen. So our hands are tied in what we can and cannot do and some of the questions we can or cannot ask.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Larry Goodin.
Speaker 2: I bring the hammer down this way. First of all, I get Sacramento involved and to anybody guilty of it. We'd have to spend 10000 hours of community service. But the key is getting Sacramento involved. Let them start earning their payroll, their money. And again, I'm very serious. 10000 hours of community service. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week, a police. Rather repeat the name of Jesus.
Speaker 5: Tell my.
Speaker 0: Thing around.
Speaker 5: So see me. Yeah. This is a good thing because I got three of them taken in the last year and a half.
Speaker 0: But I thank you. But I propose you do a set up like those fake cars and everything. They got.
Speaker 5: Me over on Carson and cherry hours.
Speaker 2: And I wasn't in it 15 minutes.
Speaker 5: There's somebody over the L.A. Fitness watching, and they've taken bikes.
Speaker 2: Left and right.
Speaker 5: To the point where.
Speaker 0: People parking their bikes on the inside. So do set ups, put.
Speaker 2: Them on them, wire things, then.
Speaker 5: They're going to come for that. But they've even getting lax. It's like they got a minor sore. So you're gonna have to.
Speaker 0: Do set ups and a lot of them cats.
Speaker 5: Are doing drugs is apathy was going down.
Speaker 2: Check the canals it go straight.
Speaker 0: Downtown that's the whole thing I'm sick of my bikes get mad I got taken.
Speaker 5: By the motel six by. What's that. A cafe next to it. Yeah.
Speaker 2: The load of cafe. Was that. Yes. I'm glad.
Speaker 5: Get out there. Do. This is a good thing.
Speaker 2: Don't take it waste 954 Grand theft now is not 409. It's not.
Speaker 0: Fun anymore. Why not?
Speaker 5: Okay, so anyway.
Speaker 0: Yeah, this is a good thing, so.
Speaker 5: I'm not going to drag this out. Why is she still here? Janine Pierce.
Speaker 0: All right. I got off topic. Okay, well, just keep it on top. Okay, good.
Speaker 2: Keep me on topic. I like the bike thing, but I like an.
Speaker 5: American bike system, not a communist bike system. Okay, no communist bike system. This is real good. And Jeanine still got to go.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Make speaker, please. Hi. Curtis Kaiser. I'm a resident in support of Councilwoman Price's proposal. I've gotten a bunch of bikes stolen. I think the city has done a.
Speaker 2: Great job of starting to build out an infrastructure so that bicyclists feel comfortable, excited to go around the city.
Speaker 0: But it's disheartening when you see all the chop shops going around. So I think this is a real step in the right direction.
Speaker 2: I appreciate it. I would recommend or request that we have a lower number than five. We I sometimes see five or more, but I more frequently see two or three. And so if there's any way for us to have an ordinance that penalizes.
Speaker 0: People who are doing two or three instead.
Speaker 2: Of five, I would appreciate that if.
Speaker 0: You're a broken down and your friend's broken down and you're legitimately fixing your bike or one or two, you should do the trick. And I thank you very much for doing this. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Seven words, and so did Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach. As a criminal defense attorney, it goes against everything that I believe in, to support the addition of a criminal an additional criminal offense into our municipal code. However, after reviewing the proposal from Councilman Price, it is obvious that this misdemeanor offense or wobbler, it strikes the right balance between the rights of the homeless of homeless residents within Long Beach and the interest of other residents. I urge everyone to take notice of the care and concern the Councilwoman Price has taken into crafting this ordinance, ensuring that there is no way to make sure that this new law could be challenged on the basis of having an illegal, discriminatory effect or impact. However, the precision of this ordinance only highlights the existing sections of our municipal code that would not stand up to judicial scrutiny if they were to be challenged in the courtroom, in the courts. As I first told then Vice Mayor Garcia in 2014, Long Beach was for code sections. Chapter 10.18, Subsection 040 Living in prohibited women in vehicles prohibited Section 9.4 to subsection 110 capping and in certain prohibited areas. And Chapter ten, subsection 30.090. Special Regulations Against Camping Overnight. All these laws were designed and enforced in a manner that leaves our city vulnerable to a potentially crippling civil suit by homeless advocates. Our police department and city prosecutor's offices are also ill equipped to handle these sorts of cases on their own. By their own admission, their sole tools for assisting homeless people that they come into contact with, involving administering citations for infractions or misdemeanors. To actually solve the problems of chronic systemic poverty, we need to radically restructure the entire society by written by rebuilding a shredded social safety net and obliterated workers rights movement. But for the purposes of triaging the problems of the homeless homeless people here in this particular city, we need to provide direct financial assistance to these individuals in the form of increased general relief from the county and indirect aid from the Health Department and county social services. Social and social worker agencies. Prop 87, for example, was a wonderful law that removed the social stigma of felonies from thousands of people enabling, enabling them to reenter society and contribute positively to their communities. It is time of the Council continue this trend away from criminalizing people at the bottom of society by directing the city attorney to remove the aforementioned sections of the medical code and to direct the city manager to provide an assessment of all available funds to see what money can be redirected to the Health Department so they can take the appropriate role at the head of a comprehensive anti-poverty program here in the city of Long Beach. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Nick Russo. I'm here representing my employer pedal movement, which is local bike services facility. We operate the bike station downtown Long Beach, as well as the interim operations of the bike share system. And we just wanted to voice our support as pedal movement in support of this measure. I think like other speakers before me have noted, it's obviously a huge problem and we see that every day as clients come in, you know, remarking on their stolen bikes, which, you know, as much as we appreciate the business, it's a really unfortunate situation to encounter. We share many of the concerns that homeless advocates or other advocates of low income communities may have with ordinances like this. But I believe the care that's been put into crafting the proposal does mitigate that issue. We would also just like to recommend a certain language in the proposal that states something more specific other than just bike repair stands. We are in the process of rolling out a program for basically mobile bike facilities throughout the city. And while we are a valid business licensed in the city of Long Beach, we just feel that because these facilities will be taking place often in parks and other public spaces, that it may potentially negatively affect our business. That being said, because of the considerations built into it already, we're not concerned about that. And I personally would just like to voice my support of this because before I was a resident of Long Beach, I was here visiting and bought a bike and had it stolen during my trip. So luckily it was at the end of my trip and I was able to use bike share along the beach. Thank you. Next week, please be here.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name's Maureen Bailey, and I'm representing the Belmont Heights Community Association, and we just like to share our support of this proposed ordinance. In our view, it takes a reasonable method, another tool in the toolbox to allow our public safety folks to kind of make it uncomfortable for this type of commerce to take place. And the fewer places that the commerce can take place, hopefully the fewer times that bicycles will be stolen and chopped up and then resold. So we've got to chip away at the problem if we do want to be a bike capital. And I think we're well on our way. Our district has two bike boulevards. They're well-used and we'd like to see more people on their bikes, of course. And we really appreciate our councilwoman taking the lead on this. She listened and we appreciate that the the the ordinance. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 5: Thank you and I appreciate the public comment. I guess my question is to the author or Councilmember Price when one of the speakers mentioned how we got to five or more. Can you can you explain that? And and would you be amendable to this?
Speaker 4: Absolutely. And I appreciated that comment as well. And I have a note here. The reason we chose five, really, it's an arbitrary number. We researched other similar statutes. And I know that our city attorney is always very prudent in his administration of the laws. And I wanted to make sure that we put us in a position where we weren't exposing ourselves to potential liability. So one of the things I was going to ask as part of this motion is if we can look at reducing that number to two or three, because that's an excellent point. You know, if you're helping your friend with their bike, you've got to. Anything beyond two. We've got an issue here, at least enough PC for the police officers to ask why these people have more than 2 to 3 bikes. So I think that's great. Yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 5: I think that's great as well. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Councilman Price. Thank you. And the final thing I was going to add, I was going to make the comment about the number of bikes and also for the city attorney, if it's possible for us to think about wording, that's a little bit broader in terms of the type of apparatus that would be available for individuals to work on their bikes to include the types of stations that we talked about. So if we could have something that was more broadly classified as bike repair, facility, stand or station as opposed to just a bike repair stand or station, and that would encompass a more structured bike infrastructure that's designed to allow people to to pull up and have their bikes worked on. So obviously, we want to make sure that we're not going after pedal movement for infraction violation or any other facility or organization that's similar to them. But I want to thank the residents of the city, especially the third district, who came out tonight. I do hear a lot from you about this issue. This is something we've been working on for a long time. And I want to thank our public works department and our police department because they helped shape the language of this particular proposal. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, members. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to go ahead and take public comment right now. So we have five speakers so can reside. Larry GOODHEW, Lee, Richmond, Charlie, Jim Oberst and Somer Hanson. So can you up in Larry and Lee, if you could, you know, be prepared to come next. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager and City Attorney to draft an ordinance to prohibit the assembly, disassembly, sale, offer of sale, distribution, or offer of distribution on public property or public rights-of-way of bicycles and bicycle parts, under certain conditions and with certain exceptions; authorize the Public Works Department to work with the Police Department to remove bicycles and bicycle parts following notice of violations of this prohibition. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02132018_18-0133 | Speaker 0: Everybody else. Summer. Fantastic. So next, we're going to go ahead and take number 16.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Price recommendation to refer to the Parks Recreation Commission to consider naming the sports. The Sport Court at Marina Vista Park. The Luke to Sue Johnson Court.
Speaker 0: Councilman Price.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Vice Mayor, I, I want to I know this is an item that my colleagues will support, but I can't resist talking a little bit about why this item came to be, because this was a very special person in my life and in the life of my community. In 2005, a group of third district students, middle school and high schoolers were involved in a youth participatory budgeting program. One important member of the student committee was 15 year old Luke Johnson. Luke was a resident of Alamitos Heights and lived close to the park with his mother, Rena, father Todd and brother Spencer. Luke was diagnosed with leukemia at the age of 14 on the very day he started his freshman year at Wilson High School. In 2006, Luke lost his two year battle with leukemia. This journey took him out of school throughout his early high school career. The committee became one of the ways that he was able to stay in contact with his peers during his illness and was a responsibility he took seriously. Luke was well-loved in the community and he was a friend to everyone. His deeply missed by the community, his peers and his family. In honor of his community involvement and the role that he had and the Marina Vista Sport Court being built, the community has expressed its support for naming the new sport court in Luke Johnson's memory. I ask my colleagues to support this item. I have I did ask Luke's parents not to come tonight because I know this is going to go through a process and I don't want them to keep having to come to council meetings. Once the process goes through the motions, we will do an official naming at the park and have a lovely celebration with his family and the members of our community.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Austin, very public comment on the same.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name is Alex Phillips and Luke Johnson is a child that lives in my neighborhood. I know his parents, I know his brothers. And I know this would mean a lot to the entire community. And I think it's wonderful that we can do something like this because it was a huge tragedy. And thank you, Susie, for bringing it to.
Speaker 3: Something.
Speaker 4: That we could do for Luke and his family. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And no further public comment. And I just want to say, Councilmember, I think this is a great idea. I'm happy to vote and support this tonight. And members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Number 15, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve renaming the Multi-Use Sport Court in Marina Vista Park the Luke Tatsu Johnson Court. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02132018_18-0137 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item number 20.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Mango Council Member Super Now Councilman Austin. Recommendation to require City Manager to formally communicate the city's opposition for Senate Bill 827.
Speaker 0: Thank you to her mother.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I think that our message has been heard as we received a call from Senator Reno earlier today and he has agreed to make changes. I do not know what those changes will be yet. He has not opened the door on that yet. But I at least appreciate that the work has been communicated, and I think that that is a step in the right direction. I'd love to hear from my colleagues before deciding what we should do related to waiting to hear the amendments and or making a firm disapproval today with the option to.
Speaker 4: Reconsider at a future date should the amendments be appropriate.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Come to Austin. Thank you.
Speaker 5: And I we have a letter before us also before from Senator Wiener requesting that we hold off our decision until he can make appropriate amendments. He is anticipating, making and introducing significant amendments to his bill in late February. And so I would think we should, in good faith, allow him that opportunity to make those amendments and then bring this this item back before or refer this issue to the state large committee as well. We could also refer it to state alleged for further deliberations, since the author is asking for more time. I just think it is it's a good faith effort. I appreciate the fact that he did reach out. I spoke to him personally just before the meeting and he was pretty emphatic that, you know, he's heard from not only the city of Long Beach and understanding that we're postured to oppose his bill, but other many other cities throughout the state as well. And so I think he's heard some of the outcry from from local government. And he understands, hopefully, that that local control is something that we are extremely interested in. And so I would just like to recommend. Madam Chair, I mean, not Madam Chair, but the maker of the motion hold over this item until a later time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Customer reviews.
Speaker 3: Yes. I also really appreciate that he's reached out. I think sending it to committee is a great idea. On my first glance at this, after a couple of conversations outside of just local control, which is what you guys have listed as one of the reasons for not supporting it, I think the impact on affordable housing and the lack of community benefits in this bill are really lacking. And so I would hope that we would, as a city, take some more time to put forward some recommendations. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Sabina, I think it is clear that this doesn't minimize our opposition to the bill as it was written. And here's an actual copy of the letter from Senator Scott Wiener. And so if I guess we'll remain to see if the maker of the motion which direction she wants to take it. But I just want to make it very clear that this does not affect our opposition to the original bill. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 5: And I was with Mr.. I want to just thank Councilmember Mongo for actually bringing this item forward. This is obviously something that I've heard from constituents about. I think many of us also have as well. This is a hot topic in the city of Long Beach and by bye bye showing our our, I think, interest in opposing this bill by bringing this forward, it is certainly going to help the dialog and put us in a better place when talking about this legislation in Sacramento. So thanks again Councilmember Mongo and we will we will operate at your pleasure on on moving forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you as any public comment on this item. Simon Councilmember Mongo.
Speaker 3: I think that I think that this shows that Long Beach is a player in the state and that the things that we do at council matter. This has only been agenda raised for the minimum amount, which is the 72 hours because we had some back and forth on the language of the motion. And I think that this has served us well. I think that this letter I will send it out to the community in my newsletter when it comes out next so that the community can see that we're being heard. And I would like to bring this back once the amendments have been submitted for our consideration and if at that time Chair of the State Committee would like to have a meeting that same evening, I'm open to that as well. And of course we can agenda is that without a recommendation of the council.
Speaker 5: So we want to just send it to the committee.
Speaker 3: I'm open to sending it to committee if you're able to agenda as the meeting before or after it. But before, we would have to stand up and really.
Speaker 5: Work to do that.
Speaker 3: We'll do that with anything.
Speaker 0: Mr. PARKIN.
Speaker 2: If I understand then, is the motion amended then to refer.
Speaker 0: It to committee, or is it received and file and take it up by the committee? What's your refer to?
Speaker 3: Committee referred to committee.
Speaker 0: Committee.
Speaker 3: With a requirement that it must be back before this committee if the committee is unable to meet by March, let's say mid-March.
Speaker 0: Your committee before it comes to committee.
Speaker 3: Great.
Speaker 0: All right, members, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to consider amendments to, and a potential State legislative position on, SB 827 (Wiener), legislation to increase housing density along high-quality transit corridors and at major transit stops, and forward the State Legislation Committee's recommendation to the City Council for adoption. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02062018_18-0091 | Speaker 1: So thank you. We have a great professor there. She was the smartest of our entire group, just so you know. It's true. So we with that, let me go ahead and go back and we had item nine was pulled from consensus. Let's hear number nine.
Speaker 2: Report from Health and Human Services recommendation to execute an agreement with California Governor's Office of Emergency Services to accept and expend grant funding in the amount of 306,000. Thousand 666 for the My Sister's Keeper program.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. And we did have a comment. Customer Pierce wanted to comment on this.
Speaker 6: I just I have our director of the health department, Kelly Colby. I wanted to hear a report from her. I think that this is an amazing grant and that we need to really recognize the work that we do and take it outside of our department so that our community can be engaged and understanding what our city's working towards. Go ahead.
Speaker 5: Kelly.
Speaker 8: Thank you and good evening, honorable mayor and City Council members and I thank you for the opportunity to share about My Sister's Keeper. This new funding of 306,666 from the Governor's Office of Emergency Services, otherwise known as Cal OAS, continues a highly successful program that was previously funded to the Board of State and Community Corrections. So we've been operating this program for the last three years with with the from be from the. Their program is ending. That funding has ended. So we applied to colonias for additional funding to continue the program. The goal of the program is really to reduce victimization and commercial sex sexual exploitation through serving at risk females within the city of Long Beach. My Sister's Keeper program is an anti-human trafficking program that revolved around the city prosecutor's office and the Long Beach Police Department's directed services program. So it's a court diversion model, which is designed to assist women who are engaged in prostitution related offenses and are likely being human, sexual, you know, victims of sexual trafficking . And so what they really done is start to identify those who are being who are being trafficked. And instead of being identified as criminalizing it, they're moving it to a victim, moving to a victim focus. So the model is really an incredible partnership between the police department, the city prosecutor's office, our service providers and the health department . It's changed the system from viewing trafficked individuals as victims instead of criminals to us. And they've also streamline the process. The police provide citations to women. They give them an order to appear in court on the Monday. So it used to be a month, month and a half out before a person could show up. Now it's if they're seen on Thursday, they come in on Monday, they get a phone call on Monday morning reminding them to show up. And then while they're in court, they're actually provided opportunity to divert from any sort of criminal justice opportunity, instead, two services. So they're provided trauma related services, case management and tattoo removal. In the past year, we've seen over 100 tattoos removed. So the service providers learn about you know, they explain the program. And at that point, they can connect and be diverted from additional opportunities. And with the criminal justice system through the previous My Sister's Keeper, we are able to assess more than 200 women through this project. And in this one, we're going to be looking at, we're seeking to assist 40 more, but also to really look at additional data collection, to understand the long term impacts of this program. So we're excited to continue this great partnership and this important work. And that concludes my report and open for questions.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Customer Pearce, anything else to add to that?
Speaker 6: I just want to say in Bixby Park is one of the areas in my district where we've had a lot of issues and a lot of constituents concerns. And I've witnessed our police officers and our heart team out there really working directly with some of these women. And it really has made a difference. So I'm proud of this work. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. A mix up as we have Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Just wanted to chime in and say this is really important funding and it does really important work. And I've seen the work that Theresa and the Health Department has really led, particularly in North Long Beach. So thank you for this and I'm happy to support this.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And Councilman Mungo.
Speaker 5: Great program. I know that members of the Junior League had a presentation from information that was put out by your office. It was a very informative presentation, and I think that the more people that are aware of it, the better we are, because it can happen right in front of you. And people don't always know that the signs and indicators are so great work and thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion or a second for this item. I've seen no public comment on this item. Please cast your votes. This is for the consent item that was pulled.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. We're going to go to we have a short public comment just for people. I mean, the first two items up on the agenda will be the item around homeownership and the Olympics. And so for those that are here, for those and then the rest of the agenda. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute an agreement, and all necessary documents and any subsequent amendments, with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services to accept and expend grant funding in the amount of $306,666 for the My Sister’s Keeper - New Victim Intervention and Empowerment for Women’s Program, for the period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2019; and
Increase appropriations in the Health Fund (SR 130) in the Health and Human Services Department (HE) by $306,666, offset by reimbursement revenue. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02062018_18-0094 | Speaker 1: Thank you. Okay, great. Thank you all very much. We appreciate it. Moving on. Thank you. Madam Quirk, if you can, please, next to item 13.
Speaker 2: Communication from Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pearce, Councilwoman Price, Councilwoman Mango. Recommendation to request city manager and staff to prepare an eight by 28 plan needs assessment and project timeline for eight projects for a successful 2028 Summer Olympics and Paralympic Games.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. I will start and then I will pass this off. I know that Mr. Murdoch is going to say a few remarks as well. So I think as a reminder, we know that the Long Beach City Council unanimously earlier in 2017 voted to enter into a partnership with the Los Angeles Olympic Committee as part of those are. First, as we know, led by Mayor Garcetti in the city of Los Angeles, L.A., as we all know, was awarded the 2028 Olympics. As part of that awarding of the Olympics. Long Beach, of course, is a partner, and the council has approved a pretty large partnership with Los Angeles in hosting a variety of games for 2028. And we know that these include water polo, open water swimming, the triathlon, handball, sailing, as well as BMX racing. There's also currently some conversations about other opportunities for the city to showcase the community and its Olympic history. We know that Long Beach has been part of the last two Olympic bids, last two Los Angeles bids that happen and were very active. Should be noted, though, that this time along beaches hosting more games than we ever had in the past. And so those that may or may not be aware, there are some statistics out there that show Long Beach is actually one of the largest cities in the country that has actually produced more Olympians than almost any other place in the United States. And so the project in front of us today, in conversations with city staff as well as the Olympic Committee there, there has been some some interest to ensure that certain facilities, which we're already planning on, on developing that already on the books, be completed in time, of course, for the Olympics. And these are the projects as presented by our our staff and working with the Olympic Committee. We have the Belmont Veterans Pier Rebuild, of course, which will be the centerpiece for the sailing competition, will have the Belmont Pool, which will serve as a showcase of Olympic history and is expected to be widely used for city exhibitions and events. We do have the lifeguard tower rebuild, which will rebuild all the lifeguard towers across the coast. We have our Beach Concession Stands project, which is the reconstruction of concession stands for visitors up and down between downtown and the pier. We have the rebuild and construction of the arena, which will be used for handball events and needs major refurb refurbishment. Of course we have the expansion of the Convention Center Hotel Project and Convention Center connection that we expect will be used for a variety of visitors that are coming to the community. We also, of course, need to complete the airport improvements, including the mentor, the major renovations to the rental car area baggage claim, which will provide obviously an opportunity for visitors coming in and out of our airport. And finally, which is essentially a metro project, but we are partnering, which is the large it's about $1,000,000,000 at that metro L.A. is putting into the blue line for refurbishments all up and down the blue line. And the committee expects that the downtown, the Long Beach Sports Park, which we're currently calling it, will connect to the downtown L.A. Sports Park via the Long Beach Blue Line. So there's a lot of excitement around that project as well. Mr. Markley, do you want to add to that? I know you've been meeting with the committee.
Speaker 10: I guess, Mr. Mayor, I think he did a very good job of outlining kind of the concept here. As you know, we talk to the committee often. They are very excited about Long Beach. They see a tremendous amount of potential here. And just every time we talk to them, they're excited about, you know, what they're going to be able to bring here and the unique experience that we're going to have for the athletes and all the visitors and the families of everyone who's going to be participating here. So what this does for us is this provides us with a lot of vision. We only have ten years. I know that doesn't sound like a long time, but it actually is pretty short in terms of getting ready for the Olympics. There's a lot of work to do. And so by passing this, the council will give us some guidance on what those priorities are going to be for that we need to be focusing on for the Olympics. As you mentioned, the projects, I won't repeat those, but we'll come back with a report on kind of where we are , what else we need to do and how to how we plan to close some of those funding gaps. A lot of them are either funded, partially funded or fully funded and are moving forward. We have five of those in the Tidelands area, so we have some resources down in Tidelands that we've been planning for several years and that's going to be building on that. One of these is a private development site. That's the hotel, and the city has done a lot to encourage that, both through a total rebate and also a lot of the land sale. We've got our airport project, which is which is funded through the airport revenues and then of course, the partnership with Metro. So we believe this is an aggressive vision, but also a doable vision and look forward to giving you some more information on that.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. And this, I assume, will be the beginning of also regular updates to the Council on the progress of the projects as well as the the progress with the Olympic Committee as well.
Speaker 10: Yes. So we'll be talking about these projects. And we also do need to come back to you and talk a little bit more about some of the final details, or at least the agreements for 2028. So the council took action on 2024. Since that time, there has been changes and it's now 20. 28. And so we are going to be coming back to you over the next couple of months to to get those final agreements in place with the Olympic Committee.
Speaker 1: Great. I know that we have to tweak part of the agreement there. So thank you. There's a motion to second. I'll start with Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And I want to thank the mayor for his leadership in bringing this item forward. And I think there's a beautiful synergy here between us and the city of L.A. in jointly preparing for this incredible event that's going to highlight our city. I am fortunate to, alongside my colleague, Counsel Council Member Pearce, to represent the coastline in the city of Long Beach and in the third District and throughout Long Beach. We pride ourselves on being the classics capital of America, and nothing is going to allow us to showcase that more than improving the facilities that we have, that where we will house Olympic events, Olympic athletes, Olympic spectators, family members, visitors alike. So I very much look forward to investing in some of these infrastructure projects that have been outlined here and continue to bring pride to a city that produces more Olympians in the area of aquatic sports than any other city in this region. And that's something we don't talk about as often as we should with so many young Olympians in our local high schools. And having this these facilities be a source of pride for them when the Olympics are hosted here and frankly, always is something that should be a priority for the city. The Belmont Pier, as many, many people know, was damaged pretty significantly last year. And the city has been struggling since last year to figure out how we're going to make, first of all, the necessary repairs and also consider the significant work that it's going to need for the years to come. With the Olympics coming and the sailing events being so heavily focused around the pier area, I think the opportunity to rebuild the pier and enhance its its its status as an iconic facility in the city of Long Beach is very important and I'm looking forward to that and I'm glad that it's one of the eight projects same as the case for the Belmont Pool. Obviously, we've set aside more than half of the money that we need on the project, and we have an incredibly engaged and active community, dedicated and committed to seeing us raise money and look for alternative funding sources to be able to completely fund that project. And I'm very, very pleased and proud to be part of that, that project. So I'm glad to see that that's on the list of eight. The other thing that I think is really important, and I know Councilmember Pearce agrees with me on this is our lifeguard towers. Our lifeguard towers are really in bad shape. They don't reflect the quality of the lifeguard program that we have here in the city of Long Beach, the great work that the men and women of the lifeguard division of our fire department do. And so enhancing those facilities, I think, will go a long way for building community pride, but also making us look like the precious gem that we are within the region when spectators and Olympians come to town. This is a really great opportunity for us to think about creative ways to partner with public and private entities, potential grant funding options, and really explore some out of the box ideas to get our facilities in top shape for the 2028 Olympics. So I thank the mayor for bringing this forward. I think staff for their commitment to these projects. And I ask my colleagues to support with vigor this item. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 5: I am so excited to move this forward. I really appreciate the hard work of the city staff and the court. My colleagues and I really look forward to the opportunity to host an international event right here in a city that's done such a great job in moving itself forward. And many in my side of town reflect back on the year of 1984 when we hosted before. And it's only appropriate that we get our house in order and ensure that we put our best foot forward for the world. I look forward to many sponsorship opportunities for our large facilities, similar to the $70 million donation splash naming rights that were just received in L.A. for the Coliseum. I hope that we have a couple of $70 million offers right here in Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: I yes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor, for putting this item together. You know, when this item came to me, I definitely know all the work that's been done. Five of these projects are actually in District two, which is the heart of downtown. And so I had a couple of questions. I, as you guys know, had some concerns about the Olympics in the beginning of supported it. I think that they've done a great job in making sure that there are community benefits tied to the city, as there's been about a decade conversation around what happens when Olympics come to our city. And so I want to applaud the city for working with them on making sure that we're getting some of those community benefits for putting this list together. There are items on this list that I had some concern about before, and I've had a couple of emails, so I just wanted to publicly address them. On naming the Belmont Pool. I was not here for that vote. I know that it is with the Coastal Commission right now and we have, as Councilmember Price mentioned, half of that funding. One of the things I like about this item is that it's lifting up Long Beach and saying, we're open for investments. We're open to make sure that we have good corporate sponsorships, that we've got good athlete organizations that are sponsoring. And so I find this is a great opportunity to make sure that we're not carrying the entire financial burden on our backs. And I look forward to hearing what comes back from the Coastal Commission on that. My favorite project on this list is definitely the beach concession stands, something we've talked about for a really long time. The Alamitos location is going to be phenomenal. I met with staff today and we hope to have some kind of groundbreaking by the end of the year, hopefully. I don't know, Tom, if you want to talk just a little bit about that in the RFP process, because it is something that is probably my favorite project right now.
Speaker 10: Yes, Councilmember, we have been working on creating some pretty stunning designs on how to engage people on our beach, to come and visit concessions and be able to to have a great experience. So those are there's three different projects. We are bringing those forward to the planning or to the Coastal Commission. They've already gone through Planning Commission. They're really designed both for residents and visitors alike and coastal serving users. So we're hoping to get that through the Coastal Commission by the end of the year and to continue to put together the funding. And so we can do a groundbreaking. We're fingers crossed by the end of the year.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you. And I also want to recognize that on that concession stands, I know we've had a couple of conversations with Dolby and other folks about that. So just for the first time, we're looking at breaking up those reps and being able to have local businesses in there, whether it's oysters at one and burgers at another . So I always have to champion that any time it comes up. So my other question is really around the conversation, around housing. I looked at L.A. and it seems like L.A. is trying to get to 100,000, 100,000 new housing units to be developed by 2028. And part of that plan was that you're going to have athletes housed in these units, and then once the athletes leave, that those would be converted to affordable housing. Do we have any plan to house any of the athletes in Long Beach?
Speaker 10: So none. Not this time. The way that they're creating it, most Olympics create an Olympic village, and that's really where they house the athletes. And that's right now plan for for L.A. but we are going to be the hub. So they're designing us to have people come down here and not just have one event or two events, but really to have a center. So we're a major center, the Long Beach Center. But as of right now, housing down here is not one of the projects that they're looking at.
Speaker 6: Okay. I know that there's we'll probably hear in community comment tonight some concerns around housing impacts. Any time we've had this and I know there's some studies that show some good reports. Are we going to have an annual report on the 2028 list?
Speaker 10: So we can certainly report back on how we're doing. I think that's part of the report is to let you know what the timeline is. And then, yeah, we need to stay on target and report back. I do want to answer your question about housing, though, is that is clearly something we've heard from the council that we need more housing and that there's been a goal set. I believe, Mr. Mayor was 4000 units in it, mostly in the downtown area, and we're well on our way. So we are building a lot of housing. There is a number of skyscraper projects that are either breaking ground or. Moving forward. So housing is important and you'll see in ten years a much different downtown than what we know today.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Mr. Modica, I would like to ask that whenever we get our annual report on the eight projects that we also just have a report about how our housing is increasing. I know that this council and the mayor is taking housing really seriously and just want to make sure that we're following that along with all the work that we're doing outside of it, so that we're addressing the conversation head on. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Andres.
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you, Amir. You know, I'm really excited about the you know, to my colleagues who are bringing this item forward, you know, also along, which is a long story history and, you know, athletics and the Olympics, you know, good preparation starts early. And I think working that we do to prepare for the 2028 Olympics could be successful and financially viable, you know, which will create jobs. And I would really like extremely like, you know, to ask the city manager focus a lot on local employment and the implementation of these eight projects to a greater degree possible. That is very, very important, I think, to me and anyone else who lives in the city of Long Beach. It's employment, local employment. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 11: Thank you. And I like to speak in support of this item. This is very exciting and there is obviously a lot of work to be done in the next ten years. I was out at Skog last weekend and I heard a presentation from L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti. He gave a pretty comprehensive presentation, and the expo actually included Long Beach in the presentation as well and all of the the the games that will be here. He also talked about the Olympic Committee agreed to to frontload some financial resources to to the L.A. Olympic Bid Committee. Mr. Mayor. And I was curious to know whether or not there's been conversation, to see if any of those resources will be available to Long Beach. And in terms of what to help us get to these these projects, if you know.
Speaker 1: Yes. And maybe Tom can add. So there's some some extensive conversations going on around funding opportunities, both on the community benefit side as well as on the construction side. So on the community benefit side, for example, we're looking at the as people probably aware, the L.A. Olympics in 84 was one of the few Olympics that actually made money. And the foundation around that Olympics is still actually putting money out into the community through their nonprofit work. So one of the things that they're looking at this year for the 28 Olympics is they're looking at a long term plan to provide essentially to pay, particularly for low income families, all of a kind of athletic programs , swimming programs, parks, recreation, youth programs, and trying to be able to fund kind of a master youth sports program that would last for a decade plus for the communities and where the Olympics is actually in. So that is something that's being actively discussed and a goal of Mayor Garcetti's. And in addition to that, we are we expect some substantial opportunities to work, obviously, with with the Olympic Committee on opportunities to kind of close some funding gaps for us that we might have in in these projects.
Speaker 11: Great. Well, I look forward to supporting this and working as a council, as a city to make sure that we are a great host in 2028.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And Councilmember Superdome.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I have a question and a couple of comments. The question is to Tom Monaco. When will you bring this back for a second look. Do you have a date in mind?
Speaker 10: I don't have a date at this point. We can certainly get you back kind of a general report. But some of these projects are further along than others, and they're going to require some additional study on what it will take. So, for example, the lifeguard station, we have not started that project yet. We don't have a time frame or a sense. But for things like the concession stands, we have a lot of information. So I'm hoping in the next probably two or three months we'd come back and have that first look and then let you know, you know, further what needs to be done.
Speaker 9: Okay. So I won't frame my comments as a friendly amendment since this is coming back again. We can discuss that. But first, I just want to follow up on Councilwoman Mango's comment about the L.A. Coliseum, or maybe we should call it the United Airlines Coliseum, $70 million, but it's only for 16 years. And so that's a tremendous opportunity, I think, that we can look into, and I would hope that would be studied. Also, the one point that is striking to me is, is as was mentioned, so many of these projects are in the Tidelands area and that's great for funding. The downside is that it doesn't engage our entire city or all of our communities, but we do have a prototype for doing that. And I would hearken back to our legacy with the 32 Olympics. And you talk about tough economic times, 1932. We're about three years into the Great Depression, but they had a city wide program to ask the residents to plant vacant lots or decorate vacant lots. And that happened all over the city. The winning lot was on the corner of Locust and 14th, which was nowhere near any of the venues. And as a side note, that was that contest was won by a renter who had only been in the city about five years. The other thing I think we should look at is kind of the legacy of the 84 Olympics. And there are two. They looked at the entire community and looked at our legacy from 1932. So realizing that the traffic circle in the fourth Council District was built for the 32 Olympics, they made sure that torch run went down Lakewood Boulevard around the traffic circle. So we have lots of opportunities to engage the community and get these areas spruced up for the event. So that's all I am. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I wanted to chime in and add my support for this item. I want to also say, you know, I you know, when I drive near the Compton Town Center up Artesia, you'll see that 1984 Olympics logo. And I think we should also also, you know, make sure that we understand how to frame this to our residents is going be a lot of questions about what what our game plan is, what we're doing. And I'd like to understand better or get a briefing at some point on how there will be benefits to the local community in terms of like the L.A. 84 style benefits that were referenced tonight. Those are exciting. They, you know, help support swimming programs and things like that in all areas of all communities. And so I really want to want to better understand that and be able to champion that a bit more. I'm going to be excited for this. You know, my girls will be teenagers. I'm thinking about, you know, what sports they can get into now so they can really be inspired at that time. When I look at these sports and I want to make sure that we get some tickets to the Olympics. Thanks.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you. Let me take public comment. Please, please come forward.
Speaker 4: All right.
Speaker 9: Judy Clarke is the address. Obviously, I support this measure. And if people haven't thought about it, we will be getting even more venues. As I think most people understand, these are the what happened this summer with the smoke and the fires in L.A. Basin, and there's no indication that will not happen again. So we will be getting more venues. I want.
Speaker 1: To turn to.
Speaker 9: The issue of having the Marine Stadium included in that as a rowing venue. If you recall, two years ago, I came before the council, I think it was during Christmas break when Casey Wasserman's point people called me three times and said they definitely want to have the Marine Stadium as the rowing venue. It will be completely. He understood that the Davis Bridge is going to be replaced. It will be completely compliant. Unfortunately, what has happened based upon some credible individuals, some information that I find to be very far from a very credible individual. Mr. Wasserman has been. Persuaded away from and somebody for reasons far from commendable has essentially been poisoning the well suggesting that he take it to the first alternative to was up the lake villages which proved out to be very unsatisfactory notwithstanding the overall success of the 84 games because it was so distant. Then there was a place they suggested down by not far above San Diego, equally problematic. Then they were going to put it in Lake Balboa in the middle of van eyes, where even in the best, without any smoke and fires, it's 102 degrees. You know, there are paradigms that are going to address that. But I would strongly suggest you move forward with the plan to have the Marine Stadium designated it. It will be, as I say, the bridge will be in place within 3 to 4 years. No bench. Those two supports structures and so forth. The Corps of Engineers comes in with about 90 days before or 60 days before and does their thing to hold back the tides and the currents. And so there's no reason why the Marine Stadium should not be the rowing venue for these games. And I'm going to put my foot on that. You keep that on the neck of the issue because it makes absolute sense to have it here and it makes no sense to have.
Speaker 10: Any of the other locations that unfortunately.
Speaker 9: Mr. Wasserman was steered.
Speaker 1: To. Thank you very much. I can. Mr. Good here. I know this is one area where you and I agree very closely. And I, I talked to Mr. Wasserman today, and I can just guarantee you that he's very aware of our interest, our strong interest that for additional opportunities for us to host at the top of that list, as you all know, is the event that you're talking about. And so it's a decision, of course, that's not our decision. That's correct. But we they are absolutely aware of our ability to do and host an amazing event, a marine stadium. And so that's something that they know. Thank you. Reinforced. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Next speaker good evening, council members and Mr. Mayor. My name is Alan Perlman. I am a senior principal at Studio 111 Architecture, an urban design firm here located right in downtown. I'm also a third district resident, and this year I co-chair the Long Beach, the downtown Long Beach Alliance's Economic Development Committee. And tonight, I want to express our strong support for the recommendation to pursue the eight by 28 plan. I think leveraging the fact that Long Beach will be one of the Olympic host cities once again, it's a generational opportunity. It allows us to continue improving our city. And, you know, while completing the eight projects identified by 2018 will be important for the Olympic Games. We believe that they represent infrastructure and quality of life improvements that will benefit all residents of Long Beach for many years to come. So it's about really not just the Olympics, but the long term improvement of our city. In fact, Mr. Mayor, we want to take this opportunity to suggest, to think maybe even a little bit bigger, because while the Olympics represent one catalytic event, an amazing event for us, there are other things in play that are equally exciting. And if you think about putting them all together, the improvement plan for the L.A. River, the changes to Shoreline Drive, that will really create a totally new experience of coming into the city and a much more pedestrian friendly downtown. The expansion of the aquarium, the revitalization of the the Shoreline Village and maybe Marina Green Park and a more productive use of the elephant lot and going all the way up and down our shoreline. I think that all of these things point to an opportunity to take advantage of really one of our greatest assets, which is our waterfront. And I think if you can imagine a cohesive plan of tying everything from the L.A. River all the way across the city, it really ties the downtown and the rest of the city together into an amazing opportunity. So as a stakeholder in the city and the downtown, I'm thrilled at these opportunities. And I think now is the time to dream big about what we could do for our city while we take advantage of ideas about having equitable outcomes which are extremely important and value capture in some of these projects that really can help fund the future of our city and really plan together for ourselves and future generations. As always, the NBA is here to lend its support in these exciting ventures. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Good evening, mayor, and members of the council. I'm Jeff Miller. I've lived here a long.
Speaker 10: Time and I was here for the 1984 Olympics. And I and my neighbors and friends and I enjoyed them very much and looking forward to doing it again.
Speaker 9: I have a few comments about one specific aspect of the eight projects, and that's the BBC, also commonly known as the Belmont Pool. The agenda item behind you reads the critical phrase there is for staff to prepare a plan with a needs assessment. What this plan needs is a pool that can actually be built as planned. Now, the Belmont pool is the wrong location. The traffic, the congestion, the lack of access. The visitor amenities are not there. No true cost has actually been given for what this would be. And the the money is not there. The in there just insufficient money to build that there. But most important, perhaps, is the issue of sea level rise and other factors that very likely will cause this to be rejected by a coastal commission. The need here is a pool that can be built. So I urge you to look at building this pool downtown where access is assured. The freeway is there.
Speaker 10: The blue line is there. All the bus lines converge there.
Speaker 9: There is adequate parking. There are hotels, restaurants, other entertainment opportunities downtown, the aquarium, the Shoreline Park, all within walking distance for the visitors who will come. And a pool built there could very likely not be subject to the limitations of the one being planned. And maybe it could be built so that some of the actual Olympic events could be held in our pool downtown, which is not the case with the current plan to put it on the beach. So I urge you to maximize your opportunities for getting the Olympic funds that are going to be available to use them wisely to put together a pool that will last not just until the 28 Olympics, but on beyond that, and it will not be swamped by the rising sea. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, city councilman and women. My name is Gordon and CJR. My address is in file and I am a resident of the third district. And I'd like to speak to you tonight about a request to remove this pool, the Belmont pool, from this eight by 28 recommendation and request by the mayor. First, I'd like to remind you that the project is under litigation by citizens about responsible planning. The carp group following the council's approval of this IIR for the for the pool earlier or late last year, I should say, May of 2017. I understand that while the suit may have a hearing in May of 2018, that date is not confirmed. In the likely event of a ruling against the city of Long Beach because of serious sequel violations. There will be important issues that the city must remedy in order to move ahead with an updated or supplemental air. One official or one critical issue is the fact that the city chose not to identify any valid alternative sites for the project in the event that another location is identified and one that could potentially be outside of the coastal zone. The mayor's plan for eight Olympic projects may be spoiled, at least five that are planned for the coastal zone. In addition, the appeal to the California Coastal Commission on the city's local coastal development permit for this project is still pending. A hearing to determine the significant issues has not been scheduled and no date has been set by the coastal staff for the appeal itself. As you know, a number of Long Beach residents have appealed this project and it's also important to remind you that two sitting coastal commissioners have also filed their own appeals. Although this action is not unprecedented, it highlights significant Coastal Act implications that this pool has and its location have for the Coastal Commission, specifically its location on the beach and without regard for the threat of future sea level rise further, it's clear that the pool will never be used for these Olympic events. It's being designed as a hall to host exhibits, and I'd suggest to you that there might be some other locations within the city of Long Beach that might be more appropriate for that kind of use. Specifically because of the funding uses that are funding sources that are going to be needed for the rest of these projects that are being proposed. I'd like you to consider removing this item from the eight by 28 project. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Q Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening. Mayor Garcia, Council Members.
Speaker 5: Vice Mayor Richardson, thank you for bringing forward the home purchase project. I think that's great. We're very excited about having a rebuilt Belmont Pier. I can't tell you how many people I certainly in the third district and around the city will enjoy that. And so that's a great project. I would like to.
Speaker 8: Suggest one addition to what you're working on. I think the lifeguard stations.
Speaker 5: Are important, but I think a lifeguard headquarters.
Speaker 8: A marine safety.
Speaker 5: Headquarters, the building that they're working out of on Junipero, is it? It's very antiquated.
Speaker 8: And in September of 2016, the city had a presentation.
Speaker 5: There was apparently plans being made to rehabilitate the lifeguard headquarters. So that was presented in 2016.
Speaker 8: And I've tried to reach the gentleman who was Pine's, who was the contracted by the city.
Speaker 5: I haven't heard back from him, so I don't know where that stands. But please talk to the marine safety people in the lifeguards. They really need a upgraded location and they need extra equipment. They need the room and they need really modern. We're going to have a lot of people to watch over.
Speaker 8: And also I join in.
Speaker 5: Urging you to think about working with the Olympic Committee. If you're going, there's no one who.
Speaker 8: Doesn't want the aquatic community to have a nice.
Speaker 5: Pool and they want a pool for events. And that's their large interest for diving, for a water pool, for swimming. And so it makes sense to do what the.
Speaker 8: Olympic Committee is going to do, which is to put their pool in downtown Long Beach, where there's parking, where there's access. Those things I've mentioned already, and there's going to be even a more beautiful.
Speaker 5: Place to watch from the pier and watch the sailing. If you let us keep the Olympic Plaza Park and I do urge you to go out there, it's a beautiful scene. There's the park. People are enjoying.
Speaker 8: It all the time. You can see the pier from there. You can see the sailboats.
Speaker 5: I think there's just such a win win of trying to.
Speaker 8: Encourage the aquatic.
Speaker 5: Community to get their mind around the fact that there can be a beautiful sand Long Beach aquatic center in downtown. It'll better serve the people who live on the east and west side, and it will cause much less dissension, which we've encountered because of the lawsuits and because of the coastal problems.
Speaker 8: So I really urge you to to work on that. I'm glad America's in charge.
Speaker 5: I'm sure you'll do a good job of putting all this together. And thank you very much for listening.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Good evening. My name is Johnny Coleman. I'm with a coalition called New Olympics.
Speaker 10: L.A. represents many housing advocates, homeless advocates.
Speaker 9: Anti-Imperialist.
Speaker 10: Immigrants, rights workers.
Speaker 9: Groups across Southern California. There are over 30 groups in our coalition as we speak. We launched a year ago. I've spent basically every day in the last year working and dissecting and credit and critically looking at this bid. I'm curious to see how many people in this room have actually read the bid. It's extremely long. I've read it many times. It represents a very bad deal that the lawmakers in L.A. have negotiated for. It puts the L.A. taxpayers on the hook indefinitely. It puts California taxpayers on the hook if it goes 270 million to 540 million over it. And and this is to say that it has been passed by L.A. City Council with no budget. There is no budget for the L.A. 2020 to 2028 Olympics right now. This is historically unprecedented. This has never happened in 100 plus years of the Olympics. So that's very disconcerting. Not to mention, thank you for whoever brought up the possibility that this might have a negative impact on the housing on people's housing issues, the affordable housing crisis or homelessness. But what was not talked about was what this will mean for sanctuary. It is a national special security event, the Olympics. That means that the Department of Homeland Security, which includes ICE and CBP and the NSA, is not only allowed but to encourage to work with local law enforcement. So if anyone here in this room that's sitting in front of me was a proponent of sanctuary status and in Long Beach acquiring that, then this is directly contradicts and undoes all that work you're doing. Also, it's really interesting to hear you people, especially Eric Garcetti, the mayor of L.A., touting youth sports. I don't know if anyone's been paying attention to the news recently and what the Olympics do under the guise of youth sports, but it's extremely irresponsible. I also want to correct what someone said earlier about United. The United to naming rights are the Coliseum. The IOC actually prohibits any city from letting the venue use corporate naming rights during the period of the Olympics. So United, for example, cannot be called the United Coliseum during that period. And they actually didn't know that when they negotiated the bill. As The L.A. Times wrote about this yesterday, we also talk about the. Legacy of the 1984 Olympics. For who is the question? I work a lot with activists in South L.A. and in Skid Row, and you should ask them what they thought about the 1984 Olympics and all the power that it gave Daryl Gates and how that led to initiatives like Operation Crash, Operation Hammer and the 1992 uprising. We'd also ask that the city, if it does actually make any sort of profit, that funds not go to the 84th Foundation, which is a nonprofit and is not accountable to the people that have elected you all. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hello. I am also with the No Olympics L.A. Coalition.
Speaker 8: And so I followed the Los.
Speaker 5: Angeles bid extremely closely as well.
Speaker 8: And and following that process.
Speaker 5: I've been shocked at the haste and lack of.
Speaker 6: Transparency in the process.
Speaker 5: There was not in.
Speaker 8: Any kind of adequate community involvement from the get go. The vulnerable communities that Johnny before me mentioned, but who are most likely to be impacted by the games, were not included in the conversation, let alone told about the the risks.
Speaker 6: Involved in hosting.
Speaker 8: Every Olympics ever, such as increased gentrification, police militarization, budget overruns and displacement. Then when the International Olympic Committee cut a deal with L.A. and Paris and gave Los Angeles the 2028 Games, City Hall quickly just flipped to the numbers and voted it through without any more public input or even the illusion of public input or a budget , as Johnny also mentioned. So in assessing these massive Olympics related projects in Long Beach, I encourage.
Speaker 5: You to act differently and include the tenants and other vulnerable people who will be most impacted.
Speaker 8: By them. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Stephanie Dawson.
Speaker 9: So the Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach chapter. Point of order. Before my my time starts, Mister City Attorney, I've noticed three different conversations that have gone on tonight between council members and people in the audience. I'm just a simple wee lawyer, so I'm not the best person when it comes to analyzing the California Public Records Act . But this is an agenda, a public meeting. And if they want to be doing constituent services during the meeting, they need to be in the evening, make appointments during that for that specifically. Secondly, Rex, the other day when we met when you met Donnie Anderson in the street, you might want to talk to him about his felony that he picked up during Operation Crush in the 1994 Olympics. As he was sitting in his house and minding his own business, Daryl Gates and the LAPD crashed down his door and struck him with a fellow with a felony that he only this year got removed thanks to the work of the California ACP. He is just one of thousands of people who are victimized by the police militarization that happened as a result of the Olympics during that time. Talk to the people who are still living in North Long Beach in Compton. And they all they all have very similar stories about the about the oppressive nature of the police that happened. They were allowed to happen during that time. Secondarily, if you're looking at ways to of the projects that are being named as targets for improvement during via the Olympics, none of them do have to be specific to the Olympics. These are all projects that can be funded through progressive income taxation or through parcel taxes that can be achieved, that can be achieved by you guys passing policies separate to the Olympics, trusting the Olympic Committee, which is internationally reputed to be one of the most corrupt organizations in the world. It's a reason that we rejected F1. Racing is the exact same reason that we should be doing that. We're rejecting the Olympics. It is an untenable, corrupt organization that extracts money and works as a displacement engine for especially low and moderate income people inside of the city. If you want if you want new sports again, we can raise taxes within and on our own, on our own residents in a progressive manner to be able to pay for it. So finally, please, if you think that this is going to be some sort of massive gentrification effort on the on the part of and improving public infrastructure.
Speaker 10: Just Google the 24 Olympics.
Speaker 9: In in Athens. You know there's slideshows now of most of these or most of these past Olympic venues. They are covered in moss and mold and not being used anymore.
Speaker 10: Thank you for your time.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Thank you, counsel. My name is Max Norris.
Speaker 4: I'm here on behalf of the Democratic Socialists of America Long Beach chapter. I would.
Speaker 9: Like to take a moment to ask.
Speaker 10: Mr. Parker again what exactly.
Speaker 9: The Council's position on the PRC laws is. We saw it again twice. Two members go into the public.
Speaker 10: Speak out of turn during a meeting. My understanding is that violates the Public Records Act. So I'd like disclosures from those people.
Speaker 9: To be made public. Thank you. Beyond that, I'm.
Speaker 10: Here to speak against the Olympics. This is a deal that's.
Speaker 3: Not for our average Long.
Speaker 10: Beach's. This is a deal for Eric Garcetti.
Speaker 9: Mr. Wasserman and elite people of Los Angeles. We may have the most Olympians coming out of Long Beach, and that's great. But wouldn't it be great that they got to go some? Or else. And that all these problems that everybody tells you about.
Speaker 3: Would be.
Speaker 10: Somewhere else. We have enough problems. We have plenty of things that we.
Speaker 9: Could all be talking about.
Speaker 10: Instead of cheerleading for the Olympics. I implore you, Mr. Richardson, specifically, take a closer.
Speaker 9: Look at this.
Speaker 10: I know you have aspirations higher.
Speaker 3: Than this office, and this will be a stain on your record. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Mr. Mayor. City Council. My name is Richard Foster. I was 12 years president of USA Water Polo and also past president, Olympic Century Club and the aquatics capital of America. And that's the two organizations I'm here to represent tonight. We strongly support this. This plan. We're really excited that you have really thought this through and are going to do a really good job, because I've been to seven Olympic Games and some some Olympic hosts have not been that good in preparation. And it shows. But those who are prepared and do a great job reap the benefits for decades. And I think this is a great plan. I'm really excited personally and on behalf of those two organizations that you're taking this step. Just to address a couple other comments. The best run Olympic Games in history was 1984 in Los Angeles. Financially and otherwise, we have a great track record here in Long Beach. As Councilmember Price mentioned, we put out Olympics. I don't know why we put on so many Olympians, but we just do. In 2012, if we were a country, we live in the 15th ranked country in the world in medals. So it's been really incredible. And going to Miss Richardson's comments about the effects on youth. When I was President U.S.A., water polo. Every time there's an Olympics, we have a real upswell in young children wanted to participate in Olympic sports, and no year was greater than 84 when we had the Olympics right here. And you can imagine for water polo, which is kind of our town sport, having hosting the water polo events here, we're going to skyrocket. And young people, boys and girls, wanting to participate in sport. So the benefits on our youth are just tremendous. So thank you for voting to be part of Olympic Games. And we we obviously support this project.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Next week for peace reasons.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 5: Hi, Mayor Gordon. Gordon Norwood. Again, I was listening to the conversation about the projects and all the money there is going to be invested in Long Beach and I'm really excited about that. But my I just came to mind that I want to make sure I want to be assured that it's going to benefit all communities. As a person who was a youth in 1984 in South Central, there was a lot of money put into Los Angeles, but I can tell you that it didn't come to South Central where I grew up. And so I want to make sure that all of our council district or some representative from all council districts is on that committee and that we are looking at all committees and not just the more our communities and not just the more affluent areas where the the coastal line, where we already are constantly building. But I don't see that same building happening in District six. So or and, you know, other not as affluent areas. So I just want to make sure that all that everybody is represented and is going to benefit all areas and not just certain areas. Because again, we're talking about the 1984. It was a wonderful, wonderful situation, wonderful event for L.A. or wonderful for L.A. But I was a young girl in South Central. I didn't see all of those the great things that we that I just heard about happening in my neighborhood. So I want to make sure that. Is that true. And Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next week or please. This is our is going to be the last two speakers. Okay. I will close the speakers list. Thank you, mayor.
Speaker 9: City Council, City Management. First of all, thank you for the leadership. When L.A. first announced that the Olympics they were bidding for the Olympics, Long Beach was noticeably absent. And so it was with your leadership that got Long Beach into the game and got us into the.
Speaker 4: Bid and we.
Speaker 9: Became part of the L.A. Olympics. So, first of all, thanks for doing that for our.
Speaker 4: City very much. Appreciate it. I'm Steve Goodling.
Speaker 9: The Long Beach Convention Visitors Bureau president. Our board looks forward to this event. Our membership of over 500 businesses looks forward to this event. And we couldn't be more pleased that you all are taking the leadership. What Mr. Modica said is absolutely correct. Ten years will fly and all of you involved with public work programs know the process between Coastal Commission and everything else that needs to take place. We have to begin now. So this eight and 28 is exactly spot on. These facilities will not grow moss. The convention center.
Speaker 4: Is was built in 1965. It needs new seats. It needs work. It has. And have had that touch. But yet it.
Speaker 9: Served us with the California Women's Conference, with the TED Conference and other events.
Speaker 4: That is a community facility.
Speaker 9: And now our nonprofits in our city, in addition to our convention, but also our nonprofits are using it to raise money to support their groups of women's shelter and other programs in our city. So our city assets are benefiting our residents in addition to the economic impact of showcasing Long Beach. So on behalf of our board, the Convention and Visitors Bureau.
Speaker 4: And on behalf of all of our.
Speaker 9: Membership, we'd like to thank you. And we look forward to working with you in hosting the 2028 Olympics. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Goodling, and our final speaker.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Kevin Yeager. I'm a member of Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach and a constituent of District One. I appreciate what previous speakers have said to highlight the risks that the Olympics will bring to our city. So I just wanted to, as a democratic socialist, dwell on the undemocratic processes that have got us to this place in 2017. Our City Council approved the city manager to enter into an agreement for the 2024 Olympics, and if so, what Mr. Mayor described as a tweak actually happened. And it's sorry. And that's moving the Olympics from 2024. Four years later, it's 2028. Long Beach has to date not approved anything having to do with the 2028 Olympics. This was done under our nose. And we're just going along with, you know, big brother, Los Angeles dictating what's happening here in our city with international business agreements. So why were the Olympics awarded in 2028? Well, it's actually unprecedented for the Olympics to be awarded this far ahead of time. And the reason, well.
Speaker 9: In at least.
Speaker 10: Many people's opinion that they awarded the 2028 Olympics is because the Olympics are decreasingly popular among cities. More and more cities are waking up to the risks that the Olympics bring. After we've seen devastation and raising rents in London or just so many disasters in Rio. People are realizing that the Olympics are terrible for cities. So that's why the Olympics were concerned that if they waited four more years for the 2028 bid process, they wouldn't even have any applicants. So they tried to stick us with the 2028 Olympics right now. And so this is why it's so mind boggling to hear the previous speaker talk about how ten years will fly by and how a mr. Monica is saying, you know, ten years really isn't a lot of time to prepare for the Olympics. It's the most time any city has ever had to prepare for a modern Olympic Games. So as I said, I think there were undemocratic processes even when we voted for the 2024 Olympics. It was presented as a done deal. There wasn't much substantive conversation around how this would impact the most vulnerable communities in Long Beach. And now we have another four years. So I would urge the City Council to take a step back and take these extra four years to get more input, do more studies on how this would affect rents, how this would affect police militarization in our immigrant and people of color communities. And if we're going to pass any priority developments, the only thing we should be prioritizing is affordable housing. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Yeager. Members Bruce Gordon Castro votes. There's a motion in the second.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Next item is we're going to do item 12. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager and staff to prepare an 8 by 28 plan, a needs assessment and project timeline for eight projects that are critical to a successful 2028 Summer Olympics and Paralympic Games; and to prioritize and brand these projects as Olympic priority development projects for future funding opportunities. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02062018_18-0057 | Speaker 1: Carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Next item is we're going to do item 12.
Speaker 2: Report from Public Works. Recommendation to accept an easement deed from Long Beach Unified School District located at 4840 Lemon Avenue for installation of public utilities and except Long Beach Unified School District's initial study and mitigated negative declaration for a new Early Childhood Learning Center, District eight.
Speaker 1: Nothing at all.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to get a staff report from Public Works.
Speaker 9: Yes, Councilman. There are Austin members. City Council.
Speaker 1: This item was brought before you at the last council meeting and it was asked to be held over to give staff an opportunity to review the secret document, the mitigated negative declaration, and some of the traffic analysis done as part of that process. After you've had a chance to go into.
Speaker 9: That in more detail and understand what.
Speaker 1: Some of the mitigation measures staff has reached out to the Lumbee Unified School District and propose an alternative at this location. It's adjacent to Barton Elementary School, which is essentially a at the Alamo. And LEMON That intersection does not currently have a traffic signal. However, it was rated one of our more challenging intersections in the city, and it is deemed to be included on a future traffic signal list. So the city staff is working with Long Beach Unified School District staff to share in those costs so we can advance when that traffic signal would come forward. That isn't specific to the easement.
Speaker 9: The easement is a different matter. It is for utilities.
Speaker 1: But we do feel that we have positive momentum.
Speaker 4: In.
Speaker 10: Addressing bringing.
Speaker 1: A traffic signal to the line one.
Speaker 9: LEMON And that concludes.
Speaker 1: My staff report. Thank you. There's a motion and a second on this. Councilman Austin thank.
Speaker 11: You. Excellent report. This is a this EDUCARE facility with the Long Beach Unified School District is going to be an excellent addition to our district. Prior to the aged care facility actually coming online and being actually a vision of the school, Barton Elementary School and many of the residents in the area requested a traffic signal at Limon and Del Amo because of a high volume of accidents. The educator will add another 200 students plus another 50 staff. And so I think it merits a greater conversation. And I'm glad that our public works department and Lomas Unified are actually talking about that. And I'm very encouraged. So I support this item and encourage my colleagues to do so as well. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: This sounds like a great partnership. I'm happy to support it. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And I'll just chime in and say this is a really exciting project, some very high quality child care and sort of preschool early learning facility in North Long Beach. This is going to be one of the one of the most spectacular child care facilities in the region taking place in North Long Beach, excited to partner with school district, excited to partner with Councilman Austin. I just think I'm just really excited about this project. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 7: Yes, excellent job, Councilman. Awesome. Because the fact that that's where our future starts, it's a good place where we'll be starting. Thank you again.
Speaker 3: We thank you for any public comment on this item saying nonmembers, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to accept an easement deed from Long Beach Unified School District, the owner of the property located at 4840 Lemon Avenue, for the installation of public utilities; and accept Long Beach Unified School District’s Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a new early childhood learning center at Barton Elementary School. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02062018_18-0097 | Speaker 2: Motion case.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Item 16, please.
Speaker 2: Communication from Vice Mayor Richardson, Councilwoman Gonzales, Councilman Andrews and Councilmember Urunga. Recommendation to receive and file a report from the Department of Health and Human Services on the status of current flu levels.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. And this. This motion tonight is about really receiving a presentation on the flu. Every year we go through our process of helping to educate the community, and it's led by our health department. And this year, it's particularly important that we focus on the recent flu, given that this is one of our most aggressive youth flu seasons in a decade. There was an article weeks ago that really highlighted sort of how aggressive it's been in Southern California. And weeks ago there were about 40 deaths by the flu. But it called out at that point that two cities, two large cities in L.A. County, didn't have any deaths to the flu. And they were the two cities that had their own public health departments. So it was Pasadena, Long Beach. The statistics have changed since then, but I think it's important that we do raise this up and we highlight our health department. We asked for a report in front of the full council and in front of the public about this year's flu season. So at that so at this point, I'm just going to ask for a staff report.
Speaker 4: Mayor Councilmembers.
Speaker 9: I'm going to turn this over to our director of Health.
Speaker 10: And Human Services, Kelly Collopy, and also our health officer, Dr. Anissa Davis. So Kelly and Anita.
Speaker 8: Good evening. One of the things about tonight is we've.
Speaker 4: Been able to show you sort of the breadth of some of the.
Speaker 8: Work that we're doing. So from black infant health to violence prevention, and now we'll be sharing about the flu. So Dr. Anissa Davis, who's your health officer, will be presenting and will be open for questions after. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and Council Members, thank you for giving me this opportunity to present information on this year's flu back flu season. My closeness to the mike.
Speaker 4: They.
Speaker 8: Each flu season runs from approximately the early fall to spring. The dominant influenza virus strain this season is H3N2. This strain of influenza virus is associated with more hospitalizations and deaths in young children and seniors. The flu season this year began earlier than usual and appears to be widespread and particularly intense, with record high percentages of people visiting health care providers, urgent care and emergency rooms for flu like illness. We don't know if the season has peaked yet and there are numerous different strains that are circulating. So we could see more cases in the future from different strains. The vaccine efficacy rate is currently unknown, but predicted to be between ten and 30% effective for H3N2. It's still strongly recommended that you get vaccinated, however, because vaccination can decrease the severity of the flu and your chances of being hospitalized from it. And it's not too late to get vaccinated. This slide shows some of the surveillance data that is collected by the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services. The Orange Line shows the number of cases of flu for this flu season so far, and the blue line shows the number of cases for last year's season. You can see that this season started rising much earlier than last season, and we've quickly surpassed last year's numbers to date. In the city of Long Beach, there has been a 78% increase in reported flu cases compared to last year. There have also been 13 cases of patients younger than 65 who had to be in the ICU and had the flu. And there have been three influenza associated deaths in people younger than 65. All of the people who died were adults who had underlying medical and medical conditions. We've also investigated eight flu outbreaks in hospital in long term care facilities and Long Beach. The Health Department's flu response is comprised of surveillance, education and outreach and immunization activities or surveillance of Long Beach hospitals indicated that Long Beach emergency departments and hospitals were heavily impacted with high numbers of patients seeking services. There were reports early in the season of shortages of ventilators and masks at one facility, but these needs were quickly resolved by the Disaster Resource Center, a regional center tasked with supporting surge capacity for hospitals in the Greater Long Beach area. There have been no further resource issues among hospitals, to our knowledge. Tamiflu is an antiviral treatment for the flu. There were reports initially of shortages of the generic form of Tamiflu, but the branded product is currently widely available. Widely. As far as disease surveillance and outbreak response, the health department works closely with neighboring jurisdictions and the state to track flu activity regionally. Besides monitoring flu cases, we also investigate outbreaks in hospitals and skilled nursing facilities this season to provide further support. We also held an influenza update for Skilled Nursing Facilities Webinar to review influenza prevention and outbreak protocols. Vaccinating individuals to prevent or lessen the severity of the flu is a mainstay of the department's efforts to protect the people who work and live in Long Beach. So far this season, nearly 3500 flu vaccines have been administered to residents and city staff, with an additional 3500 doses distributed to community partners and neighboring jurisdictions. The Health Department has held or participated in 25 different flu vaccination clinics this season at local parks, senior center, senior centers, Cal State, Long Beach, among other places, Red Cross nurses and the Medical Reserve Corps members were invaluable partners in this effort. In addition to Health Department activities, the Occupational Health Clinic also vaccinated 481 employees. Our largest community event is our free flu vaccination clinic done at the main health department on Grand. Each year, usually in October. This is an annual tradition going back several years. This year, with our first ever drive thru vaccination clinic where we gave over 600 vaccinations in 5 hours because of the severity of this year's flu season. We held a second drive thru clinic in January where we vaccinated over 150 residents and staff. Both clinics were huge successes with a great deal of positive feedback about the drive thru. About the drive thru component. People really liked that and I just want to shout out four of my staff members who were instrumental in making this a success of this new way of giving vaccinations. If you raise your hand, think. In closing here, our recommendations for preventing and treating the flu. It's not too late to get vaccinated. Vaccine supply is plentiful and widely available, and it's one of the easiest ways that you can prevent yourself from getting the flu or lessening the severity of it. Take antiviral drugs if your doctor prescribes them. The sooner you start to take them after you get the flu, the better they work. Limit contact with others if you're sick. Stay home from work if you're sick and keep kids home from school if they're sick and washing your hands often with soap and water is still one of the best ways to prevent the flu and a variety of other infections. And avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. This concludes my report. I'm open for questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you for that presentation. Again, we just thought it was important that we lift that up and highlight it, given the aggressiveness of the flu this season. I don't see any Councilman Andrew's comment.
Speaker 4: But one mike clinic.
Speaker 3: I don't think your mike is on.
Speaker 7: I just want to thank you for connecting the vaccination clinic and education for the community. And this is extremely important, you know, for so many of us, because a lot of people just think it's a joke, but other people are dying. So I think it's very important that we got this update. Thank you. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I wanted to say I think it's awesome that we had a drive thru clinic and that's fantastic. Awesome. And both of those clinics where they done at the health department offer, Willow. Both of them. Okay. Is there any talk about maybe one in North Long Beach and one east side?
Speaker 8: Do you want to do? Should I? So next year we're planning on having it at Long Beach City College. So over there by Veterans Stadium. Okay. So a little bit closer.
Speaker 6: Great. And then is there a National Handwashing Day? Is that in flu season?
Speaker 8: I don't know when it is.
Speaker 3: Should be every day.
Speaker 5: It should be every day. I agree. It should be every day. Okay.
Speaker 6: Multiple times a day, I hope. Okay. Thank you for all your hard work, guys.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any public comment on item? Please come forward.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you, Jane Templin, again. I just have a question of why the recording stops at age 65.
Speaker 3: Well, let's go ahead and hear the answer to that.
Speaker 4: Oh, I need to hear that.
Speaker 8: I can respond. Yeah. Okay. That's a great question. So because those that are over 65 usually have a lot of other variables that go into how they do with the flu. We really track those that are younger than 65 to get a good measure of the severity of the flu season itself.
Speaker 3: Good response. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Okay.
Speaker 9: Anything else.
Speaker 3: You think? 2 minutes. All right. Thank you for your time. Okay. No further public comment. Members, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Council to receive and file a report from the Department of Health and Human Services on the status of the current flu levels in Long Beach and Southern California, detailing steps Long Beach residents can take to prevent contracting and spreading the illness. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_18-0057 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Councilmember. Can we please. Actually. Madam Secretary, why don't we read the item first?
Speaker 1: Item ten is a report from Public Works recommendation to authorize city manager to accept an easement deed from Lomita Unified School District. The owner of property located at 4840 Lemmon Avenue for the installation of public utilities and except Long Beach Unified School District's initial study and mitigated negative declarations for a newly early childhood learning center at Barton Elementary School.
Speaker 5: District eight.
Speaker 0: Councilmember.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, counsel, for the reconsideration. I'd like to move that we continue this item. I had some questions about the project's initial study and mitigated negative declaration that I've discussed with the public work staff, and they've indicated that they'd like some time to look at it. And so the given the matter given that the matter is not time critical, I'd like to hold this over until we can get some more information. I'll just say I'm generally very supportive of the the project. It's a great project for early childhood. Education is going to be one that will bring a lot of focus on our city and particularly in the eighth District, and do a lot of good things, more importantly for for working families in the community. But there are some some concerns with the traffic impacts in and I just have some questions for public works to look into a little bit further. And so I'd like some time to study that issue.
Speaker 0: Okay. So Helder, for the next meeting of the city council, which would be February six, is the final few weeks.
Speaker 3: I would defer to the director of Public Works.
Speaker 0: Mr. BECK. Yes, Mayor. Members of the Council. I think that should be sufficient. We have started to review what was prepared by the school district, and we believe we'll have some information to share with the council by that time. If not, we'll continue that that continue the item again. Okay, sounds good. Then there's a motion in a second on the floor. Please cast your votes back. February six.
Speaker 1: Note in case.
Speaker 0: Think you can count has been approved. Is Brian Matheson here? Please come forward, sir. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to accept an easement deed from Long Beach Unified School District, the owner of the property located at 4840 Lemon Avenue, for the installation of public utilities; and accept Long Beach Unified School District’s Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a new early childhood learning center at Barton Elementary School. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_17-1062 | Speaker 0: Right. I'm 21.
Speaker 1: Item 21 is communication from Kinsman Austin Chair, State Legislation Committee Recommendation to approve the 2018 State Legislative Agenda as recommended by the State Legislation Committee.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Of the Great, there is a motion and a second council in Austin. Did you have comments? Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: First of all, I'd like to thank the state led committee councilmembers Gonzalez and Mongeau for their work on helping to draft this, as well as the city manager's office and the government relations team led by Diana Tang and all of the staff input that helped develop this comprehensive state led agenda. It is a continuance for much of our work over the last several years. Is there strong on local control, public safety and sustainable living, as well as addressing some of the key issues that are facing our our city and state of moving forward? And so with that, the work was put in. I think it's pretty self-explanatory. I would ask for member support on this.
Speaker 0: Catherine Andrews.
Speaker 2: Second.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. I would like to add in here, if I could, maybe a friendly amendment to add the issue of net neutrality. I meant to add that on the federal legislative committee, but item. But that went a little fast for me. But if we can add it here for the state legislative, that would be great.
Speaker 3: You mean adding support for. Yes.
Speaker 0: Well, I think and maybe the councilman. Councilman was referring to there is a Scott Wiener bill on net neutrality. Yes. So I'm assuming that's the the item of.
Speaker 5: Support for that.
Speaker 0: Okay. Councilwoman, so we're showing Councilwoman Gonzalez anything else in addition to that? That's it. Councilwoman Mingo.
Speaker 5: I wanted to thank Al for his leadership in getting us all together and reviewing all the bills. It was a progressive year for legislation and thank Diana Tang for her work as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And public comment on state ledge.
Speaker 8: Image. Robert Peak representing Jesus since you clown my trumpet, I got a Jesus said You've been that clown. They said, okay, anyway, so let me get on the camera so they could see me. I don't even know what that's about, but I've been here for the last year and I saw how everybody voted. I'm not satisfied with everything. State legislation. And first of all, I like to say, you know, that's a good job you did. And I like how you clean the park up, too. I remember that. You know, so and only thing is, is Ginny Pierce got a good part in the state legislature. She ain't to no communism. This is a matter of I'm gonna get up here America for Americans to name Pierce got a go at you when you run for office. You need to squeeze her out. You got enough power to do that. That's part of the state legislature. I just.
Speaker 0: It's the state legislative agenda.
Speaker 8: Agenda. Agenda. Okay, your agenda needs to be pushing her. Her comments aside.
Speaker 0: Hey, it's okay. I got it. Please be respectful and Ebonics.
Speaker 8: Man. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Sir. Let's respect the hat you're wearing, too. So please, let's not say that.
Speaker 8: Understands me every time.
Speaker 0: So what I think. Why don't we stick to the state legislative agenda?
Speaker 8: You don't have to tell me. I respect Jesus. I respect him. You don't, by the way you vote and everything you respect. And by caring about people, that's what you do. Now, as far as this agenda, this agenda, I don't know that I got I couldn't get in the public comment. So I'm use this to say what I have to say about this agenda. Now, I know we have Mr. Super now. He's not going for a button. Stacey, man, go. Come on. Oh, better. You know, I like you. You were Republican. We are on the same team. Come on, let's roll. Suzy ain't here. She's cool. Miss Communist. Miss Karl Marx. Got to go, Nina. She just read the long time, I don't know.
Speaker 0: About to get back to the state legislative agenda.
Speaker 8: The state. This is the state. This is within the state. Okay. You doing a good job? I ain't got nothing against Bert. We ain't even arguing. Now I feel like. Argue with.
Speaker 4: You.
Speaker 8: Yeah. Hey, I can get on the ballot. You know, I do better job. You know, we've seen all the black folks in hell. I saw them. We could do something, you know, that's what we need to do. We don't need to be like no Uncle Tom Bradley or Mark Ridley-Thomas. I mean, just show you something. I'm not out here to tell you that she don't want to see you do a great job so I could be behind. You know, I'm serious. And I'm not here to tear stuff down and do all the yelling. I want to see you do great job. I want to see you give your grandmother and give you a ride back, Lord, and do like, you know, you should. I mean.
Speaker 0: About let's make sure we go back to the.
Speaker 8: Last 20 seconds for you to leave all that communism stuff there. Leave it there. Leave it there. You got any.
Speaker 0: Little agenda.
Speaker 8: Money here? Leave that there. If people people are sneaking into Venezuela, they sneak in in the U.S., red, white and blue. They ain't going to Castro. They come in here. That's all. Thank you, sir. Later.
Speaker 0: Okay. Please go ahead and cast your votes for the state legislative agenda.
Speaker 1: Bush and Kerry's.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to go up to item 1330. I think we have a series of of items. I believe it's 13, 14 and 15, I believe, by Councilmember Gonzales and another author. So why don't I turn this over to Councilmember Gonzales and we'll start with item 13. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to respectfully request City Council approval of the 2018 State Legislative Agenda as recommended by the State Legislation Committee. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_18-0060 | Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to go up to item 1330. I think we have a series of of items. I believe it's 13, 14 and 15, I believe, by Councilmember Gonzales and another author. So why don't I turn this over to Councilmember Gonzales and we'll start with item 13.
Speaker 1: Item 13 Report from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Andres, Councilmember Oranga Recommendation to Request City Manager to Work with Technology and Innovation 18 Library Services, Office of Equity and Community Stakeholders on a Digital Inclusion Master Plan.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you. I'd like to think my council colleagues, council member Muranga and Council Member Andrews for joining me on this item. I think it's very important, as we've talked in the larger scope of our technology masterplan, I know inclusive of that was a bullet point related to digital inclusion, but I wanted to make sure we brought this forward to really talk about it in depth. So now cities across America and the nation are experiencing a digital divide for various reasons. Whether it's technology as a whole, computer skills, affordable Internet service hardware for students. So many different things are being addressed. And any solution towards digital inclusion must involve connectivity, capacity, digital literacy and technology affordable, accessible computers. And so my office and I, we've been working we've been researching a package of items. This one is the first that will include a masterplan for digital inclusion overall. It's going to be a road map, and it'll request that the city manager work with various city departments. Much of what was already mentioned by our city clerk's team and a few of the stats here, according to the 2015 U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, 28.7% of households in language do not have a fixed broadband subscription. And that is about roughly 120,000 residents, or the amount of people in the two council districts together who cannot reliably access the Web. So about 30 to 50000 households, if you can imagine, are off the grid. And these recommendations that we've included are important. And it doesn't just address seniors and children and individuals and households, but also small businesses that we know can increase sales and revenue with just an online platform, social media presence and of course, a Yelp page. This is the type of technical assistance and business improvement district that businessmen improvement districts excuse me can do on behalf of business owners in these areas. So as we know, we are in an age of Postmates and Uber eats and all of these different food delivery services. We know that it can be a great deal of help to these small businesses. And in the 908, when three we know that there's very high unemployment rates, we know that there's very high poverty levels, and that we know that many parents need jobs. So we must do a better job. And this will absolutely help that, I believe. So we've been working and I know there's so many different private partners as well as city entities like Library Services and the foundation that I see here today, our Parks Department, Long Beach Unified School District, many nonprofits and businesses that would like to join us in this road map to digital inclusion. And I've also had many private partners like charter and laser fish, that have weighed in on this as well. So with that said, I hope my colleagues will support me today. It's a very comprehensive plan. We're asking the city team to come back in 120 days and we realize that that's a short time. So again, if we can get a two from four, that would include an update. If we're not able to meet that 120 days, that would be great. And thank you very much. I look forward to seeing where this goes.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Barringer.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank Councilwoman Gonzales for bringing this forward. My community in the West Palm Beach area is one of those communities that the lack of Internet service and and the digital divide would greatly impact. When you look at the unemployment rates and their access to computers, so bringing this forward to make sure that we are as equally connected as the rest of the city is is a tremendous help to the West Palm Beach community. And I want to thank you for bringing this forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 5: I, too, want to thank my colleague for being thoughtful and having a whole holistic view to the digital divide. And I just want to make some comments. And, you know, you referenced them in your comments. Just recognizing that nearly 10% of our nation is immigrants. And that's particularly important whenever we consider that if someone doesn't have legal status, it's very difficult for them to get Internet because they don't have a Social Security number or ID or utility bill. And so making sure that we are finding new ways to connect all of those that deserve to have Internet access so they can find jobs or work on paperwork, any of those needs. I also would like to ask that we include connecting with some of the schools as we outline how we are finding new opportunities for people to have access to the Internet. In the meantime, we know that a lot of parents, particularly in our central Long Beach, don't have access to Internet. And if there's a computer lab or computer time that parents can use at school, that might be an additional opportunity outside of library. So again, I just want to thank you for your leadership on this and really looking forward to hearing from staff when it comes back. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 2: Yes, thank you. You know. I find that it digital inclusion has been in recruiting topic here in Long Beach for quite some time because we have spoken of infrastructural improvements, you know, such as fiber optics and neighborhood corridors, wi fi to enhance the city connected connectivity, you know, as an access and affordability, you know, pose challenges to low income community. Many sixth District households are directly affected. And thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez, for putting this together in a legislative package that addresses these technological hurdles I hit on and I'm looking forward to seeing and the result of the needs and access to the detailed account of free and affordable Internet available throughout the city of Long Beach. And thank you again, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Good job, Councilwoman. Good issue and good job to the Lowndes.
Speaker 3: Media Collaborative as well for raising raising the digital inclusion issue. So I'm in support.
Speaker 0: Thanks. Thank you. Let me I just want to thank Councilman Gonzalez and the cooperation. This is a really great item and really thoughtful about all the the issues that we have around the digital divide. I just want to also just include Mr. Rush as part of when this comes back to the council, I know that the Technology Innovation Commission is also working on doing an assessment and and survey and survey work on this topic. And so when when this comes back, I just want to make sure that we also hear from the the commission who I know is doing a, I believe, a survey just to get some more feedback on how we're doing in some of the neighborhoods. So if we can just if the report can be inclusive of their work, I think we'd have a better overall picture. And if that's okay with the councilwoman to add to them to the motion, we'll do that. Okay. Any public comment on this item?
Speaker 5: Good evening. Thank you. Mayor Garcia and City Council we. My name is Kate Huizar. I'm the executive director of the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, a nonprofit that raises funds and has raised over $21 million for our libraries. I really appreciate the leadership that the council's bringing. Specifically, thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez and the coauthors for supporting this initiative with the focus on them. One in four families in Long Beach households who do not have an adequate portal to the Internet. It's clear that our Long Beach public libraries are the strongest tool this city has in bridging bridging the digital divide. Last year, more than 1 million patrons visited our libraries. More than 7 million resources were access, and more than 80,000 youth attended library programs, proving that our nationally award winning libraries are more relevant in the digital age than they ever have been. Our foundation's sole mission is to bolster library services and expand access to them, ensuring that they serve the thousands of children and families who need them. With the help of our donors, we are committed to advancing innovation and improvements in our libraries to meet the 21st century needs of the patrons who use them. Our libraries offer a number of programs and services that address the digital divide, including access to computers, laptops, tablets, the Internet and training to use this technology. In addition to being the biggest funder of the digital studio program, the funds we raise make the mobile studio possible, which brings library services, technology and STEM training out into the community and communities that face this digital divide. We know that Long Beach students need computers, Internet to do their homework. We know that families require email and computers to apply for jobs, even non-technical positions. And that's why we fund programs like the Family Learning Centers in the digital studio. But we know that properly funding our libraries so that they may offer this technology and training to the entire Long Beach community is critical to Long Beach's economic success. We know that libraries can transform lives, but only if they are well-funded, well-resourced and accessible to all. Libraries are the best investment we can make in the city's economy, but we can't do this alone. So we look forward to working with you all and our amazing library staff and community partners to bridge this digital divide. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker.
Speaker 5: Hi. Can we say resident of District one? Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales, for bringing this issue forward. I live in a low income senior building. When things get tough financially for the seniors, the first thing to go is their Internet and cable service, which creates social isolation conditions. And as we try to mobilize the senior community to be more active and engaged in our community and to advocate for themselves, we need access to digital communication. In my building, you can only get it if you're in a certain part of the building. You don't have any digital access at all. And a lot of the seniors, particularly the low income seniors, have flip phones still the pre flipped plans. So they don't have any access to the Internet at all. And I'm so glad you mentioned net neutrality because that's a huge issue. You know, I'm already experiencing Internet slowdowns at my work depending on the amount that I consume of Internet time. So this is a critical issue for our seniors, and we hope that you will consider them strongly in whatever reporting comes forward. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thanks so much. Next speaker, please. Yes. Hello. Good evening. My name is Sam Hall and I'm representing laser fish tonight. Laser fish is located in the seventh District and we're actually the world's largest privately held developer of software that digitizes content and business processes. And really here tonight to express our full support for this council item and the others as well. We believe this is very important for our community, one, because we create the digital pathways that engage citizens better engage citizens to their government. But we're also a company that hires a lot of people in this city. Over a third of our domestic workforce is located in Long Beach, and we understand the importance of having a digital workforce.
Speaker 3: So we're very supportive. Please let us know.
Speaker 0: What we can do. But essentially we're here to support, so please reach out to us. So thank you very much.
Speaker 5: Hello. My name is Eileen Harris, and I'm the development director at Humanity, where 523 nonprofit located here in downtown Long Beach. And it's our mission to bridge the digital divide. We do so by taking in unwanted technology from corporations or individuals and repurposing it and then donating it back out to low income families. And what we do is create a platform for diverting unwanted technology out of landfills and into the hands of someone who can use it to better their own life. Since we started in 2012, we've been able to serve over 4000 low income households with computers, internet and digital training. We work with businesses like the City of Los Angeles, USC, as well as Disney Animation Studios. All of these to leverage the resources that they have to connect people who could use an Internet connection. And throughout the process, we're able to provide this vocational training to volunteers in the community who are interested in learning how to refurbish and repurpose computer hardware. We are very ecstatic to hear that this is being taken so seriously by the council, and we sincerely appreciate Councilwoman Gonzalez's efforts, as well as the vice mayor, Richard Rex Richardson, as well. And we're also hearing support to say that in any way we can partner and business to the city in this fight against the digital divide. We would love to be on the front line with you and we look forward to the roadmap as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you for all the work you're doing in the community and we really appreciate that. So thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Any other speakers? Okay, Mr. Pete, come down, please. I repeat, speaking for.
Speaker 8: Jesus again, because somebody's got to speak for him. Hey, I wouldn't have come up with him. Somebody mentioned the library. And you know what I'm going to say about the libraries? Mr. Mayor? No drag queens. Drag race in Long Beach. No drag queens in libraries. That's for. That's for a club somewhere. I mean, we do whatever we want. We do whatever we want away from the kids. That's the only thing. This is a free country. I'm not for beating anybody back for what they want to do.
Speaker 0: The item actually, this is item.
Speaker 8: They mentioned libraries I'm talking about today. Library services department. When I found out, you name warned me that a drag queen was coming. So she mostly or whatever. Maybe that's cute to you, but it ain't to me because I've got grandkids that go there without me. I don't want to see some drag queen twerking and talking about homosexual stuff. I want my kids to have a chance, okay. If they want to be that, they could be that on their own. But they're not going to have your friend in there twerking. Okay. So that's what I'm saying. Don't try to shut me up. Yeah. And we got to get rid of Ginny Pierce. Got to go. No communism in America. I had to say that. Now, hey, back to that library. Hey, drag racing. No drag queens. So you always look in a way you don't look. Why? I'm surprised Stacey ain't talking to you this time. You know, she. She bails you out sometimes, helps you. But the thing is, listen, I'm saying it over and over. I'm using all my 21 minute, 21, 20. No drag queens in the libraries. We need to get this item.
Speaker 0: This item is actually about.
Speaker 8: I don't care.
Speaker 0: Digital. See, it's about digital inclusion.
Speaker 8: Okay, well, you know what?
Speaker 0: I want to make.
Speaker 8: Sure you know. Okay, well, check this out. I'm going to say this over.
Speaker 0: You have to keep speaking on digital inclusion.
Speaker 8: I'll misspeak digital inclusions. I was talking to somebody on this digital phone and they told me they were Democrat too. They said they didn't like drag queens in library. I talked on my digital phone to Republicans. They don't like drag queens.
Speaker 0: A So you got to stick to the topic.
Speaker 8: Which.
Speaker 0: Actually it's not. The topic is actually a recommendation to do it.
Speaker 8: Yeah, you're trying to find my time now. No drag queens, you might remind me. No recommendation, no question. I don't even know what that's about. I know they said libraries and I'm taking the last 35 seconds. No drag queens in the library. I'm making this my personal issue. You should've never did it. And I'm going to grind this today. And no drag queens. We let our kids go. No, we're not finished. We're not.
Speaker 0: Well, you're not speaking to the top.
Speaker 8: You in 20.
Speaker 0: Say, Mr. City Attorney. Yes. Repeats not so.
Speaker 8: You don't want your grandkids going in the library with it.
Speaker 4: He needs to stay on the topic of the digital income. There's nothing to the library.
Speaker 8: Okay. You guys don't know about alcohol. Liberal. Somebody is didn't want they kill you.
Speaker 0: Just you need to. You need to stay on topic, sir.
Speaker 8: I don't need to stay on nothing. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 0: You're actually. Your time is up.
Speaker 8: Yeah, your time. Thank you, sir. Your time is up.
Speaker 0: Your time is up, sir. So, Mr. City Attorney, do you want to repeat if someone continues to be off topic? What the. Well, sir, if you continue to do that, I'll ask you to leave. Mr. City Attorney.
Speaker 4: Yes, they need to respond to and talk on the subject matter unless it's open during the public comment period at the beginning of the meeting or at the end of the meeting, they need to talk. And if they're repetitive or off topic, they can be asked to stop talking. They can't be escorted out. They're they're allowed to remain.
Speaker 0: Right. And to try to make sure that they're minded of all of us. And so we will continue to read, to remind you what to say on topic. Mr. Pete next. So there's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Technology and Innovation (TI) Department, I-Team, Library Services Department, Office of Equity and community stakeholders on a Digital Inclusion Master Plan and return to the City Council, within 120 days, including but not limited to:
Connectivity
· Identify "Digital Divide" communities in Long Beach where the number of households and businesses without reliable internet access is the greatest in the city;
· Overview of programs that currently exist through our local internet service providers (Spectrum, Verizon, Frontier etc.) for low and modest income households and incentives that may be provided to expand and promote these programs;
· Locations of all free, public wi-fi available to Long Beach residents and feasibility of rebranding the various existing networks emanating from City facilities or City funded networks as 'LB Wi-Fi'. Provide recommendation of strategic locations (business corridors, community centers, public facilities, bus stops, metro stops) to prioritize for 24/7 free, public Wi-Fi;
· Identify large | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_18-0061 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is item 14 councilwoman.
Speaker 1: I am in 14th communications from Councilmember Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pierce, Council Man Andrews and Council member Durango recommendation to establish the City of Long Beach as an official affiliated of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes. So this National Digital Inclusion and Inclusion Alliance is a unified voice for home broadband access, public broadband access, personal devices and local technology training and support programs. And it offers additional resources for local governments like ourselves that are looking to create a road map to digital inclusion. So I'd first again like to thank my council colleagues for this item. With that said, in that mission and that same spirit, I thought it would be great for the City of Long Beach to participate and become an alliance affiliate and also a digital trailblazer blazer. Now, the difference is that the the the becoming a digital trailblazer will actually allow the city of Long Beach to extend our reach and collaborate constructively with local government agencies across the nation to find new and innovative ways to advocate for digital inclusion. This is all at no cost, and all we would have to do is to become a digital trailblazer, was to be able to connect with NDIA staff, which will my office is absolutely happy to facilitate and then also demonstrate that at least one of eight digital inclusion indicators which are located on the website there there's it's an extensive list are being met and then lastly provide a link to more information about the work and a city staff contact. So we'll have our information up there, a contact here in the city, perhaps someone from the team that could be our go to. And overall, we have many municipalities that have become affiliates and trailblazers to include Austin, Texas, Washington, D.C. and Seattle. And I believe this would be a great way for us to receive more resources and connect with other cities in this respect. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And we have the second of the motion, Councilmember Blanca. Okay. Any public comment on the Digital Inclusion Alliance? See? None. Please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to establish the City of Long Beach as an official affiliate of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_18-0063 | Speaker 1: Motion case.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 16.
Speaker 1: Item 16, communication from Kelton and then Gonzalez. Councilwoman Price, Councilwoman Mango Recommendation to require City Manager to work with technology and innovation in conjunction with the I-Team and Economic Development Department on patents.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Actually, I'm sorry. You know, she was she's the maker of the motion is this is Councilman Gonzales could do on a switch set up maybe. Thank you, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. Last item, I promise. But this one is aside from digital inclusion. This actually looks at our patents. We know that patented patenting, sorry, is a very useful indicator of the culture and of innovation in the city. And in fact, 2.2 million patents were issued in the U.S. between 1976 and 2016. And Time magazine actually put out an article in 2016 named The 100 Most Genius Places in America. And I know Long Beach can definitely be a part of that list. And I'd love to showcase that in this item. So a quick patent search for the city of Long Beach yielded nearly 10,000 results. And I know that in this item, we've identified, of course, our academic institutions, but so many different entities that can assist us in finding out what type of patents we have. And specifically, I labeled and I brought forward the economic blueprint and I think John Kaiser for his work in helping us through that. But the economic blueprint details some industries that are specific to Long Beach that would perhaps have patents under them, and it would be good to look into that. And so I think this is a great item, a great start in quantifying the patents and seeing exactly what they look like for Long Beach and finding ways that we can continue demystifying how you can get a patent overall from the patent office. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 5: Great work. Great work on this. I look forward to the report.
Speaker 0: Anybody. Come on the item. Yes, sir.
Speaker 4: Hi. I'm George White, a resident of the third District, and I'm in support of this item. After a career as an engineer and a high tech entrepreneur, I started a second career as a registered patent practitioner representing inventors and companies before the patent office. And patents are complicated area. The rules are changing all the time, especially for more abstract patents. But it's a fantastic business tool. I'm in the process now of retiring as a patent practitioner, and so I've got a lot of knowledge about it and will be having a lot of free time. And I'd like to volunteer to assist in this effort in any way you want. So you might be thinking, so are you a patent attorney? No, I'm a little known thing called a patent agent. In order to represent people before the patent office, you need to pass the patent bar exam. Get the patent office as it's an all day test that.
Speaker 0: Half the people fail.
Speaker 4: On patent laws and patent office procedure. In order to be qualified to take the test, you have to send them your college transcripts. I went to MIT. I'm an electrical engineer. I just send them my transcription. They had to count how many classes I had and various things to decide I was worthy to take the test and attorney or not. Being attorney is not relevant to becoming a registered patent practitioner or representing people before the patent office. So people who are patent attorneys are both state licensed and members of the patent bar. The reason they have laypeople doing this is not that many lawyers have an engineering degree, and there are a lot of you know that that in order to help somebody get something patented, you really have to understand the technology, you know? Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. So, you know, the current public comment on the patents, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Cause me a subpoena much in case.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. And thank you, Councilman, for those items. Moving on to item 17. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Technology and Innovation (TI) Department in conjunction with the I-Team and Economic Development Department and return to the City Council, within 90 days, detailing the following:
· Number of active patents in each of the following "key industry clusters" defined in the Blueprint for Economic Development:
· Logistics
· Leisure and Hospitality
· Business Services
· Education and Knowledge Creation
· Health Services;
· Complete number of active patents within all industries in the City of Long Beach;
· Opportunities for increased collaboration with the CSULB Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship;
· Recognition program and social media campaign highlighting Long Beach residents and companies that have been awarded patents in "key industry clusters";
· Measurable goals for increasing the density of patenting in Long Beach;
· Opportunities and potential partners to host workshops aimed to demystify intellectual property protection and patenting for local business owners, students, and interested | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01232018_18-0065 | Speaker 1: No case.
Speaker 0: Okay. Next up will be item 18.
Speaker 1: Item 18, report from Public Works Recommendation to award for contracts to for an item called Professional Engineering Architectural Services for the Long Beach Municipal Urban Storm Water Treatment Project and receiving via the Long Beach Municipal Urban Stormwater Treatment Project Master Plan and execute a First Amendment to contract with corps consulting for as needed professional engineering services to increase the contract amount by 1.5 million. District 126789.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is a motion and a second is a public comment on will be must project.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor, we have a president.
Speaker 0: Yeah, let's let's wait. And why don't we do that? Let's go to the presentation.
Speaker 2: Well, presentation.
Speaker 0: For Public Works director.
Speaker 4: Craig Beck and the deputy director Sean Crumby. This is a pretty fantastic project.
Speaker 0: By the way. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the council, we do have a short PowerPoint that I'm going to ask Sean to go through in a minute, but we are very excited to progress this project forward. I think most of you I've had an opportunity to talk to you about Long Beach, Mass. But it is something that is, from my perspective, going to be revolutionary for some of our beaches and bottom of the L.A. River water quality. This essentially will treat the western watershed area of the city from water that is in the storm drain that normally gets pumped straight into the L.A. River. We'll we will be able to treat that water before it goes into the river. And what you have before you this evening is the design contracts that will allow us to take this to full construction documents and then get this project bid for construction mass. Sean, to go through the details and and provide you a little bit of an overview of some of the initial architectural renderings from the conceptual design and once it's fully built out some of the project scope. Sean. Good evening. Honorable man and counsel Patrick cited Craig's ex. I'm also excited to be here tonight to present this item for the LBE must so it'll be must. What is it? It's an acronym for the Long Beach Urban Municipal Stormwater Treatment Plant. What the project does, as Craig mentioned, is we're going to do rainwater capture or stormwater capture from 11,000 acres on the western portion of the city. We will clean and treat that water, which up until this point has carried pollutants with it into the river and onto our beaches. The project allows us to comply with our EMS four requirements or our Clean Water Program. We also have the opportunity to create a facility that's inviting, invites people in, has recreational opportunities and educational opportunities for the community. And finally, I think the hope is that the project will clean water to Title 22 standards and allow us to reuse it for irrigation and other purposes throughout the city. So it'll be must. The projects going to be delivered in multiple phases. A master plan was done that highlights the entire project and the needs for the for the project. The graphic that you see in front of you, the area shaded in blue, shows the entire project. What we're here for tonight is design contract that will allow us to deliver the first phase totaling $30 million. That 30 million is comprised of 28 million from the state that has been provided to the city for the sole purpose of cleaning transportation related runoff. So runoff from our streets and and throughout the city and 2 million from the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy that's been provided the city to construct wetlands that provide recreational opportunities. Water storage for the facility. And wildlife habitat in the area. So the entire project, the city has multiple funding applications and requests out to every agency we can possibly come up with. They have influence that drains into this includes state organizations, L.A. County, flood control, multiple cities. So it's our hope and belief that additional funding will be coming that will allow us to do a future expansion. This graphic shows the facility, as is planned for the south of the existing Shumaker Bridge, is a five acre proposed wetland that will provide that will be funded by the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy grant but will provide recreational opportunities and storage for the facility. North of the Shoemaker Bridge is where the water treatment plant will be constructed. What you see there is a graphic representation of what we will build, but there will be a public process that will allow us to flush out esthetics that the community wants to see in the facility going forward . This slide depicts the organizational structure of the project moving forward. Of course, the city of Long Beach is the project lead, but we have a team of consultants that have been compiled and presented to you tonight to help us deliver the project. Cole Consulting has been serving as the program manager up until this point and will have a critical role moving forward. But Stantec and Gillespie, Chapman and Associates are two of the critical members of the team that will be providing the technical design for the project to move forward. So go schedule moving forward. After word tonight, the project will go through design through 2018 with the goal of construction of the facility happening in 2019. There are spending deadlines, however, with the Caltrans funds that have been acquired and the first of those is due this spring. So portions of the project will be moving forward right now. Those projects will include site preparation. They will include preordering of some of the pumps and specialized equipment that will be residing within the facilities. The if the plan is for the complete facility, be built out by the summer of 2020. Thank you, Sean. So I think what you have before you is a project that is really going to help benefit the cleanliness of our water. But one of the things that Sean didn't highlight, and I wanted to mention, it's also an important goal as an education facility. So one of the things that we will be designing into the I'll be mass project is a community engagement where youth from schools or neighborhood residents can kind of come see the wetlands, where we can talk about water quality, where we can talk about the cleanliness of the water going into the L.A. River. And we really value that. We must as a as an educational facility as as well as a functional stormwater treatment facility. So that concludes our report and are available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you so much for the presentation. And I know you all are very excited about this. Just as much as the Willmore residents are very excited about this. I can see it in your faces and I just know, you know, working with our office, I know we've been telling you about, you know, construction time, construction time . But this is great. I will ask the when is the outreach period going to begin?
Speaker 0: Thank you for the question. So with the design contract that's being asked to be awarded tonight, there will be a public outreach component that will happen in 2018 that will be built into the design and happen this year and improvements or the design will reflect input from the community.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. And I know that will connect with the Council office on timelines when that occurs so we can add additional help and outreach as well. And then I love that we will obviously have an educational component, which is, I think so important for this area. And I also want to thank as well Kiko Anderson, because I know he's briefed my office and me personally and I appreciate all of his work as well as Craig and Shawn, your work in this too, and I look forward to seeing this through. This is a huge, huge undertaking for us and I'm glad we're finally there. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Mr. Congressman Weiner. Thank you. Councilmember De and I, too, want to add to my excitement to this project. I have been working with General and with Mr. Beck and Mr. Colombian on this project. I had the additional honor of serving on the Riverton Mounds Conservancy, and we were able to get this project through to donate $2 million towards a restoration of wetlands and towards the education component of this project. So it it's really that that to my excitement that we were able to to do that for the for this project and looking forward to having having it in place and seeing all of the wonderful kids going through it and learning something about wetlands and learning about water recycling and restoration. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 5: Yes. I also want to congratulate staff for their work on this. And I know this is something we've long talked about. And I think it's really exciting that we have the first phase. And I want to thank you for highlighting the public education component and encourage us hopefully to work with our city partners like the aquarium, Cal State, Long Beach in ensuring that we have a robust educational program and opportunities there. So thank you very much. Very excited.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is a motion to seconds in any public comment and I'll be must see none. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Andrews.
Speaker 4: Oh.
Speaker 7: Yes.
Speaker 1: Machine Nation case. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ PW17-085 and award contracts to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., of San Diego, CA; California Watershed Engineering Corporation, of Fullerton, CA; HDR Engineering, Inc., of Irvine, CA; and, Gillis + Panichapan Architects, Inc., of Costa Mesa, CA, for on-call professional engineering and architectural services for the Long Beach Municipal Urban Stormwater Treatment Project, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $5,000,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contracts, and any necessary amendments, including adjusting the fee schedule for inflation;
Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $2,000,000 offset by reimbursement grant revenues;
Receive and file the Long Beach Municipal Urban Stormwater Treatment Project Masterplan;
Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND03-17; and
Autho | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0029 | Speaker 0: Thank you. That concludes the presentations as well as the initial adoption. So we're going to go into our hearing. So we just need about a minute, 2 minutes to actually get everything set up for the hearing. I want to ask again, we have folks that are standing and I'm being told by, of course, our fire folks that we need to make sure that if we can be seated would be ideal if you're here for anything but the hearing. It's going to be a while. So please, if you're here for the hearing, which is on the the bond hearing, wetlands hearing, that's where it's going to begin in about 2 minutes. So. Thank you. Will transition and Madam Clerk will get everything set up and just give us a minute.
Speaker 3: Was it? Wrote my. That's a reasonable. Right. You see over. I like. Thanks. So. You know, that would be a. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Yes. Right. Yes. See that. But.
Speaker 0: Okay, we're going to go ahead and start. Let let me. Let me just go ahead and clarify and just make sure that everyone knows the order of the hearing tonight and we'll go from there. So obviously, we're going to begin the hearing in just a minute. There will be an oath required that the court will conduct. We will have the staff report, as is typical, and that presentation will go forward. And then after the staff presentation, the applicant will go first. Okay. So the applicant will go first. The applicant has 15 minutes after the applicant concludes their 15 minutes. Then the appellant, the actual two appellants. So each appellant group has a max of 15 minutes. If it can be between ten and 15 minutes is ideal, but up to 15 minutes you have. And then the applicant will have a opportunity for a five minute rebuttal. And then, of course, there's public comment and then we'll close public comment and then we'll actually go into deliberation from the city council. So, Mr. City Attorney, I think we have to correct that. Right. Okay, great. So with that, let me go ahead and begin and have the city clerk please read the item.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing. Consider third party appeals by and Cantrell representing citizens about responsible planning. And Anna Christiansen. Charles Moore representing Protect the Long Beach, Los Cerritos wetlands and uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation and deny the appeals. Adopt a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report. Select the environmentally superior project. Alternative Number five. Adopt a statement of overriding considerations and approve a mitigation, monitoring and reporting program for the Los Cerritos Wetlands and Oil Consolidation Project. Declare Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code Amendment, read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading. Adopt a resolution to submit a request to certify an amendment to the support of Certified.
Speaker 5: Local Coastal Program.
Speaker 1: Adopt an ordinance approving an amendment to the city's oil map and approved site plan, review and Certificate of Compliance to consolidate existing oil operations. Implement a wetlands habitat restoration project and provide public access opportunities. District three.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we're going to do an oath for those that are going to be addressing the council. Madam Clerk, we can do the oath.
Speaker 1: Please stand. The appellant's appellants. Please stand. You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God.
Speaker 3: I do.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So with that, I'm going to go ahead and turn this over to our city management team who will be doing the presentation.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We have Oscar Orsi, our deputy director of development services. Christopher Koontz, Advanced Planning Officer in Kerry. Tie, our current planning officer are going to be conducting the presentation tonight for us.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Eric Garcia and city council members. As mentioned by the clerk before you tonight, Cerritos, Wetlands, Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project. This project takes place over four separate sites, generally located near the corner of Pacific Coast Highway, Second Street and Studebaker Road. I'm going to spend some time on the project sites. So on the screen before you are, it's an aerial with a four color overlay sites. So the first site, the largest one we're going to start with is the synergy oilfield site. It's 150 acres and that's shown as green on the screen. This is the site that's behind the In-N-Out Burger there at Second Street and Pacific Coast Highway. The site is divided, divided roughly into two portions. There's a northern portion and a southern portion. The northern portion contains a steam shovel, SLU and wetlands. And the southern portion is an active oil field that currently has 39 wells on it. The second site is shown in teal on the screen. It's 33 acres that is owned by the city and it fronts Second Street and Shopkeeper Road. And if you're on Shopkeeper Road, you can see some oil derricks there as well. And this is a wetland site and it currently has 13 wells on it. The third site is shown in yellow on the screen, located at the southeastern corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road. And this is the Studebaker Road that is a stub. That's a seven acre site, and it's known as the pumpkin patch site because every year it hosts the pumpkin patch around Halloween and also the Christmas tree lot during the winter. The site is undeveloped and currently has one well on it. And then the fourth site is shown in amber and it's at the corner, the south or northeastern corner of Second Street and Studebaker Road. And this is the Studebaker that does go through. This is a five acre site, and it's owned by the little Cerritos Wetlands Authority, who is one of the project applicants. And currently the site, the site is undeveloped and currently it's used for a variety of industrial storage. You might notice stacks of corrals stored up there. So the project ultimately involves moving all of the oil operations off of the synergy site and the city sites and then consolidating or creating new oil facilities on the pumpkin patch and the CWA sites. So I'm going to spend some time on the project description for each site. So I'm going to start with the synergy site first. So as mentioned, there's a northern portion in the southern portion and and the northern portion would primarily it's wetlands restoration. And the applicant is pursuing this as a mitigation bank that's currently under review. The southern portion is the active oil field and it currently has the Bixby Ranch Field Office on it. The driveway access for that is off Second Street, directly opposite shopkeeper there. And that building is located in an earthquake fault at the moment. So as part of this project that would relocate the building about 400 feet to the southwest of its current location and convert that to a visitor center along with the public access trail for so that people can walk and see the wetlands. The entrance point is proposed to be the same as the current driveway. As part of the improvements, the applicant would also need to do frontage improvements, namely sidewalk and any bike lane improvements that are needed along the street frontage specifically here, Second Street and Pacific Coast Highway. So I mentioned a little bit about the mitigation bank, and this is just a graphic of the northern half of the site and the list, and it lists the different habitat types. So throughout the the plans as well as the air, there's detailed information on the wetlands restoration. And there's also mentioned the mitigation bank would need to be reviewed by an interagency review team, and that would consist of various federal and state agencies, but would include a U.S. Army Corps of Engineer, U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, etc.. And then I also will add on this is just the graphic for the northern half. The southern half does have restoration and it's phase two, and that's also located in the plans that are in the council's packet. And so this is a close up graphic showing the visitor center access from the current driveway and some of what it would look like once improved. So it would have landscaping along a a more traditional driveway. The driveway right now is meant for industrial use. It's got a gate on it, etc.. And this would be a paved surface accessing the visitor center and the public access trail is shown at the line starting from the edge of the parking lot. I don't think my laser's working, but it's up on the top of the screen and there's a little gathering of trees that's shown as a picnic area. So moving on to the next site, the second largest site is the city site. This site currently has 13 wells and the proposal would be to remove all the obsolete oil facilities. The applicant. However, the development portion of this would be that the city site would host a pipeline system to connect the LC site and the pumpkin patch site. So this graphic I'm just going to note is not oriented north like the other graphic is. And so the LC site is actually shown at the lower right hand corner. But the purpose of the pipeline would be to connect the two sites so that they do share some oil facilities. And I'll talk about that in a bit. The use of the city's property does require a surface use, release agreement and grant of easements, otherwise known as a surge. There is an existing surge on the site now, and that would need to be amended by the city to reflect the project. The amendment of the surge would reflect the ultimate configuration of the pipeline and also clean up any existing easements on there that are no longer being used. So that brings us to the pumpkin patch site. And this is the seven acre site that fronts PCH and Studebaker Road. The proposal for the site is a combination of office and warehouse, so a 5200 square foot two story office building, as well as a 9750 square foot warehouse. The back half of the building would be you. I'm sorry. The back half of the site would be used for the proposed oil facilities. The applicant proposes 50 new wells and that would be a combination of oil production, water injection and water source wells. They would be located in wells cellars below grade, so they would look a lot different from the current oil wells. On the Synergy Oil Field site, these are below grade and they would be behind a screen wall that's on the perimeter. So that essentially the view from the public streets as well as the bike trail would be generally of landscaping and a screen wall. There's a 30 foot setback, for example, along the PCH frontage and also at the corner of the site as you're entering Long Beach from the city of SEAL Beach across the bridge, there is a spot where the applicant is proposing to incorporate entry monument tation for for use as a city gateway there. So this next slide shows the building elevations of the proposed office building as well as the warehouse. As you can see, the building is designed in a modern esthetic with colors to generally reflect water and the incorporation of natural materials. The building does use materials that are durable, and so for the most part, there's a substantial amount of glazing, aluminum and metal. However, the the substantial overhang of the sloping roofline is, is clad with the natural wood. So it creates a natural wood soffit, which.
Speaker 6: Brings a sort of a warmth.
Speaker 5: Of warmth of appearance to the to the building. The warehouse itself is a multicolored concrete construction, and it continues on from the warehouse into a screen wall that wraps around the perimeter of the site in order to screen the oil facilities. And then the last site is the site with five acres. As mentioned, the site is currently undeveloped and the applicant proposes to improve the site with a 70 new wells again in a below grade sellers and there would be the combination as well oil production, water injection and water source wells. The project includes an energy microgrid, which is an energy system that essentially serves the the projects, the four sites. Electricity is generated through natural gas turbines that uses the natural gas that is produced as part of the oil extraction process. And this, combined with solar panels on the pumpkin patch site, will produce energy to power the oil operations. As you can see on the slide, there is extensive landscaping proposed on both street frontages. The setbacks range from 25 feet at a minimum to up to 50 feet. At that wide spot there on Second Street. And like the other sites, like the other sites, the applicant is required to improve frontage improvements such as sidewalks and bike lanes. And I should note that while this is not part of this next part, it is not part of the city council's approval. There is a land exchange. In other words, a low rate of wetlands authority would exchange this for the Synergy oil field site, which is being restored as wetlands. And so that is involved sort of in a in a background fashion. So we've talked a little bit about the project components, but I did want to talk about the timeline of the project. The project proposes to take place up to 44 years. And the way I like to look at it is it's it's four years of activity. And I'll walk the council through the activity. But then there's a 40 year timeline of basically decommissioning the existing oil wells. And there's also a threshold at which the oil wells must be plugged and abandoned. So the basically upon issuance of building permits for the pumpkin patch site. Oil production potential on the synergy site is capped at 25% of the oil production potential. So right off the bat, as soon as the city issues building permits for the office building, there will be an immediate reduction in oil production. But more noticeably within the first year, your first two years, there will be a substantial removal of obsolete oil facilities, including aboveground pipelines and tanks. For example, today, you know, there are quite a few storage tanks on the synergy site that just are marked out of service. So those would be an example of things that are removed and that would be similar to the other sites. Wetlands restoration on the northern portion of the synergy oil field would begin immediately. And then grading activities on the pumpkin patch and CWA sites would follow. So then to year three and four would we would start to see the construction of oil facilities as well as non oil facilities. So that's the relocation of the Bigsby Ranch Field Office and conversion into the visitor center, construction of the office and warehouse, public access trail and frontage improvements like sidewalks and bike lanes. At this point, a well plugging in abandonment of existing wells would also begin.
Speaker 6: So I did want.
Speaker 5: To talk about the the 40 year that comes after. So after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the office building begins a 40 year timeline during which the existing oil wells are basically put out of put out of service. And there's a there's two milestones that I'll talk about first, which is year by year 20, the existing wells would be reduced by 50% and by year 40, completely eliminated. And there's also a threshold in the project that if a certain well produces less than one barrel of oil for 18 consecutive months, that that well will also be plugged and abandoned. And so at the ultimate conclusion of this project timeline, the synergy oil field site will be completely restored. So this is the list of approvals. I'd like to talk a little bit about.
Speaker 3: Through.
Speaker 5: The entitlements that are before the council tonight. So first on the list, we have the zoning code amendment, which is an amendment to the sea dip. That's the Southeast Area Development Improvement Plan, which lists permitted uses for the different sub areas. The four sites are in three different sub areas and so the setup amendments are intended to ensure that the seated language is consistent with the allowable uses and also taking out uses that would no longer be allowed. The second portion is the local Coastal Program Amendment. All of our zoning documents in the city are for the coastal zone, are incorporated into the city's local coastal program, and as such, any changes to the zoning documents have to be certified by the California Coastal Commission. And so as part of this action, the city council would transmit a resolution of four, a local coastal program amendment . The next the next step is an oil map amendment. Currently, the city's oil code, entitled 12 of the Municipal Code, requires that only drilling can only occur in designated areas, and the pumpkin patch site and the alpha site are not listed. And so part of the action would be to add those two sites to the city's oil code as well as the map. And thus I'm going to cover the next two together, but the site plan review and the certificate of compliance. So the site plan review is to allow the development of buildings, the office and warehouse building, as well as the visitor center on the on their two respective sites. And then the certificate of compliance is to record a legal description certifying that the site is in compliance with the Subdivision MAP Act. The last on the list is a consolidated coastal development permit. As luck would have it to, only two of the four sites are in the city's local leading local permitting jurisdiction for coastal. The other two are in the state permit jurisdiction. And so in 2014, the city the city agreed to have the Coastal Commission process a consolidated coastal development permit. This allows for a more comprehensive review and an integrated review of the four sites, since this is one project that occurs on the four sites and so subsequent to the LCP amendment, the California Coastal Commission would need to take review and take action on a consolidated CDP. Next, I'm going to cover environmental review. An environmental impact report was prepared for this project. As you can see on the screen, the city released the initial study, a notice of preparation in 2016 about mid-year and also conducted a scoping meeting. It was during this initial study that it was determined that certain environmental resource areas would have potentially significant impacts and therefore an air was prepared that air went through a 45 day review period last fall. And then since then, staff did receive a series of comments which have been every single comment has been responded to. And so included in the council's packet is the draft IIR as well as the final IIR. And the final IIR is what includes the response to comments as well as any errata to the draft EPR and the mitigation, monitoring and reporting program. This is a list of the environmental resource areas that were studied. There should be 18 of them, with the exception of one, which is air quality. Every resource area was found to have less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts, along with incorporation of mitigation measures. And so I will talk about the one significant impacted resource area in a bit. But here's the full list just so you can see all the topics. So under air quality, the project is shown to have short term significant impacts as a result of construction during the air quality modeling for this project. The worst case scenario basically would be that all construction phases of the project occur simultaneously, and while it's unlikely that would happen, just in case it does happen, the project would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold for nitrous oxide. Despite inclusion of mitigation measures that reduce NOx emissions to the degree possible, the project would continue to exceed the. I call it Squamish but south coast kms. The thresholds for NOx and.
Speaker 6: Therefore.
Speaker 5: The included in this Environmental Impact Report is a statement of findings and a statement of overriding considerations. And in order to certify the EIA, the Council would need to find that the benefits from the project outweigh the one significant impact in this case short term construction emissions. There are no there are no long term operational characteristics of the project that would result in air quality impacts. So again, construction only and then the next two slides detail all of the mitigation measure titles just for your benefit. But the full mitigation report is in the Environmental Impact Report that's been included in your packet. And so because this is not our everyday development project, I wanted to talk briefly about some of the the care we took during the E.R. process. So the E.R. was independent, independently prepared by the city and city secured consultants. These consultants are under control exclusively to the city and therefore producing a document that reflects the independent judgment of the city. All technical reports that were supplied by the applicant were peer reviewed and verified by city secured consultants. Tribal consultations were conducted in accordance with state law and specifically Assembly Bill 52. And also the process as a whole. Both the project and environmental review were were subject to extensive an extensive public review process with numerous opportunities for public engagement. Every comment, as I mentioned, was responded to. And basically the purpose of this extensive documentation effort is to protect the environment and the city's interests. As part of the preparation of an ER are alternatives are required to be studied. The alternatives are chosen in a way that have to reflect some realistic reflection of what could actually be done. And thus so the young studied five alternatives. The first is the the do nothing alternative. In other words, just leave the site the way it is. The second.
Speaker 6: Is to assume that development consistent.
Speaker 5: With the zoning would put today's seat up or would occur, and that would be construction of a commercial or industrial commercial on the on the pumpkin patch site. Construction of an industrial project on the CWA site, for example. So all of the assumptions that the zoning would allow.
Speaker 6: The third would.
Speaker 5: Be for reduced production, which involved the construction of the same level of equipment and infrastructure, but capping the production levels and therefore basically extending the timeline where oil wells would be taken down. The fourth would be to use the Southern California Edison system for energy rather than construction of an energy microgrid. And the fifth was an alternative pipeline location on the city site. Each alternative is evaluated with regard to all of the environmental resource areas that were on the prior slides and compared to the level of impacts that the proposed project would have. The air found that the other alternatives resulted in the same, if not greater, environmental impacts. But the relocated pipeline alternative alternative five would result in lesser impacts to biological resources, and I'll explain why on this next slide. So the two graphics on the screen compare the alternative, a number five to the proposed to the proposed project. The alternative five is shown on the on the top graphic and you can see that it it it's on the it's on as the service road is on the west again. So these aren't oriented north because of the way they fit on the screen. But the alternative five would be located on an Eastern Service road that is wider. It's already wider, which means it has been previously. It's been previously disturbed. Any biological impacts along that have been more previously disturbed than the other service road and placing the aboveground pipeline along this alignment would result in less biological impacts. And so overall, comparing the five alternatives to this one is the environmentally superior alternative because it has lesser impacts to biological resources. I do want to note that as we mentioned, the consolidated coastal development permit, the Coastal Commission will be able to review the all of the proposed improvements on the site and that includes the pipeline alignment . So I do want to make sure that we understand that the Coastal Commission will also look at this. So I want to cover a few topics that were broached on public comments in previous meetings. And just to clarify a few topics or a few project details. So the we've been asked by the public of whether the project in involves a process called fracking, otherwise known as hydraulic fracturing. And what hydraulic fracturing does is that it basically opens fissures in the underground structure to release additional oil. So fracking is basically the use of we have to use a lot of water, sand, chemicals. And most notably, an extraordinary amount of pressure to change the underground structural integrity of the ground. What the project proposes and that's documented throughout the air as well as the project description is, is not that simply the project needs to reinject the wastewater that comes out of oil production. And I should stop and explain that when oil is extracted from the ground nowadays, because oil production has decreased over the last ten or 12 decades, the 90% or so, basically the vast majority of what comes out of the ground is water. And that has to be re-injected back in in order to avoid subsidence. Furthermore, additional water has to be re-injected because you have to fill the void that is left when the oil is extracted out of the ground. And so the water the project will re-inject water into the ground in order to avoid subsidence and re-inject it in a place where the oil came from. However, it is done at a pressure which is monitored and which simply will fill the void. And it won't. It is not a fracturing operation. And so therefore the project does not include and is not approved for fracking. Furthermore, fracking has special permitting requirements through the California Department of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources. It requires a special permit. There's a different notification process, and additional equipment would be needed because there is additional equipment that is needed. Any physical improvements on this site would be would have to be re-approved by the Coastal Commission as well as perhaps come back to the city as well. And depending on its configuration. And so we would like to stress that the regulatory framework of permitting oil wells is highly regulated. And not only do they control, does dogger control what is put in the ground, but it's what it is, how it's injected, the pressure. And that's demonstrated through regular reports that have to be submitted. Another set of questions we were asked What is the relationship between drilling and earthquakes and whether that was analyzed? This topic was covered in the air through the applicant teams researched. That was peer reviewed. Furthermore, various public and regulatory agencies have had the opportunity to comment. And the there is a lot of science out there about about the relationship. But in California, because of our regulatory framework and the method in which water is injected simply to avoid subsidence, there is no connection between the two. And I will go on. There's a second slide to this, which is that there is there has been in other parts of the country relationship between induced seismic activity and wastewater disposal . The most visible example of that was in a case in Oklahoma where water was being injected in in an area where they weren't even drilling oil. They were simply re injecting vast amounts of wastewater. And that created an instability underground. But that has not there's no connection of any of any of that in California, and that is documented by by scientific evidence. So I want to move on to talking about some of the risks from the existing equipment. The existing equipment on the site dates back to mid-century, the 1960s, and clearly no longer meet today's safety standards. The environment has also changed. There has been documented evidence of sea level rise and also climate change. And so without the project, the drilling equipment would basically remain there until something happened in you know, with the combination of sea level rise during a major storm event, the site is basically surrounded by water. So that could be this could be at risk for for some danger. And furthermore, the continued operations of an oil field in a wetlands does pose a significant environmental risk to the existing habitat and water quality. And this is an. Opportunity to get on a road to to clean that up a bit. So some of the project benefits the sign off of the building permit on the office building would result in a 75% immediate reduction in allowed oil production. The first two years would see the removal of the vast majority of obsolete pipelines and tanks, which would represent not only an important improvement to the just the safety of the site, but also the esthetic value of the site. And lastly, over time, the wells would be abandoned and equipment and the equipment would be taken out, allowing this energy site to fully be restored as a wetland site, along with a visitor center and a public access trail. So there will be some parts of the project that are more immediately seen and some that are going to take time. But there's a level of balance here. And so that's why the project timeline is, is what it is. I do want to talk about the appeal. The as I mentioned earlier, the city council has the final local authority on this project. On November 30th, the planning commission, which is the city council's advisory body on land use legislative actions, voted to forward a recommendation of approval to the Council to appeals were filed of the Planning Commission's action and they were filed by an Cantrell representing citizens about responsible planning and also Anna Christiansen and Charles Moore representing protect the Long Beach low cerritos wetlands. The appeals site various reasons pertaining to the process outreach and environmental review. Just to explain broadly the appeals themselves are attached in the City Council packet. Other than the actual appeals filed, there was no additional information to support these assertions, and staff recommends that the Council proceed as it would on evaluating a planning commission recommendation. Lastly, I want to talk about public noticing. So public noticing was distributed in accordance with the Long Beach Municipal Code that included publishing in a newspaper, as well as mailing to property owners and occupants. Within 75 750 square feet of the combined project site to date, staff has received nearly 400 comments and I lost count, I have to be frank. But there were about there were over 350 support communications. So the recommendation for the city council tonight is to deny the appeals and enact the Planning Commission recommendation to certify the Air Select Alternative five and approve this project, as well as forwarded on to the California Coastal Commission for Review. This concludes my presentation and we're available for questions of the applicant or I'm sorry, our environmental consultant team as well as the applicant team is also in the audience. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much to the staff for that presentation. Appreciate that. We're going to move on to the next piece of the hearing. And so before we hear from the applicant, which is going to be here in just a minute, we do, of course, as part of this part of the presentation, we have some comments first from the governor Band of Mission Indians per per staff. Is that correct?
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 3: Somebody has to be in there.
Speaker 4: Hasan.
Speaker 0: Welcome. Good evening. My name is Andrew Salas. I'm tribal chair of the Gabby Leonard Band, the Mission Indians Teach Nation. My father. Some of our tribal members are here.
Speaker 4: My father is up above. He's our chief and leader.
Speaker 0: Spiritual leader of our tribe. We are a tribe, are many of us from the villages of the Ali Basin here. We're a tribe.
Speaker 4: Of people who come from villages of the area. We are direct blood descendants to the Long Beach area. In my hand here. I hold the documentation of my family and.
Speaker 0: How we are connected. And so if you can just address. Okay. Thank you. We are connected to Long.
Speaker 4: Beach, Pobeda and on my grandfather's originally. Developed and made in old the Bixby Ranch. This. These documents here I hold shows the proof of.
Speaker 0: Who I am. During the past.
Speaker 4: 216, 2016, we got a letter from the city to engage with concerns if.
Speaker 0: We had of this development.
Speaker 4: Or the wetlands. And we think.
Speaker 8: These guys.
Speaker 4: That are opposing and standing up because their heart is in the right place. We have concerns also.
Speaker 0: About this particular area of the.
Speaker 4: Wetlands, which was sacred area. Of our people. But we must learn today, today that we must work with the lead agencies and developers. In these areas of concern, we must learn to take a little bit or take nothing at all. We are for the removal of the oil fields that are there. We are for the rehab of the wetlands and bringing in trying to bring it to what it was before. We are for this project. We are.
Speaker 0: And that's why we're here to represent in other respect. Like I said, guys you guys are up there.
Speaker 4: I this project kingdom yet as we follow through the project there's going to be concerns.
Speaker 0: We're going to have to speak up.
Speaker 4: You could do that. You can't do.
Speaker 0: This.
Speaker 4: We're going to be there. That's what we're here for. I don't know why people don't understand and don't give us the.
Speaker 0: Ability as Native Americans.
Speaker 4: Of this area, descendants, blood descendants. Why they don't acknowledge us and give us the opportunity to speak and let us handle our tribal affairs in our tribal lands with refugees in our own land. We cannot speak on behalf of our tribal territories because there's other individuals that interfere. We have a code of honor. Native Americans. Throughout the continent. There no other native interferes in another native territory.
Speaker 0: Tribal territory unless called upon further out. No one has called anybody. They haven't even reached out to us. People that are protesting.
Speaker 4: Which is a no no in our Indian in our books is a no no. So I, I know that there's been some static.
Speaker 0: I've seen the emails.
Speaker 4: That have been going around and there's representatives who have represented my people and speaking on behalf of my people. Who have no right to because they do not have the blood lineage.
Speaker 0: That we do of the people that once inhabited this area.
Speaker 4: In the folder, I don't see them here today in this folder, but I hold over 13 individuals that are not here today that I had to hire. Not only for this project, I had a genealogist that works. In behalf of Office of Personnel Management, not only to prove so I could prove who I am, but so I could prove who they are. So that way they could start getting into tribal affairs. They hired scientists.
Speaker 0: To go against us to prove that we're not from this area. Could you imagine where we were?
Speaker 4: All of this just turning out instead of coming to us and speaking to us and reaching out to us? They don't do that. They laughed at us.
Speaker 6: But we're here.
Speaker 4: We're going to stand strong. And with me, I brought tribal leaders and members of other nations who are going to speak in behalf of me and themselves and how we are going to resolve and work alongside and with you guys. That's the way it should be. We understand we were at Standing Rock. We were there. But like I mentioned, we need to give a little or get nothing at all. And we want our weapons back the way it was long, long ago, historically, where our families were gathered in that area. Those areas, these representatives here that I represent, my people, they call the area the wetlands sacred. Yes, it is sacred. The water sacred. The animals are sacred. Everything is sacred.
Speaker 0: Everything is sacred to us.
Speaker 4: But yet these individuals allowed digging up at Long Beach, at the veterans hospital in areas of low. So they allow that these people in this camp desecrated more sites than you can shake a stick at.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. You're welcome. And everyone else, of course, will speak during their public comment. Thank you. Thank you very much. So I'm going to leave these for you. Actually, you can leave them over here with the clerk. Thank you very much. And then I know here before the of the appellant, we also have. Thank you very much. We're going to we're going to go to all the other public comment will come during during public comment and then Mayor Bob Foster.
Speaker 4: Mayor Garcia, members of the council.
Speaker 8: I'll be very brief. I just wanted to.
Speaker 4: Make the council aware of my involvement.
Speaker 8: In this project.
Speaker 4: I was it was probably about to year 2000.
Speaker 0: When I got a call from the then.
Speaker 4: City manager, I was at Southern California Edison Company, and I got a call from the then city manager to ask us if we would consider taking those five acres, the LC site, and donating it to the city of Long Beach to do exactly what this project does, which is to facilitate the removal of the oil wells, transferring it to the locations, and being able to facilitate the restoration of the wetlands. It's been nearly eight years since that phone call. It's it's it's amazing to me that it's taken this long, but that actually is the point. This project cannot happen without the imagination and the resources that the developer has brought to this. I've wanted this done for 18 years. Well before I was mayor.
Speaker 0: Ellison donated that land that eventually.
Speaker 4: Went to EL CWA. EL CWA.
Speaker 0: Loves this.
Speaker 2: Project. It's the right.
Speaker 4: Thing to do for the city. It's the right thing to do for the environment. And quite frankly, if this project didn't go forward, I don't believe these wetlands would be restored, certainly in my lifetime, and probably yours as well, Mr. Mayor. And I just wanted you to know how important this project is, I believe, is to the city, and certainly to me personally, it's gratifying.
Speaker 2: Finally, after 18 years, this actually may become a reality. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Mayor Foster. If I can, please have the appellants, the applicants. I'm sorry. Please come forward. There is an applicant presentation here again as we continue. And please begin when you're ready.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson, members of the Council. I am Shana Shoffner, Chief Executive Officer of CAA Planning and I am representing Beach Oil Mineral Partners in this application. We are joined with our CO applicant Illustrious Wetlands Authority, who you will hear from shortly. I would like to thank staff before I get started for their very thorough presentation. I'm going to try to not be too repetitive from their presentation though. You will hear a couple of common themes. I note that I do not have a clicker up here in order to advance my PowerPoint. If I might get that, it would be very helpful.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 5: So to remind the council, we have four separate sites. We have the synergy site, the city site, pumpkin patch and LC CWA we are bound by. Oh, okay. So I have animations on this which are not working. Uh, is there a different way to do this?
Speaker 0: Other we can when we do this one, we're going to start the time.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: We'll start over. Can you just make sure that we have our technical pieces here in place and for so we make sure they're working correctly and then we'll start the presentation over.
Speaker 5: Staff. Was this loaded as a PowerPoint?
Speaker 0: Well, it's okay. Just let's talk about the presentation. We'll go from there. Okay.
Speaker 5: So we had a list. Okay, that's fine. Oh, yes, I have a lot. That's fine. Okay. So it appears that this was not loaded as a PowerPoint presentation. And so all of the animations that I have provided to call your attention to certain things won't be here. I will try my best to do those in my allotted time, so I'm ready to keep going.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 5: So again, we have Studebaker, PC Age. And second, those are our main streets around the project sites.
Speaker 6: The project objectives are oil consolidation to upgrade the technology.
Speaker 5: To be safer and more efficient on a significantly smaller footprint, and the wetlands restoration to enhance the habitat quality, to create a visitor center and to allow for public access. The immediate actions associated with approval of the project or the establishment of a non wasting endowment, the initiation of wetlands restoration, the removal of invasive species from the restoration area, removal of 95% of the existing pipeline on the synergy and city sites which are shown in red. And to remove two of the out of service tank farms, one is shown in yellow on the synergy site, the second is shown below it on the city site. The next steps include the immediate grading to restore tidal flow within the wetlands, to create an earthen berm, to address sea level rise. A public access trail within the existing disturbed area, which is outside of the wetlands footprint and site preparation. Work on the CWA and pumpkin patch sites. Following that is the construction of new oil facilities. This includes tanks, infrastructure removal of the final tank farm on the synergy site, which is shown in yellow and the construction of a pipeline across the city property connecting the pumpkin patch and all CWA sites. Then we have well drilling, which will occur only on the pumpkin patch and all CWA sites. The final step is for a project operation. At the synergy site we see the visitor center and the public access trail and the purple. We also see the pumpkin patch and our CWA sites with the pipeline across the city property. I would like to go into a little bit more detail on the wetlands restoration and project components. As I have already stated, our project initiation, the wetlands restoration is the first step along with the establishment of a non wasting endowment for the future operation of the wetland property. This is not contingent upon the success of the oil operations. However, the transfer of the LC site is contingent upon the wetlands restoration, so we are assured of wetlands restoration by the transfer of those properties. In the yellow area we see the public access trail, which is within a disturbed area. Again, it's outside of the wetlands and we see the relocation of the visitor center shown here in red to an area outside of the fault zone. And we have a parking lot as well. Okay. Sidewalks and bike paths. The project includes another important component, which is the installation of sidewalks and bike paths on all street frontages. It also includes a bike repair station along Coast Highway at the Pumpkin Patch facility. And this is a great location because it's very close to the bike path along the San Gabriel River, which is a very heavily utilized bike path related to the existing oil operations. The project includes a provision to cap the oil production.
Speaker 6: At the existing wells.
Speaker 5: At 25% of their maximum capacity. That would be upon building permit issuance for the new facilities related to the removal of the existing oil facilities. Three important factors.
Speaker 6: The first is that four wells that produce.
Speaker 5: Less than one barrel of oil per day for an 18 month time period, those wells are removed immediately. Within 20 years, 50% of the wells are removed. Those locations are remediated and revegetated within 40 years.
Speaker 6: All.
Speaker 5: Remaining wells and any remaining infrastructure is removed and those sites are revegetated and remediated. These removal provisions are insured by an existing performance bond with dagger, which requires the removal and remediation of these wells.
Speaker 6: The project proposes the.
Speaker 5: Creation of a micro-grid energy system.
Speaker 6: This is state of the art technology. This is local source, local use.
Speaker 5: We are utilizing zero pollution, solar panels and natural gas. There is turbine cogeneration which reduces the air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Over 50%. Well, microgrid energy systems are new. They are supported by the federal government, the state of California, and environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club. As California transitions from oil to renewable energy sources, low carbon oil is viewed as a bridge towards renewables because it is less polluting compared to higher carbon oil. This particular oil, which is referred to as SEAL Beach.
Speaker 6: Formation Oil, has a very low.
Speaker 5: Carbon intensity compared to the California average. Historically and currently, there are 12 locations.
Speaker 6: Where the.
Speaker 5: Pipeline crosses the Newport-Inglewood Canyon fault on the project sites. All 12 of those locations are within wetlands.
Speaker 6: Under the proposed.
Speaker 5: Project. All existing pipeline crossings would be removed and replaced with a modern pipeline, which would only cross the fault in one location and would be located outside of wetlands. The pipeline has been designed to flex and move in response to a seismic event, which is compared to the current very rigid pipeline that cannot respond to these seismic events and that does not have containment measures. The facility design and safety includes modern technology, leak detection and active monitoring, automatic shutdown, pipeline tank and well containment systems. Here we see old technology. These are inefficient. There's no requirement to comply with modern standards. We have a static glide and there are no containment measures. The new well, sellers you see are energy efficient, newer, safer design, enhanced esthetic appearance because they are built into the ground and they have containment measures. Now, the applicants have involved have been involved and engaged in substantial pre-application planning and outreach efforts. That means before they even submitted the project to the city, they engage with city staff and Coastal Commission staff to refine the project in meaningful ways. In addition, there has been substantial outreach with the community, including groups like the Arbonne, the Land Trust, Native American stakeholders who we've just heard from business groups and nature ways. There was a three day open house which the applicant hosted a scoping session on the air. Two separate study sessions at the city level and the Planning Commission hearing for this project. As you will hear tonight and we have heard during this process, there have been three main issues raised. One is related to sea level rise. This is an issue that was studied consistent with the Coastal Commission regulations and address in the air with no action. Without this project.
Speaker 6: The synergy site will be subject to.
Speaker 5: Future inundation because of sea level rise.
Speaker 6: This project includes an earthen berm to.
Speaker 5: Address those sea level rise issues. The next issue is the Newport-Inglewood Canyon fault. Of course.
Speaker 6: All oil operations.
Speaker 5: Are clustered around faults because that's where oil is accessible. There are great benefits from the project from a technological perspective, but also moving the structure, which will be the visitor center away from the fault zone, is a great benefit. And critically, removing the existing pipeline crossings, which again there are 12 across the fault in wetlands, will be a great benefit of the project. Related to Native American consultation, we have heard from Representatives tonight, so I won't rehash that. Now I'm going to hammer off to Mark Stanley, the executive director from the Low Street US Wetlands Authority. He's got a few slides for you and then I will briefly conclude.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Mark Stanley from the service as well as authority and also the executive director of the same cable and also addressed the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. The lawsuit that's right now is authority as a Joint Powers Authority. It is made up of the State Coastal Conservancy.
Speaker 4: The RNC in both cities that.
Speaker 0: Are part of the lottery, those wetlands. So the city of Long Beach and SEAL Beach. Their mission level CWA is to provide a comprehensive program of acquisition protection, conservation, restoration, maintenance operations and environmental assessment of the illustrious wetlands. That is all in the protection of our habitat. Make sure we restore the area, improve the supply of water, its quality groundwater, recharge and water conservation. Since its inception in 2006, the CWA has acquired over 170 acres of land with the no less widows wetlands complex, which you see on the screen there. That represents over 500 acres. As you can see, there is multiple landowners we are concerned with not only what's before you tonight, but that entire 500 acres and getting.
Speaker 4: It all restored in the LC.
Speaker 0: LC Stewardship Program. We have been able to invite the public in to experience the wetlands.
Speaker 4: We sponsor tours throughout the wetlands.
Speaker 0: Thousands of citizens of the city of Long Beach throughout the region have been able to get out to the wetlands and see the potential of how it could be restored, but more specifically.
Speaker 4: The loss of this wetlands or consolidation.
Speaker 0: The Restoration Project will support the CWA with achieving its mission. So so will result in the public acquisition of 154.
Speaker 4: Acres of coastal.
Speaker 0: Wetlands property that has been.
Speaker 4: Privately owned for over a century.
Speaker 0: The restoration of title wetlands and buffer habitat of 77 acres. The consolidation and eventual full removal of antiquated all operations infrastructure that currently constrains 100 acres within the complex. The transformation of an existing Bixby Ranch building into a visitor center with Associated Trails, an expansion of our stewardship opportunities to a.
Speaker 4: Much larger portion of the weapons. The proposed project is.
Speaker 0: Consistent with the goals and objectives of the Conceptual Restoration Program. Next slide that shows the effort that we have gone through with the conceptual restoration program, several different alternatives that we have looked at, and the restoring of the 500 acres of the weapons area. Since this project is so well aligned with our mission. In August of 2016, they also had a board of directors authorize an operations agreement that outlines the terms through which they also.
Speaker 4: W-A would transfer approximately five acres.
Speaker 0: In exchange for the loss of those wetlands 154 acres. Since the signing of this agreement, the LC has been dedicated to tracking every aspect of this project. It is as it has progress through the permitting and entitlement process. CWA represents representatives who have worked closely with the applicant staff on the development of the project draft and in response to the comments. We've hired several consulting firms to perform peer reviews of the documents that most pertain to CWA is interested in the project and we provided the applicant with constructive feedback on how to improve these reports . We have reviewed we have reviewed the 31 public comment letters that were submitted to the City of Long Beach as part of the public comment process and recognized the numerous topics of concern that exist for this project. We have met with the applicant on numerous occasions since the public comment period ended to ensure that all reasonable stakeholder comments are properly addressed, that all necessary agencies are being consulted. All CWA staff has been impressed by their response enough responsiveness of the applicant to our concerns and even more impressed by the applicant's coordination.
Speaker 4: With those with those wetlands.
Speaker 2: Stakeholders.
Speaker 0: The applicants have met with the El Dorado Audubon, the Lost Widows Wetlands Land Trust on. Consistently throughout this project, these two organizations have identified themselves as the most significant proponents. Their perspective on this proposed project notes acknowledgment. Outside of these specific organizations, the applicant has presented the project at all the major home owner groups that surround the proposed project and for the public at large. The LCA was very impressed with the kids three day open house event that was held in August. Thank you. And we have to just wrap it up in October of 2017. This event showcased the.
Speaker 4: Applicant's dedication.
Speaker 0: In informing the community. Thank you very much. In conclusion. Yeah, time's up. Thank you very much. We are in support of this project and I hope to thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay.
Speaker 6: Thank you. And we'll be back for rebuttal. Yes.
Speaker 0: Appreciate it. Okay. Thank you very much. Next, I have two sets of appellants. Which are the two? Appellants, because it's going to go first. It's control. Okay. So both get a total max of 15.
Speaker 6: So I'd like to ask for additional time since the appellants had the Native-Americans speak on their behalf. And also I think they went over their 15 minutes.
Speaker 0: So so actually, let me just clarify that real quick. So, Mr. City, translate. I asked you the same question. And do you want to clarify that?
Speaker 4: Yes, Mayor. Actually, the presentation.
Speaker 6: By the local.
Speaker 4: Indian tribe was not part of the applicant's presentation.
Speaker 6: They were invited by the city.
Speaker 4: To make a presentation after a couple of meetings with them about the project. So I think as a courtesy to them, as an Indian nation.
Speaker 6: They were asked to come speak.
Speaker 0: As part of this. As part of the staff presentation. Correct? Okay.
Speaker 6: And was Mayor Foster also part of the staff presentation, guys?
Speaker 0: Because we were going to have a civil forum and a civil hearing. And so that's not helpful. So thank you very much. So I believe actually that we have taken out, Mr. Mays, that you took off time from the rebuttal for the portion of Mr. Foster, is that correct? That's correct. Okay. Ms.. Cantrell.
Speaker 6: So may I have two extra minutes?
Speaker 0: So per the city attorney, everyone is getting 15 minutes. Is that correct? Okay, Ms.. Control.
Speaker 6: Good evening. And Cantrell, on behalf of CARP citizens about responsible planning, we are appealing the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the EIA Zoning and Oil Map Amendments, LCP and Site Plan Review for the Low Cerritos Wetlands and Oil Consolidation Project listed in the air as the Low Cerritos Wetlands, Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project. I am curious as to why restoration was left off the title in the staff report. Perhaps it's because this project isn't really about wetlands restoration or even consolidation, as the Coastal Commission staff has pointed out. It is all about oil expansion, 120 new wells on smaller areas with a great possibility for disaster. Historically, this area was the estuary of the San Gabriel River, fresh water from the Lower Cerritos Channel. And I'm sorry this doesn't work very well, but it's here. And the San Gabriel River mixed with tidal saltwater, creating a brackish tidal marsh until driven off the land. Native Americans lived along the river finding food and tools for their baskets, houses, clothes in these west wetlands. With oil extraction, tank farms, houses and power plants. The annual flooding of this area required the channel ization of the San Gabriel and the Los Cerritos Channel, thus reduced the freshwater input for the wetlands to stormwater runoff and occasional rain. Once more functioning wetland remains in stream travels through which the air admits may be public trust lands. At one time, all of this area belonged to the Bixby family. But as oil became depleted and the Coastal Act denied new drilling, drilling and building on wetlands, the Bixby sold this property to Tom Dean and Jeff Berger. The city acquired the surface rights for the part of the wetlands by the east of Trader Joe's, in a swap with Dean for a developer city land along the Los Angeles River. Another land swap where the city got the short end of the stick by not getting the mineral rights. When Dean and Berger were killed in a plane crash, the remaining wetlands became the property of synergy slash beach oil minerals. Oil extraction is permitted on wetlands. If the pumps predate the Coastal Act. But new drilling drilling is prohibited even with well enhancement, which includes pumping water and chemicals into the wells to remove the sludge. These old wells are not producing much oil. The Earth states that oil production from Synergy and city properties as being around 300 barrels a day. Synergy believes there is a large pool of oil to the east of their property but needs non wetlands for dwelling drilling. Thus the proposed acquiring of the Lower Cerritos Wetlands Authority's five acres on Studebaker and Second Street, along with the lion's property known as the pumpkin patch on PCH. The loss of Rita's Wetlands Authority five acres was mitigation from Edison for the San Onofre nuclear plant and at one time was planned as the site of a visitor center for the low cerritos wetlands. Although this land was once part of the estuary of the San Gabriel, the property has been filled, covered with gravel, planted with non-native, so as no evidence of wetlands left. However, it is uncomfortably close to the earthquake fault to allow drilling. The Lion property on PCH also has layers of landfill and has been used as a pumpkin patch Christmas tree, lot storage for Grand Prix tires, oil extraction and was once a lease term nesting site. Joanna Eagle Inglewood Finding John Joanna Ingle, the Coastal Commission biologist, reports that some of this property has the hydrology to qualify as wetlands . These photos of the endangered southern Tara plant are from her July 2017 report. She concluded there were not enough plants to qualify as ACIA environmentally sensitive habitat. This is not surprising as the property owners have been killing off all the wetland plants for years. In July 2004, Don may, as president of Earth Core and Most Serious Wetlands Land Trust reported at an MLP for the proposed strip mall in the pumpkin patch that there was a three acre dense cover of Southern power plants, about a third of the site and a thick mat of heliotrope and pickle weed over much of the rest. On August six, 2004, I visited the site with Don and took these pictures. We found about half of the plants had been scraped off, as you can see in the background behind Don. But there were still lots of tar plant there. Don wrote to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife on August 12, 2004, and reported that the rest of the plants had been sprayed with herbicides. On August 8th. On January 12th, 2018, I was alerted there were heavy equipment working on the pumpkin patch. When I arrived, there were no bulldozers, but I did find the area scraped clean of all vegetation, as you can see here. There were patches of very green, healthy plants growing inside the fence, but otherwise even the back of the property not used for Christmas trees was completely bare. After the recent rains, it would be reasonable to find some sign of plants growing in locations other than just along the fence. I can find no explanation for this perfectly level moonscape other than scraping by a bulldozer and destruction of all evidence of wetlands. Here is the steam shovel slew on October 2017. This northern part of the synergy property is functioning wetlands with obligate plants and animals. However, this is the area scheduled for, quote, restoration, unquote. Bond plans to enlarge their mitigation bank by breaching the current berm, separating the slew from the oil fields and flooding the uplands with more tidal flow. The problem with this plan is that the uplands have been indentified as being full of oil, sludge and toxins and require extensive cleanup. This is where the endangered building Savannah Sparrow now nests and forages. Because of the brief description in the A.P., the California Fish and Wildlife apparently didn't realize the significance of this project and made no comments. Their biologists have had a long involvement with these wetlands and should have been consulted. As a layperson, I believe this so-called restoration is going to have direct, disastrous effects on many species of plants, birds and animals that now call the wetlands home. An independent, qualified biologist is needed to make that determination, not one paid for by the applicant. Another big issue is the wisdom of oil drilling and running pipelines on or near a known earthquake fault. The red line on this map is the Newport-Inglewood fault, which runs right through the wetlands. In the argument for Alternative five pipeline through the wetlands, it stated that in the event of a rupture in the pipeline, only 30,816 gallons would be spilled, compared to 37,773 gallons, which could be released with the pool limit per parameter location. Further, the EIA eyes response to a possible oil spill or oil leak was that the oil will be all contained on the property by berms and will cause no harm to humans. What about the other inhabitants of the wetlands? Coastal Commission staff recommended an expanded annual analysis of the risk of the oil spill. As far as I'm aware, this has not been done. One of the project's objective is enhance gateway entry points to the city over existing industrial conditions and RMS control.
Speaker 0: Have four and a half minutes. I'm going to give you in an additional minute. So just to give you that additional a minute. Okay. So you have five, five and a half minutes.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Even the 18 foot wall, which is called a screen wall at the pumpkin patch, will not hide this 160 foot oil drilling rig, which will be what the public will see when entering our sustainable city. There will be another 160 rig at the corner of Second and Studebaker, along with collapsible 120 foot rigs at both sites. Although labeled temporary, these rigs can be in use for possibly the entire life of the oilfield. Plus, the public will still be looking at the existing oil pumps on the Synergy and city project for almost up to 44 years. Leave it in the ground. Ask the port to provide the restoration money for the degraded portions of the wetlands, as it did for Bolsa Chica and other wetlands. This may require some changes in the law, but as shown tonight with the sea dip amendments, nothing is written in stone. There are too many defects in this project to cover in one short session. Karp urges you to have at least one public study session to address all the impacts, including esthetics, air quality, biological contamination, cleanup, cultural, geological, oil, spill risk traffic, water and inadequate mitigations. This EIA is not ready for approval. Please be good stewards for one last remaining salt. What marsh in California and Joe Weinstein has some comments also as president. Of carp.
Speaker 0: As part of your your your time. Sure thing.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 8: Yes. Hello. I am Joe.
Speaker 4: Weinstein, president.
Speaker 8: Of Citizens.
Speaker 4: About Responsible Planning. Of course, we endorse the notion of.
Speaker 8: Restoration of these wetlands to something much closer to their former natural state. The problem is that while there are a couple of problems.
Speaker 4: One problem is that the air does not fully specify what might in fact be good news, what might in fact be components of an adequate project. But there is no specification there to guarantee that. And without specific.
Speaker 0: Statements.
Speaker 4: In the project description of the air, what you're really buying is a pig in a poke. We hope that's not true. But no matter how many verbal reassurances you have gotten tonight and we'll get afterwards, unless it's put into the EIA or project description, there is no guarantee to the public. We are concerned not only with environmental impacts of the project itself.
Speaker 0: But with the loosey goosey approach to the supposed restoration.
Speaker 4: The few details as to restoration methods are not reassuring. For example, plants are to be are to be wonderfully protected from any chemical treatments, but weeds are to be subjected to, quote, aqueous glyphosate. That is to say the probable.
Speaker 8: Carcinogen.
Speaker 0: Roundup, which we.
Speaker 8: Do not even want to see.
Speaker 4: Continued further in the Long Beach parks, let alone in this wetlands.
Speaker 8: And as and control mentioned.
Speaker 4: Simply flooding the uplands with tidal flow and then maybe leaching out contamination that is there and will be there without extensive operations that are not fully detailed or guaranteed is simply a recipe for contaminating what is good now.
Speaker 0: In fact, the Coastal Commission pointed.
Speaker 4: Out that there are no specific standards of the so-called restoration that has to be met. Who will carry it out. Which obviously qualified biologist will certify the success or mandate amendment of the restoration? Who will do the necessary long term monitoring so that it isn't just a flash in the pan one time success and then die off restoration. The air does not provide clear answers. There might be good answers, but they better be written into the air. We are concerned that there has been no comment from.
Speaker 0: The California.
Speaker 8: Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Speaker 0: I remember the concern is that, you know, there is a whole.
Speaker 4: Slew of mitigation measures and monitoring measures, but only two of them pertain to what would be done by way of actually upgrading and restoring the wetlands. All the others pertain to maybe mitigating the extra damage that this project will do to the existing wetlands. Thank you very much. Finally, if I may make one final point. We're concerned with the misleading.
Speaker 8: Treatment of the no build alternative.
Speaker 4: You see, this is a long term project.
Speaker 8: Therefore, there isn't simply a single no build alternative.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much.
Speaker 8: Many alternatives are possible, consistent with not building today.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 8: But getting.
Speaker 4: Your support tomorrow.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And we'll have our second appellant, please. Okay. We're going to set 15 minutes for the second. Appellant.
Speaker 4: Your first.
Speaker 6: We're splitting up our time into five minute increments.
Speaker 0: Sure thing.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: Sure. It was possible to get the clock up. It was up last time, but it was in the way of the presentation. But. Oh, do you want to. Do you want it up? Yes. Okay. So we'll do put the 50 minutes up there.
Speaker 6: Okay. Okay. Thank you. My name is Tasha Knapp Kristensen. I'm co-founder of Protect Long Beach, Los Cerritos Wetlands Group, along with Rebecca Rebecca Robles, a Harshman elder, and Anna Christensen component. So I'd like to start off by acknowledging that we are on the land, and I would like to thank the council. I appreciate those of you who took the time to meet with us and let us offer our perspective. And I would like to say I am also a member of the Omaha Nation. I'm indigenous as well. So we've been working with a shaman and talking about elders on wetland protection issues, along with Gloria Ioannis of the Anthony House Band and Rebecca Robles. I am an elder and this project is presented by the project and is actually part of a very ancient landscape. It's a bit about the tongue of ownership in peoples and has the potential for sacred site designation under the Native American Heritage Act. The evidential basis for this fact is that there is many unmarked archeological sites, either within a half mile of proximity or directly on the project site. The pumpkin patch is a work site. They found a skull there. Mean, we actually found the remains of individuals. Rancho Los Alamitos was a Chalmette Insite industrial site for processing the food that they ate, the shells, the shell meat, and probably remains a current ceremonial site. I'm engaged with the time again to Hodgeman people as I grew up in this community. I attend those ceremonies. And you know, Gloria, I am speaking for Gloria, Ariana in this timeslot. I do not speak for the Tongva or Hodgman people, but working with Angela Mooney Darcy of Sacred Places Institute, Rebecca Robles and Gloria R.A., they have, you know, given me permission to to represent that perspective. So Angela was in a car accident recently, couldn't be here. And Gloria has the flu, so I'm here. The high likelihood of findings on these archeological sites compared to, you know, what was said in the planning process, what the planning department hearing was that they had done 100% tribal mitigation, tribal archeological mitigation. They can't be true because you don't know what you're going to find until you start grading as and control has demonstrated. That's already started happening, apparently. You know, what are you going to do, find a skull there or something? Everything's within a half mile of the site. The you know, the remains. In addition, as I was told by elders, Gloria and Rebecca, that, you know, there are also these unique archeological remains called cog stones. They are not found in very many Tongo Harshman sites, and they're usually a cultural signifier of a like a large population of individuals. So they found called stones that along with burials of one individual, which they consider probably of a status of like a, you know, a spiritual leader, because individual individuals are not usually buried with stones. And the other one was like a very old dolphin that was like tens of thousands of years old, surrounded by these stones . So you're talking about a unique, unique heritage and a very ancient culture that still continues to practice ceremonies today. And how many times? Okay, I got to hurry. I just want to bring up the high likelihood of findings along with the SB 18 and 83 to California laws, which puts the onus on Long Beach City Council to develop an ongoing tribal relationship with the Tonga people, and that that includes all three of the bands, not just the one that we heard from tonight. And, you know, we need to develop an ongoing relationship with all three tribal bands on this band. You know, we don't know that he got a letter, but if that has not happened, by the time if this moves on to the Coastal Commission, just as in Banning Ranch, you know, the same tribes came forward and actually our perspective one on that one, these same issues. So not just the ones you want to work with or you know, but that are like pro project or whatever. But also the other ones like that I'm representing, they care about their culture remains undisturbed. And so, you know, we also need to have a type of monitor on site that represents all three of those bands and that's also under the state law. Okay. So those are my asks too to make sure and contact all three of those bands and and how those tribal monitor before the screening starts. Okay. Thank you. And I Christenson Part two the process required to ensure that the public was informed of understood and was able to comment on the low cerritos wetlands restoration and Oil Consolidation Project is flawed. Public outreach has been inadequate and inaccurate. Public presentations designed like See the picture by Beichuan Middle Partners describing the project as wetlands restoration or consolidation are deceptive. Both the Low Service, Climate Authority and Long Beach Development Services have allowed Beichuan Middle Partners to create and present a single , distorted and self-serving misrepresentation of what is essentially under the Coastal Act, a, quote, hazardous industrial development, unquote. Responding to the project, A.P., an initial study, California Coastal Commission staff has stated, quote, to characterize the proposed project as a wetlands restoration project. And first, any relocation of oil extraction and processing equipment. Second is a misrepresentation of the overall project and could be misleading to the public. The impetus, the reason behind the development of the project was the updating and more importantly, the expansion of oil extraction and oil processing operations at the synergy oilfield between mineral partners has continued to speak for all parties, making presentations and engaging in additional promotional outreach efforts and has not altered either either of those. In spite of these concerns by the Coastal Commission at the very beginning of public outreach, the public is being misled and sales risk are being downplayed and ignored. As they stated, they presented both the air and the air to the Planning Commission and no community meetings have yet been held on this project that were not presented from the perspective of beach oil, mineral partners. No other points of view like the ones you are hearing in our appeals have been presented. Tribal consultation required by law has not been fully attempted by project proponents, by or by the lead agency under. And I won't go into that given the tiny bit of time I have it more layer on that in your packets. Also, you have more detailed descriptions of these.
Speaker 4: More.
Speaker 6: Points to these issues, the involvement of public lands and public entities. So now we're looking at the that we started with the process we're now into the proponents. Who are the proponents of this project? Well, the main proponent, the one on the paperwork is beach or Mineral Partners. However, as stated by the Coastal Commission staff, this project cannot take place without the land swap, without the CWA being involved. So over a 30 year period the involvement of the LCA make this Wetlands Protection Agency a fully necessary and willing partner in quote unquote a hazardous industrial development and a for profit mitigation being, the LCA has compromised its own restoration plan. Let me see how we're doing here in favor of that design. My Beach Men, Mountain Partners, as they said, to build that berm, that berm is necessary and.
Speaker 4: That is brought to the.
Speaker 6: Attention of the LCA right in the beginning by a biologist, an independent biologist, that it was designed to protect their new oil drilling platform from sea rise. The road to this wetlands, I-40 and its to two of its members, the Coastal Conservancy and the IMC were created, publicly funded and have as their core missions the protection of water polluting groundwater, the groundwater that's going to be used to drill for oil preservation and restoration of habitat. A core value clean air, clean water, open space are a priority. They also promote green initiatives. Okay. So is is it even legal for them to start drilling for oil? The project itself, the final Environmental Impact Report, states there's no sacred sites, just a heads up to the tribal group that's here. Read the project. They say there's no sacred sites there. No sacred sites, no problem. All right. This determination is made in spite of the testimony and evidence that you're hearing tonight. So when you say what's in the air, what are you approving that you're approving it? It states there's no sacred sites. And you just heard the tribe here today say they are okay. Finally, you can look in your packet to see the many numbered issues in the Coastal Act. I'm submitting it. I don't have time to read it, but but the code that basically says you can't do this, you can't do a hazardous site like this in the wetlands I that.
Speaker 4: So thank you for the opportunity to present our comments and our investigation into the air tonight. You know, I'm a 70 year old, 30, 50 year, so I'm 70 years old. But I've been commenting on city council matters for 50 years. So I've had a chance to look around. And from my perspective, you are the best city council Long Beach has ever had. Really? Yeah. I'll tell you why. You've shown a willingness to embrace future friendly ideas like the ban on expanded polystyrene and even improve on it by adding foam coolers and filler foam pellets used in pillows and beanbag chairs. You think independently, but are capable of acting collectively for positive change. And that's all we're asking for tonight, that you act together to reject this foolhardy air that will give us time to work with all concerned, to truly think outside the box in order to create a project that is a win win for the owners and the proponents of wetlands restoration. You know, I enjoyed reading the sea air. I like to read things like that. I mean, did you know there are several ways other than the Richter scale to measure earthquakes like the modified McCallie scale is it's qualitative a says one is earthquake not felt seven is difficult to stand or walk and 12 is damage nearly total. The claim is made in the air that the use of modern equipment and procedures will eliminate the danger of drilling next to a fault. The published conclusion that the Huntington Beach oil fields deeper drilling was a probable causal factor of the 1933 earthquake is dismissed in the air. For this project, however, the project is going to be very close to the fault line there. As fact, it's just about two houses away. It's 200 feet away. So it's and it's going to go very deep. It's a layer cake of poor, thin and missing sediments, multiple pools of oil stacked vertically. And they're going to go down maybe over 10,000 feet to get at this oil. There's a brand new oil source and this is a deeper, not yet drilled zone, and that's the target of the proponents. What we need for the restoration of this potentially beautiful area is a beautiful project, something that combines modern technology that will remove the existing infrastructure and then restore the wetlands with a lower risk. Profitable project for the developer. You will note that in the proponents literature there are many pictures of the restored wetlands and the visitor center, but not much showing the actual drilling apparatus. But this this is this is what the drilling apparatus looks like. You can see it right now on Second and PCH. That's where what's going on right now is second and PCH. And you know what? They're doing a lot of building of. Well, it was I mean, this is the modern.
Speaker 6: Oil.
Speaker 4: Rig. This is the modern oil well, like what we had on Porcupine Hill and SEAL Beach. But this apparatus will be used for drilling and re drilling, you know, before you can do these below grade pumps that you say are going to be invisible, you've got to drill the hole so you can start pumping. And these are the things that are going to do it. And then you're got to have capacity for flaring. That's another problem that we have here.
Speaker 0: There needs to be.
Speaker 4: A better way than wasting natural gas and directly heating the atmosphere, whereas the modern technology to avoid this fiery welcome to Long Beach along our gateways along both Pacific Coast Highway and Second Street, we would like to make a few comments about the 1960 landfill on the Pumpkin Patch site. We really love it. Algolia. We think this is modern archeological site. We'd love to be part of excavating that and getting it out because it needs to be x ray. It will be excavated because it's leaching toxics into the San Gabriel River. And we're hoping to be able to use this as a modern archeological site. But, you know, today the budgets of major cities are being drained by emergency response to events over which they have no control. Increasing numbers of their systems are dying and their property lost due to the rapidity, intensity of the effects of climate chaos occasioned by the proliferation of greenhouse gases. The Long Beach Climate Action and Adaptation Plan is a work in progress. But Mayor Garcia and Mayor Garcetti both signed zero emission goals. And these are states that now I'm going to run out of time. So just let me say this, that there's a new constituency here. There's kids that don't see our future. They see business as usual, as suicidal. What we need is business unusual. This project is not unusual enough. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Thank you. That concludes the appellant comments. Both sets of appellants we're going to have now, the applicant will have 4 minutes of rebuttal time. We'll put the 4 minutes up on the clock.
Speaker 5: Staff me get my PowerPoint back up.
Speaker 6: Please create the applicant's PowerPoint.
Speaker 5: Presentation backup, please.
Speaker 0: If the PowerPoint presentation.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 0: Why it is if there's a phobia to chatting an audience, please. We just need to continue with the hearing. Thank you.
Speaker 3: All.
Speaker 0: We put the time up, please. The 4 minutes.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Good evening again. Shawna Shoffner, C.A. Planning representing the applicant. I'd like to start my rebuttal with what happens if the project is not approved. There would be no wetlands restoration, no public ownership of the wetlands. We would reinvest in the existing oil operations, some of which are in the wetlands without newer, safer technology. We need no additional entitlements or discretionary approvals to reinvest in these existing wells. That can be done by Wright and will be done without this project. There would be no visitors center, no trail, no sidewalks and bikeways. So we see there is great public benefits with the proposed project. Without it. We do not need new discretionary approvals. I'd like to address some of the issues that were raised by the appellants. You've heard that the Coastal Commission does not allow oil wells in wetlands and that only pumps appreciate the coastal sector are allowed in wetlands. This is incorrect. New oil wells are considered development and require CDP. Coastal Act Section 30233 allows oil production within wetlands. It's one of the very few uses that is allowed within wetlands. We also heard that there will be impacts to wetlands under Alternative five with the pipeline. This is incorrect. The EIA discloses that with the pipeline and Alternative five, there are no impacts to wetlands related to the wetlands restoration and the technical studies. I understand that you'll hear from several biologists tonight who have worked on the restoration plan, but the quality of those technical studies that made up the plan have been subject to multiple peer reviews, including by the Audubon biologists and more significantly, the IATA, which is the inter-agency review team, which includes U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Commission, nymphs and others have been engaging in review of this plan for more than three years. There's also success criteria built into this plan and five years of monitoring to ensure success. We heard tonight that the maximum spill capacity was a question asked by the Coastal Commission and that apparently was not answered. This is incorrect. That is a question that was asked by the Coastal Commission staff in their comment letter on the air, and a response was provided in responses to comments and as part of your final air tonight. Okay. I'd like to conclude this is a project that has substantial public benefits, the immediate restoration of the low street US wetlands, and the establishment of a non-Western endowment for the ongoing operation of the wetlands. A visitor center and a public trail. New sidewalks. Bike paths. A Bike repair station. A sizable increase in revenue generation for the city of Long Beach and a state of the art project with a micro-grid energy system and enhanced safety associated with new oil facilities , and most importantly, the removal of these antiquated oil facilities over time from the existing sites. We request the project approval consistent with the staff and the Planning Commission recommendation. Our project team ownership and technical experts are available tonight if you have any questions. Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Okay. That concludes the application, the appellant comments. So we are. So just just to make sure everyone's very aware we're gonna be doing public comment a few things before public comment starts. Public comment obviously going to come to the mic. You say your name you and you make sure you identify yourself. But also please make sure that when your time is up, your time is up and be respectful. And if the audience please be respectful of every speaker, regardless of what place you are or what position you're in or what you're for. Okay. So we're going to begin public comments.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 2: Bend down a little bit. Done.
Speaker 4: A good evening, honorable mayor and council members.
Speaker 2: My name is David Bright and I'm a field representative for assembly member Patrick O'Donnell. I am present today in order to make a comment on behalf of Assembly Member O'Donnell in support of the Illustrator's Wetlands and Oil Consolidation Project.
Speaker 4: Assembly Member O'Donnell was born and raised in Long.
Speaker 2: Beach and spent his childhood in and around the low street as wetlands. He grew up with an appreciation of these special lands and has always fought to protect and restore them. A Senate member, O'Donnell believes that the loss of Rita's wetlands, oil consolidation and restoration project is a good project with many benefits. He appreciates that not only will wetlands be restored and move into public ownership, the existing oil operations will be consolidated to two offsite parcels and are replaced with newer, safer and more efficient technology. Additionally, the project represents a substantial revenue boost to the city's general fund, which he feels is desperately needed. Assembly member O'Donnell believes.
Speaker 4: That this is a great project for Long.
Speaker 2: Beach and is happy to offer his support. He is looking forward to the area being restored so that he and future generations can responsibly enjoy these sensitive areas. Assemblymember O'Donnell feels that this is a unique opportunity and urgency to approve the project without delay.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. City Council. My name is Bill Thomas, a resident of Alameda Tates, living less than a mile from the property you were discussing. I can only say we've learned a little more history than I realized tonight. And my history only goes back to Long Beach to mid-fifties when I came out here. So many, many oil wells around here. And my goodness, they got a lot of oil wells. And now that I'm old and gray, I've seen the progress go. I was a Navy man back in the fifties, and we transitioned from a Navy town to a fantastic growing city. And I'm here to speak very positively on this project that I've watched closely for a number of years. I'm amazed that John McEwen has been able to have so many outreaches and talk to so many people and being active with the sea tip reconsideration. We thought we did a lot of outreach, but they've done a magnificent job of reaching everybody who's interested in this. And I see the future for the wetlands area being a great thing, and I just hope it moves faster than some of the numbers I've heard. I'm looking forward to having it. Thank you for it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Honorable Mayor and City Council. My name is Ben Goldberg.
Speaker 4: I am a native of Long Beach, as well as a resident and homeowner at the neighborhood just adjacent to this project. I also work at the building that will be adjacent to the other part of the project, which is the pumpkin patch. So I feel I have a little bit of perspective here. I was the president of the University Park Estates Association for many years on the board as well for many years, and represent many of the residents there today.
Speaker 0: We've put all the communications up regarding.
Speaker 4: All the outreach on our Facebook page for our residents specifically. Everyone's been informed. It's been a well ran campaign allowing input from our residents directly in our neighborhood as well as surrounding neighborhoods. I will tell you that when Mayor Foster past Mayor Foster, I should say, mention that phone call 18 years ago. I was running for city council around that time as well, and this issue was front and center back then. And I am amazed it took this long to get here, but I certainly hope that this council will see fit to approve it unanimously and send it on to the Coastal Commission, which we know will be a whole nother set of circumstances to deal with. But this is a good project. There's a lot of residents here that were that have been here their whole lives that don't even realize that the wetlands is actually there because it has not been open to the public for all these years. The only way to get in there is through kayak or boat on one side, and otherwise it's basically private property and pretty much cordoned off. I mean, there have been a few tours recently, but it was sure would be nice after raising two children there, one who's now 21 and one is 28 who never visited the wetlands . I'd like to bring at least someday, God willing, grandchildren to this wetlands site. Re re rediscovered all that wonderful walkway and everything else. So please don't let the people from outside our neighborhoods come in here and tell you that we don't want this project to move forward. We do, and I hope that you'll approve the project as presented. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. City Council. My name is Wareham Lisowski President, Long Beach Citizens for Fair Development of a graduate of Long Beach Poly. So there's my Long Beach credentials. We'd like to support what all the appellant said. There's a lot of problems with the air. Namely, I sent you all a letter today describing some of the problems with the air. One of which is the sites currently producing 300 barrels of oil a day.
Speaker 4: And this proposal is up to 24,000.
Speaker 8: Barrels of oil a day. The Environmental Impact Report does not address the greenhouse.
Speaker 4: Gas emissions from that increased production.
Speaker 8: Also, there are environmentally sensitive areas like the appellant control said on the pumpkin patch area. In fact, yesterday and today there was workers over there scraping, putting, fencing up. Who knows what's going on over there now to obscure.
Speaker 4: Environmentally sensitive areas.
Speaker 8: So what we'd like is for this.
Speaker 4: Council, this body to while beach oil is extracting.
Speaker 8: Oil out of the ground. This council should be.
Speaker 4: Extracting from them.
Speaker 8: Concessions to make this a better project for the people of Long Beach. 40 years is too.
Speaker 4: Long to wait. California is making a move away from fossil fuels.
Speaker 8: We have regulations to where any new development needs, any new development needs, electric vehicle chargers.
Speaker 4: So we support the move.
Speaker 8: Towards non-fossil fuel energy, and we urge you to reconsider this project. It's just too much oil out of the ground in too environmentally.
Speaker 4: Sensitive an area on a dangerous fault line. Thanks so much.
Speaker 0: Speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name is Kyle St Romain. I'm a resident here in Long Beach. I'm in support of this project. I think this is the type of forward thinking that our city needs more of where we have public and private interests coming together to create something better for all of us. I've often driven past the wetlands, wondering what it's there for. You see these abandoned tank farms, marginal production, idle wells. It seems like a waste in its current state, and I'm in support of it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor to City Council Staff Jeremy Harris, senior vice president of Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce, here tonight to support this project. On behalf of our 800 members, our leadership and all those involved with the chamber, we believe this is a win win. For the community and also those folks that care so much about the wetlands. We believe there's several reasons why you should support this tonight in order to move it forward. One has been mentioned multiple times tonight, the wetlands habitat restoration and the amount that will be going into that to the new revenue, as pointed out by the report, is welcome new funding to the city's budget and finances as it's been estimated, and then three protections that have all been mentioned in and around the site as compared to what you see there now. For the interest of time, we just ended our comments in tonight in support of this project. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and vice mayor and members of the Council. My name is Lucy Johnson and I'm not a native of Long Beach, but I've been here longer than anywhere else. I've been so since 1980. I drove past the site virtually every day, both directions. And in this past October. Excuse me for reading this, but I wouldn't forget it otherwise. I toured the Synergy Oil site during one of the open house days after viewing a presentation of the restoration plan and walking around the site. I came away impressed with the plan to consolidate and modernize the oil operations and over time, restore about 150 acres of wetlands. From what I saw and learned about the project that day, and since this is a tremendous opportunity for the city of Long Beach and the LC, the trade of about five acres of CWA land near the project for the hundred and 50 plus acres in the synergy oil field and the commitment of Synergy and its partners to consolidate the oil operations into two parcels totaling approximately ten acres is a trade that must be completed. The air adequately addresses the concerns of the opponents regarding air pollution, fracking and pipeline leakage. Upon approval from the City Council and all the permitting authorities, the blight now seen on both sides of Second Street between Studebaker and Pacific Coast Highway will be eliminated over time. Just imagine the beautification of the site and the return of the native wildlife. The low cerritos wetlands will become one of long beaches, most treasured assets enjoyed for years to come by residents and visitors alike. This is a tremendous opportunity to ensure the future of the Lo Cerritos wetlands and one that the city of Long Beach cannot afford to pass up. I therefore urge the members of the City Council to unanimously approved the staff's recommendations for permitting and to deny the appeals. Thank you for your consideration of my comments.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is John Burchill. I'm a senior vice president with Wells Fargo Bank. I'm based in Bakersfield.
Speaker 0: Hey, guys. Everyone gets respect to have their time at the mic, regardless of your position. So please continue, sir.
Speaker 4: I'm here as the lender of record to synergy oil. I have over 40 years of experience in commercial lending, including real estate, agriculture and oil and gas lending. But we can get into the economics of the oil and the underwriting and all that. But one of the most important things that we do as a commercial lender, first of all, is who are the people behind the project? I first met John McEuen and his team at Synergy in 2012. Every negotiation we've had with them, everything we've asked them to do, everything they told us they would do, they have done. And that's the first thing. Any type of a project like this, as extensive as this project is. You've got to look at the people behind it and their ability and willingness and desire to complete it. So those are my comments. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Hi, I'm Marsha Lisowski and.
Speaker 0: I'm the on the stand committee of Long Beach Area Peace.
Speaker 4: Network. And we come from this from a kind of a different perspective. We are come from the idea that we would like.
Speaker 0: To prevent global warming. One of the things that happened in the last couple of years, of course.
Speaker 4: Is that there was a huge drought in Syria. The drought was caused by global warming. It caused.
Speaker 0: A civil war, a civil war that we're.
Speaker 4: Involved in that has taken thousands of lives and.
Speaker 0: Displaced millions of people. We say that we want this world to be left.
Speaker 4: In the ground. There's 200 million barrels is not worth the damage that it's going to do to our environment. So we would urge you to reject this whole project.
Speaker 0: Obviously, we support restoration of the wetlands, but we don't think that this project is really it's undercover project.
Speaker 4: For oil drilling, which is I think there's.
Speaker 0: Other ways to fund this. You know, one of the things is this. Is there enough pollution on the to make this a Superfund site? Nobody's looked into that. Is there money from the port.
Speaker 4: That could be swapped.
Speaker 0: For restoration?
Speaker 4: You know, we don't have to drill.
Speaker 0: Baby, drill.
Speaker 4: And Long Beach is supposed to be a green city. We're all talking about the port. We're talking about all the. Trucks and everybody, you know.
Speaker 0: Cutting the emissions and using gas and stuff like.
Speaker 4: That and electricity.
Speaker 0: But this project definitely goes.
Speaker 4: Against everything I think that our city really should stand for. So I want to thank you for.
Speaker 0: Allowing me to speak tonight. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: So, hi. My name is Ines Educate.
Speaker 5: I'm the vice president of the Ridgewood Heights Neighborhood Association, the eighth District. I'm also partial one, Tony and I. I want you to really consider the appeals, because all.
Speaker 6: We're asking for is for due diligence.
Speaker 9: To have happened.
Speaker 5: And I'm not going to focus on all the environmental things that you've heard tonight.
Speaker 6: I'm going to focus.
Speaker 5: On just one aspect of the environment Environmental Impact.
Speaker 6: Report, and that's the cultural impact and that.
Speaker 5: The and supposed due diligence that happen there.
Speaker 6: Now we've heard from one and I know you guys invited the guy rellenos to come here and talk about it and I appreciate the government perspective. Yet there are Tonko and Hatch women local, truly local that live here that grew here. And there was no outreach to those people. None. And there still isn't. And though and you know, I know Mr. Christiansen came up here and explained to you how things have been found on the site. And instead of like actually having a tribal representative out there to actually do the due diligence, nobody's trying to stop the the the overall order of what you are trying to accomplish in hopefully mindfully addressing this this area. But just from a cultural perspective, I just want to point out to you how profoundly racist that is, because when you are when you are ignoring what you know, what you know, the due diligence is supposed to be, you know, what it's supposed to be. And instead, you're creating a situation where indigenous people have to sue an oil company in order to see justice served. You know, the last line of defense, you cannot let that happen. That is why you have to go for the appeal, because this was not done correctly. The local leadership was not contacted. Two of the 11 and one of them is up there. And you ask them to speak here in favor of this when you have not concluded your due diligence. And we are talking about sacred sites and we are talking about racism, this is systemic racism. If you're wondering what it looks like, this is it, this is it. So when you think about what you're going to do tonight and I urge you to vote for appeal to vote for the appeals, because we're just asking for the you look, there are actually they're scraping the land now, land where you where we found artifacts , land where it's documented and nobody's asked the Native America the I'm sorry, the indigenous Cal State Long Beach representatives. Nobody's asked the local representatives. And you're going all the way the same to San Gabriel Valley. Thank you for San Bernardino. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, mayor garcia and council members. My name is Anne Thompson. I'm a 40 year resident property owner in District three. The description of this project as a restoration and conservation of the low serious wetlands is misleading. Clearly, this project involves the expansion of oil extraction and processing operations at the Synergy Oilfield, the Long Beach Press Telegram newspaper. Yesterday, January 15th, addressed California's Green goals, stating California has earned the right to brag about how much it has clean up its environmental act. Fossil fuels are required to power. The state's economic engine have decreased by a third since their peak in 2001. So why endanger precious wetland area to go after more oil? I am proud of California and I want to also be proud of Long Beach. It's disappointing to me that the Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust supports the oil endeavor. I am also shocked that my council representative, Liz Price, is also supporting this plan. I therefore support the appellants in this project and will also support them before the Coastal Commission. Thank you very much from here.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor and Council.
Speaker 4: My name is Mike Murchison. I am a lifelong resident of Long Beach. I've spent the last 52 and a half years. On the east side within a stone's throw of where we're talking about tonight. It was only the last several months when I got married. I moved to I love the eighth. I moved up to Councilman Austin's district. I'm here tonight to tell you that I've represented most of the proposed developments in the last 15 years on the east side of Long Beach. And every single turn, we always went straight ahead and we never brought in the environmental community. This time around, the owners took a different stance. This time around, John McEwen, Peter Zak and Frank Serene took a different approach. They reached out to city staff, they reached out to coastal staff. Never heard of that before. They've talked with Jack Haynesworth on down for the better part of four or five years. So to talk about the fact that we haven't done extensive outreach, it's just a misnomer. We've reached out to everybody we could think of. We held, as you saw earlier with these presentations, three day offering to have the community come out. We had over 200 people come out there. We've reached out to the Native American Indians. We will continue to do so. I'm offering tonight so that you can hear and hear publicly that next week I invite carp, then full board membership, not just joining in their full board membership. I'm asking if Warren wants to come out. I'm asking any other opponents that want to come out next week. We will take them out there. We will sit down with our biologists. We'll sit down with third party biologists will sit down with our greenhouse gas emissions. People will sit down with anybody that wants to come out there to learn about what this wetlands restoration is all about. What it's about is the ownership is putting their money where their mouth is. They're going to restore these wetlands on the front end. That's what this is all about. This site has been a problem eyesore for as long as I've been alive. This is a unique opportunity for the city of Long Beach and for those that enjoy the wetlands. I encourage you to support it. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Evening, Vice Mayor and Fellow Council. My name is Tommy five. I represent IBEW Local 11.
Speaker 4: We have our members. I wanted to recognize our members that's here tonight. And some of you recognize there are women that's in our trade and some of them that are single mothers that, you know, have come out tonight. And the things the you know, they've got other things better to do. But they come out to a city council.
Speaker 0: Meeting because they know how important it is.
Speaker 4: For them to get and create jobs. All right. So this project.
Speaker 0: And we're wholeheartedly support this Bumpass Energy project.
Speaker 4: Because we know it's going to create good electrical industrial jobs. You know, we have a commitment with with the developer to do so when it comes to a labor agreement.
Speaker 0: But, you know, early on when we talked to.
Speaker 4: Developers and so forth, we like to see job creation. The city wants to see job creation. And that's what exactly what's going to happen here on this project. Thank you. Thank you. Next minute, please.
Speaker 8: Hey, give an honor to Jesus Christ, the one who deserves it. Okay, let me fix my camera. Okay. I don't know much about. I don't know the history of this. I don't know the biology. I'm sound like Sam Cooke. But I know in 2018, I'm gonna do more praying. I'm going to do more praying. I'm a show myself to be a good Christian, and I'm praying on it. So. Anybody want to pray with me? Pray to Heavenly Father in Jesus name. I thank you for everything you do. You know what's good? I don't. So I ask you to do what's good and right. Amen. Now, that being said, hey, it's a new year working together. Get stuff done. That guy that left out nobody. What he said in the paper.
Speaker 0: Mitt is not on this today. One on one with me.
Speaker 8: So I'm but I'm going back for the next one. I'm not going to even mess around. I'm not going to make you have to tell me to stop saying that today. So I said I'm turning off. I'm not turning over to the same person. Right. Take it easy.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Laura Harding, and my parents purchased a home in University Park Estates back in 1971. So that's where I.
Speaker 6: Grew up and I am excited about the proposal.
Speaker 5: I received a flier.
Speaker 9: And went to the open house and from.
Speaker 5: What they showed me I find it exciting.
Speaker 6: I've heard it said, you know, growing up there right now, you look at rusted pipe.
Speaker 5: And so to that's not.
Speaker 6: Standing up to any kind of code. So if there was some disaster, that's.
Speaker 5: Going to end up being a huge disaster.
Speaker 4: So the fact.
Speaker 6: That it would be re piped or realigned and then brought up to code.
Speaker 5: I think is a good thing.
Speaker 6: And I just really look forward to.
Speaker 5: Being able to go back over there in the wetlands again. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Executables.
Speaker 5: Hi. My name is Aaron Foley and I'm a resident of Long Beach. I think it has been noted that the lawsuit shows wetlands is one of the most biologically productive places in the world and acts as a sanctuary that possesses an incredible amount of equal I call it ecological value. In fact, it has also been noted that before Spanish settlement on the Pacific coastline, Rosarito was wetlands, was home to the Tonga people. Tonga elders, like the late Lillian Robles, fought to protect sacred sites like the low cerritos, those wetlands, as have many other people here. Only about 7% of the original salt marsh habitat that once existed in Southern California has not been developed, and much of the remaining habitat is measurably degraded. So I definitely agree that restoration of the wetlands with native plants, etc. makes sense and is important. But no new pollution is ever a solution, especially in a city that has terrible air quality already and is on a land that is over a fault line. It feels par for the course of Trump's world to make deals, to get an oil company, to restore the land they desecrated for their own profits and fossil fuels by giving them other land to drill on, not to mention giving them 20 to 40 years to do so. The risks of the current old equipment, the ugly esthetics there are, lack of containment and other dangers that were discussed and admitted to earlier should be the hardest to resolve, especially due to their danger to us. Like if they're not up to code, why aren't they forced to be up to code without us having to give more of our land? How are they allowed to have such outdated equipment? They should be held accountable and made to restore the land because it is the right sustainable thing to do. We should not have to barter with them. To do so. We must let our voices be very loud and very clear in Long Beach and show that we will not perpetuate this backwards oil dependency type of thinking. We must move ourselves forward towards environmentally sound solutions and away from fossil fuels. We are not dinosaurs. We are innovators. We are creators. We are the people of the great city of Long Beach. And we can be better than that. We must do better because we are also humans intrinsically tied to the earth and our environment and our habitat, and we must shift to start acting accordingly, accordingly, any policy or ordinance, etc., that involves giving more land to oil companies to drill on, especially that which is over a fault line is not smart policy. Yes, dependency on this so-called black gold will not disappear overnight. But what if we took this first step, this right step? Let us not just give lip service when it comes to supporting indigenous rights and environmental justice from afar, as we did with the unanimous support for the water protectors of Standing Rock. Let us not only show support when it concerns matters in other states and doesn't require us to change business as usual, doesn't require us to have evolve. No matter the amount of doublespeak used here tonight, the air should not be approved. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Next to the police. Oh, hello. My name is Wayne Murchison. Thank you for holding this and for opening your minds hopefully to what's happening. Man, these guys are selling this so well that they're what they're going to do as a benevolent thing of fixing the wetlands they're holding. Like she said, that is dangling. That is an incentive to do this. We need to divest ourselves of oil and oil extraction. It's going to have to happen in this city anyways eventually. Why not start it now? If you do this, you're culpable in just extending this, this oil extraction. What's killing us? What's killing our planet? These people, the oil extractors, their product is money. And believe it or not, money can be an addiction. So an addict will tell you anything. Bend over backwards. For you to go away and leave them alone. Let them do what they want to do. Any addict will do that. These people are going to fix your wetlands. Well, why weren't they fixed a long time ago? Why aren't the people that did it being held culpable instead of letting these people use it as a dangling good thing that they're doing? How benevolent they're going to even make it look pretty. But it's only pretty on the surface, not underneath. And you've got to stop these addicts from ruining our lives because an addict and heroin addict only ruins their lives. A shoe addict? Well. But these people, not just these people, many corporations. Their bottom line is money.
Speaker 8: They're addicted to money. And they ruined many people's lives.
Speaker 4: We have to stop doing. We can't. We can't give them a reason to pull out oil and say it's a good thing. No, it's not going to end tomorrow. But we can start by ending it and looking forward to the things that are going to make stuff for the city, money for this city, and a Greenway Development Research development you want to bring in.
Speaker 0: Make it a city that's.
Speaker 4: Third and advanced. Start bringing in research development towards a green city.
Speaker 0: You can't make speak of these.
Speaker 4: Homonyms you can always address on file. So I want to talk about something. I looked through the air and there was something that I found highly inadequate. I made an appeal before the Planning Commission. I'm asking the City Council to take this into consideration very seriously. Climate change is not adequately discussed in the air. There is a short, brief paragraph, and what they basically say is that because of all the the the oil and coal and everything else that's being burned everywhere else, what we're doing here in Long Beach is insignificant. You know, if you compare to what's going on in Russia and Iraq and Saudi Arabia, you know, we're just a small sliver. What I don't understand is how you can extract 200 billion barrels of oil and and tell me that somehow.
Speaker 6: If everything goes right, if there's no earthquake, there's no.
Speaker 4: Slippage, there's no incident. If everything goes right.
Speaker 6: We burn this into the air.
Speaker 4: How that's not going to increase greenhouse gases. I don't think that that is scientifically possible. I think based on what we all know, because none of us are necessarily experts, we got a few experts in the room. But the general public, what our.
Speaker 6: Understanding of of climate change.
Speaker 4: Is and this is a city council that accepts climate change, that accepts the truth and the reality of the situation. Climate change is real. It always has been real. Now, despite the.
Speaker 6: Oil companies big.
Speaker 4: Campaign to lie to us now that this game or industry is here to tell us more lies. I want us to just take one quick second to ask ourselves if this fossil fuel is extracted, we're not increase greenhouse gas emissions. And I think that that's a fact that we are going to have to deal with. I know that many members, in fact, all of the members of the city council accept money from oil companies. I have looked through all of your almost all day except for Janine Pearce. I look through all of your paperwork's on file and you all get money from Mike merchants and some of the lobbyists are in the room. I know there are a lot of families who have who have their family assets tied to these oil investments. But I'm asking.
Speaker 6: For you all to to.
Speaker 4: Think.
Speaker 6: 1/2 outside of your donors, outside of Mike Murchison and all your.
Speaker 4: Friends and our friend.
Speaker 6: The former.
Speaker 4: Mayor. I'm asking you to think about future generations, because, folks, we're here at California, which was on fire last year. I don't know if you guys caught that.
Speaker 6: We are a beach city.
Speaker 4: And the sea level is going to rise. Wall is go is going to raise worldwide. And where we're at right now is our hand is on the thermostat. And we have to ask ourselves the question, how much harder do we want to make it in here? It was 105 degrees last November. That's the earth itself speaking to us, Long Beach, what are you going to do with that? Fossil fuels and so.
Speaker 6: Are we going to listen to the.
Speaker 4: Earth or we're going to listen to Mike Murchison and the mayor and all of the investments that are tied up in Wells Fargo, all of the investments that are tied up against our future. I don't know about you all, but I have a future to believe in. And that means that we have to take our money out of fossil fuels. We have to act as if we accept climate change as real. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, city council and mayor. I'm Dr. Wendy Griffin. I'm one of Al Gore's climate reality leaders. I've owned a home and lived in Long Beach in the Rose Park District for 24 years. And I've had the privilege of kayaking through the wetlands.
Speaker 5: Like probably all climate activists.
Speaker 6: I want us off of fossil fuels. And when I first read about this proposed project in the press telegram, I had a letter to the editor printed to that effect. Since then, I've had the opportunity to learn more details about this project, and I now support it. And I want to tell you why. Then three reasons. First, much as I want to leave our fossil fuels in the ground immediately tonight.
Speaker 5: Realistically, I know.
Speaker 6: That there needs to be a period of transition to clean energy. Ideally, this is going to have to include using low carbon intensive fuel. That's exactly the kind of fuel that we're talking about in the project today. The carbon intensity of this fuel is about half of what the rest of California, the fuel, the oil and the rest of California is. And almost one fifth of what it is in many places in the world. So although no oil is clean oil, this is possibly less dirty oil. Ideally, this transition would also include cogeneration systems that capture and use excess heat generated during electrical production. And this plan also does that. Second, long term, it's estimated the microgrids, like the proposed system, will eventually replace extensions of the current dirty grid because the key advantages they offer in resiliency in response to local conditions. This is 21st technology that we should be encouraging. Third, if the options are to leave the wetlands polluted and riddled with outdated and potentially dangerous pipelines and wells, or have a fully restored wetlands return to the city in exchange for city parasols. Approximately 1/10 of the size that they're talking about being traded. I believe that the only rational choice is trade. The Last Surrender Wetlands Trust Board apparently agrees with me because I got that letter this morning, along with, I understand, the internationally known biologist, Erikson. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Carol Meyer. I am a homeowner and board.
Speaker 6: Member of the House of.
Speaker 5: A very little community, often unknown and forgotten sometimes of island village, which is in the very southeastern corner of Long Beach bordering SEAL Beach. We are.
Speaker 6: Very fortunate that this wetlands is in.
Speaker 5: Our backyard, literally, and we love it. Many of our homeowners are members of the Wetlands Trust.
Speaker 6: We participate.
Speaker 9: In a lot.
Speaker 5: Of the activities, and we're thrilled if this project gets approved and expands the wetlands. In addition to the fact that it will improve the.
Speaker 6: Entrance into.
Speaker 5: That corner of Long Beach, it's a major.
Speaker 6: Entrance from the south. And frankly, what someone else used a word tonight, an eyesore. And we believe that this will significantly improve that entrance.
Speaker 5: And I would like to thank our councilwoman.
Speaker 6: Susie Price, because she does know that island village exists.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening.
Speaker 6: Mayor Garcia and Council Members Vice Mayor Richardson. My name is Melinda Cotton. The project before you.
Speaker 5: Tonight is incredibly complex.
Speaker 6: And has a multitude of worrisome elements.
Speaker 5: You've heard a number of those.
Speaker 6: However, due to time constraints, I will focus on a serious concern about the financial viability of this project. Some of the corporate realities as it relies on the price of oil remaining at a profitable level for more than 40 years. However, oil prices are extremely volatile, as you've heard. Reliance on oil is fading. Oil prices were down at, I believe.
Speaker 5: 30 a barrel just in January a year ago. And while I'm sure the applicants.
Speaker 6: Are sincere in their efforts to combine profit with restored wetlands.
Speaker 5: What happens if that doesn't work out? What if the.
Speaker 6: Applicant finds that it is not a profitable endeavor and either abandoned said or worst case declares.
Speaker 5: Bankruptcy?
Speaker 6: It seems the area might be left in a worse state than it is today, and we see that the named applicant is not lion management, which owns the pumpkin patch property. Nor wetlands property owner synergy. Oil and gas. But a separate limited liability company, Peach Oil Minerals Partners LLC, which is identified by the Secretary of State as a Delaware entity. We understand limited liability companies are created for different projects to protect the partners and deal with legalities and financial arrangements. But when there are problems, we're also told it's hard to locate them and it's not lion. So that's a concern. I previously ask in letters to the to the attorney, city attorney two to the Planning Commission when I spoke there and to Assistant Manager Tom Mordecai as to shouldn't have this city to protect the taxpayers and the city itself have complete insurance policy performance bond. Something similar of that. Shouldn't there be specific goals, performance goals and measurements of progress? And shouldn't there be a bailout option? I'm a little confused. I never heard back except from Tom Oracle, who said that this was a.
Speaker 5: Private entity.
Speaker 6: And that they would look into the question. I've still not received answers. However, the applicant's representative mentioned some type of performance bond. So if the city has some protection, some insurance, some assurance that for 40 years this company is going to exist and be able to fulfill its obligations, I would.
Speaker 5: Like to know about them because I think it's really important. Thank you for your attention and I.
Speaker 6: Hope we can understand that situation more fully.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Hi. I'm cautiously and my address is on file and I'm a member of Carp. I'm the secretary of Carp. I'm here to speak on this. As opposing this project, I think we would all like to see the eyesore of the old oil wells removed. That's universal. And restoration is a good thing. And I saw a lot of things up there in that presentation where I thought the vision was good. But the question would be whether the market in place in 40 years is going to bear that out. Reportedly, there are only 3% of our wetlands left on our coast and precious little habitat remains that is natural to the area. As the stewards of this precious resource. It is our grave responsibility to protect it for future generations because of the damage oil does to our environment. We are moving towards solar and wind powered technologies. It seems likely that oil will be less in demand in the near future. The emissions make it not only undesirable as a fuel but damaging to our environment and a chief culprit in global warming. And this brings me to my main concern with respect to this proposal. And it's really the plan that this goes out 44 years. The first five years that I saw presented here looked appealing and looked like that's doable. They are standing up to saying, here's a deliverable and here's a timeframe on it. Now, there's no detail behind that. You know, I managed compliance for years in aerospace. And this is not enough information to judge compliance. You would need a plan, you would need detail, you would need dates, and you would need that commitment before you actually go into investing in this kind of a venture. I would like to see the cleanup front loaded into the schedule, and I did see some of that. Here tonight, although telling me that half of it will be gone and 20 years is way too vague. In 20 years, who knows if we're going to have oil as a major player in the environment? It's a very generous schedule to give someone 40 years to clean up. You know, the the pumpkin patch and the rest of it. A lot can happen in that stretch of time. Oil may become obsolete as a fuel. The price of oil may fluctuate, making it impractical to drill last may be enacted to force us to give up our dependance on oil. Cars may shift to solar power, and that's not a dream. That technology was successfully developed over 30 years ago. Any of these possibilities can lead this company to bankruptcy and abandonment of the site. And it seems there is a risk that the cleanup may never occur or occur. So the other thing I'd like to speak, I don't have no time left. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Mr. Mayor. City council members. Thank you. As a resident of Belmont Shore, I support this project. I attended the open house that was held in October and was impressed with the event and the transparency of the information that was shared. I have recent experience within the oil and gas industry and this project with respect to restoration. New facilities will.
Speaker 4: Thereby improve the quality of life for residents and wildlife by not only allowing the restoration of these wetlands, but by using newer technology to improve safety.
Speaker 0: And reliability of current oil operations. Newer technology and industry best practices within the engineering and design phases will improve process and environmental safety. Removal of the existing oil storage tanks and pipelines will drastically improve the esthetics of the area and reduce truck traffic through pipeline transportation. I also like the idea of funding it through private investment, the establishment of a mitigation bank, as well.
Speaker 4: As continuing oil and gas operations as an.
Speaker 0: Income stream for the city to hire additional police resources if desired, much like the thumb's facilities. This project will benefit residents and visitors of Long Beach for many years to come. I am excited for the wetlands to.
Speaker 4: Be restored and be able to walk out on new public access.
Speaker 0: Trails. As a Belmont Shore resident. I would suggest that a resident be permanently assigned to all has up and.
Speaker 4: Risk.
Speaker 0: Assessment activities throughout the design and engineering phase of this project. Please, I strongly support this project. Look forward to participating and hope for quick approval. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Hello. My name is Elizabeth LAMB, and I'm executive.
Speaker 5: Director of the Lost Cerritos.
Speaker 9: Wetlands Land Trust.
Speaker 5: It took us a while, but we have come to a place where we support this project.
Speaker 9: Because it includes comprehensive wetlands and habitat restoration.
Speaker 5: Provides public access.
Speaker 9: Opportunities and.
Speaker 5: Consolidates oil.
Speaker 9: Operations offsite, and will transfer ownership of a substantial portion of low street US wetlands into the public domain. Those are all things for.
Speaker 6: Which we have long.
Speaker 9: Advocated over.
Speaker 5: The course of our research. The beach.
Speaker 9: Oil mineral has been a transparent and and.
Speaker 5: Has been responsive through our review process where we have.
Speaker 9: Asked them many questions and many detailed questions and.
Speaker 6: We always got back answers.
Speaker 9: From them. That helped us understand the project. In addition, as this project has implemented, beach oil Mineral has committed to involving us the land trust.
Speaker 6: In order to.
Speaker 5: Ensure we are fully.
Speaker 9: Updated and involved.
Speaker 6: As the project moves.
Speaker 5: Through its review.
Speaker 6: Process. Furthermore, as a.
Speaker 5: Result of.
Speaker 9: Our conversations.
Speaker 5: With the.
Speaker 9: Beach Oil Mineral Team and advice from our soil and water consultant, we have been promised a thorough and transparent process regarding the assessment and removal of onsite hazards and contamination. This will ensure there will be no site contamination of the wetlands as the land transitioned from oil.
Speaker 5: Operations.
Speaker 9: To conservation. One of the things I want to emphasize is.
Speaker 5: The role of us as a watchdog.
Speaker 9: In this process. We've been promised full communication, full.
Speaker 5: Access.
Speaker 9: To the information we need.
Speaker 5: To ensure that this.
Speaker 9: Project benefits the wetlands. And if I might say to everyone in the room, our role as watchdogs and advocates for the wetlands will never cease. And while there are people in this room that disagree with.
Speaker 5: How we view this project, we ourselves will.
Speaker 9: Remain committed to protecting the wetlands and restoring them as habitat for future generations to enjoy.
Speaker 5: As well as.
Speaker 9: Fragile endangered species. Thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Connie Warner and I live at Belmont Shores Mobile Estates. I'm here to support the wetlands restoration. I'm a native, grew up here and lived here 40 years. I moved for work and moved to Atlanta, Georgia, not realizing the importance of wetlands until I established myself a National Wildlife Federation certified backyard wildlife habitat providing food, water and shelter for wildlife in our area and a place to raise their young. When we retired, we came back home. We came back to Long Beach and I was pleased to see our remaining Lazaridis wetlands had not been developed. My husband and myself feel very fortunate to have our home overlooking the wetlands and steam shovel slew. We watch great white egrets knowing egrets, great blue herons, osprey cormorants, pelicans diving, diving for their food and many other types of waterfowl. Wouldn't it be wonderful for the local children and residents or whoever is visiting to be able to see these beautiful birds on a path going around the wetlands and an education center to educate and appreciate how important the wetlands are to our area and wildlife. If it wasn't for the oil production or remaining wetlands would have been lost a long time ago to development. I am a member of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust and would appreciate and support their recommendations and would appreciate a yes vote. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, mayor and members of the city council. I thank you all for being here tonight. And I mean all of you. I guess maybe you've had this means you've had your flu shots. Everyone's here. And I appreciate all the audience behind me who is here tonight. So many citizens willing to take the time to come out and talk about and listen to this subject. A lot has come to light just tonight. I want to see the wetlands restored. I guess everybody here does. It's it's a great thing. And I hope that there's a way that it happens. And you've heard some of the concerns tonight. And I hope that this remains an open and transparent process. I hope that some of these concerns actually, all of them I hope all of them are addressed. But as is appropriate now and in the days following, rather than simply approve the plan and just wait for it to go to the Coastal Commission and be addressed there. There's no need to wait. And in waiting that would only invite delays and appeals. And I hate to see a delay. So I hope the openness and transparency continues and that these concerns are addressed. I'm here to report to you a factor that hasn't been mentioned yet tonight, I don't believe and that concerns new information and air deals with all the information presented at the time. But new information that comes after that air needs to be considered. Also, this new information concerns the Newport-Inglewood fault. And this was a report that I read in the L.A. Times in March 21st of last year. If people want to look it up and read it, it's a report of some research that was done by scientists at CSU Fullerton and also the U.S. Geological Survey. They did some research in the wetlands and took core samples and discovered that there was evidence of three earthquakes on this fault, all of which were bigger than the earthquake that struck Long Beach in 1933. These were so violent that they caused the land to subside as much as three feet in just a matter of seconds. Now, these were long ago, of course, these were ancient earthquakes. But as we all read from time to time, we're due for the big one. We don't know when it's going to happen. But their research indicates that really we are due and these large earthquakes can occur with much more frequency than was thought before. Well, this is kind of new information and should be considered, and I think this needs to be factored in again, rather than simply wait for it to get to coastal where it certainly will be considered there. So please address it now. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. Thank you for letting me speak. My name is Dr. Gary Stickle, and I'm not here to talk about the merits of the project. I am here to talk about who the true indigenous people Native Americans are of this area. I got my Bama and to UCLA and I taught there as well. And I've been studying local Indian people for 50 years. So I know what I'm talking about. I've had my research verified by the major archeologists of Europe. Professor Colin Renfrew, University of Cambridge, who got the London Times to announce our discovery of the oldest site in this area, the Farpoint site, which was in the Chumash tribal area on Point Tomb and Malabo. Also the Smithsonian. Our National Museum has verified my research, so I know what I'm talking about. I was asked to speak here tonight by Chief Ernest Salas, who graces this proceeding and is sitting up there. The true indigenous people of this area, called the Keech, spelled cases the age they were first encountered by the Spanish in 1771. What we call Whittier Narrows. And then they established a concrete outpost. Initially, the Spanish call them K'iche because the people call themselves Kage, but they have Spanish sides that you can't keep your nose like Angelina's. Then one day when the mission was washed out, they two years later they moved to five miles north to where it is today and San Gabriel. And initially there they were called Keech, which is verified by a book by a padre there in 1909, fathers who grant us, but eventually they call them gatherer lentils, which is not what the tribe likes because it's the name given to them by their conquerors. And so their name is stuck with them, unfortunately. But the name was first published in 1846 by Horatio Hill, the United States government, and then by the Smithsonian and other major scholars of that century. And what I want to announce to you tonight is that the state of.
Speaker 0: California only.
Speaker 4: Recognizes the Keech, and this is because vast areas, the Keech covered vast areas. I want to show you a map. Official tribal map. Investir is the whole top of the map is the San Gabriel Mountains, which is considered sacred.
Speaker 0: By the new American Areas.
Speaker 4: Commission. And all this area off your shore here is sacred to the case. It's called a sacred sea of Kish, recently approved by the state of California's Native American Harris Commission. No other tribe. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Mayor. Council members.
Speaker 2: Thank you for having me tonight.
Speaker 4: My name's Kyle, sir, and.
Speaker 2: I'm speaking as vice president of land management. I just wanted to address two comments.
Speaker 4: Briefly made by Ms.. Cantrell and others. First being the use of pesticides. In 2008, we acquired the property in 2011.
Speaker 2: So the use of pesticides in 2008 wasn't under our jurisdiction or anything that we had involvement in. Nor are we using pesticides, nor we use them since we acquired the property in 2011. So just wanted to make that you guys aware of that.
Speaker 4: And second being the use of grading equipment, I believe there was calls made to the city within the last week. I want to just confirm with you guys that there is no band, no work, no grading work done on the pumpkin patch site.
Speaker 2: And I'm here to speak to that on the record. So thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, everyone.
Speaker 0: Mr. Mayor, city council people. My name is Pedro Jose.
Speaker 4: Melendez, and I'm a Pueblo Indian. I've been living here in California for almost 63 years. I'm 70 years old. I went to Cal State, Long Beach, and I'm not here to debate whether you will approve this or not or whether you should or you shouldn't. But please consider the request of Chairman Salas. One of the things that's most important to me is because I've studied our culture and I've been working on the issues of identity theft, is to expose this so called Tribe Called the Tongva. I known for at least 25 years. I've seen the light through the created fake news out of Cal State Long Beach. I live with you are catching them. I am finished near to Kasztner. Yet to hear you.
Speaker 0: I am from San Juan Capistrano.
Speaker 4: Where they are catching them gave birth. There's a lot of lies going around. Fake news doesn't exist in Washington, D.C. Fake news exists here at Cal State, Long Beach. And you will see in the future how many of these people will be exposed, because we have a national effort to expose to all these fake betrayers of truth and justice. And one of them is the Tongva. Please vote with your heart as it comes down to this question of whether you should have these wetlands or not. To me, there's an interest because it's healing Mother Earth. But what's most important to me is that you become knowledgeable of what's going on in your own city, in your own Cal State, and act with consciousness. Because one.
Speaker 0: Thing we know as Pueblos is that we're living in an era of.
Speaker 4: Truth. This is the six generational text, the soul, where the truth will come above the lies.
Speaker 0: And you will see it. You will see what.
Speaker 4: Happens in the next few years. Thank you very much. And I know you have a difficult task before you, but I appreciate you giving us the time. Please, Mr. Mayor, read that folder that Chairman Salazar gave you. You will find all of these so created leaders of this Tonga group. And they can be exposed and they will be. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Message to congratulate Maldonado's Ibarra Karam Jeremie my retire retirement. He Garbarino. Good evening. You know, I saw things going on about the wetlands, and I saw the call to action that was put out there by several people. And at first, my first response or my first thought was to come over here, go to these actions. Say No pipe, no pipelines, keep the oil in the soil. Black snake killers. You know, I've been I I'm a great grandmother. And I answered one of the.
Speaker 5: First calls to Standing Rock.
Speaker 6: But I only answered it when we were asked to go there. I didn't take it upon myself. I know my first reaction was, no, this can't happen. And after taking the time to educate myself, read everything, read as much as I could. I have to say, yes, we need this project. We need to clean up those wetlands. And if this is a start, this is a baby step, it needs to happen. All this pollution and desecration of our lands didn't happen overnight, and it's not going to get fixed overnight. But we need to begin that process and we need to work together on it. We need to ask the city of Long Beach. We need to ask the oil companies. We need to ask all related indigenous people of this area and anyone else who has who's involved, who is here to preserve their land for future generations, for their children's and grandchildren's, for everyone to come. We need to work together. We need transparency in what's going on with this project. We need to support each other because if we don't, who's going to support us? We're all we have. This is the only world we have. Protect our mother. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 6: Let's have a council. Have a mayor.
Speaker 9: Garcia, thank you for having me. Thank you for having all of us. And also, as one also addressed the audience and saving you, everyone who's here tonight for being here, I think.
Speaker 6: We can all agree that we really want progress. We really want.
Speaker 9: Progress in growth for Long Beach. I agree. I'm right there with you.
Speaker 6: I love my beach.
Speaker 5: Group in the same district.
Speaker 9: And I student went to college by high school, great school, great music program, great academic school. Anyway.
Speaker 5: I also got my B.A..
Speaker 9: At UC Irvine and I was before that at Lumberjack City College. And you remember you coming Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 5: There and speaking.
Speaker 9: To our policy program there. And I appreciate that. That's great. But I'm not here to speak on behalf of my piece. I'd agree that. But I'm here to speak on behalf of this earth. Right. This Mother Earth.
Speaker 5: And we're just coming past this three day weekend honoring the great Martin Luther King Jr.
Speaker 9: And he was.
Speaker 6: A man that we honor. Why? Why? Why is it. Why is it such a special day to be on of that man? Because he stood up for what's for what's.
Speaker 9: For what was right in the darkest the.
Speaker 6: Darkest time in our history. He stood for what was right.
Speaker 5: And so in that honor and that spirit, I'm.
Speaker 9: Here to speak on behalf of this.
Speaker 5: Earth, this earth, this beautiful, sensitive earth. And as we know, this dark time, we're in it.
Speaker 9: Climate change is real.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Elliot, for.
Speaker 5: Everyone who's spoken and and brought that forth. Climate change is happening. We're seeing it in this globally, what's happening and in our nation with oil drilling, it's there so much information out there on the causes and the consequences.
Speaker 6: So I'm urging a council and mayor to really. And I agree the restoration.
Speaker 5: Yes, of course. The restoration.
Speaker 9: Yes.
Speaker 6: Or pipeline with a pipeline. Let's fix this project. Maybe this is not the project.
Speaker 9: To do that.
Speaker 5: Can we? I really I just really want to.
Speaker 9: Put that put that out there. And I hope that you hear us tonight.
Speaker 5: I'm with you, though. I'm with much progress.
Speaker 9: I'm all for that. And I.
Speaker 5: Plan to continue.
Speaker 6: Doing my degree in studying nutrition.
Speaker 9: And health sciences, public health, because.
Speaker 5: I know that's what's needed in our community.
Speaker 9: And I look forward to serving our community in that way.
Speaker 5: But anyway, thank you for listening.
Speaker 9: And I really hope that.
Speaker 5: You guys stand with Long.
Speaker 9: Beach in that light and that progression, that good progress. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's a shame Phenix in show. She needs some northern paper shushing, maybe negotiation. Okay. Good evening, everybody. My name is Cheyenne Phenix. I come from the neighboring Northern Paiute Nations. I'm representing the future generations. I am a part of the seven generations that are our native people, are indigenous people have talked about. And I want to ask for forgiveness for speaking in front of my elders who are here tonight. And I ask for the respect from them for what I'm going to say here. And as a the seventh generation who is rising in our stories have been told, but the old ways will will guide us. But at the same time, there needs to be the new the new generation that's going to come and they're going to speak out. And as my sister was saying and acknowledging that Martin Luther King Junior's birthday was yesterday and we celebrated his life. And whatever you all were doing, just know that he was there. He was standing up for our brothers and sisters who are struggling during that time. And one thing he said was that our lives begin to end the day that we become silent about the things that matter. So as you all become silent about these things that matter, the Earth is calling out our children, our great grandchildren that are coming. They're going to be crying out for clean water. They're going to be crying out for that clean air, for all the smog to go away, for the rain to come back, for the temperature to drop back to the way it should be. And as a as a person who who will soon be taking care of my elders, that that will be going on, but will won't be here anymore and that have that sacred knowledge of passing it down to me in our language and our ways. We won't have any of that anymore. We won't have any of that anymore. If there is the continuation of pipelines, if there's a continuation of funding these corporations, these people that only want that money and they don't care about your families, they don't care about this land, they don't care about any other thing but themselves. The money cause houses, things that are only temporary. But what's going to last forever is us as human beings, working together and building a future, building a clean future, a bright future for our children to come, our grandchildren to come. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week, the peace.
Speaker 4: Good evening, everyone. My name is David de la Tierra. I've lived in Long Beach for six years now. And first, I just want to thank the Kitchen Nation for taking the time to dialog with me. Unfortunately, I have to say I disagree with them. I think we cannot trust these oil companies. We've had over 600 oil spills in California since 1984. The Dakota Access pipeline hasn't even been built for a year, and it's already leaked three times, to my knowledge. So we can't trust them. And you all you people sitting here, you're responsible and you're supposed a place of power for hundreds of thousands of people and kids that are being born today, kids that will continue to be born. I know people that are pregnant. You're responsible for their lives. And when that new pipeline and the new oil drilling leaks, you're going to be responsible for their sickness and their cancer, at least partially. So I urge you to vote against it. And in regards to the jobs, how long are you going to have those jobs for and that it's creating? Those are only temporary. If you want a job, as my class has been understaffed for months. No one's come to help us. So yeah, that's what I want to say about it. So I just hope you guys vote with their hearts like my sisters have said.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We have a we have about 45 minutes of public comment as well as obviously the beginning of the deliberations. So unless there's objection from the council, we're going to go down to 2 minutes. See? No objection. No 2 minutes. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you, brothers and sisters, for having me here today. And this is my prayer before I speak. Thank you for being with me today and sleeping with me and my ancestors as they would be with me as I speak to these people who hold significantly power on the moon and my family resides in prayer. They may be with me today as I speak. Thank you. So I strongly urge against and I speak on behalf of the American community here in Long Beach. I speak on behalf of of Long Beach. I was born here 20 years and watched this place go and see what's going on. And I speak on behalf of my low income community, the children they were bringing the children to come here, the people that will visit the mental health community, the homeless community of only the minority. My urge I strongly urge against this project and I urge that you analyze, you understand that these risks are not worth taking. They're not not worth it. It's like seeing a bottle of prescription pills and you see all the side effects in extreme IT extremities, like heart attacks and seizures and hives and all this stuff. And you still take them. It makes some sense. And I strongly urge against this project just by having you have to prove you have evidence that is a gas and showing you what what this could do and even if it were to happen or not. And why why would you take that risk? Why would you put hundreds of people's lives at risk? And you have that decision. You have a choice to make. And I can tell you what you're going to do. I am not going to even in the reading to. But I pray that you make a wise decision today. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Speaker Hey, good day. My name is Matthew Cheatham, as I'm the son of John two, Thomas Elder, the coach, Gavilan O'Bannon, mission ends and muscle nephew to our chief, Ernie Salas. I also act as the biologist for the tribe. We are. The reason why our tribe is involved in this is because we participated through the AB 52 process, the 11 entities that were contacted. It was up to them to participate and it seems that only two responded and we were one of them. So that's some of the reasoning of why there weren't other tribal governments responding at this time. So to clear that up from our perspective, our tribal government perspective being this is our tribal area, we feel that the restoration of the wetlands is a something that we've been wanting for a long time. And we, too, have a distrust of how our land has been treated and how our land is restored. We truthfully don't feel it can be restored because it's already been degraded to a point of of just pretty much it's an example now of a wetland, not an actual functioning wetland where, you know, our tribe feels that we our generation needs to now participate in these actions so that we can provide information such as the Monitor, Pinoys, the Cisco turbines, all the flavonoids, all the components, the phytochemicals that are found in our plants that our families use for the medicines and for our foods, things that heal our land. And we feel that adding these components to the land, the healing components, will also help to heal our community together. So the allowance of the future communities to be able to interact with the creator's creation is something that we promote and then that we support, and that's what we feel is going on with this project. And so that's why we as a tribal government are bound to protect and preserve these natural resources as well as any cultural resources that may be uncovered during the process.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next, please. Your Honor, City Council.
Speaker 6: My name is Jim Beebe. I'm from the Disney Nation.
Speaker 4: Oh, yeah. To hear you know.
Speaker 6: I'm not sure. The owner.
Speaker 0: Of a of the right buffalo film.
Speaker 8: Studio we.
Speaker 4: Do documentaries.
Speaker 6: Can open.
Speaker 4: Here in regard.
Speaker 6: To my friends or the Quiche Nation. And I've been hearing.
Speaker 0: All of this negativity. And what I would.
Speaker 4: Like to do and I'm saying.
Speaker 6: This in front of you.
Speaker 4: I would like.
Speaker 6: To donate.
Speaker 0: The cameras, the.
Speaker 6: Time and everything in regard to creating.
Speaker 4: A documentary.
Speaker 0: So that.
Speaker 6: The truth.
Speaker 4: Will come out. Oh, yes. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and councilmembers. My name is Eric, guys. I'm a resident here in Long Beach. I'm also a consultant to this project. My company develops and finances clean energy projects, and we were retained for that purpose with this project. I'm also a climate activist. So just to be clear with you guys, there's nobody that wants to control fossil fuel emissions and bring climate change under control more than me in this room. And I imagine many of you before me and certainly behind me. So I want to raise two points for you guys tonight that are worth highlighting here that tend to get glossed over in a project like this. One is the complaint. This is a precursor, but the company coming to us is highly unusual in the industrial corporate world, asking us to design an energy system that reduces pollution to the maximum extent possible. So this is corporate responsibility in an unusual way, and I wanted to highlight that. So how did that manifest? It came about it. It resulted in the microgrid, the design of the microgrid that you guys have heard about a couple of times. Well, what in the world is a microgrid? Why is that important? The end result.
Speaker 0: Is it reduces.
Speaker 4: Emissions by tens of thousands of pounds. And it's evidenced by this this book, an international bestseller vetted by experts all over the world, the solar system, the co-generation turbines and the microgrid system itself. The final point I want to make is we're sitting on low carbon oil here in Long Beach. This oil field is at about six. It's these are units of measure grams of carbon dioxide. It's at a six. The average in California is 12. The carbon that comes out of the tar sands in Canada is 24. So what I'm saying to you is the California Air Board has vetted this in great detail with a great deal of environmental input and support from multiple groups, and found that the oil here is substantially less in terms of its carbon intensity. And I apologize for going over my title.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and Counsel. My name is Bruce Bullock. I am also a consultant to the Beach Oil Minerals team here. I am currently a professor of energy management at Southern Methodist University in Dallas and also director of the Maguire Energy Institute. But I'm here representing myself tonight. I actually got involved in this support of this project at the encouragement of my students, several of which live here in Long Beach and are very interested in this project. I've been involved in urban drilling issues both in New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Oklahoma and now California. And I guess one clear message I have is there have been very few projects.
Speaker 0: That I have been.
Speaker 4: Involved with or seen that are as well thought out as this one is, and that is on a global basis. First, the eventual footprint of this down to ten acres and the engineering done in terms of the surface equipment to minimize that surface. I haven't seen that virtually anywhere. Second, all of the containment that's done in subsurface structures, that's a best practice that you won't see anywhere outside of California. Those kind of containment structures elsewhere are usually just walls around the wells themselves. Finally, I concur with most of the other speakers here.
Speaker 0: Of the.
Speaker 4: Environmental benefits associated with it the low carbon oil.
Speaker 0: The replacement of all unregulated.
Speaker 4: Equipment with new equipment that is actually new source performance standards were passed in 2015, all of which will be applied to the new equipment on this project. And I appreciate your listening to me here tonight. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Nick Speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, counsel. My name is Johnny Bloomberg and I'm actually currently a resident of Los Alamitos, but I'm originally from Long Beach near Long Beach State. And as a kid, I would always ride my bike from the summers area next to the wetlands on the bike path to SEAL Beach. And I also have a small boat and Syria is bigger marina directly across from the Synergy Property. I'm currently a student at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, studying finance and energy management as well. And part of my study is includes understanding the science, economics and operations related to energy management or energy production. And with this education, I have a greater appreciation of the idea of updating infrastructure in order to promote safety and cleanliness. I also think it's a great idea to consolidate existing operations and minimize the impact of producing a resource that allows every single person in this room to live a comfortable and safe life. As there's been a lot of time hiking at the Bolsa Chico Island just south of here, and I would love to have something similarly right in our backyard. I think my whole life, wondering about the theory, those wetlands and the idea of finally bringing them to life really excites me. As a local resident and a student of energy, I strongly believe that the approval of this project will bring numerous benefits for years to come. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: The keynote speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor Council. My name is Tina Phifer. I'm the president of Glen Lucas Associates, and our firm has had the privilege of working on this project for over five years with the current landowner. Prior to our involvement with this landowner, we also worked with the prior one, and our unique perspective on this project has always been on how to restore the wetlands. And so our objective was to create a restoration plan that was part of the Environmental Impact Report that looked at how best to do it, what are the best methods, how to restore it in such a way that minimizes the temporary impacts? All of these things went into our restoration plan that has been not only peer reviewed, but is undergoing the current review process with all of the federal and state agencies. And I bring this up because there are a couple of things I want to hit on tonight that were raised by the public as far as concerns go
Speaker 6: . Number one is.
Speaker 5: What happens to the restoration of the the funding for the oil operations goes away. And the answer to that is there is a performance bond that has to be posted by this applicant at the outset of the restoration. So whether or not the oil operations carries through as planned or goes away, the performance bond is in place to make sure that once it's kicked off, it doesn't stop. We have to maintain performance standards. We have to report to the IRS for five continuous years in order for the wetlands credits to be released. So that's the answer to that first question. The second one is how is this project going to fund the long term management of those restored wetlands? It's equally important to us to see the implementation. But once we're gone and off the site after five years, we want to make sure that these wetlands also stay in the high functioning habitat that they are once they're signed off. After five years. So the answer to that question is that the applicant also will be establishing and funding an endowment, and that endowment will be given to the low street as wetlands authority for the long term management. And those are just the two things I wanted to address. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thanks so much.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and Council.
Speaker 0: I'm Tony Blomkamp. I'm senior biologist and wetland.
Speaker 4: Specialist at Glen Lucas Associates. And I had the great privilege of being part of the team that designed the Wetland Restoration Team and was just speaking about it.
Speaker 0: I actually want to speak to you.
Speaker 4: In a different capacity tonight. I'm a I've been an instructor in the Environmental Studies Program at Cal State Fullerton for the last 24 years. So I hope you don't hold being a titan against me. I am teaching at Cal State Fullerton. For the last 24.
Speaker 0: Years, I've developed three courses for the Graduate Environmental Studies programs.
Speaker 4: One of them is Conservation of Migratory Birds. I just finished it last semester. It's probably my favorite course to teach. And what you what I've learned in teaching this class is.
Speaker 0: How are the world population of birds?
Speaker 4: Continues to decline for many reasons. For many, many reasons. But we do know that the loss of wetland habitat has been a significant issue in that this.
Speaker 0: Is an incredible.
Speaker 4: Opportunity, a really unique opportunity to begin the process of restoring the whole Los Cerritos wetland complex.
Speaker 0: And we're starting off with, you know, the first 75 acres.
Speaker 4: Then there'll be another 75. And as you as you, you, I'm sure you're aware that it's just a matter of stepping stones.
Speaker 8: You know, the.
Speaker 4: Rest of the wetlands are in Long Beach and then over to Hellman, and over time, we're going to end up.
Speaker 0: With many hundreds of new wetlands that will be.
Speaker 4: Really important along the Pacific Flyway and will be significant in maintaining the populations of of our of our waterfowl, shorebirds, past rains, raptors, you know, across the entire suite of, of our fauna. So again, I just, just thank you for listening to everyone tonight and please approve this project.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 6: Next speaker can we say resident of the first district and I've been appointed to speak on behalf of the Gray Panthers tonight who are supporting this project.
Speaker 5: Wendy Griffith pretty much said everything that we espouse in terms of the preservation of this land and supporting this project.
Speaker 6: What I'd like to address is the earth when I was little, although I always used to be open, and since when I had children, there became this thing of nature deficit kind of unawareness of their native environment. And the restoration of the.
Speaker 5: Wetlands is something we desperately need for our young people. I first met Erickson when I took a group of kids from the Boys and Girls Club out to one of his restoration projects.
Speaker 6: And the kids were so fascinated and engaged in what.
Speaker 5: Was going on with a natural environment, but many of them who lived in low income housing didn't have access to a yard.
Speaker 6: Or natural things to explore and parents.
Speaker 5: Working three jobs. Their parents had no time to take them anywhere.
Speaker 6: Our youth need a safe place where they can go and explore and learn.
Speaker 5: About our natural environment so they can grow.
Speaker 6: Up to protect our earth. And we can have a restful place that protects our birds and our ocean and wildlife that live in that area. So we encourage you to support this project as we do. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name is Andrew Carroll. I live in Long Beach, California. Thanks. I want to thank the council, the mayor, vice mayor for the time. I want to thank the audience. Everyone's been listening to both sides tonight very silently. I think that's very respectful and it bodes well for our community and our ability and our democracy. And I appreciate that. I think the city council has done a tremendous job in allowing equal time to both sides of divide presentations, and I appreciate that as well. It is in the interest of sort of being consistent with that ethic that I find it a little unfortunate that one native group was invited to speak, that they were given 5 minutes of official time in order to speak in favor of the proposal, and that I'm sure it didn't mean to come across this way, but that did come across as if they were representative of the entire native interest. So I want to speak to that ambiguity. I think that could have mainly been done a little bit better. There might have been some time to find some other native groups who clearly tonight showed up. And I also want to thank individual indigenous people for coming and speaking on both sides of this issue, and I hope to see more of that. And I just wish that there would also been time for maybe 5 minutes of a different group. I had one friend leave actually, because she she deeply felt after hearing the support from the during the 5 minutes that that she felt ethically ambiguous herself about where to stand on this issue. Because for a lot of us, it is a deep issue to hear indigenous people come out in support of this. We really respect that and we don't want to, even if we personally disagree, we give space for that and we want to say, do what you want because we respect that. So to have one group speak in support and make it look, and I'm sure with an intangible the ambiguity was there that it might be indicative of the entire community creates that ambiguity and creates a lot of it for us. A lot of us in this room, some tension. Lastly, I think during the rebuttal phase, there was a comment made by the speaker during her initial rebuttal that came across as very kind of threatening. I'm sure I don't need to recall it. I think we might remember it that if this didn't pass, that they would just keep using defunct equipment to drill and do whatever they wanted. I think that's a regrettable statement. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thanks, Speaker. Good evening. My name is Steve Brothers. I'm live in Councilman Councilwoman Price's district, the third district. I want to frame my comments with a quote by a great man. I think you'll all recall excuse me, last June when President Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement. So this is a quote. In a statement released Thursday, Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia called the move a huge step backwards for America. I have joined mayors across the country to work towards adopting the global agreement on our cities, he said in a statement as a coastal city. We must fight for our future and the next generation. I mentioned that just to concede that I do understand that this is a council that cares about the climate crisis in earnest, that you the city does have a sustainable city action plan and tries to act in accord with A, B and SB 32. I acknowledge that my comments, though, are in opposition. I'd like to just point out that the plan's proponents downplay risks and dismiss concerns related to climate as insignificant. But if you read the draft Environmental Impact Report and the concerns put forward and the response by the Coastal Commission and other environmental groups, it becomes clear that this is all a giant and convoluted mitigation scheme. The word mitigation appears.
Speaker 4: Over and over and.
Speaker 0: Over again as the emissions from the project equal are the emissions from the project equal to 11,000 cars per day on our roads for the 40 year endurance of the program. The they respond, basically conceding that that's the case and say, yes, but this is they dismiss the issue because of cap and trade schemes. In other words, the problem is real. But they will buy pollution allowances to offset it per the COD procedures and guidelines. So another question, is bump going to finance the restoration with the wetlands mitigation? Well, sort of. It's a way of financing it with this mitigation back. And this allows developers to buy the right to damage or destroy natural functioning wetlands elsewhere. Remember, according to a Cal State University system study, 90% of California's wetlands are already gone. The scheme is a cynical shell game of shuffling destruction around. What about the Newport-Inglewood fault? No problem. Proponents assure us the drilling sites are not in the fault zone. Never mind that the LC site is only 200 feet outside the technical parameters of the fault zone and the Newport Inglewood fault does bisect the project area and they do plan to run a pipeline over it. So what about the spill danger? Well, yes, the worst case for the site would be 61,000 barrel spill. The worst case that the pumpkin patch would be a 5000 barrel spill. Worst case that the pipeline over the city property would be a 30,000 gallons spill. Thank you, sir, so much. In terms of please keep it in mind. Thank you very much. Thanks, Speaker.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Hi, Mr.. Mayors, the members of city council. Gary Shelton, 27 year resident of Long Beach. My address is on file. I've known all of you for a long time. I've known Ann Cantrell for a long time. I've known Joe Weinstein for a long time. I've known Cat and Chuck Moore for a long time. But I don't know a whole lot about is this project. But I come down here because I know these folks don't come down here on a whim. If Ann Cantrell and Joe Weinstein say there's something wrong with an air, that it has flaws, then you know something? The history at this diocese should tell you that it has flaws. Thank you. I wish I could reiterate what they might be. I don't know. I just trust that what I wish you folks will do tonight is discuss this not only on the merits of the project, which is what they always turn to when there's a flight air. You can discuss that all you want, but talk about the air and its potential flaws or its lack of flaws because we need to hear that from you before we'll trust your decisions and then make your decision wisely, which I know you will do. You're all honorable people. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Gonzales. Sorry it's late. I saw you keyed up, and I just read your name next. We're going to keep. So I.
Speaker 4: Apologize.
Speaker 6: Hi. My name is.
Speaker 0: We're going to we're going to go ahead and keep going. I'm sorry. Please continue.
Speaker 6: Hi. My name is Cindy Koke. Not related to the brothers, but our planet is worth more than oil company profits. Let me repeat, our planet is worth more than oil company profits.
Speaker 5: Let's put a Y in front of R.
Speaker 6: Your planet is more worth.
Speaker 5: More than oil company profits.
Speaker 6: Your planet. Our planet. We're all in this together. Do you think you could start making decisions that are environmentally responsible?
Speaker 5: How is it that you think we don't need clean air and clean water to survive? Our government is our worst enemy.
Speaker 6: In this country. So sad. All of you say we're here for you. If you have any problems, let us know. Well, we're here for you. We're here now. What are you going to do about this problem? Are you going to help your constituents and the environment or the corporations? Please, please, please stop being puppets for the corporations. They are not people. And they certainly don't need clean air and clean water to survive and they don't vote. I would love to ask each of you why you went into politics.
Speaker 5: I always thought it would be to make the world a.
Speaker 6: Better place, but that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. Greed and power have taken over. So if you're hell bent on destroying our environment and cutting your life short, that's your business. Unfortunately, it can't be done without taking us with you. You are responsible for our lives. That's a big responsibility and hopefully not taken lightly. So would you could you please respect your life a little more so we can all live a happy, healthy life? I don't think that's asking too much. Stop this nonsense of trying to get every last drop of oil out of the ground. It's not going to happen. This planet, remember, years and hours won't survive. We will all be gone.
Speaker 5: I long for the day. We no longer have to fight our government.
Speaker 6: To save our environment. You live here too.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker. And before our next book goes up. So we're going to go and close the speaker's list. So we have three? Nope. Okay. We have one warrant. I'm going to close the speaker's list. If you're not in line, it will be closed. And. Okay, this is your last chance. So. Okay. So after this speaker's list is closed, officially, we have five speakers. Please.
Speaker 4: Thank you, everybody. Thank you for allowing this space to be shared. And it's time away from your families and other priorities. I want to encourage the Board to vote no without further review from the California Coastal Commission and other further detailed examinations of the Independent Environmental Review. I strongly ask for our future generations, for forgiveness, for what we haven't done to these wetlands, and ask for forgiveness for what we're about to do to these wetlands. This 20 year and this 40 year clean up project is great, but it's nothing that's going to help us now and it's not going to help our descendants. So I ask that everybody rely on the guidance, the wisdom, the fortitude of our ancestors. Black, brown, white, yellow, purple, orange. And then we asked for guidance and lessons from our descendants in whatever form and shape they may come. And so please let all love for this earth and all compassion for our community and let our courage for each other prevail. And you guys, I have a blessed decision. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 4: Next speaker. Hello. Thank you for hearing. Hearing me. My name is Winston. I've lived in Long Beach my whole life. I live in Belmont. Sure. I'd like to apologize. No, I didn't prepare anything. I wasn't planning on speaking tonight. And I'm not going to speak to the merits of the proposal. Other people have done a lot more research. Other people know a lot more than that. And we've heard from them. And we'll say, I'm inclined to trust folks who've done the research, and I'd be more inclined to trust experts who weren't being paid by a party to the to this proposal. I think there's a you know, a question of political principle at stake. I don't believe the public has been adequately informed. I mean, you know, for all that we talk about living in a cynical times and, you know, people joke about about, you know, not trusting politicians or public officials, I think overwhelmingly people do. I think people really believe that. You know, there are public officials with, you know, with state and local agencies. Their elected officials really do want what's best for them and are looking out for them. And so and so. And they trust those folks to frame the issues correctly. And so when they hear that there's this this great environmental restoration project being proposed, most of them will, you know, say, well, that's great news. And the issue I have here is that it doesn't seem to me that this is I think that's a very misleading way of framing this issue. It seems to me that this is a drilling proposal to be compensated by a restoration project. And I think if you told people that, you know, this is a drilling proposal to be compensated by some restoration, that would be having a very different discussion than, you know. Do you support wetlands restoration proposal? Proposal. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Eric Zorn, lifetime Long Beach resident. And for the first 22 years of my life, I did not know those wetlands existed for the last 23 years of my life. I have dedicated it to seeing the wetlands conserved. I'm one of the lucky ones. I have spent tens of thousands of hours in those areas. Wetlands. I know every inch, every nook and cranny. I began to explore a wild land in my own backyard. Lucky me. Now I'm sharing with my two and a half year old. We drive down Second Street and he looked at the oil fields. He goes, wetlands. And he knows that just because I've made him aware. Not everybody else gets to be aware. And I plan to dedicate tens and tens of thousands of hours of my life to making all of us aware. I think what a great success. I haven't heard anybody say they're not in support of seeing the wetlands restored here tonight. So I know I've taken many of you on individual towards the wetlands and share them with you. What a great resource for our community, for our future. And I think this is an incredible debate. And thank you for hosting it tonight. And we hope to see more opportunities for more exploration of wetlands into the future.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next figure, please.
Speaker 5: Hi. I'm from the land of the Tonga. I'm all for restoring the wetlands, but. I don't see how you can do that by putting in 120 oil and water wells. It just.
Speaker 6: I don't.
Speaker 5: Get the logic. All right. I'll be straight up.
Speaker 6: And I'm from a.
Speaker 5: Community where I'm surrounded by oil refineries. And I. I inhale all that crap. I can heal that crap. They might not inform me that they're having a flare up, but I feel it in my lungs. And I get my asthma inhaler and I just start inhaling in. Hello, Mr. Garcia? Yeah. And anyways. You know, I think you.
Speaker 6: Owe it to your constituents as well as the people who live outside.
Speaker 5: Of directly outside of Long Beach to vote against this project. You know. The refineries. I live nearby. There's always some sort of mishap going on. There's an accident, you know?
Speaker 6: How do you want to put your people in danger?
Speaker 5: I mean, a bunch of these.
Speaker 6: Oil drills and oil wells.
Speaker 5: You know, on an earthquake fault.
Speaker 6: And not to mention that.
Speaker 5: Intersection of second and. Of Second and PCH in Studebaker. I mean, it's just so there's already a lot of traffic there already. What's it going to look like when when there's all that construction there?
Speaker 6: So I so please vote against this. Do it for.
Speaker 5: The people of Long Beach.
Speaker 6: Also do it for the.
Speaker 5: Planet, because you keep saying how green and progressive long beaches show. Show us. Walk the walk, please. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next and our final speaker.
Speaker 6: We have too many open.
Speaker 4: Unanswered questions. They said this is going to happen. That's going to happen. Hey, like it said, 40 years, 40 years. You know what's.
Speaker 0: Going to happen. Just pleased to see your name for the record, please, Sir Arthur.
Speaker 4: 40 years. I you know, I'm Native American. I know we want our land clean. We want to do this. We want to renew this. We want to renew that. But we want to do it the right way. We want to do it with everything. Everything answered. Openness. We want openness. I want my grandchildren, my great grandchildren, their children to come out here. And see the wetland. But I don't want the oil. Ha, you know, pumping more oil, pumping more of this, doing this and doing that. How is that helping the land? How is that helping us at all?
Speaker 3: Yeah, but. Let me.
Speaker 0: Thank you. That concludes public comment. So we're going to continue the hearing. I want to go ahead and obviously close the public comment period of the hearing tonight. And we're going to be going into the deliberation and closing of the hearing. So to start off. Councilwoman Price, thank you.
Speaker 9: Well, thank you to everyone for being here this evening, for expressing your views both for and against the project. I appreciate the thoughtful consideration that everyone here has given to the actual proposal, and I appreciate the passions that have been expressed on both sides. I want to give a special note of thanks to our city staff. They have been working with me to understand and frame this project for over three years now, and I appreciate the guidance that that they have provided. And, you know, a lot of times we talk about analyzing the air and what's in the air. And tonight's the focus of of tonight's meeting isn't necessarily to approve or not approve the project. It's to consider the appeals and the merits of the appeals and to make a determination as to whether the Planning Commission's recommendation should be upheld. Having said that, I am very supportive of this project, but there are a few areas that I would like to talk to staff about. And I apologize in advance. I don't think the clicker is working. Unfortunately, I did this presentation during their go. Okay. During the during the comments from staff and the appellants and the public. So I apologize if there are any inadvertent errors or typos. But one of the things that was mentioned in the rebuttal of the appellants was that this is the appellant, the I'm sorry, not the appellants. The applicants are permitted to drill for oil at this site by right. So I'd like to ask staff to elaborate a little bit more on that.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Councilmember Price I can shed some light on that in terms of this site. So the project has has four pieces and according to the city's oil code of the only, there's a there's a portion of the synergy oil field site that is currently in the in the on the oil map. But quite frankly, the the the leasehold predates that. And so any of the oil drilling on hand is actually legal, non-conforming, and it doesn't meet today's oil code. But are they legally permitted to drill on the CW site? The answer is not right now, not unless a change to the oil code and the oil map are made. And same goes with the the pumpkin patch site. Okay.
Speaker 9: What about the synergy site?
Speaker 5: The synergy site, a portion of. Yes. And because they are allowed by the existing lease hold that was put into place prior to the city's oil regulations. Yes, they are.
Speaker 9: So so the answer to that question really there is there anything the city can do to preclude them from drilling for oil at their site?
Speaker 5: No. They are currently permitted to drill for oil on this energy oil field.
Speaker 9: One of the questions we've heard a lot from the appellants and I appreciate them raising this issue with me. I did have a very productive meeting with them yesterday evening. But the question is the esthetics of the area, the city's response. And by the way, I know everyone knows that URS are voluminous documents, but this volume here is just the volume dealing with the comments and the comment letters. And the Coastal Commission letter is in here. And the city's very thorough response to that is also in here. And it talks about a little bit of the esthetic features. And one of the things that we've heard is that the esthetic features will actually be more invasive in terms of the scenic visual that the public will see when they drive around the site. Can you speak to that a little bit?
Speaker 5: Sure. So the Environmental Impact Report did in a esthetics analysis as well as as well as visual simulations on all four sites. But I'm going to focus primarily on the site and the pumpkin patch site, because those are the sites of the proposed well sellers. So the actual well sellers are underground. But more importantly, the perimeter screening of each site consisting of a substantial landscape setback as well as a screen wall, would prevent passers by on the public right of way from seeing the oil operation. Furthermore, if you are on the site so the well sellers are in the ground, there are storage tanks on the CWA site toward the back. That again, would it be a screened by the wall based on the line of sight from where the person viewing the site would be on the public right of way and in relation to the position of the storage tanks at the rear of the site. And then lastly, I will mention that there are there's obviously oil drilling rigs that will be present on the site primarily during the construction. But there is a collapsible workover rig that would be visible during the maintenance of oil operations. But because it is collapsible, it will not be visible while it is not being used. So those that's a summary of the things that the public would see, essentially a screen wall and landscaping.
Speaker 9: So the the the rigs that you just mentioned, those would not be a permanent feature of either of these sites.
Speaker 5: The correct is that during construction, there is one that will be there for for the duration of construction. But the other one that's used for maintenance will not be visible because it is collapsible. Okay.
Speaker 9: We heard some questions about current risks of oil spills and what safeguards, if any, would be present in the new pipelines and the infrastructure. There's some concerns about that. Can you speak.
Speaker 5: To whether or.
Speaker 9: Not and I'm going to talk about this a little bit further, because it's actually very well documented in the staff's comments specifically to the Coastal Commission. But can you speak a little bit to this idea that this allowing this project to move forward will increase our residents and also the habitat to additional danger or risk?
Speaker 5: Sure. So in terms of when in terms of the proposed oil wells and I just want to make sure I understand the question, so please correct me if I'm going in the wrong direction here. But in terms of the proposed oil wells, there are extensive safety measures that range from whether it's its sensors, it's detectors that would have automatic shut off mechanisms during any kind of an event. So that's part of the modern safety requirements that new oil drilling facilities have to have. And if we need to get a little more technical in terms of detail, I can call on our consultant for that. With regard to the with regard to the existing oil facilities, obviously, I mean, the because they're dated, it would be hard to say what would happen during any kind of a any kind of a seismic event and how much would spill knowing that there are aboveground pipelines that that that would traverse the site that are applicant could probably also speak to the volume. I know there's been a couple of mentions. But in terms of having the new oil facilities constructed, they all have very extensive safety mechanisms built in, if you will.
Speaker 9: We talked a little bit about improvements and I appreciate Island Village who was here. They have been for years asking for sidewalks in and around their residential community. Can you talk a little bit about the bike lanes and the sidewalks and where those are anticipated to go?
Speaker 5: Sure. So an overall summary is basically that anywhere that's along a street frontage that does not already have sidewalk improvements and bike lane improvements, the applicant would be required to install those. So for example, along the Second Street frontage of the synergy oil field site, right now there is not a sidewalk, there is a compacted area where people might generally walk if they're not walking in the gutter. But they would that that would be improved. Similarly, on the south side of Second Street, where along the city property site now along the Pacific Coast Highway Frontages, there is in part already sidewalk and already bike lane. But anywhere where that needed to be improved or there was a deficient area, the applicant would basically come in and repair that to make it whole. So any frontage. So on the four sites there's if I count properly, there's eight frontages.
Speaker 9: Okay. So I just want to make sure that this project, the the approval of this project will include a sidewalk being built on Second Street from the location of the island village residential community to the Marketplace Shopping Center.
Speaker 3: But what?
Speaker 9: Because that would be along the synergy and city property.
Speaker 5: So the boundary of the city property along Second Street goes to right where Studebaker Road currently terminates. So I believe there is a gap on Second Street between that and Island Village, if I'm correct. So it would not extend all the way, but it would go all the way from Shopkeeper Road to the point at which Studebaker Road terminates.
Speaker 9: Excellent. Thank you. I think we're going to have some new city installed bike lanes that will be going at that location anyway on Second Street, Westminster.
Speaker 5: That's correct.
Speaker 9: Are there and this is a question that was raised by the appellants, are there going to be any chemicals injected into the ground as in addition to the water, the groundwater?
Speaker 5: As part of the applicants project description. The only thing injected into the ground is the waste water from that's pulled out of the ground during the oil extraction and any additional water that would be needed to fill the void of the extracted fluids from the from the production formation. There are no chemicals that are identified as being injected.
Speaker 9: Now, I know you mentioned or someone mentioned earlier that there are a number of regulatory agencies overseeing a project like this and allow and allowing for a review process before permits are issued. If there were to be an injection methodology used by an oil operation, is there a particular regulatory agency that would have to be notified and made aware of what is actually being injected into the ground?
Speaker 5: Yes. So the primary regulatory agency would be the California Department of Gas, Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources. So Dogger, they require any well permit a well operator to keep monthly reports. They also permit the what it goes into the well they permit the what pressure it goes in and any other materials, if you will. So, yes, they are the primary permitting agency and they do regulate all of those aspects. Right.
Speaker 9: Is it possible for us to build in any sort of ongoing monitoring to make sure that the Native American archeological assets are identified and preserved should any exist at the site or any of the sites during this project?
Speaker 4: So, council member, I want to start by saying that's already a mitigation incorporated into this project and present in the mitigation, monitoring and reporting program. But in addition to that, we will be maintaining an ongoing relationship with the tribe that responded to the AB 52 notification and went through the formal consultation process. They will be doing the monitoring on site and then they will also be involved on the operations side because obviously the visitor center needs to give not only sort of European history, but needs to have native history and needs to give the full story of our relationship with this land today and across history. So but the formal monitoring is required within the mitigation monitoring program. But we also have that additional relationship where we're going to be working with those tribal officials on an ongoing basis to make sure that the operations of this location meet all of our our shared needs and expectations.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you. And then are there any concerns that the methodology that is going to be used is going to expose the public or the habitat that exists at the location to any risks similar to what happened in Oklahoma.
Speaker 5: So that's a that's a good question. I'll do my best. So the what happened in Oklahoma was actually the injection of wastewater into a underground reservoir, if you will, that was not a part of the production formation. So basically, in layman's terms, what was happening was wastewater from other drilling sites was being transported to the name of the particular reservoir is is escaping me I'm sorry, but was transported to this location and then injected into the ground in an A in a manner that it wasn't filling the void. In other words, it was basically injected under pressure and creating the imbalance in the undergrounds, in the underground structural integrity. And that was what was documented as causing the induced seismicity activities in this situation. And this particular project, the water re injection, is back into the production formation where the oil came from, thereby restoring the stability in the underground. In other words, you're filling the void where you created the void. And so it's just restoring the imbalance. And so that the two situations are completely different. And based on that, we do not have concerns about this being like Oklahoma. Okay.
Speaker 9: And then there was a question raised. I don't know if it was raised this evening, but I know it's been raised with me on a prior occasion. And council member Urunga and I sit on the low Cerritos Wetlands Authority. So I think we both feel comfortable with the answer to this question. But there is a question about the ownership of some parts of the land swap properties, including Steam, Shovel, Slew, and whether or not Synergy actually has the right to swap that piece of land with LCA way. Do you have any information on that?
Speaker 4: So for any application, not just this one, the project applicant has to prove either that they hold title to the property or that they have the expressed permission of whoever holds title to the property. So they demonstrated to us that they do hold title to that property. So that's sufficient for a planning application. But as you mentioned, LCA is engaging and a land transaction and that will involve a title search which I understand has already been done and other representations such to prove the ownership. So the ownership is not in dispute from the from the staff point of view. I know there were public speakers that made other representations, but we don't have any documentation to support it being in dispute.
Speaker 9: And frankly, I'm definitely not a contract lawyer here, but I would assume that if they're purporting to trade property that doesn't belong to them, it would dramatically change the terms of the contract. So I think that's that's an issue that would be litigated further down the road. So based on what I heard from staff and some of the questions that were asked by some of the points that were made by both the applicant and the appellants, I think there are some undisputed facts that that everyone here can agree to that.
Speaker 6: First of all, there's multiple.
Speaker 9: Regulatory permits that are going to be required for this project. It's really an unprecedented project in some ways because the creation of the mitigation bank, the restoration of the wetlands and oil drilling, those three components together are kind of an unprecedented combination of factors to have. And therefore, we're going to have more regulatory agencies involved with the approvals and permitting of this project and oversight than we would with any other project of this of this character, the equipment that's out there now. Oil drilling began at this site in the 1920s. The equipment there is mostly from the 1960s. There are currently zero two little safeguards in place in the event of an oil spill. That is absolutely undisputed in terms of what's going on there. Now, the pipeline that would be installed would be updated and only cross the fault line in one location as to as opposed to multiple locations, which is the reality out there today. And these are undisputed facts. These are not these are not my opinions. These are just undisputed facts.
Speaker 6: Both the low.
Speaker 9: Carbon oil.
Speaker 6: Levels are lower.
Speaker 9: Than any compared to the California average of oil operations. So I think that is also an undisputed fact. This project does not include fracking. Water is injected into the ground to replace the oil that is removed and created a void, creating a void. The pressure is monitored and will fill the void. And. There is regular reporting on what is injected into the ground by state regulatory agencies. The methodology for water injection here is different than that which was used in Oklahoma in terms of the risks and associated factors. This project includes.
Speaker 6: A berm to.
Speaker 9: Guard against the impacts of sea level rise. The response to the Coastal Commission letter from the city covers the height of the levee and the extreme water levels of 5.5 feet in the year 2100. There is always a risk.
Speaker 6: Of oil spills.
Speaker 9: With oil drilling. That is a reality. However, the risk of oil spills is less with the alternative project that's being proposed than no project at all because of the safeguards that are in place, say everyone dies.
Speaker 0: We're going to be respectful of everyone's time. We'll listen. And so now it's time for the council deliberate. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Because of the new pipeline and the trench that will be built, there is a leak detection methodology and a containment system and an emergency shutdown procedure as part of the new pipeline system. There are also secondary and tertiary containment systems built into the project to contain the spill on site should a spill occur. And in conclusion, in terms of this point that city staff made in the event of a worst case scenario spill, the total spill could be contained within the containment berm and the impacts would be less than significant. And these are the opinions of our experts, and I know some don't agree, and I appreciate and I respect that . But these are the opinions of our experts with whom we work in the city in terms of outreach efforts. This project has worked very closely with the Third District Council office to direct its outreach efforts in the communities that are most impacted by the project. Thus far, we have had meetings with the Alamitos Heights Improvement Association, Belmont Shore Business Association, Belmont Heights Community Association, Belmont Shore Residents Association. Belmont Shore. Mobil Estates. Audubon Island Village. The Chamber of Commerce. Loews Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust. They had nine meetings, which I appreciate very much. Naples Improvement Association, Naples Island Business Association, University Park Estates and the Gray Panthers. In addition, we had open tour.
Speaker 6: Hours that they hosted for several days.
Speaker 9: They also did a study session at Planning Commission where many of the people who were at the podium saying that there was not enough outreach that spoke out. So there was an August and an April planning commission study session where some of the speakers who were saying that there was not enough opportunity for public comment actually spoke . And of course there was the LCA way presentation that was done several years ago. Getting private property into public hands through a land swap is one of the goals of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority. There are 500 acres of wetlands that we want to get into public hands as best as we can. We have a limited amount of funding with which we can purchase that private land in order for us to be able to get public access and public management of some of these privately owned properties. It's important for us to have a public private partnership, and this presents an opportunity for us to do so through this land swap alone.
Speaker 6: The Lo Cerritos.
Speaker 9: Wetlands Authority will acquire 154 acres of private land in exchange for five acres of public land. And if the applicant and I want to thank my colleague, Councilman Aranda, for this, because this is something that that he and I worked very hard on with the low Cerritos Wetlands Authority negotiations, that if the applicant were to change their minds based on the price of oil or some other economic factor making this project unfeasible for them, the public will still retain steam shovels SLU, which is a huge, pristine property for the city of Long Beach. Additional project requirements that I would like to include in this motion are as follows. Within 60 days of receiving permits for this project, the applicant shall erect a decorative perimeter screen around the entire synergy site along Studebaker, Second Street and PCH. The plant. They must plant mature trees along the perimeter of all of the LC waste site along Studebaker and Second Street, where that site. Is located. And they must install hardscape, a decorative hardscape in the median area located immediately across from the LC site on Studebaker. I believe that's roughly a 200 foot or so median that we would like to be enhanced as a beautification project associated with this project. So that is my motion. I ask my colleagues to.
Speaker 6: Support this project.
Speaker 9: This is a project that many people in this room have worked for for years. It is a good project. It is our only way to restore these wetlands because they are privately owned. And but for this partnership, the owner of this property has no obligation whatsoever to restore these wetlands ever. And so the fact that they have come forward with this proposal is an opportunity. And will they.
Speaker 5: Profit?
Speaker 9: I assume so. I assume they will profit because this is not a charity organization, but the fact that they would profit anyway as an oil company but are willing to work with the city to create a win win situation where both they profit and our youth can appreciate this property as a restored wetlands habitat for generations to come is a huge opportunity for the city of Long Beach. So I thank my colleagues for listening and I ask for your support.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. The second on the motion was Councilmember Yanga.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor. And Councilmember Price, as you're as you do an excellent job in terms of not only summarizing all the issues that are before us, but also giving some additional information in regards to the pros and cons of the project as a whole. As you were speaking, I was going down my list of questions and I just kept erasing them. Just kept marking a marker. You did such a thorough job in in describing it. One of the things that you said right near the end was about the steam shovel slew. That's true. What we worked a deal with them on that was that if in the event that they were, they'd be able to continue with the project, that it becomes permanent in perpetuity. It will belong to the lawsuit. Wetlands Authority. This is Mike. This it's going to be my this is my third meeting on this as individuals in the crowd. No, I'm also a member of the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, the Wetlands Authority here, and also the Coastal Commission. So there's another opportunity that I'm going to have to listen to this discussion again. At each time that I hear it, it seems like there's is and the councilwoman mentioned it about a win win when you're looking at 154, 159 acres total and you're looking at 154 being transferred to the Wetlands Authority for keeping those wetlands and restoration and five acres remaining with the with the owner. You know what part of that deal does not not fit. Now, I understand during the course of the conversation that we had that there's a great concern about oil. There's a great concern about carbon footprints. And there's a great concern about climate change. That's that's there. That argument is always going to be there. The point is, is that what this project is going to do is that it's going to preserve what we want. Well, it's it's going to preserve that. In fact, it's going to good it's going to have wetlands. And right now, we don't have there is no access to arena. It's not it's not public. It's soon will be. Let's hope. The bottom line is that when we look at talking about our future and our future of our kids and wanting them to enjoy what Mother Earth has to offer, it's it's going to be there. Now, there may be a price. Yes, there will be. But the the overall goal, I think what we have with climate change is to get away from from fossil fuels and to get more electric. And I think that's going to happen. And that's a concern. I could see that that's one of the major concerns that we have, is that if oil loses and it has last couple of years, I mean, it went down from, what, 99 to 100 or even $110. It was at one time went down to 35. That was a major, major hit. And in fact, a lot of our city projects in entitlements had to be put on hold because of that. It's making a comeback, but not as strong as before or as anticipated. So we're still dealing with that issue in terms of price. But what we have here in this landscape opportunity is an opportunity to keep these wetlands forever in perpetuity. There is amount conservancy worked out this deal with with synergy in addition not only to to preserve the wetlands but also the rivers. Miles Conservancy gave the authority an additional $300,000 to be able to develop the wetlands by creating some passages, some walking paths, bicycle paths, and an opportunity for people to enjoy the well as well once it gets restored. So that that's the positive part of it. When it comes down to the Coastal Commission and it is going to go up to the Coastal Commission. Excuse me. Cookie cutter. Mr. Crisp there were several mentions, several references to the council commission and its appeal or what are its looking at it. And there's reference made to a letter that was included in the air. Could you summarize just briefly what that letter says in regards to the city's application? I think you're a councilmember. Your own members of the council said there were several public speakers that referenced a comment letter that was received on the draft environmental impact report from the California Coastal Commission. It came from their energy unit up in San Francisco. Staff member Kate Huckleberry. So that letter was lengthy. It spelled out every conceivable issue that needed to be addressed during the permitting process for this project. So it was helpful both to city staff and to commission staff to lay out what all of those issues were. And those issues were all responded to one by one in the air. But it also gave us an important leg up on the analysis that the commission staff has to do and the city has to assist them with during the coastal permitting process that will continue at the Commission. Some of the public speakers may have mischaracterized that letter because there was not an opposition letter. It was not the Coastal Commission stating that they are in favor or are not in favor of this project. It was them laying out all of the issues that have to be addressed during the permitting of this project. We also received and the clerk included it in your your package and an additional letter from the Coastal Commission dated January 9th of this year from Kate Huckleberry Page. Also, it spells out the process that has occurred thus far and closes with throughout the process of reviewing this proposed project. We have enjoyed a very professional and productive working relationship with your staff and look forward to continuing our coordination as we complete the steps outlined above in the future. So the Coastal Commission is our partner on this project and they will continue to be our partner. They've laid out very thoroughly for us all of the issues that need to be addressed. We've addressed those issues and we'll continue working with the staff at the Commission as it continues.
Speaker 2: Through this.
Speaker 4: Process. Thank you. Well, that sounds very encouraging because obviously, as a member of the California Coastal Commission, it is its goal to preserve wetlands and s shape whenever, whenever it can and in all places. We've had a few victories. We've had a few losses. But the bottom line is that the goal of the commission is to preserve the coast and preserve wetlands when when it can. The issue that that it raises, which concerns me, obviously, is, of course, the the increase of sea level rise and what that will do to to not only this project, but actually projects up and down the coast everywhere. It's a it's a major concern. We're looking at the possibility of close to six feet of sea level rise within the next 50 years. The only concern that I would have with that, with this project is the fact that we have the proposal, the proposal to get half of the of the project cleaned up in 20 years and then the rest of it in 40 years. I think that's a little long, frankly, myself, because we're looking at sea level rise, reaching that level in 50 years. I mean, we're almost underwater already when it comes down to, you know, by the time you finish this thing. So I'm I'm hoping that maybe we could talk to the to the applicant making it maybe a little step up the timeline a little bit so it's not as lengthy, perhaps? You know, I would prefer half, but hey, we could do it within the next 30 years. So that would be I think would be wonderful because it would it would shorten the time that we can have people enjoy the wetlands and not be underwater. I'm not being facetious. So, I mean, that's one of the things that I would like to see. And now and I hope that we're able to work that out. But again, that's going to be a discussion that the city will be having with the Coastal Commission, and I'm sure that possibly the Coast Commission will probably bring that up as a as a concern because of the of the timeline. Other than that, I don't have much else at the Councilmember Price did a stellar job in summarizing all our concerns. Like I say, and I just wanted to add a little more and that basically that that the. Three years might be too long. But I can would say one thing about the course commission. There's always it's a barricade. It's just a if you want to call it that, you have the Coastal Commission staff, which works with the applicants, and then you had the Coastal Commission, the the elected, not the elected, but the appointed body that reviews which staff does. So staff's responsibility is to work with the applicant to try to mitigate all the issues involved with any project, trying to make sure that they're addressed, to make sure that if there are concerns regarding environmentally sensitive habitat or there's spills that might be available, I mean, might be happening. That's their job. Their job is to make sure that whatever project that's going to be going before the commission, the body itself is as thoroughly reviewed and and meets all the standards of review that needs to be taken care of before it comes to the commission, so that when the commission reviews it, they make their evaluation and determine whether it's a good project or not. There has been on several occasions where staff recommendations have been overturned or not overturned, but basically opposed by the commission and vice versa, where the commission has imposed even stronger restrictions on a project. So that's still available that might that might still happen. This coastal commission that's there now is is one that's very thorough in its work. There are individuals in there who are very highly sensitive to a lot of the topics that were brought up today. For example, the the the SCA issue, the the wetlands and also about the, the concerns brought up by our by our Native American speakers who came up here in regards to the type of land that's there and the and the concern that there may be some disturbances of some burial grounds. There is, as was mentioned before, some legal considerations for that. And that's going to happen. There will be some somebody there to review that. The only concern that's been raised and I agree with it to to to a great extent, is that the the whole work, if you will, wasn't done beforehand. I mean, there is no study at the present time that indicates whether there is a burial a burial sacred ground in that area or not. And you wouldn't know until you put the shovel to the ground. And you describe you discover any kinds of remains that would determine whether it was this area, a sacred burial ground or not. That's unfortunate. But there's I think at this point, there's no other way to to find out. So there there's of course, there is what, you know, an oral history that that would determine some of that. I understand that totally, completely. But in the long term, I see this project as a again, it's a win win. It was a win win when I heard it. And the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, it was a win win when I heard it with the loss of Edo's Wetlands Authority. And in terms of the city and what we have going here, I think it's a win win for this too. And I would also support that moving the motion forward so that they can continue on its path through the Coastal Commission where it would have another another opportunity to be heard again. So thank you.
Speaker 0: I would say thank you very much, guys. No, please, no, no. I'll push from the audience. Next up is Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: Yes. So I want to thank everybody for being here tonight. We're going on almost 5 hours. So I appreciate everybody's concerns and voice as I've been listening to everything. There's just many questions that I have relative to Coastal Commission discussions overall. E, R and AQ, M.D. memos. All of this, to be quite honest, still seems very unclear to me personally and not comprehensive enough for me to support just because newer technology and oil expansion can be done. I don't believe it should be done. And although I absolutely support a full actual restoration of the wetlands similar to what Bolsa Chica.
Speaker 5: Did, that actually was a true restoration.
Speaker 9: That phased the removal and cleanup of oil extraction from wetlands. I agree to half of the project, of course. Yes to bike paths, yes to jobs, yes to walking areas and yes to public opportunities. But again, I'll have.
Speaker 5: To disagree with the project.
Speaker 9: Overall. So many questions still remain. Sea level rise analysis seems unclear and incomplete. Our staff report, as it seems, only states that existing out of compliance infrastructure would be a problem for sea level rise, but not new infrastructure, which does not really does not give me clarity personally. And then, of course, as mentioned many times here, Native American outreach was not through enough to include all bands. Senate Bill 18, which includes the traditional tribal cultural places, and requires.
Speaker 5: Our local planning authorities to connect with California.
Speaker 9: Native American tribes. Plural and overall scenario. Planning to identify maximum potential impacts for a large earthquake have not been analyzed fully, but rather includes why issues occurred in other states not inclusive of the worst case scenario in our own state, per the Coastal Commission memo. And lastly, the South Coast Air Quality Management Staff Memo per September 2017 includes concerns about air quality and health risks and stated that the air underestimates impacts in both construction and operation, not just construction. Overall, 75% of immediate.
Speaker 5: Reduction of drilling, not production, will.
Speaker 9: Actually happen. And that is certainly an issue for me. And I know it's an issue for many of my residents, and this is why I will be voting no on this item. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Got some repairs.
Speaker 5: Thank you very.
Speaker 6: Much. And thank you to my colleagues and everyone here for the hours.
Speaker 5: Of commitment and the time that you've spent leading up to this in the years that have come before this. And I have to be honest, the meetings I've had, I had meetings with the people doing the drilling. We had a very good meeting where they went over all the details with me. I asked lots of questions. I then personally reached out to Elizabeth LAMB and asked Los Arenas Wetlands for a briefing to kind of fill me in on where they were at. Believe my staff met with and of Christiansen, but besides that, I didn't have a lot of outreach from a lot of the people that I saw speak tonight that I consider folks that I would have liked to have heard from. And so my time, I have to say, I went out and I took my entire staff and we did a tour probably six or seven months ago of the Wetlands. And I am somebody that before I even moved to Long Beach, I would go to Bolsa Chica and watch the birds and go on walks and really have enjoyed that. And so the idea of restoring this area to our wetlands and putting in place walkways and a visitor center and lifting up our Native American history is something that, you know, was shiny and exciting to me sitting here tonight listening and really, you know, reviewing all the information that I have in front of me. And also considering that as a city leaders, we have to make sure that we do not have that moment where we see an opportunity to be swayed from our values. And through my campaign and through my time on council, I've always said that I'm committed to seeing us get off oil. And while I believe tonight this item will pass, I will not be supporting this item either and I will make sure that we engage with the Coastal Commission to do the following and let them know that what I would like to see out of the next steps is, is really a commitment, as they've said, to have clear standards for a restoration plan. It does seem like you guys have done a fantastic job and I applaud the work that you have done. It's a it's a fantastic vision and plan to say let's reduce the impact of where our our oil fields are. And I think it took a lot to get to where you are. And so I want to continue to applaud that and continue to applaud the participation you've done with those areas, wetlands. But knowing that if it's going to take 40 years and we still don't know where we're going to be with oil in 40 years, that I definitely have some concerns and the fact that. We have the A.D. letter and a couple of other things that I reviewed tonight just gives me pause. And so for for this.
Speaker 6: I want to work.
Speaker 5: With our coastal commission, with city staff, with the community members to reach out to the Coastal Commission and try to make sure that we have some real standards for the time when this potentially could get passed at that level. But it wasn't. It was one of those nights where I came in thinking I was going to vote one way and I'm leaving voting another way. And so I just want to applaud you guys and encourage you not only to do your outreach on the night of, but do your outreach ahead of time. That really helps me get my head around what we're voting on because we definitely have a big agenda tonight. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much. And I just want to say, usually when we have several hours of public comment, I'm exhausted. But I will say that, you know, the comment this evening on all sides were were were excellent. I appreciate hearing from everybody. I felt like I learned something not only from our staff's excellent presentation on the air and the merits thereof, but also from from the community, Native Americans, indigenous people here, and and all of the stakeholders. I did not come here this evening with my mind made up. I wanted to listen to public comment. I did review the documents before me and I had a couple of meetings and I will just say that I'm going to support this, this document or this this air and this project, because I think it it is something that is a I believe, a realistic approach. It is an innovative approach to to restoring wetlands, the benefits of getting 100 of, what, 55 acres of 54 acres back to wetlands restoration is is something that you I don't want to want to leave on the table. I believe that the benefits far outweigh the risk here and understanding that if we do nothing, which I've heard that there's favor for, there's still going to be oil drilling. I don't I don't see that that, you know, saying no to a a project that is actually going to add several benefits to the city of Long Beach and the community as a whole is is in our interest. And when I looked at the summary of environmental impacts, most or most, if not not all of them were less than significant with some mitigations. And so with that said, and I want to just say to my colleague, Councilmember Susie Price, and to Roberto, you longer have been involved with this for far longer than most of us. I trust their judgment on this because they have been in the trenches on this issue with most of the stakeholders. I trust the lows of Low Street as well as the authority. I trust the soil loss, widows, wetlands, land trust. I had an opportunity to to to tour that facility with my staff a couple of years ago and saw the great potential for restoration there. The the the neighborhood association came out and spoke in support of this. Our former mayor and the council member who represents the area, who is dealing with stakeholders and residents right there all the time. And so with that, I think, again, I'm going to going to go for a realistic approach. I think supporting this project is is something that that that's a risk that I'm willing to take as a as a city. I think we're going to have to be vigilant in watching this project all the way through, I don't think. But but I also think that the first two years give us tremendous benefits. Right. Again, if we're talking about taking out 95% of pipelines and and which you can see in terms of visibility is is a huge benefit, esthetically, but also to the environment. And so I'll be voting in support. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I wanted to add a couple other things to my motion actually that I forgot to mention regarding the building requirements for the visitor center and a few other things. So I know that once we talk about the wetlands wetlands restoration and this is really a question for staff will be working with LCA ways restoration of the overall restoration plan so that the restoration is consistent with that plan. Is that correct.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you for your question, Councilmember Price. Yes. The staff will continue to remain engaged throughout the applicants refinement of the restoration plan to make sure that it is consistent with the project approvals. Okay.
Speaker 9: Because there are things in terms of the size of the trials, for example, the number of trails, whether or not there's recreational space there for, you know, picnicking or passive use. All those things I'm assuming will be working with LCA way as we move forward on those details.
Speaker 5: Yes, that is correct. Although I would like to point out that in terms of the the the intent of the public access trail is to provide but to provide access. But because it's essentially a wetlands, it's a wilderness need native area, there's going to be relatively limited types of actual development for recreation. And I did want to point that out. But yes, we will be working with both the applicant and LCA. Okay.
Speaker 9: So as part of my motion, I wanted to also add for consideration by my colleagues that the project be required to use native plants and marsh plants for any of the specific areas that are planted as part of this restoration project. I know that's a few years out, but I'm I'm hoping that that's agreeable with my colleagues on the pumpkin patch site for the construction of the office building. I would, as a requirement of this project.
Speaker 6: Require bird.
Speaker 9: Friendly building techniques such as.
Speaker 5: Bird.
Speaker 9: Safe glass measures, shielded lighting those. The best practices in regards to safeguarding the building from.
Speaker 6: From bird.
Speaker 9: Impacts, native tree planting and landscaping are.
Speaker 6: All of the.
Speaker 9: Both the LCA site as well as the synergy site. And that's it for me in terms of the additional conditions. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mungo.
Speaker 6: Yes, good stuff. Talk a little bit.
Speaker 5: About why the the specific Native American tribe was invited here today.
Speaker 4: Sure. Thank you for that question, Councilmember Mungo. So Native American consultation is really governed by two specific laws known as AB 52, SB 18. And what happens is at the very beginning of a project, any project, but in this project in particular, letters are sent out to the tribes with information about the proposed project and asking if they'd like to enter into what's called a formal consultation process. And some of the speakers gave reference to the 11 letters that went out. So in this case, there were two responses to that notification that's prescribed under law. So from the Gabrielle, you know, tribe that we heard from at the beginning of today's meeting and from another tribal official which referred us to the Gabriel Llano tribe. So under the those two laws, what happens then as we enter into a formal consultation process with that tribe? And I was the city's officer in that consultation process. And we talked about the project. We talked about the history of the site and what resources may or may not be on the site and how we would do monitoring during the implementation of this project. So those tribes come from two places. They come from the Native American Heritage Commission, which is a state agency that keeps a list of those tribal authorities, or they come from a tribe proactively contacting the city and showing that they're not just an individual, that they're a tribal government, and that they would like to be consulted going forward on land use matters. So we complied with those laws and based on those consultations, prepared the project mitigations and prepared the summary of information that's found in the Environmental Impact Report. And the Environmental Impact Report also talks about tribal cultural resources. And when it does so, it's talking about a specific resource that has been identified on a list. It's not to say that areas are not held sacred or special or valuable or don't have important history to one tribe or many peoples that may associated with it. It's it simply as prescribed under law. Does it exist on a list or has the tribe that we're having formal consultation with identified it as being eligible for that list? So that's the formal, very legally prescribed process that the city is required to comply with. And we continued the relationship and the formal consultation project process with the tribe that. Contacted us and wanted to participate in that, and we asked them to provide clarity about that process at today's meeting. Now, that's contrasted to the secret process and the project review process remains open to any and all. So all of the speakers, many of them attended project meetings. Others did not. But all of the public meetings, the notice of preparation, the Environmental Impact Report, all of those documents and all of that public process commenting and being responded to is open to everyone. So well, the tribe that responded to the Abbey, 52, which is a prescribed legal process, that is the process we followed there, and that's the formal process that doesn't lock anyone else out. Everyone was open and available to participate in this project and comment, and all of those comments were considered and responded to and they were taken into account by the Planning Commission and I'm sure are being taken into account by the council this evening.
Speaker 5: Yes, they are. Thank you very much. I think that helps considerably in the discussion on whether or not the city continues to do outreach. And I know I look forward to the outreach item that was submitted by my office and three others in looking to formalize and better understand what those processes are. But specifically, I appreciate that there's specific law related to this that really helps guide our our path in ensuring that everyone's included. A lot of great testimony tonight. I really appreciate the level of respect that was here. I know that when this was before the planning commission, there were challenges and I appreciate how everyone is so passionate . This is a very important issue and I've enjoyed reading the many emails and letters that have been put into public comment today. In addition to your your speaking. I. It was great to see that through a process over the weeks that the different communications coming out started moving towards the middle. And I think that in the communication from CWA yesterday, it really showed a movement in where they were and where they came to. And I think that that's a really important thing. In government, it's it's hard to talk about a future. And in everything, there are costs and benefits. And for me, I really appreciated Councilwoman Pryce outlining the undisputed facts and specifically just going back in my mind to gaining 150 acres of protected land. And so for that, I appreciate both Councilmember Urunga and Councilmember Price's work on this for such a long period of time and keeping them engaged in the very minute details of the project. I only have one additional question. In the next few weeks, we're bringing back some ideas on ensuring that we're not going to have a deficit next year. And one of the things that I've been really diving into the details about are those ongoing costs associated with some of the infrastructure that we have. And so with every new sidewalk we add, every new median we add. Councilwoman Price, in your. Addendums. Would those also be covered under the endowment so that they would maintain those going forward as well to ensure that we don't add any additional ongoing maintenance?
Speaker 9: You know, I hadn't thought about that. That's an interesting idea. I, I would recommend we ask staff about that because I know there's maintenance issues, but then the liability is for the city. So I don't know how that works because if the liability falls with the city, then the city has to ensure a certain level of quality and work that's consistent with the rest of the city. So I defer to two staff. I see we have public works folks here and.
Speaker 5: Lawyers leaning in and discussing. Yeah, would that be something that the endowment could cover?
Speaker 4: I think Mr. Mays is going to answer that in a second.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 6: We were just discussing it. Currently, we do not have a procedure for implementing something like.
Speaker 4: That with hardscape.
Speaker 6: Typically we have projects that come before you all.
Speaker 4: The time where there is a requirement for the property owner to maintain soft.
Speaker 6: Scape plants and those sorts of things on their property. But we don't have anything in place that will allow city staff.
Speaker 4: To require ongoing.
Speaker 6: Maintenance.
Speaker 4: Typically we require an applicant if their requirement is to build a hardscape.
Speaker 6: To build it, present it to us for inspection and approval, which we do. Public works department does.
Speaker 4: That and then it becomes the city's for.
Speaker 6: Ongoing maintenance.
Speaker 5: Okay. Well, that's something for us to think about in the future and looking for a way that when organizations are looking forward to adding to a essence of a community, by adding in hardscape that we find some methods I which they would be able to take on that ownership. So I still believe that at this time I'm going to be supportive. I look forward to seeing a time where when I kayak through the wetlands, that this is all our land and it's restored because I think it's important for our future and for our children's future. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. So, again, I well, I didn't I don't proclaim to be an expert on this project, but I, you know, took a look at it, you know, follow the Planning Commission project. I really like the structure of our city in terms of being broken in the districts because I proclaim to be an expert on most projects in Council District nine. And this this this project is not in Council District nine, it's in District three. So I would acknowledge the third district councilwoman for really doing her homework in breaking it down on this issue. Now, in speaking with the stakeholders over the last few weeks, listen to the testimonies. I formed some opinions on this. So I do want to just acknowledge. First, I want to acknowledge an effort, a very clear, intentional effort to try to be inclusive. I see nontraditional partners working together on this from business types, environmental types, Audubon Society, labor. It's not often you see bird folks and construction folks both saying the same thing about a project. So it's something that we have to acknowledge. I do want to also acknowledge. So some of the benefits that I see that have been articulated here in terms of that wetlands restoration and in Councilman Alston can attest we've we're working on a wetlands restoration up in North Long Beach and it's and it's amazing thing for our community. So I'm really excited to see that you're you're about to see this this take place in your community is exciting and it does a lot for for our the value that we place on nature in our community. I think it's important to acknowledge the old infrastructure, the outdated infrastructure that has been in place for years, to be able to to reclaim that and take it take it back and restore that. It's a good thing. I like to see that, you know, that the council member has extracted what she thinks is appropriate for her district. I think when projects like this happen, sometimes that's the only chance that you have to really achieve some of your public policy goals or some of the things that the community has wanted for a long time. That's good. I want to thank Councilman Turanga for engaging and helping me to understand, helping the council and the public understand the process with the Coastal Commission. So that takes a lot of work and a lot of time. And so thank you for that. I also want to acknowledge the concerns that were raised today. So we are a city in a state in California who publicly acknowledges things like climate change and the fact that we have a dependency on oil. So when votes like this come up in front of us, it is inconsistent with what people say. It is inconsistent. And I think it's also unfair to expect that projects that have been in the pipeline for so long have to be the burden to have to carry the burden on a project by project based for broader vision and a larger conversation. I think the question, frankly, is and this is a question I'm going to pose to city staff, if we want to be a city that does, you know, does what we say we're going to do and sets a vision to be environmentally responsible and conscious, what document? We're a city who operates and plans, but what document or what plan would help guide the city's decisions in terms of what we do in terms of oil? So I'm going to pose that to maybe our planning staff. Is there a document or are we working on something?
Speaker 4: Sure. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. So the city has a sustainable city action plan and it's a good plan. But we acknowledged a couple of years ago that are really just wasn't sufficient for the city to reach its green goals. So in the budget that we're now living under the last budget, the Council was good enough to approve a good amount of funding, just under $1,000,000 for a climate action and adaptation plan. That's going to do two things. It's going to allow the city through actionable steps to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and our carbon footprint. And because while our role is important, it is a worldwide phenomenon. And climate change is happening right now and will continue to change and sea level rise is happening and will continue to tend to occur. It will allow us to adapt and change our infrastructure and protect life and property as these changes to our climate and sea level happen. So when I talk about reducing emissions, that's not just drilling less oil. That's the responsibility of you and I and all the residents and all the businesses in this city. It has to do with energy draw within people's homes. It has to do with the energy profile of how we get around and whether we're using a gas powered vehicle that's an efficient or an electric vehicle, which is still powered through a power plant that's most likely run on natural gas, but is still allowing us to lower our our carbon footprint. It involves very hard choices and data analysis, including we all want to. Be. But does that mean, you know, requiring certain energy upgrades on older buildings, does that require some type of punitive steps for for higher emission sources around the city? So that can't really be done, you know, in the blink of an eye. So that's an 18 month process that we're over six months into. And we'd be glad if the council's interested to provide a written update on that effort to the full council in the form of a TFF memo.
Speaker 2: I think that would make a lot of sense. I mean, so my thought here is no one gets elected to city council to try to do harm to their community. I think when you acknowledge the conditions on the ground and you see the clear benefits in this project, you have to make a gut check, you have to make a decision. And a lot of people have done that. This project, from what you know, what's being presented here, it seems to be something very positive for the community. The larger question is, you know, how do we ask that broader question about the energy ecosystem? How do we begin to sort of measure these decisions we make? It can't be on a project by project basis. We're not going to change climate change on a project by project basis. We have to have a vision and a plan. And I think that's I think that, too, from power is going to go a long way to help put this in perspective. If we were to today ban oil drilling in Long Beach that alone will we were still going to have to purchase purchase oil from other sources because the infrastructure around how we cook is, you know , is on natural gas. So a lot of our cars are still on on petrol. I mean, the reality is there needs to be a larger, broader conversation. So we can sure certainly do what we can and we trust a lot of time city staff and your local council members to place things in the projects. But in reality, we have to have a broader conversation about our vision as a city. So I'm supporting this. I'm going to say congratulations to to the stakeholders here and to Councilwoman Pryce. And I look forward to enjoying those wetlands at some point. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to make a couple closing comments and we're going to go to a vote. We're actually going to take five separate votes. I believe your city attorney, they've got to be separated out.
Speaker 4: That's correct. Okay. By virtue.
Speaker 6: Of each of the five.
Speaker 4: Paragraphs in the staff letter.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. So just just a few things. I'm going to step out so we can put the project site map, I think, on the back there. That'd be great. Thanks. So a few things, I think. First, I think it's important to know, obviously we want to think this is I think the longest hearing I've been in since I've either been mayor or been on the council. So a lot of community interest and input. And so I do want to thank everyone for for being here, particularly folks that represented native peoples and folks and community members that live also just adjacent Lee adjacent to the site. And they're actually impacted by by the site. So I've probably been driving by or biking or walking by that site since I was eight or nine years old. And it has always looked the same as it looks today. If you think about what are the major kind of environmental projects that the city has had for many years, the two that stand out to me as being the most significant has been one around clean air and the ports and the re and to ensuring that we actually clean the air in and around the port complex. And the second has been the restoration and acquisition of the wetlands. Those are two big issues that not just us but before us have been advocating and fighting for for many, many years. I think that the proposal we have before us is an opportunity, obviously, to finally achieve the restoration of what was at one time a incredible and beautiful asset to this region, which were the wetlands. To me, there's no question of some of what the vice mayor said, what the city is doing in regards to the Clean Air Action Plan around the port, electrification of busses and cars, sustainability, solar. It is leading on, I believe, almost every issue around climate change. And I'm really proud of that work. I understand the concerns of the community and some of the concerns that are associated because of the issue around oil. So I do I do understand that. But when I look at this map behind me, what I also see is a once in a lifetime literally opportunity to acquire that parcel that is owned by synergy there in the green in the map above us. This is not an opportunity that we are going to get likely again in in in a generation or more. This is something that has been developed by a team. When I think about the opportunity to take that site, that millions of folks drive by and walk by and actually open it up to the. Public. And to wildlife and to restore that site. I think that's something very, very special and and important. I want to add also that I want to thank Councilwoman Pryce and Councilmember your particularly obviously I mean, the Councilman Price represents the area, but both have served incredibly with incredible distinction on the lottery as wetlands authority. And I think that that work has led them to this point of where we actually are today. So this just didn't happen in the course of a year or two years. It's been a many year conversation and and work to get us to this point. And so I want to thank them. You know, also, I mean, this is from the I've always believed I do believe that the council members within their area do always understand their projects best and obviously are doing their community outreach and talking to their their constituencies as well. Finally, I'll say that when you think about environmental stewardship in Long Beach, there are few groups. There may not be any groups that have more respect and admiration than what the lottery as well as trust does in this community. And so for me, when you look at. At the groups that are doing great work in Long Beach and in great environmental work. The trust has always been at the forefront of of that work. And so for them to come out and support this project in the way that they did, I know. Took. There is no one that provides a more critical lens or asks more questions or is tougher on questions around the wetlands than the trust is, and particularly that Elizabeth LAMB is. And so I have a tremendous amount of respect for her, for the board, for the trust, and for their ability to to evaluate critically this massive proposal that's in front of us. Now, obviously, if we deny the appeals today, there are still a long process ahead of us, including a extensive review by the California Coastal Commission. And having been a former member of that body, they are a different set of of of of critical eyes. And that will also put this project through a different process as well. And so I look forward and I hope that we can get to a point where we can look at that site in addition to the site the city already has acquired and be able to actually open it up to future generations of people in Long Beach and see wildlife flourish there and do something real special for the environment and the community. But I do understand people have different opinions and I respect those different opinions and I respect people's points of view on this topic. And so with that, I clearly look forward to the restoration of the wetlands. We will take the votes. There was a motion second on the floor, so please cast your first vote on the first motion. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, consider third-party appeals by Ann Cantrell representing Citizens About Responsible Planning, and Anna Christensen/Charles Moore representing Protect the Long Beach/Los Cerritos Wetlands, and uphold the Planning Commission’s recommendation and deny the appeals, adopt resolution certifying Environmental Impact Report (03-15), select the environmentally-superior project alternative (#5), and make certain findings and determinations related thereto; adopt a statement of overriding considerations, and approve a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Los Cerritos Wetlands and Oil Consolidation Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2016041083); | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0037 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Key. We have item 13. We had a we had a couple of requests, some just doing the items that are up first, item 13/1.
Speaker 1: Report from economic development. Recommendation to authorize the city manager to establish an agreement with the Long Beach Downtown Development Corporation to provide services and financial support for economic development activities in the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 5: Citywide.
Speaker 0: Mr. CHRISLER.
Speaker 10: Good evening, Mayor, and members of the City Council and I'm very happy to bring this item before you. This will allow the city to partner with the Downtown Development Corporation, which is a501 C3 nonprofit. The purpose of the EDC is to attract new business and investment, as well as to help the city in economic development efforts that may be unfunded. The DDC will also allow us to apply for grants that may only be eligible for 523 organizations. I am also would like to acknowledge Craig Cogen, who is the Executive Director of the deal. The DDC was originally formed as a as a an organization separate from but in partnership with the DOJ. And so Craig has stayed here tonight to answer any questions that you might have about the DDC and its history. So with that, I will answer any questions and happy to respond.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And let me let me just also just add that we're we want to thank after the deal for the work in kind of launching the development corporation. We there's been a lot of conversations around working with the DBA, the folks in the business, the nonprofit community, and also the Economic Development Commission. In looking at establishing as well the city wide look at economic development from a kind of not a public nonprofit, private, public nonprofit point of view. For those who may not be aware, economic development corporations exist across the country. Almost every major downtown has them. They are incredible economic engines. The closest thing that we have to Long Beach that works here oftentimes is the L.A. EDC, which are all pretty familiar with, which is the L.A. Economic Development Corporation. So that obviously is a economic development corporation that operates across the county. And so this would be this is really the beginning of the formation of of this type of effort locally. And I'll add and one of the things I'm really thankful was staff with Mr. Cogen with the commission is there's really a focus around economic inclusion and making sure that we ensure that that everyone is being included and that we're focused on all workers of all income levels. And I think that's really important to be a focus as well. And so I want to thank all the folks involved. There's a motion and a second count summary, Ranga.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mary. And I totally agree with everything you've said. It's an opportunity as well for the philanthropic community to give them another alternative to donate money so that we can work on two major projects. So I'm very pleased to make this motion.
Speaker 5: Councilman Mongo This is something that I have looked forward to since the day I was elected. I so appreciate the DBA for stepping up and taking leadership on this. I appreciate Mr. Keisler for following through. It has been a long road of getting here. There are so many small business associations that don't have a place to live, and through the M.O. use with this organization, I really see an opportunity to take business development, our business corridor improvement and our investment in the region related to those improvements just to the next level. So thank you so much for your work on this. It is a long time coming and could not have been possible without a heavy lift from many, many committed people. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council Member Pearce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I also would like to congratulate the economic development team and the DBA for your work. I actually was looking forward to hearing from Mr. Cogen on your vision, what you guys have done, and just give a little bit more context to what's in front of us today.
Speaker 0: Could you do that while doing public comment or don't do it right now?
Speaker 5: We could do it now. I think that would be sure.
Speaker 0: Mr. Cogen, you want to give us an update?
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, Craig Koji with the downtown Long Beach Alliance as well as with the Downtown Development Corporation. The DDC was created in 2011, 2012, about the same time that the redevelopment agency was dissolved. And this was created to really pick up the pieces of the downtown project area when it was scheduled to be terminated in June of 2017. Obviously the state had different ideas at the time and so the entire redevelopment agency was dissolved. Statewide, the development corporation was in a position to help business as well as community corridors to eliminate blight. This is the goal and the mission of Development Corporation. It is, as Councilmember Turanga mentioned, a charitable organization. It is citywide. It has no boundaries. So that's the beauty about this organization. And it doesn't have the legal boundaries that, say, the DOJ has with its assessment district. So we've been reaching out to different corridors throughout the city. We are going through a revisioning and reevaluation and repositioning process as we speak. It will no, it won't be called the Downtown Development Corporation. We named that in 2012 because of the as a placeholder and certainly it served its purpose. And now obviously it's expanding its mission and expanding its boundaries to be able to serve on a citywide basis. So we'll be working with different corridors, working with different organizations, as well as with the Economic Development Corporation or Economic Development Commission, as well as DARPA, to further its causes and its mission.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. So help Pierce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I just thought the context and the history was a little bit helpful and wanted to ask one question on. Sorry. It might not be you might be staff. How do other businesses that are not in business corridors and residents find out about this organization? You guys think we're just going to vote real fast? I'm sorry.
Speaker 10: COUNCILMEMBER Yeah, absolutely. So. So that's one of the things that we're establishing with this agreement. One of the things that is important when you have a city government private entity, whether it's a private nonprofit or otherwise, is that, you know, we can't we need a partnership agreement to be able to promote each other. And so the beauty of this is that now that this this nonprofit vehicle will be available to help, you know, fundraise on behalf of these efforts to work with small businesses. And they have flexibility to do some things that the city might not be able to. But this agreement will also allow us to advertise what the DDC is doing and direct small businesses or associations or donors or grantors to the DDC to work out agreements. And so we'll be advertising and promoting the great work they're doing, just as they will be advertising and promoting the great work that the city is doing.
Speaker 5: Great. Thank you so much. And I just want to applaud the leadership. You guys have helped us. We're about to launch our Arts Park work. I know the loop has been something that you guys are revisioning right now. And so I think it's really exciting that the entire city is going to have the opportunity to participate in revitalizing.
Speaker 6: So congratulations.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much. This is a very intriguing idea. I was recently with our board with the BC BIA, and I know they are looking at doing something very similar. I did have some questions regarding the the autonomy. Are they completely or is this organization completely autonomous from the Adobe? And I guess that would be from Steph, Yes.
Speaker 10: Councilmember Yes. So these are these are two separate entities. So in terms of their their TAC status, they're they're formed as, as different entities and they stand alone. There is separation. And there are a number of things that you'll see in the agreement that we establish that ensure that there's there's not a conflict of interest. There's also different activities that they can engage in. As Mr. Cogen was mentioning, there's certain aspects of the 501c6 the bid or the deal that has restrictions in terms of what it can engage in the members. It serves the boundaries that it's required to stay within. So yeah, these entities are different. And I think that, as Mr. Cogen said, now, that now that the DDC is looking at the citywide mission and how to engage with city wide economic development, there will be a revisioning and how, you know, that board is structured in that that charter changes is part of this next step.
Speaker 8: And so when we when I read that we are or this this this board or DDC will be have a avoid a conflict of interest when raising funds that advance economic opportunities for workers, investors and entrepreneurs throughout the city. What do you envision and what type how do you envision this this organization helping workers and investors and entrepreneurs and charitable means?
Speaker 10: Oh, absolutely. So so on one. One example of that would be going out to work with a foundation who may grant funds to a five or 23 or nonprofit agency. In the past, the city, you know, couldn't apply for those funds. So the DDC may apply for funds on on on our behalf that could help with anything ranging from, you know, entrepreneurial support programs to, you know, fundraising for a specific program, maybe loans or grants to two local small businesses. The other thing that that the DDC can do is when we have maybe a new business who's building a project in in the city in the past, you know, the question would be, hey, how can we help businesses on the corridor around us if they're not part of a business improvement district or, you know, there's there's not a place that now these companies can give funds and work in agreement with the DDC to then implement special events, maybe facade improvements or some other economic development projects in the neighborhood that surrounds them and that benefits that that that corporate anchor. So it gives them an option that, you know, we haven't had previously and ultimately will benefit the city both directly and indirectly.
Speaker 8: And because there is a partnership with the city. I just have to ask because I know we have another item coming up a little bit later regarding audits of the bids. Would this nonprofit be subject to audit?
Speaker 10: Councilmember So in in the agreement, it actually has a section that talks about part of the terms and conditions is that any, any activities related to the city that the DDC engages in, that they will maintain records subject to audit not only during the term of the agreement, but up to five years after the agreement expires. So, yes, those kind of controls are in place. We actually have this a similar set of controls in place with other nonprofits, whether it's the police foundation, the Long Beach. Partners for parks in Long Beach Care. So it's a similar arrangement where we have, you know, the ability, if with reasonable time to ask the DDC to to share all information and financial records related to activities that that involve the city.
Speaker 8: Wonderful. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, Richardson.
Speaker 4: Thanks, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 2: Just wanted to acknowledge, Craig, we you know, we've had these conversations a long time. And I know that this has been a vision of yours for a long time to get the Economic Development Corporation, the Community Involvement Corporation, off the ground. And and I'm not concerned that it came out of downtown. Frankly, you were the most prepared business district to start this. And you were ahead. And you've done what you've done is help to bring other areas of town on board and to reap the benefits of what you've been able to do. I want to thank you for recently attending the Roundtable on Economic Inclusion for everyone in roundtable, and there were a lot of good conversations. And, you know, we're working on the Kiva stuff. So I know that you received a presentation from one of our from our facilitator to Nuer on that. I want to thank you for for expressing interest and coming on board as a as a trustee to get this program off the ground. John, so little question, are they going to be an official trustee or what is this action going to help prepare the EDC to to play that role? Or what's going to happen with Kiva? What's the relationship there?
Speaker 10: Yeah. Vice Mayor So the in terms of how our trustees function with Kiva program, there's a couple of roles that the DDC can play. The presentation we received the other day was for the Economic Development Committee of the DOJ, which you're referring to, and ultimately what organizations can do in the city in which I believe they'll be considering at their next board meeting is a recommendation to become a trustee. And what that means is that an organization or an association or even an individual in the city of Long Beach can vouch for individual borrowers. So they would meet with them. They would say, You know what, I met this individual. They are who they say they are. They're going to be using these funds to help their small business. And that helps to build credibility for residents of Long Beach to then become lenders for the Kiva microfinance program. So this is a perfect example of being able to partner with another organization that can both serve as a trustee and potentially even apply for grants or fundraise on behalf of these kinds of programs that help our micro-entrepreneurs.
Speaker 2: Great. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Any other public comment? I know that Mr. Guzman already spoke CNN. Then, please.
Speaker 3: Grace. You are quite.
Speaker 6: Supernatural.
Speaker 0: Since entrepreneurs are yeses. Okay, thank you very much. Now we're doing item number seven and then item number six. And then item number ten. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute documents necessary to establish an agreement with the Long Beach Downtown Development Corporation, a non-profit organization located in Long Beach, CA, to provide services and financial support for economic development activities in the City of Long Beach. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0040 | Speaker 0: Since entrepreneurs are yeses. Okay, thank you very much. Now we're doing item number seven and then item number six. And then item number ten.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Andrews, Councilman Austin recommendation to direct the city manager to schedule a city council report to review progress on the city's report on revenue tools and incentives for the production of affordable and workforce housing.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: Yes, I first would like to thank my council colleagues, Andrews and Austin, for joining me on this item. However, I know that other colleagues have taken great part in these housing discussions, and I thank all of you as well, and I appreciate everyone that has participated in the discussion relative to housing issues and renters. Advocacy for renters. The issues of displacement. Finding ways in which we can empower renters in Long Beach with resources, education and policy while working with both housing advocates and property owners, is certainly the spirit of this item. As we know, we are almost 60% renter populated, and I don't believe we have any choice but to address the issues that so many of our collective residents are facing. This will be a challenge, I know, but I really urge all of us to be open minded to the process. Renters, property owners, and all who truly care to make the city more housing inclusive and supportive on all levels. We will review our progress on the city's report on revenue tools and incentives for the production of affordable and workforce housing. So much work has been done there, but we will ask city staff to work on a seniors first program as the immediate downtown area. Somewhere I call home is home to over seven senior restricted housing locations. And for that reason, we should have a vested interest in finding more programs for them. Options for new expanded rental relocation programs from renter, from renter to home ownership programs will also be included in this package. In addition, I'd like to include a few more items. First, a review of our covenants for restricted housing properties. I know we have quite a few restricted housing locations that exist in our city and council districts one, two, four, six, seven, eight and nine. And the majority, of course, are District one. But I would like to have city staff provide options the city can take in either keeping the covenants in place or finding some sort of next step. Number two is create a meeting of the minds between all housing advocate groups and property owner groups. So Housing Long Beach, La Brea Apartment Association, the California Apartment Association and Small Property Owners Alliance and provide insight on research so they can provide research and insight on these policies. And lastly, we should include in this report the report on citywide rental rates, which was dated on September 26, 2017, which will include more information and provide a larger context to this discussion. And lastly, we included last but not least, and I think a lot of this is what I certainly have focused on, but want to ensure that we focus on ongoing, is that very small percent of negligent landlords. We know that they exist. They're about 1%, maybe even less than that in our city. And they are the individuals that are consistently putting their tenants in serious quality of life issues. They create blight in our neighborhoods. They disrespect our neighborhoods while also putting renters at risk for being evicted. It's unfair and unjust, and as a city, we need to finally address the issue of slumlords even more than we're doing now. So with that said, I look forward to my council colleagues, their discussion, their insight, their input on anything in here that they'd like to see. And I also look forward to this report coming back in 90 days. And if we cannot get it back in 90 days, let's at least get a two from four that says that we're still working on it. So we know that this is still a life document. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, councilwoman. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez and Andrews for bringing this item forward. I know I've had some extensive and heartfelt conversations with the mayor about this issue as well, and I'm happy to sign on in support of this. I think it's time that the city council and we've had we've kind of played around the edges a bit, but I think we need to jump right in and have a full discussion about housing in our city. And I do believe that we should be looking at housing for all, but we should also be looking at housing in our most vulnerable citizens first. This this particular item asks for us to look at, especially seniors, and looking at affordable housing for students and working families and those experiencing homelessness. I am obviously disturbed with a 2% vacancy rate in this city. Obviously, it means that, you know, we have a high demand here in the city of Long Beach and we should be providing assistance to tenants. I would love to look at and see and understand what the best practices are in that area. I want to see how Long Beach compares to in our housing issues compared to other cities in our region. Regionally, I want to I want to look at it from a broad perspective as well. I want to know what how we compare to other big beach cities in Orange County, in L.A. County. And I do think that it would behoove us to and we've talked about it in other forums and other issues, but in other agenda items, forgive me, but exposing those who are irresponsible landlords, I mean, because I think a lot of the responsible players get get painted with with a broad brush because of the the irresponsible actions of a few. And so I know that this is going to be an issue that we discuss citywide. Anyway, we're having this conversation city wide, but I think it's responsible for the city council to try to lead the discussion today and have it throughout the course of the year, because I don't think the issue is going to go away. It seems to be more exacerbated by today, and we need to be looking toward solutions. So I'm happy to support this item and look forward to a report back from staff. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Councilman Andrew. Yes, Mayor.
Speaker 4: First of all, I would like to thank our Councilwoman Gonzales for bringing this item forward. You know, I really believe it's time for us to have a progress report on actions and, you know, underway for affordable and workforce, you know, housing. You know, the report has already addressed housing needs and opportunities to create housing, you know, for various opportunities. But at this point, I think it's important that we create a program, especially for our seniors. And I'm looking forward to seeing these updates in the coming years. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Longo.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I read a interesting.
Speaker 5: Study recently that came out from L.A. County and five or six other nonprofit and foundation partners that came together to talk about health and life.
Speaker 6: Expectancy. And if you take.
Speaker 5: The time to read the report, I think that you'll find that housing has such a.
Speaker 6: Huge impact on people's life expectancy. If you take the time. There's a particular.
Speaker 5: Study that compares Cudahy and another community that is so significantly similar in terms of demographics, education, all the different components and the.
Speaker 6: Various things were not the determinants of length of life. The major determinant was.
Speaker 5: Housing and the availability for people to own their housing. And so.
Speaker 6: I would only ask that we also look at the opportunities.
Speaker 5: And incentives.
Speaker 6: For those that have apartments to convert those and allow the people who live in them to buy them and own their own future. So I look forward to hearing this. I think it's great work. I know there's lots of great work still to do. Well, I appreciate comparing.
Speaker 5: Us to other cities. As a person who lives here and loves it here. I don't know why anyone would want to live anywhere else. And so I know why we have such high demand.
Speaker 6: Because everyone wants to.
Speaker 5: Live in the greatest city in America, Long Beach. And so it's hard to compare the most amazing downtown by the water and the greatest residents in any city in America. And so.
Speaker 6: For that, I look forward to the.
Speaker 5: Report and thank you for leading on this. It's really important that Long Beach stays ahead of the curve.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 5: Yes. I want to thank my colleagues for agenda raising this. And it's great to hear that so many of my colleagues feel like housing is a big concern. Obviously, housing, jobs and education are the three things that determine life expectancy. And as you guys have heard me mention in my district, there's a six year difference in life expectancy in my district alone. And so dealing with the issues of housing are really.
Speaker 9: Important and.
Speaker 5: Critical to me. I just wanted to say that I think the timeline of 90 days, after all the work that's already gone into this is really reasonable. And so I hope that staff does come back in 90 days with some information so that we can start moving on the work that we've been doing for a long time . Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 2: Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Just wanted to chime in and just say that, you know, as a part of the everyone in conversations, we've been taking a look at it, some of the home ownership piece of this. And it's an important, important part of this. Homeownership is still one of the chief means of wealth building. And whether we want to acknowledge or not, we have a real issue around the racial wealth gap in our city. You know, we just saw a presentation from the Green Lighting Institute that study Long Beach, Oakland and Fresno. And what it really did was paint a picture that, you know, homeownership is taking place in our city. We're seeing a lot of investment in all of our neighborhoods, even in the low to moderate income neighborhoods. But we're not seeing is those loans being originated by or to low to moderate income individuals. So people who actually live in those those neighborhoods. And and so there there's a lot of work to be done specifically on that issue. There are some programs we've learned a lot and some of these conversations. And and we're going to be coming forward with some of that, some of the feedback from those discussions in a matter of weeks. So I think this is all timely. I think it's great that we can place a focus on it. But I don't I see homeownership is called out. And I think we there's a lot that we can do to make sure people can and can enjoy that that dream of owning a home and then realizing those benefits. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Just two things that I think obviously are one, very supportive of this. I worked with Councilwoman Gonzalez on this agenda item, just crafting it just to make sure that we had the right the right focus. And also, I had spent some good time with Councilman Austin also as well, and Councilman Andrews. And so I think we all are obviously interested in how we protect our folks and to allow them to stay in their homes, particularly in these issues around folks that are receiving rental assistance currently and those that are in covenant properties . So two things I think that are important. The first is we need to make sure that the first part of this motion, which I don't want that to get lost either, is going to happen much sooner than 90 days, which is this council needs to have a public report on. The work that happened over the last year and a half around housing production and around affordable housing. And so I know that will come hopefully in the next few weeks, I assume. And I just want to just point out that some of the key pieces of that are going to be the issues around ensuring that we do the inclusionary housing policy for new developments. The issues around short term rental agreements. And so those items especially are important for that report. And I think there'll be a lot of questions from the council and others about the status of those. And so I think that's important. And then the second piece of this is these new items. I think the the critical piece of this agenda item, I think also is looking at what kind of best practice and policy is around the country. And we should never be scared of good research and we should never shy away from getting as much information as possible as to what other cities are doing in this area, whether it's around vulnerable populations in rental assistance, whether it's around policies that support tenants across the country, in other cities, or rental to homeownership programs. And so this is an opportunity to have all of these discussions at the table for the Council. So obviously very supportive. And I want to thank the council members, all of us, for working together on this item. Council Member And I'm sorry, was this back? Okay. Sorry.
Speaker 5: Councilmember Pearce Oh, yes. I recall that there was a two from four that was possibly already done on the Mello Act or maybe it was inclusionary housing. Is that true? Do we already have some two from fours out of this study?
Speaker 4: I'm going to ask our housing bureau manager, Patrick Geary, about that.
Speaker 8: We councilwoman, we actually have several different force that have gone upstairs, and we can highlight those when we come back to do that update on the revenue.
Speaker 4: Tools, incentives for if we're.
Speaker 5: Going to ask just for like a email tomorrow, that includes all the two from fours that stemmed from the study. Just so we have that in the meantime. Sure. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Please come forward. Thanks again, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 4: Gary Shelton. Councilmember Austin, you mentioned I want to see this and I want to see that, and so do I. And Mr. Mayor, I think. Well, while you were expressing your thoughts on Patrick, you're might have been taking notes that kind of look that way. I'm not sure. Some things that I would like to see in this and thank you very much, Council Member Gonzales, for bringing this forward and the others with you. Council Member Andrews The move from homeowners, from renting to home ownership, we have an imbalance right now about 40% to 60%, I think ownership to renters. And if we were to bring parity, if we could do 5050 on that, I would like to see something in this report that would address how we're going to move 25,000, 25,000 housing units from renters to owners. There's a lot of condos that would be converted. There's a lot of housing, affordable housing ownership opportunities that have to be created. But we're talking about 25,000 just to bring parity. So this is a long term goal that hasn't gone anywhere. And we're going to try moving it. We have to start moving it now. So I'd like to see how that might be taking shape. I'd also like to and I've talked to you all about this before when we've had these housing sort of summit informational meetings around town, affordable with a Capital A, I'd like to make sure that the report is very, very clear on what that means in relation to affordable housing for the workforce folks, which is moderate and above moderate. We hear a lot about Low Maid. Well, the low is all we ever hear about in the below moderate level. There's also very low and extremely low. And you talk about the seniors that are in the in the in living their final years trying to seek affordable housing. And many of them are extremely low housing, are extremely low income. And you should know that that's less than $19,000 a year for an individual. So that's important to know that there is something other than low when it comes to workforce housing and low, low mod housing. And then finally on on rental assistance and relocation programs also for vulnerable seniors, but any rental assistance, a relocation program, I would like to see how they plan on perhaps focusing that on rental assistance and not on simply relocating people. So as long as we are wishlists, Patrick, if you can ask some of mine, I would really appreciate that. And an encouragement that you can give Patrick to do that from the council would be greatly appreciated as well. Thank you much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank council members. My name is Jordan Winn. I'm a community organizer for Housing Long Beach, as well as a member of the Long Beach Tenants Union. I'd like to thank once again Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this forward tonight. We're really eagerly looking forward to this review. And one of the things that we wanted to bring to attention. I know. Guess he was just talking about many of the different things that we want to look at the other cities have done. And we, of course, want to bring forward the issues of renter protections that's rent control and just cause eviction. These are things that we definitely want to see, hopefully considered by the city council, as you probably know. Last Friday we resubmitted language for a rent control and just cause eviction as well as the rent board ballot initiative that will hopefully be seen on the November 2018 election. So we're hoping that whatever review occurs in about 90 days that these things are brought up by city council and we're looking forward to these. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Mayor City Council, Don Darnell are asking me. I'm a commissioner.
Speaker 4: On the Senior Citizen Advisory Commission and also their housing committee. I want to applaud Councilmember Gonzales, Andrews and Austin for bringing this forward. I think it's a very timely and very necessary one. We're going through so many housing issues, as well as the homeless issues at the same time. I retired from a 30 year military career and myself took advantage of a program in the city of Long Beach Head at that time to help obtain housing. And so if it wasn't for that, I wouldn't be able to live in my condo right now. So that was a good program.
Speaker 8: I don't know.
Speaker 4: The details of it, but whether it could be brought back. But there are some details that certainly should be considered. Of course.
Speaker 8: The people that.
Speaker 4: Should benefit from this, of course, and you've put seniors first is great. But we're talking about low income people.
Speaker 8: We're talking about skinny veterans.
Speaker 4: Disabled and great. Many of the seniors are disabled to some extent at least.
Speaker 8: But displaced people and homeless people, it's very important. I would and of course, as you recall, as you know.
Speaker 4: Seniors are very high propensity voters, too. So don't forget that what I would request. Two things I'd like to request is that the proposed program be very specific.
Speaker 8: In the range of rents and the costs that would be involved and excuse me and defined.
Speaker 4: As affordable, a clear definition of what's affordable. Different parameters there. And also, I'd like to request the city manager allow.
Speaker 8: The the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission to review and comment on the proposed program before it's submitted to City Council.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 8: Hello. My name is Harry Hap. Gideon and I belong in First District. What I want to say is a one week ago. I was at the state of the city. I enjoyed your presentation, Mr. Mayor. And it was. A very, I should say, enlightening and very exciting speech. Three. Two days after that, I found myself in Sacramento in a committee chamber discussing Costa Hawkins. I'm sure you're all familiar with that. And the restrictions. It's an archaic law that places restrictions on housing. There was a vote taking place. There was public comment and a vote taking place, and it was defeated by one vote. The the measure was to eliminate has the cocoons. And that. Yeah, that. That was disappointing, but not as disappointing as the number of people. That had come there to a to object not to object to the repeal of it. And that was. That was really, really disappointing. And so what we'd like to see what we'd like to see in Long Beach. Like the speaker. A couple of people before me is. Is just cause evictions and rent control. So with that, I thank you all for putting up with me. But the horrific thing that I saw that took place. I believe that there's large amounts of currency that's coming into this country as buying up properties, raising property values and causing my time's up.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello, honorable councilmembers and mayor. My name is Fred Sutton with the California Apartment Association. Thank you for all your time on this dais and spending time on this issue. The association is very thankful to see housing providers and their expertize is to be consulted on items that could affect their communities. There are many operational nuances that need to be taken into consideration as we have these discussions. There are policies in other cities that work very well and there's policies in other cities that are very counterproductive, both to our shared goals and to the housing stock. We look forward to working with the city and all the council members on these issues. And thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And our final speaker.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Honorable Mayor Dr. Garcia.
Speaker 5: Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the council. I'm here this.
Speaker 6: Evening on behalf of the Small Property Owners Alliance, and we very much appreciate Ms..
Speaker 5: Gonzalez, Councilwoman Gonzales, including our organization, as we've we are an important.
Speaker 6: Organization representing owners in Long Beach as well. So we greatly appreciate that. We look forward to being able to work with the city as we build on your report.
Speaker 5: Mayor Garcia of last year, those 29 recommendations, we want to.
Speaker 6: See what has happened. We're interested, too.
Speaker 5: And we also want to work with the city on the issues that are being brought up this evening. So we thank you very much for that opportunity.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And with that, we will close the public comment. There's a motion in a second to approve the recommendations. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to go ahead and do. Where is my list? We're doing six and then 10 to 6 is a day work program for Councilman Price and then ten is the audit bid. And I know that our amazing auditor is here. See, now she's getting a taste of all of these lunch. I know she wants to run for the council after this. That's all I keep. I keep I keep hearing that. And actually, that's that's that is actually correct that we have her is my thing here we I actually we it's so late they so here is Ken is Ken Roth here? Here. Ken, please come down. Is Jordan win here or win? I'm sorry if I got there. He talked to you. Okay. Okay. Okay. Is Robert Pete here? No. Okay. Mr.. Mr. Roth, these are. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to direct City Manager to schedule a City Council report to review progress on the city's Report on Revenue Tools and Incentives for the Production of Affordable and Workforce Housing, adopted by the City Council in May of 2017. Include updates on all 29 action items, including progress on the inclusionary housing policy, short term rental policy, and updates on new funding from recent State legislation including recording fee legislation.
Direct City Manager, through the Department of Development Services and the Housing Authority, to present research and findings on potential polices to support tenants, protections for seniors, rental assistance programs, and support for renters to move into homeownership. Policy considerations should include:
• A "Seniors First" program to ensure vulnerable seniors receive
priority in rental assistance and relocation programs;
• Options for new and/or expanded rental assistance and relocation
programs;
• Policies that support tenants adopted in other cities;
• Programs to assist renters with homeownership programs; | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0039 | Speaker 0: Get us that information so that we could have it. Thank you, sir. Okay. Now, item number six.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Price Councilmember Super Naa Councilman Andrews Councilman Austin Recommendation to request that the city manager's office engage nonprofits regarding the feasibility of establishing a Pilot Day work program focused on people suffering from homelessness based on successful programs implemented by other cities.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. So I know it's very late, but I ask for my colleagues engagement on this one. And this is an item that came back to us from city staff as a result of the May 23rd agenda item that I brought asking for a comprehensive strategy to address homelessness. This was one of the ideas that we had research that had been used in other throughout cities and other parts of the country, and that had worked real effectively in terms of getting homeless individuals into a permanent or more stable work situations. And so I appreciate staff in their December 18th memo to the council highlighting this as an option that would be feasible for the city of Long Beach. A number of cities across the country have developed successful day work programs designed for homeless individuals. Some of these include Albuquerque, New Mexico. Anaheim, California. Bakersfield, California. Denver, Colorado. Hayward, California. Tucson, Arizona. New York. New York. San Francisco, California. San Jose, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz, California. Homelessness continues to be a major problem in Long Beach. I know that my district is not alone. However, in my district it continues to be the number one area where we get residential concerns regarding quality of life issues associated with transient activity and homelessness. And our continuum of care. There is major through our continuum of care, there's major progress being made, and that is all very positive. However, the issue of homelessness is complex and there's no single solution, meaning that it is necessary for us to develop creative approaches and try them even on a small scale or pilot basis, to determine what needs and opportunities exist for different individuals. Providing an opportunity for individuals struggling with homelessness to earn a day's pay could help reach out to those willing to work but unable to find or keep employment due to their homelessness. Efforts like this could also help build trust in the homeless community and encourage more people to accept and seek out services and resources available to help get people off the streets long term with sustained improvements to their lives, with creativity and hard work, Long Beach can do more to help those most in need and suffering from homelessness. This dog work program will become another resource for those who have unfortunately found themselves homeless and in need of income, in need of stability, in need of opportunity, and in need of a hand up, not a handout. Not only would this program be giving work to those most in need, creating a benefit for those individuals.
Speaker 6: But the work.
Speaker 9: They would be doing would also be helping the city do more maintenance and beautification, resulting in benefits to all Long Beach residents. This is a project that, when looking at the feasibility staff, recommended partnership with a nonprofit organization, and that's really what this item requests. The item request staff to seek out potential nonprofit partners and develop a potential budget. So when looking at other cities, the budgets were actually not huge to do something like this. And I think given the right nonprofit partner, we could certainly fundraise to raise money to do this program, at least on a pilot basis, to see if it is resulting in actual changes to individuals lives. Our office has already reached out to some nonprofit partners such as the Conservation Corps, who are interested in partnering with us on something like this. But certainly, I'm sure there are other nonprofit organizations who would want to try a day work program like this. It gives an opportunity for individuals who want to work hard but cannot get employed, whether it's because of substance abuse issues, mental health issues, or lack of residents to have the opportunity to earn a meaningful day's of work. So I ask my colleagues to support this, and the item is really asking for a report back on this particular aspect of the more comprehensive report that staff brought forth in December. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Andrews. Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yes, thank you, Mayor. First of all, I think Council Councilmember Price for bringing this forward and this item allows me to, you know, for bringing me forward to sign on this item. You know, I am very, very supportive of this measure because we really have the ability to help and provide a path to prosperity. And these opportunities should be. Readable and available to motivate individuals because in fact, it's just like she was saying, just because you have these gears, you know, illness out things is happening in your life, it shouldn't stop you from being able to get a job and start working. And I've always said that, remember, I said a job can stop a bullet. And I truly believe this day work program is something we should really explore immediately in Long Beach. And I'm hoping, Mr. West, that we can really get a chance to see all the findings, you know, seeking the findings in this. And thank you again, you know, Councilwoman Mrs. Price with this bringing this to the diocese.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I also want to thank my colleague for bringing this forward. I have a couple.
Speaker 6: Of.
Speaker 5: Comments or questions. This is something I definitely support. I think as we're crafting this and working with a nonprofit, I think there's some statements in here that say various help me find it, various forms of payment.
Speaker 6: And so I just would like.
Speaker 5: To state that I would hope that we would be paying anybody that's working the same wages, that somebody that would do their job that is housed. I also would like to include in the health department. I know, Kelly, we've had some conversations around the grants that you guys receive that you do work on trauma informed organizational development . Perhaps we could explore if we do take on this, whoever is employing these folks, that there's at least a little bit of training in how to work best with those that are struggling with homelessness, particularly around the trauma informed organizational development. So putting together something that would include that would be really important to me. And then the other question I have is what type of screening process would be included and does that include medical screening, background checks and what the reasoning behind that screening would be? And just making sure that we're not using this as an opportunity to exclude anybody from a job program, but instead connect them to the correct services to ensure that they're successful.
Speaker 6: So yeah.
Speaker 5: I with those considerations when it comes back, I definitely supportive of this. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Sounds like it's getting expensive. I want to just say that that I agree that that we should be compensating anybody that that we are requesting labor from fairly. But I do think that this is a innovative approach that that deserves our our our consideration. And so I want to thank Councilmember Price for bringing it forward. And I'm happy to sign on to this part. I know there are models and at least there's a couple of models in other cities that that actually are doing this. I know Albuquerque, New Mexico is one. I would love to study that model and understand exactly what they're doing, because apparently it's having some success. But I wouldn't limit it to two that that model or I would challenge our staff to develop our own, if possible. I think homelessness is a issue that that we all should be engaged in and should be a part of the solution. And I think not only nonprofits, but private sector companies as well should should we we should ask them to step up to the plate and help out and be creative in terms of providing a leg up or for those experiencing homelessness. So I'm happy to support and hope that the rest of the council will as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 9: Best thanks to Councilman Price for bringing this forward. I, I was actually just thinking about what else we need to do with this specific issue over the weekend, as I see an uptick of individuals who are experiencing homelessness in our parks. I think more than ever before and there's, you know, specific demographics that I think we need to to work on. So this is fantastic having nonprofits, partner. Just an idea that I wanted to put out there is maybe creating some sort of apprenticeship type program with our city employees who can become mentors for specific, you know, areas of service like graffiti removal or if it's, you know, picking up trash or what have you. I think that could be a good, you know, synergy between the two. But I think this is a fantastic item. And I'm look for looking forward to seeing more research on this.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council member Soprano.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to sign onto this item.
Speaker 4: I just want to follow up on a couple of points.
Speaker 2: Here to Councilwoman Pearce's point about, I guess, the H.R. function in hiring these folks. I don't want to get.
Speaker 4: Too far into the weeds, but.
Speaker 2: The staff see us going.
Speaker 4: By the city standard or the.
Speaker 2: Nonprofit standard.
Speaker 4: I think we've done a lot of research on this already and we'll be able to report back quickly. Right now, there are certain limitations on what a city can do in hiring these individuals. So that's why you have to partner with with a nonprofit or a partner. And it depends which partner you talk to and what opportunities that they'll have or restrictions that they'll have. And that's that's what Kelly's doing right now. Right. So to that point, we.
Speaker 2: Would have limited oversight on the. Because we would defer to the nonprofit.
Speaker 4: It would depend on as we as we do the M.O. and work this out. I mean, certainly the dollars would be a function and who would hire the people would be an issue and it would be liable for their their human resources and things. But certainly we would locate the work and they I'm making this up, but they potentially would work with could work with our clean teams and that kind of stuff is as we go through corridors and stuff.
Speaker 2: All right, thank you. And then to Councilman Austin's point about with the court this looks like is getting expensive. So item ten is what I ask for, and that is to develop a public information campaign that encourages donations to support this program. And I just happen to believe that's critical to this particular program, that we need everyone to be on board, that this is the direction we're going to try for now and we'll.
Speaker 4: Take public donations. That's it. Thank you. Got to support it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Bye. Sarah Richards.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And thanks to Councilwoman Price for bringing this forward. So question, councilwoman, is the purpose of this sort of doing business as more of an economic thing to help folks or more of a idle hands or, you know, keep folks busy during the day to be productive in a certain way in order to abate certain activities from happening in the neighborhood. How do you if you were to give me a very simple purpose for this, help me understand how you envision this program to be designed. That purpose.
Speaker 9: It's designed to provide homeless individuals a path to employment. And so that's been the focus of all the other programs that have been done throughout the country. And they've tracked how many people got to participate in this, how many of them wanted to participate on multiple days, and how many of them ended up finding permanent work after a six month period of time? So, you know, what happens is we have a lot of individuals who have substance abuse problems or other limitations that keep them from getting a job. They might be able to do it for a day. They might have a positive experience for the day, whether it's the economic benefit or the fellowship or whatever, or if they learn a new skill and then they'll want to come back a second day, maybe not the next day, but a couple of days later. And it kind of that's there's all this research that says when we're talking about long term life changes, sustainable life changes, starting off with kind of a low commitment type employment opportunity is a good way to get folks introduced to the idea of employment.
Speaker 2: So so I would so I would add this then I would offer this, you know, sometimes. So there's a nonprofit called Rap Rap The Kids. It's a nonprofit made by and fully all the membership is made up of active homeless folks. And these people give back, they make quilts, give them the kids, they volunteer in community service projects. And in their perspective, sometimes it's not about necessarily, you know, the the money that they make, but rather finding the opportunities to be be busy and give back and serve. What I like what I like to say is I know that there some there I've spoken with, you know, staff and stuff about like the challenges with these programs. And a lot of times it's just finance. It just comes down to finances because as you say, we you know, we may say let's give it to a nonprofit , but a nonprofit has to be paid or identify grants or whatever. So we shouldn't limit it to day work, like for pay, but also volunteer opportunities, ways to serve to get back to clean up. Because we will get, you know, if the spectrum is, say, over 100 homeless homeless individuals, let's say ten, 15% participate in a day work program, you might be able to expand it expanded by, you know, 5% or 10% and get that many more people engaged if we don't limit it to they work. So just that would be what I would I would offer in terms of program designing.
Speaker 3: You.
Speaker 0: Councilman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I think that's an excellent point. Vice Mayor Richardson, I agree with you. I mean, what I was envisioning I know the feasibility of doing this city wide is very challenging. So maybe if we did a pilot, maybe we have different nonprofits throughout the city and they can offer different opportunities and some could be volunteer based , some could be economic assistance based. But I'm open to all of that. I think just just getting people doing activities that are resulting in positive, positive experiences that might result in meaningful changes, I think that would be great. Like in Denver, for example, they had a $50,000 budget, they had 109 people work and get paid. And more than 49 of those participants found permanent work as a result of that effort. So I think, you know, depending on what what staff comes back with, I mean, I am committed to working with my community. And I know we have one of our neighborhood association presidents here and several others expressed support for this. I'm committed to working with my community to raise the money that we would need for a pilot just to see how this works. I think we could easily raise 40 or $50,000 to at least try it.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mingo.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I am excited to support this item. I think that it's a great opportunity for us to take a step forward and support a population that really needs our help.
Speaker 6: And great work, everyone.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Yeah, I'm very supportive of this. I think it's great. Councilwoman and the other signers as well, just the city staff. I know that we've been working on a a similar effort. I know we've been working kind of we look we look at the model of doing kind of a clean team dedicated just to this work . I know that Mr. Back Commissioner Craig, she has been working on this with them, teaming up with some nonprofits. I just want to make sure that as this moves forward, we had had approached the county about possibly funding one of these clean teams for us as a pilot project as well. I've made up of homeless individuals. I want to should we just marry these two? And so as the report comes back, I just want to have two separate efforts. But if we can, whatever we are working on, on the public work side, we can just add to this that Councilman Price is presenting. I think that would be great.
Speaker 4: Craig and Kelly been working on this together, so I think it's already married, but I'll make sure that Craig's working on that. Whatever the county's got up their sleeve.
Speaker 0: Excellent. Excellent. Good public comment, please.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, members of the city council will be happy to participate in this conversation. Right now, the downtown lobby associates are extremely alliance.
Speaker 4: Has clean team and safe team.
Speaker 2: Workers who are.
Speaker 4: Interned by MHRA.
Speaker 2: Patients. And so we use them to do volunteer work in our downtown and we have an Ally Buster program that we've initiated with MHRA. It's worked out very, very successful. And then we look forward to leading them towards the vendors that provide the services and then that goes towards obviously full time employment.
Speaker 0: So we'll be.
Speaker 2: We'll be happy to look at that and certainly look at the opportunities that we just gone out to an RFP for both the clean and safe contracts for the downtown. And we could certainly look at establishing this program into our scope of service with those vendors as well. So it's certainly a good it could be a good match at a good time.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the public comment.
Speaker 4: Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. I'm Gary Morrison. 385 Flint Alameda Heights Improvement Association President. And I'm grateful for Councilwoman Price for providing this conversation along. I think the key here is when we talking about hand out and hand up, that the hand that hands up is one that makes contact with people on the streets and people who are in need and people who are shelter lists. And hopefully we can bring them into the community and get them employed and get them a better life situation. So my constituents are very concerned about the population and the transient population in our neighborhood, the iron triangle, the panhandlers, the people who with shopping carts and and it would be really nice if we could have a program that would work that's like this, that's out of the box that can stimulate people who need to be connected to our society to get them connected. So. Thank you, Councilwoman, and thank you, everyone else for considering this measure.
Speaker 0: Thank you. See no other public comment. Let's go and vote.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 6: Price.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Excellent. Thank you. Very nice and thank you, of course, everyone that staying late for these items. We appreciate that. We're moving on to item ten, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request that the City Manager's office; Health and Human Services Department; Parks, Recreation, and Marine Department; and/or Public Works Department engage nonprofits regarding the feasibility of establishing a pilot Day Work Program focused on people suffering from homelessness based on successful programs implemented by other cities. The City will look into the fiscal impact of such a program, possible partners, as well as the potential benefits to the efforts being made to help individuals experiencing homelessness, as well as a public education campaign to encourage donations to this program and other opportunities to support addressing homelessness. The intent of this item is to offer new opportunities to those experiencing homelessness not to replace workers already employed by the city.
Should include but is not limited to:
1. Community partners to serve as fiscal agents, to provide housing for
participants, and to provide other necessary components to
success of the program;
2. Various forms of payment and daily wage for participants in the
pro | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0043 | Speaker 0: Excellent. Thank you. Very nice and thank you, of course, everyone that staying late for these items. We appreciate that. We're moving on to item ten, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Price Councilmember Super Non recommendation to receive and file a report from the City Auditor on the findings and recommendations of the recently completed audit on the city's business improvement district oversight.
Speaker 0: Came into preference over. Councilman Alston.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'd like for first of all, a staff report on this. I know our economic development department was involved in this as well, but Mr. City Manager is there staff.
Speaker 0: Report I'm assuming we're going to have that reported in our section.
Speaker 4: We weren't expecting the staff report. I'm sure we can ask John some questions, but I think we're just expecting a report from the auditor. Okay.
Speaker 8: Well, that's great, too. And I'll turn it over to to Laura Doubt, our auditor, we brought this item forward requesting a audit of our bids several months ago and our city ordered it, took it our our department took it upon themselves to to move forward with the the audit. I think the findings were very interesting. We got it in a24 from that which is commonly mentioned. I don't know if everybody understands at home with a24 from is but it is a memo or a report back and we got a great report from the city auditor and I thought it merited attention before the floor because it was an excellent job. I think it did. The the findings will will certainly help us improve the efficiency and accountability to all stakeholders in our bids and inspire public confidence. I think the report I'll just say was, was, was excellent and overall the outcomes were pretty good and there were some great recommendations. And so with that, I'd like to turn it over to you, Madam Auditor.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 5: And thank you.
Speaker 6: For to Councilwoman Pryce and Councilman to Vernon for your support in.
Speaker 5: This item. Mayors and mayor, members of the City Council.
Speaker 6: I have been observing you tonight for over 6 hours. And I want to say that it's really impressive. It's I think it shows a lot of your devotion to public service. I've noticed that none of the issues have been rushed tonight and that you've asked very good questions and been extremely focused on the issues to serve the public. And it's been impressive to me.
Speaker 5: And a night that I'll remember.
Speaker 6: Is a clicker. I just have a couple of slides. If I can just start out with a couple thank you's and I would like to specifically thank the bids and the executive directors of each one of the bids. I'd like to thank Craig Kurkjian for being here this evening and for his work with the downtown big welcome for the Bixby North Degrassi for Thelma Shaw, Steve Goodman for CVB, Kristine Hammon for East Anaheim's of area. Christopher for Fourth Street, Annie Greenfeld for Magnolia Mono with for Midtown and Tosha Hunter for Uptown. All of the bids were extremely cooperative and open during the whole entire process. I also want to thank City Management and John Keisler, the director of Economic Development, and Eric Romero for their cooperation throughout this whole process. They have been nothing but cooperative.
Speaker 5: And.
Speaker 6: Open to our audit and our suggestions, and this really could not have gone any smoother than it did. So I want to.
Speaker 5: Thank them for that.
Speaker 6: As I mentioned earlier, one of the reasons why we chose to do this bid is because we had not looked at the bids over the past 12 years. We know in 2016 that the bids brought in approximately $17 million to be invested in the city's business corridors. And we know 9 million of it was passed through to the city. And we know that the bids play a very important role in the economic vitality of our city and do tremendous work for our city. So and also, the city has a stake in the business. You know, the city's of property owner within for the property based bids. And they all about $630,000 in assessments in 2016. And it's important to the city council because you approve the formation of the bids, the agreements established, the assessment formulas and the the annual activities that they report, as well as their budgets. So I believe this is an important item to the city council so that, you know, that, that you're approving a plan that is consistent with what you're expecting from them. And we wanted to make sure that the city was supporting them in the best possible manner so that they can continue to work and have a positive impact on our on our community. And we know that they are doing great work. This has been a great experience for me and learning more about the the investment of time and resources the bids put into our city, the improvements for crime and security and cleaning efforts for their innovation, and putting events together like the taste of downtown and the car shows and the holiday parades and just as strong savers and security efforts, social media advertising. It's been a great partnership, we believe, between the city and the bids. And we wanted to make sure that the city was providing the best possible services that they could. So I just had a brief three slide PowerPoint this evening and just wanted to touch on a couple of things. Our audited focus on the city's management and oversight of the bids, including how the city handles the agreements and the reporting. We did find that there is room for improvement in the city's oversight. We had five key findings and some multiple recommendations for this. Just wanted to say that regarding state law, that that rules the bids. They're required to submit annual reports to the City Council, proposing activities and budgets for the upcoming year. And after reviewing annual report submitted for fiscal year 2017, we found that many of the reports were missing several components and did not provide a full picture of the bid operations. There were some estimated amounts of surplus in carryovers from the previous fiscal year and the amount of contributions received from sources other than the assessment levies. We believe that a budget to actual comparison would help identify these missing items such as these, and we recommend that in order to be compliant with state law and simplify the reporting, we recommend that the city reassess which reports the bids need to submit. We also recommend that they create templates and institute a review of all required reports. Part of our objective was looking at the city's management and transfer of the fees. The first was related to tracking and transfer of payments. The city receives assessment fees from business, property owners and the county, and ultimately the city passes this on to the revenue to the. These functions are incredibly important so the city can ensure the bears receive the revenue they're entitled to and that it occurs on a consistent schedule so that the Bears can receive the revenue when it's expected. We're talking about $9 million a year in assessment fees which are passed through to the city. So this is a significant amount of money we want to make sure we're tracking properly. And our recommendation was to address these issues centered around the simplifying of payment processes and have the city create a schedule to track the payments . Regarding assessment formula, this is number three on the slide. We found that the city was not facilitating, but that the city was not facilitating communication and assessment fee formulas, which led to some mistakes and how some of the businesses were billed and the assessment fees were not charged to all businesses due to errors in the system used to track the data and how processes were designed. So our recommendation was to have the city communicate more effectively on assessment fees with all involved parties, and to partner with the bids to identify unlicensed businesses in their districts. Our final slide here is when a bid forms the city, contracts with a nonprofit and creates an agreement outlining responsibilities for each party through interviews with the bids. We learned that the bids were either not aware that agreements existed or are not knowledgeable knowledgeable of the terms in their agreements. We also learned that the city is currently not enforcing all agreements as required, and after reviewing the agreements, we also found that agreement terms are outdated, ambiguous and cumbersome. So we found that there are too many reports they take too long to produce and they're often repetitive. We recommend that the city update the bid agreements to reflect current processes surrounding required reporting and payments, and the city should discuss the new agreements with the bids to ensure they are knowledgeable of the terms and enforce the new agreement terms. And finally, our communication of information. During the audit, we learned that each bid operates unique to the needs of their district. But there are certain topics that are universal to bid operations and oversight. The city's role is to be a liaison for the bids by collecting and passing on assessment revenue and facilitating the required and reporting. We found that with these responsibilities, the city has limited staff to perform all of these duties. And so the city we recommend use additional communication tools to help provide bids with the necessary information. The more effective the communication process we know, the more efficient the bids can be. And our recommendation is for a communication framework to be established in the form of a handbook and targeted trainings. In conclusion, overall, I'm very pleased that the city and the bid's agreed with our recommendations. They were open there, they were receptive. They came up with other ideas on how this whole process could be more streamlined. And the relationship between the city and the bids is a partnership that is working well here in the city to the right regarding the economic vitality of it. And we hope that the recommendations in our audit report provide a blueprint and guideline and framework for the bid program moving forward. So we thank you for your support.
Speaker 0: Excellent work. Thank you very much. Comes from us and we thank.
Speaker 4: You again for that great.
Speaker 8: Report and the excellent work by your your team of auditors. And I'm glad that our bids were supportive. Most of the feedback that I have received has been positive, especially from the out of town bid, which I understand was found a little bonus in there. So that through the process, can you.
Speaker 0: Explain that?
Speaker 6: Yes. There was an actual underpayment to the uptown of approximately $54,000 from the city to uptown. So they did receive a bonus of about $54,000, which was approximately 30% of their budget. So that was a big bonus as a result of the audit.
Speaker 4: So I know Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 8: Is very supportive of that audit now.
Speaker 4: And to that point, I also want to.
Speaker 8: Just acknowledge that we do have some staff here. You made several recommendations in your your audit. And I want to give our staff an opportunity to just talk about how they are addressing some of those recommendations. Great.
Speaker 4: Mayor Councilman Hughes, before I give this over to John and Eric, I do want to point out that we've got you know, John is brand new handling the bids, so we've got brand new management of the bid's working with the auditor. And also Eric Romero is brand new as well. So I'm very, very confident with two fresh eyes here with the department head director and also Eric being brand new as well, will take a fresh look at the bids and be pay a lot of attention to to the audit and work with COBA to facilitate all this. So, John, any comments?
Speaker 10: Yeah. Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council, Eric Romero is our our.
Speaker 0: Bid coordinator and he'll provide a short.
Speaker 10: Update as to how we will respond to the audit recommendations. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Good evening, honorable man. Members of the city council. I'll try to keep this short. The Economic Development Department is in support of the auditors findings and is committed to implementing the recommendations included in the mid order report. We feel that this will help to create the appropriate program structure and transparency that is needed to better support our business improvement districts. And we would like to thank the Auditor's Office for putting together a great audit and the Business Improvement District staff for their cooperation. The Economic Development Department plans to implement all of the auditor's recommendations in either fiscal year 2018 or calendar year 2018, depending on the specific recommendation. We will primarily focus on three different areas of work, which are payments, policies and procedures and professional development. In regards to payments, we will focus on establishing the appropriate policy. Seasoned procedures to ensure that bin payments are made on time, that they are accurate, and that all staff involved across departments understands the appropriate process moving forward. We're already moving forward with this recommendation by developing a property based Improvement District Payment Process Handbook in the Economic Development Department. It will define these policies and procedures for collecting and making payments to the bids. It will centralize key information required to make payments such as the assessments, amounts due per department and other government agencies such as Language Transit and Language Unified School District, that are also responsible for an assessment. It will centralize all of the index codes that are required to make payments. All of the contact information for key city personnel across departments that is involved in the PE bid payment process and payment tracking schedule for the bids as well. In regards to policies and procedures, we are moving forward with developing a bid handbook that will cover topics such as the roles and responsibilities of the city and the nonprofit organizations that we enter into agreement with. We will also include the agreements with the city in reporting requirements, payment and fee processes, PE bids, district management plans, and the annual reports of PBIS assessment formulas and the history on each bid. It essentially be a central clearinghouse of information that will help business improvement district leaders run successful business improvement district. We will also update each bids agreement with the city to reflect current processes and enforce and also enforce these agreements as much as we can will create templates for annual reports and other required reports as well. And in regards to professional development, will train bid staff on key legal requirements and city requirements that they are required to follow. We will also provide additional trainings with new executive directors or bid staff come on board and we will help bids, access and better understand data that they need to help run a successful bid such as business licensing information and property owner information. Our immediate next steps are to start scheduling meetings with individual business improvement districts to discuss in detail the implementation goals of the city. And it is not our intention to implement any of these recommendations in a vacuum. We will work closely with all of the bids to ensure we are all in alignment. This is just the beginning and we think this is going to be great to get the bids to where they need to be. We look to continue to support the bids and to ensure that we can continue to grow them in the city as well as are doing great work. And again, thank you, auditor down.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And next, we have Councilor Rachael Brown.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Honorary Daoud, we really appreciate all your efforts here. You had mentioned that the process was embraced by the members. I know in the case of one of the bids in my district, they were really looking for structure and it appears that that you were able to provide that and not only just structure for that bid that will be consistent throughout the city. So thank you for that.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 5: I always love how you consolidate all the big thoughts into just a few slides that really drive home the points.
Speaker 6: Often those that are managing our beds are running corporations, little mini corporations.
Speaker 5: And to be able to distill it down in the way that you did. Every single person I've talked to has said.
Speaker 6: How helpful and supportive the entire process was. And so it only reinforces how we have the best auditor anywhere. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: But you really want to be on the city council?
Speaker 6: Yeah, please.
Speaker 0: I thought it was obviously a joke. Councilman Price Pryce.
Speaker 9: Good thing for me, the nomination period is over because she lives in my district and I do not want to be auditor. So I just wanted to say thank you to you and to your office for the great work that you did on this. It was a huge undertaking and clearly something that we hadn't really evaluated ever. And so I appreciate you doing that. And I appreciate Councilman Austin for having the foresight to to realize that there were some efficiencies that could be had and some consistent application of policies that the city and and the bids will benefit from. So I want just want to thank you. That was an excellent presentation. And I know that the bid that I work most closely with the Belmont Shore Business Association is aware of the report, and I think they're actually getting some money that is owed to them, is what I read in the report from the city. So anyway, thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much. Utter doubt. Is there any public comment on this item?
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, I'd be remiss if I didn't congratulate our out for the excellent work that she conducted on this audit. Following a spirited conversation year ago December here in these chambers relative to this subject matter. Auditor Dowd and I had a conversation. And what she said was, if she decides to do it, if she decides to do an audit on bids, it will be done in a strategic manner. It won't there won't be a witch hunt involved, and there'll be clear objectives involved in that process. And she kept her promise. All the bids collaborated. All the bids contributed to the process. You're reading the report that the artist's office presented. I want to feel as though the bids had a role in writing that report based on their contributions, based on the information, the contributions that they made to the report. There are some cities that go out of their way to help bids succeed because it is an economic tool that they can use to their benefit. There are some cities that don't do anything at all to help these bids. New York City is one of those.
Speaker 4: Prime examples that has 75 bids.
Speaker 2: Within their cities, within their city, and they go out of their way to help the bids become successful full time staff, full time manual, full time execution. And I think that's a model that we could look at as a successful model for bids to succeed and for cities to be able to work with these improvement district. So again, thank you very much for your patience. Thank you very much for your leadership.
Speaker 4: And thank Auditor Dowd for.
Speaker 2: The work that her team conducted on behalf of the business and the city.
Speaker 4: So we're looking forward to.
Speaker 2: Working with us on this in a very.
Speaker 4: Strategic manner. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Thanks. Yes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Item number eight and nine or both of the Parklets will take photos up. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from the City Auditor on the findings and recommendations of the recently completed audit on the City's Business Improvement District oversight. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0041 | Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Item number eight and nine or both of the Parklets will take photos up.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzales. Councilwoman Mango Vice Mayor Richardson. Recommendation to direct the city manager to report back within 90 days regarding the current program and municipal codes related to PARKLETS in the City of Long Beach.
Speaker 0: Councilman.
Speaker 9: Yes, I first would just like to thank my colleagues, Councilmember Mongo and Vice Mayor Richardson, for joining me on this item. Everyone knows how very popular parklets are they've become in the city, and we want to capitalize on the moment, the momentum and interest for that. We as a city know that our current municipal code only states that parklets are to be used for dining experiences. And so we want to expand on that and look for ways in which we can look at alternative uses. And in the next item, you'll see one of those alternative uses being put in front of us. And so I hope to have that your support on that as well. But studies in both San Francisco, New York City have shown substantial increases in pedestrian traffic and engagement once parklets were installed. And for that reason I hope that we have your support here and see how we can expand our opportunities here and I think quite cogent from the DBA for sticking with us here and also just being very helpful in placemaking and in doing everything they can for parklets.
Speaker 0: Councilman. Mango.
Speaker 6: This is a great opportunity for our local businesses.
Speaker 5: I look forward to hearing the report back and I am very, very supportive of these. I think that.
Speaker 6: The more we can embrace the amazing outdoors and the real estate available.
Speaker 5: To us, the better it will be for our local businesses.
Speaker 0: Q Vice Mayor Richardson, very supportive.
Speaker 2: Lima, good work. I really want to see that outdoor gym parklet thing. It's a pretty cool idea. And I know, you know, last round in the Knight Foundation there were with this night City Challenge, there were some cool ideas around interesting parklets. So I think this is consistent with with some of that and then with our work around sort of bringing Wi-Fi outside, smart corridors uplink, things like that, I think, you know, we can think about doing more stuff outdoors, more parklets in nontraditional spaces. So I think it's a good idea and I support it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Very supportive. Just one. One thing to add, Mr. West, I know it's been discussed, but the one thing I just want to make sure is that we're pleased. We need to expand to ensure that future parklets at least have a public component, public option component. And I know that every parklet that we have in the city currently is attached to a private enterprise, which we love, and we love that restaurants have additional space for for patrons, but we yet to have a parklet in the in the city that is open to the public and that is actually public space or seating or activities for the public to use. And so I know that if you go to all the great cities that the councilwoman mentioned, all of them have some really, really cool public parklets. And so if we can work and try a pilot or two somewhere around the city that we can actually have a public parklet as well. Two of the other amazing parklets that we all love, that would be great. So we can add that to the conversation. That's wonderful. Is there any public comment on this? No. No further comment. Members, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to direct City Manager, or his designee, to report back to the City Council within 90 days regarding the current program and municipal codes related to Parklets in the City of Long Beach. This report should include:
• Details of the current program and procedures including costs
associated;
• Ways to modernize the program to allow other non-restaurant
small businesses opportunities to create the same public/private
space in front of their establishments;
• Insight on what cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and others
are doing regarding similar programs;
• Opportunities to make this program more cost-effective for small
business owners. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0042 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. And the second item is out of nine. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 9: So relative to the former discussion, this would be basically amending the municipal code to allow a gym parklet in front of Groundwork Fitness. And so I want to thank goodness I told her not to come. But Jill Ferraro, who has been very diligent in working with my office, I also want to thank the city attorney's office, Charlie and Linda Vu, as well as Shaun Crombie and Public Works. I know we gave you all a headache over these parklets and I know it was a lot to navigate with us, but we appreciate it and now we will hopefully have a nice new gym parklet in front of her space. So we're excited about that.
Speaker 0: I'll be working out and not really get a motion in a second, please. Why don't we let Councilman Gonzalez the real. Is there any public comment on this signal to scatter votes? | Agenda Item | Recommendation to direct City Attorney to draft an ordinance amending Long Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.14 to enable a gym parklet pilot project (Project) for the installation of a sidewalk extension parklet for fitness activities and equipment within the City's right-of-way adjacent to 333 Pine Avenue; and
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Public Walkways Occupancy Permit with sidewalk extension parklet for the Project at Groundwork Fitness located at 333 Pine Avenue. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0036 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great item 12.
Speaker 1: The final report from Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Communications Recommendation to authorize a city manager to execute a memorandum of understanding with the Long Beach Community Foundation to establish and administer a disaster relief fund and authorize a one time initial investment of 2500 citywide.
Speaker 0: This is actually a really great project, so let's see if we can have a short presentation.
Speaker 4: Reggie Harrison And then we also have Marcel Epperly in the audience remembers City Council. The item.
Speaker 8: Before you is a request to authorize the city manager to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Land based Community Foundation in order to administer a disaster relief.
Speaker 2: Fund. Incidents throughout the country and California, in.
Speaker 8: Particular, over the last couple of.
Speaker 2: Weeks and months dictate a better understanding and alternative ways in which we can assist residents during manmade and natural disasters. The Land based Community Foundation has agreed to.
Speaker 8: Partner with the City of Long Beach to manage such a.
Speaker 2: Fund that it would operate year round and it would provide businesses and and residents an opportunity.
Speaker 8: To contribute at their leisure, to provide safeguards in terms of contributions that that are made, that the moneys would be applied as dictated. Our concept would be.
Speaker 2: That the foundation would reimburse nonprofits that provide assistance to our residents.
Speaker 4: And we're really, really fortunate.
Speaker 2: That we have an outstanding foundation in the city of Long Beach that's willing.
Speaker 8: To partner with us and provide this support. Marcel Epperly, the president and CEO of the Long Beach Community Foundation.
Speaker 2: Has waded throughout the evening to be here to show her continued support for this item.
Speaker 8: And with that, I conclude staff report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So do you want to add anything or. You don't have to. It's just. It's up to you if you want, if you'd like to be here.
Speaker 9: Sir Derek, at any minutes to this marsala plate. I just want to.
Speaker 5: Say thank you for your support and that with the disasters.
Speaker 9: A lot of them that happened.
Speaker 5: Last year, if you look at Oakland with the warehouse fire and you look at the hurricanes.
Speaker 9: That happened in Palm Beach and in Houston and all.
Speaker 5: Over, it was the residents of those cities. The second thing they say after.
Speaker 9: You know, am I okay? Is my family, my peers okay, is what can I do to help? And a lot of times that's donating and.
Speaker 5: With this fund. Residents of Long.
Speaker 9: Beach can donate year round and the city can then use that as a resource to help us when we have things like power outages and flooding and things like that. And so thank you, Reggie.
Speaker 1: For working with us on this. And thank.
Speaker 5: You, city manager Pat West and Tom Monaco and the mayor and.
Speaker 9: Everybody for your support.
Speaker 3: To look at half an hour overlay on that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thanks for being here for being with us here as well. So no the public comment to please cast your vote and. But one more item. Forgot motion carries an item five. Can you get a motion in a second, please? | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding, and any necessary amendments, with the Long Beach Community Foundation, a California non-profit corporation, to establish and administer a disaster relief fund; and, authorize a one-time initial investment of $2,500 from the General Fund (GF). (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0003 | Speaker 0: Thank you. So let's go ahead and pull up our first hearing. So hearing them hearing item number one.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution approving an amendment to Midtown's specific plan. Environmental Impact Report. Adopt a resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use District Map by changing the designation of 13 properties to mixed uses. Adopt a resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report and approving a lot merger and site plan review request to allow the construction of a new five story mixed use building at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, District one.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I understand there's no oath required that true? City Manager.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 0: Okay. All right. So, Mr.. Mr. Modica, take us away.
Speaker 3: So, first off, Mayor Councilors, I do want to introduce our brand new first ever interim director of Development Services as this first ever meeting Tom Modica. Why, thank you, Mr. West. I'm happy to be here for this. You'll hear a staff report from Kari Tai, our current current planning officer supported by Oscar Orsi, our deputy director of development services. So take it away, Carrie.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Tom. Good afternoon. Honorable Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the city council staff has prepared a presentation that summarizes the staff report. If you so choose, we will proceed. This is a request for a general plan amendment to resolve inconsistencies between the Midtown specific plan and the general plan designation. Hang on.
Speaker 1: A minute. This on. I don't know.
Speaker 4: It's like, let's see.
Speaker 3: In the back. Can we please have the PowerPoint presentation? Not.
Speaker 4: Sorry. Technical difficulties. This is the general plan. Amendment request is also accompanied by a lot merger and a site plan review approval for a new mixed use project at 1795 along Beach Boulevard. Thank you. So on the screen, the red outline shows the development site, and that's at the southwest corner of Long Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. The map is oriented where North is. This is actually facing west, so don't let that disorient you. And the general plan land use designation for the site is mostly in land use District seven, but part of it is in three B, which is residential only, and the development is a mixed use project. And there lies the inconsistency. So talk about the general plan amendment a bit. This area used to be what was called PD 29 plan development 29. That was the zoning and it was changed to the Midtown specific plan in 2016. The Midtown specific plan changed the way that we implemented zoning in this area. Namely, it's more of a form based code and uses floor area ratio. So in terms of the uses, like I mentioned, the project site is on the map here and you'll see it's outside of the hatched area that leaves or is not working. But the the rear part right behind the project site area is an area that's marked as a land use district eight A and that is for retail only. And then if you look under just to the vote below the text of the project site, there's Area three B, which is for residential only. And so you can see that those two don't allow for mixed uses. And so along with the project site, we want to clean up the rear part of the project site as well as a basically a comprehensive area because general plans we can't do parcel by parcel. And so the request here is to take all of that hashed area and make it part of land use District seven. And that will allow us to implement the Midtown specific plan the way it was intended to be implemented. For example, something that is under the allowable floor area ratio may be inconsistent with today's general plan. So in terms of the proposed building at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, like I mentioned, the project is a project is five stories with 102 dwelling units, 101 of those are going to be affordable. The floor area ratio for this project is 3.4, where the Midtown specific plan allows for 4.0. So clearly that's under the Midtown specific plan also allows for ten storeys in this area. But this project is only five stories. However, if it were to go under the existing general plan designation of three B, that only allows 30 dwelling units per acre. And this has 101 over a project site that is just about one acre. And so that's that they're thereby illustrating the technical inconsistency there. With the general plan amendment approved, this project would be able to move forward. The project, like I mentioned, has 102 residential units. It also includes of a series of courtyards, common areas, balconies and amenities for the residents, as well as at that corner plaza there right at Pacific Coast Highway and Long Beach Boulevard. That would really establish a presence and identity right where right now there there lacks a character there. So this would essentially change the entire corner. So then just to summarize the environmental and project findings behind the request here briefly, the Midtown specific plan was accompanied by a certified programmatic environmental impact report. And now that it was always intended that the general plan designations would change along with that, however, as the Council was aware, the ongoing land use element effort that was anticipated to be completed and it was supposed to include the underlying properties for the Midtown Plan. However, since that has not been done, we are actually trying to comply with a mitigation measure out of the programmatic EMR, which required that these cleanup items be completed within one year of adoption. We're just over 18 months now, so we're just trying to get into compliance there. This would clean that up. An addendum was prepared for that program, air for the cleanup, and also the project itself had a separate environmental document that established consistency with the programmatic IIR. The general plan amendment that's proposed is internally consistent with the rest of the general plan. And also the findings for the lot merger and site plan review have been documented in your packet in accordance with the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission who the recommending body on this action met on December 9th, 2017 and recommended that the City Council approve this project. They conducted a public hearing as well and received a series of speakers in support. So lastly, for public noticing, for both the Planning Commission hearing as well as this hearing, public notices were sent out to a 1000 foot radius to property owners as well as occupants of that hashed area you saw on the previous slide. And the staff has not received any comments to date. So therefore staff recommends that the City Council concur with the planning commissions, recommend the recommendation to approve this project and that is articulated in the recommended action on the Council letter as well as the agenda. That concludes staff's presentation and the applicant for the development project is also in the audience. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. So that concludes. That's comments.
Speaker 4: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 0: Okay. So at this point, we're going to open it up for public comment on this hearing. Is there any public comment come forward? Saying none. I'm going to go ahead and close public comment, take it back behind the the rail. So the motion is made by Councilwoman Gonzalez. Do you have a comment?
Speaker 2: I just would like to say thank you to the staff as well as the developer. This is going to be a fantastic attribute to central Long Beach, especially on Long Beach Boulevard. We've been waiting for this for so long. So thank you very much for all of your collaborative work.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Brice.
Speaker 2: I echo that I did have a long list of questions for our interim development services director involving, you know, decades of work on his part. But I will refrain from those so we can get to the state of the city. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Because they would be very short answers.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Supernormal.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I just had one question either for staff or maybe the developer. Was there any reference to the.
Speaker 0: Original use of this building? It's hard to tell now, but it was a Norm's restaurant, one of the.
Speaker 3: Real.
Speaker 0: Most elaborate one of their Googie restaurants. But no preservation, no preservation effort or anything, I guess. Convert Googie. Thank you.
Speaker 4: QUESTION Thank you for your question, Councilman. So you're not in evaluation of any existing project site staff always looks at the existing building on on site to see whether it qualifies for any type of status. And in this case, this did not meet any criteria.
Speaker 3: Okay, fine. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Seeing no further comment. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 3: Hmm. Well.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item number two please. | Resolution | Adopt resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031034) and warrants no further environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162; and, approving a Lot Merger (LMG17-019) and Site Plan Review (SPR17-075) request to allow the construction of a new five-story 145,478-square-foot mixed-use building consisting of 3,938 square feet of commercial space and 102 residential units (101 affordable residential units) at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, in the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-1). (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0006 | Speaker 1: Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution approving an addendum to the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. Adopt a resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use District Map by changing the designation of 11 properties to mixed uses. Adopt a resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report and approving a lot merger to consolidate three lots into one lot on properties located at 183621852 Locust Avenue District six.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Staff report, please.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Vice Mayor Cory Tai again will give a short staff report.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Hello again. This next item is extremely similar to the previous item and it's just the location is slightly to the north, but it's for the same story. And the only difference I'm going to in the interest of brevity, I'm going to skip forward a little bit. The site is the development site here is outlined in in red at 1836 to 1852 Locust Avenue. And there's there's Long Beach Boulevard there to the to the right of that. The green outline is what highlights the general plan amendment area. And again, the reason that we do more than just one parcel is that the general plan covers a cohesive area. And so we took the most logical boundary and our chain are proposing to change the underlying general plan designations to allow for implementation of the Midtown specific plan. The situation is the same where right now the underlying general plan land use allows is three B and eight A, those are the land use districts they allow for residential only or commercial only. And the midtown specific plan being a mixed use district is more suitable for a land use district seven, which is mixed use. And so that's what is being proposed to be changed. The project here is a bit different, is a smaller scale. It's 48 units and this would normally be approved. Actually, this is a site plan, review committee level approval. And so the site plan review committee can only effectuate an approval of this project if the general plan amendment is is approved. So again, this is under the allowable FFR of 4.0. This is a 1.95 and it is a five storey building, 48 units, 47 of which are affordable. And it also includes amenities and private open space for the residents. And again, the project does meet the project findings. The proposed general plan amendment was evaluated and an addendum to the midtown specific plan. Programmatic e.r. And found that no new impacts would be would result from this general plan amendment. There is a lot merger because the project site is made of several lots that need to be combined. Again, the Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on this proposed general plan amendment on December 9th, and they recommended that the City Council approved this request. The public notice thing was sent out and just like the other project staff has not received any any comments on this. So with that, staff is recommending that the City Council concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve this project. At this point, the applicant is in the audience and I staff can also answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this hearing with the applicant, like the address, the council? Okay. So we'll close public? No. Okay. So we'll close public comment. Take it back behind the real Councilmember Andrews. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mr. B, I would just like to say again, we're starting to make this I-66 again look like Naples. You know, with projects like this, we can't go wrong. And I just want to say that General Plans is create an opportunity for more investments in the area. And it has my full support. You know, it needs to be I just want to let you know, this is high quality, affordable housing projects will serve and benefit the residents in that area. And I want to thank you again for bringing this project together. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I'll just say, it looked like the image looked like three levels. So this is five levels. How does that work?
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 2: The front portion of the building is three stories.
Speaker 4: Because they wanted to.
Speaker 2: Conform to the current.
Speaker 1: Neighborhood and not over.
Speaker 4: Build, but the back to where the alley is. Five stories.
Speaker 0: Good, good. I really like that. That staircase and how it sort of you know, it doesn't look too massive in the front, but you still were able to build enough units. That's good. Good stuff. I just want to make a comment.
Speaker 5: Where's Mr. Beer?
Speaker 0: The applicant.
Speaker 5: Here.
Speaker 0: Is the applicant here. Would you like it? I think they want to hear from you.
Speaker 5: We got to hear from you. It's. But this is not good.
Speaker 1: If you insist. I'm Vanessa Luna. I'm the housing director of Clifford Bears Housing. And we're very excited to bring this development forward in Long Beach. Clifford Bears has other developments, affordable communities in Long Beach as well. And we love the city. There's a huge need for affordable housing, especially affordable housing, as we provide with services for residents. And we're really excited to see it happen and very happy to see the support in the community that has come forward for this development. And we're going to be working with community partners to provide services to the residents free of charge, have a property management onsite, reputable John Stuart Company who manages our other buildings. And so it's again, we're very happy to be building here.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Resolution | Adopt resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031034) and warrants no further environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162; and, approving a Lot Merger (LMG17-015) to consolidate three lots into one lot on properties located at 1836-1852 Locust Avenue, in the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-1). (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0014 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 11 Please.
Speaker 1: Report from Public Works recommendation to authorize a city manager to execute a public walkways occupancy permit with sidewalk extension parklet for sidewalk dining at Pine Avenue Parklet located at 440450 and 454. Pine Avenue District one.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Staff report.
Speaker 3: Please. Deputy Director of Public Works, Sean Crombie. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Council. Item 11 on the agenda is a request to approve a parklet within the sidewalk dining program at the addresses of 440450 and 454 Pine Avenue. The PARKLET program is in place to allow restaurants to occupy a portion of the public right away for seating that has multi benefits to the community, in that it provides extra seating for the restaurant, but it also activates space within our public right away. It's been a very successful program. This particular parklet is a little bit unique, first of its kind, because it's the first parklet that's shared between between three different businesses, shared space. So with that, I'm available to answer any questions that you have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to acknowledge Tony Shoshone, who's here. He's really worked very closely with public works, as well as our office in revitalizing what was formerly known as City Place, which is now the street. So I thank you, Tony, as well as Shawn, Crumby and Public Works. Thank you for working through many of our parklet questions. We look forward to continuing our work together.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 1: Also the same. Congratulations. You guys have really helped transform our downtown and so thank you for all the work and always things to stop for thinking outside of the box on our PARKLET program.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Public comment on this item. Seeing nonmembers, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So at this time, we're going to go to public comment on non agenda items. We have only three. I think folks want to get to the state of the city tonight. So we have Harold Ara Boesky. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Public Walkways Occupancy Permit with sidewalk extension parklet for sidewalk dining at Pine Avenue Parklet, located at 440, 450, and 454 Pine Avenue. (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0019 | Speaker 0: Thank you. That concludes public comment. So we'll move forward now to item number 18. I see that.
Speaker 1: That's Glenn Communication from Councilwoman Mango Council member Super Non Councilmember Urunga. Recommendation to request the city manager to work with appropriate staff to report to council within 30 days on a potential EMU executed between public safety and water and gas departments.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I know this item is really important to Councilmember Mongeau, but she's stuck in jury duty, so I'm going to ask that we just continue this, the next city council meeting. So is that is that your second super mystery winner? Yeah. I don't think we have a choice, unfortunately. Well, we do have a choice. We take the item, but I think the good thing to do would be to continue it and not the special meeting tomorrow, the next regularly scheduled city council meeting. Is there any public comment on that motion saying non members, please cast your vote? | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to work with appropriate staff to report to Council within 30 days on a potential MOU executed between public safety and Water and Gas Departments. Public safety enterprise fund services and weighted costs must be addressed appropriately by all departments. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_17-1165 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Number 20, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to declare an interim ordinance adopted as an urgency measure. Establishing a temporary 180 day limitation on the issuance of any permit relating to adult use, non-medical commercial cannabis activity in the city, and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately. Read and adopted as read citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank. Thank you. And just to clarify, this is Mr. West. This is what we requested back in December to give us time to craft an ordinance. Correct. This is the past, Mr. City Attorney.
Speaker 3: That is.
Speaker 0: Correct. Thank you. Second reading. Thank you. Any public comment on this?
Speaker 3: Stephanie Dawson, Sue of Second District. Again, we had no opposition to this particular ordinance other than just as a reminder that 13 out of the 16 stores in Santa Ana were able to open their doors on January 1st and offer adult use cannabis. Additionally, Bell, Bellflower, Lynwood and Maywood are all coming online within the first quarter of this year. All of them are going to be issuing adult use commercial licenses at a lower tax rate than the city of Long Beach. Again, that if that doesn't prompt a sense of urgency within the city, within the city, as a means to be able to get us to the point where we can open these businesses and have these consumers coming to our city and spending their money inside of our city. I don't know what else could help additionally with if there are any overwhelming concerns within the city with regards to the revocation by the Justice Department for the Cole memo, I just want to again take solace in the fact that Kamala Harris, Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom, Xavier Becerra, Kevin de Leon and Alan Lowenthal all issued statements saying that they will be they will be fighting to be able to protect us as a city from any particular federal intervention that might come from this administration. And finally, just one final reminder. This year is an election year Long Beach measure impasse with all of your districts by a pretty healthy margin, as well as Proposition 64, by an even healthier margin. So, again, respecting the this particular ordinance, but at the same time, please hurry up.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Larry King, longtime resident in the seventh District and soon to be hopefully dispensary operator in the ninth District. Happy New Year, everybody on the council. And I'd also like to everything Stephane said, but I'd also like to remind you that it was in the original ordinance that.
Speaker 3: Won an election that made provisions for.
Speaker 0: Recreational as well as tax provisions which are substantially higher than medical.
Speaker 3: And I could tell you from the.
Speaker 0: Few operators that are operating.
Speaker 3: Presently, they're turning away 80 to 100.
Speaker 0: I don't want to say patients anymore. 80 to 100 customers at the door that.
Speaker 3: Don't know that they don't have a recreational adult use.
Speaker 0: So they're lined up and then they're turning them away. They're turning away an average of 80 to 100 a day. So that's a lot of tax dollars. We've made it this far.
Speaker 3: We're this close. The city is going to do all right by taxation again.
Speaker 0: I think we need to get going on recreational.
Speaker 3: Or we're losing too much business to the other cities. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare an interim ordinance adopted as an urgency measure establishing a temporary one hundred and eighty (180) day limitation on the issuance of any permit, entitlement, license, approval, operation, or activity relating to adult use non-medical commercial cannabis activity in the City; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read.
(Ordinance No. ORD-17-0030) (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0024 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Moving right along. I don't. Number 21, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Mayor Garcia. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Andrews, Councilmember Urunga, Vice Mayor Richardson. Recommendation to authorize the city of Long Beach to sign an amicus brief in support of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council. 31 In a matter in the matter of Janice versus AFSCME Council 31.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going acknowledge Councilman Austin and.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. I'm going to have to recuse myself because I do work for the AFSCME. And so, yeah, I work as myself and I'll be back shortly.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. So I had a conversation with Mayor Garcia about this item. And this is an issue that many of the many of us have tracked for years. And it's the it's an attack on a fundamental, fundamental public sector sort of standard called agency shop. And that's in question at the Supreme Court. And so agency shop essentially ensures that all employees, no matter whether you sign a union card or not, you are entitled to the benefits of whatever that contract is. So if if there's a contract that says we're getting out raises that ensures that whether you sign a union card or not, you're entitled to those rate wages because you have you sort of have been you are entitled to that right. As a part of that bargaining unit. And so public sector governments have been sort of built around this and, you know, over the years. And it would fundamentally change giant change the employer employee relationship should this this Supreme Court decision go go a certain way. And so this motion is the request that the city of Long Beach go ahead and participate in the amicus brief, which allows us to give our perspective on the issue. And so that's the motion. I'm fully supportive here. And so next I'll hand it to Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes. I, too, want to thank Mayor Garcia for bringing it forward. I'm also in in staunch support of our members that ask me, and I look forward to seeing what comes next. But I certainly support this. And thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Yes.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I also support the mayors, you know, for bringing this item forward, because I would like to say that this is an incredibly important case for local rights and workers rights. You know, this city should be able to negotiate with these workers without interference. You know, our system has had their system here. Long Beach has worked successfully, and you shouldn't fix what hasn't been broken. So I'm proud to support this idea and I will keep Long Beach locally managed and organized. So I want to thank the mayor again for bringing this forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Anurag.
Speaker 3: As a son of a long time union member and brother of Teamsters members as well. I think that support of this measure is very critical to the continuation and strength of unions in the country. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I, too, want to support this item and thank my colleagues for bringing it. I've been a member of a public employee union for 19 years, and during that time I've held leadership positions in my union. And I know that the amount of work that goes into the negotiations that union leaders engage in benefits all employees , whether they're actually participating in the union actively or not. Therefore, I think costs should be compensated and that it's only fair that we have this practice be allowed to continue. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item saying no members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: All right. So before we move on to our second public comment, I'd like the Mississippi city attorney. I'd like to recall the item that we we continue. So I want to move to reconsider that. A motion.
Speaker 3: To reconsider is in order for.
Speaker 0: That item. So I move to reconsider the item.
Speaker 1: Second.
Speaker 0: Well, I don't think you can second this. Got it. Okay. Councilman super knocking. So I'll move in second. The reconsideration. We have to vote on reconsideration before we have to take public comment.
Speaker 3: And vote on the motion to.
Speaker 0: Reconsider. Okay. So it won't show up on here, but the motion is myself and Councilmember Suber not. Is there any public comment on the motion to reconsider? Item number 20, which was the item 18, item number 18 saying no public comment. Members cast your vote on on the reconsideration of item 18.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Item set, please read item number 18, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Mongeau Councilmember Super nor Councilmember Urunga recommendation to request the City Manager to work with appropriate staff to report to council within 30 days on a potential MRU executed between public safety and water and gas departments. Councilmember Mongo Thank you. I feel like this is a great time for us to look at all of our options related to how things fit together. I appreciate my colleagues for at first choosing to delay this as I was at jury duty and under the judge's direction, unable to leave the courtroom until I could come here as fast as I could. So thank you for that. It means a lot that we take a hard look at the options available in terms of properly accounting for how our services are allocated and paid for. And so I appreciate all of those who will support this item, and I firmly ask for their support.
Speaker 0: Thanks. And I'll just I'll just add, I think it's important that we continue to review since we are a large, dynamic city and we have enterprise funds in different enterprises that operate differently, that we do regularly update this because we want to make sure that all of them are staffed correctly in public state from a public safety standpoint, and that our public safety folks recoup those costs. So I stand in support, and even though I'm not a signer on this, I stand to support Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes, I support this as well. I think Councilmember Mongo for bringing it forward. I just have a couple questions. Although I don't see the chief here. Is he not here?
Speaker 0: Which chief?
Speaker 1: Chief? Three.
Speaker 0: I thought we would move this item. Okay.
Speaker 2: Never mind. Well, then I will hold my questions for later. But that's okay. Thank you so much for bringing this forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I had a couple of questions too, but it's something I'm fully in support of. I've talked to both our chief and some of our firefighters and also looking at making sure that across the board. Here we go. I'm going to give it back to Leena. Then I'm going to let Lena Councilmember Gonzalez ask her questions first. Yes. Sorry we pulled you back in.
Speaker 2: Thanks, Chief. Just a couple of questions relative to this item. Do we currently have any existing employees of fire and other departments?
Speaker 3: Vice Mayor, Councilmembers? Yes. As a matter of fact, the fire department has employees in place with both the harbor department and the airport currently. Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then do we have I know that there was a I don't know if it was on the 2013 to 2014 agenda item that covered the same topic. Is there an update to that?
Speaker 3: Councilmember I don't have an update to that. I know this this topic has come up in the past, but we could go back and pull the data on that and find out where that stands today.
Speaker 2: Okay, great. Thank you. Those are my questions. I appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pierce, you're back up.
Speaker 1: Thanks. I was going to ask about how many enterprise funds are not included currently. Is it just the ones that are listed in the agenda item? Sorry. Should be.
Speaker 0: I think we're I think the gentleman asked for a report back. Right.
Speaker 1: Okay. So I my question was to point out which enterprise funds do not currently partner with fire or PD to put money back in directly for that area. So I know like with the airport, those funds go directly back to the airport. And are there other departments that those funds do not go to? So I look forward to the report back and understanding more which which areas of the city we might be able to have an opportunity to support our critical services. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Grant.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I see this as an excellent opportunity for some cost recovery that are very apparent, does a lot for other departments when they go out and they fix things or stop fires or doing whatever it is for other departments, and I think that they should be compensated for and they should be able to recover some of those costs. So I'm fully supportive of this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Andrew.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I'd like to thank our councilwoman, Mrs. Mango, for bringing this item forward, because I can remember back in the past, about 2013, this was a common sense measure, and I share that we would have taken care of this in the years since. But they're here. We are here again. You know, these enterprise activities must be sustainable in their own right. And with our city financial forecast to experience an increased strain in the coming year, we must act appropriately. This is a responsible budget allocation management, just like any family or small business, and we must pursue it. And I want to thank you again for bringing this forward, Mrs. Blanco.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Sabrina. Thank you. The language of this item indicates a 30 day response time. So I just like like to ask city staff if they're.
Speaker 3: If they see any impediment to getting back to us within 30 days. We certainly can report where we are in 30 days. No worries.
Speaker 0: No worries. Okay. No worries. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Okay, well, I'll take it back behind the rail. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: In consideration that this is a continuation of something that's been discussed quite extensively in the last several weeks.
Speaker 0: Years?
Speaker 1: Well, even more extensively over the last several weeks. You said you'd report back on where you are. Do you or do you have any hesitation of meeting the 30 day deadline?
Speaker 3: We won't know. And we'll get into it. We'll look back at the reports that we had in 20 1314. And if we can't come back with a final solution to bring to the council in 30 days, we certainly will report to the council where we are and when we expect to come to conclusion.
Speaker 1: Then let's you and I check in at 14 days to make sure that we're on time.
Speaker 3: Absolutely.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. See you. No further public comment. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I think it's record, guys. All right. We're moving on to our second public comment. Any members of the public would like to address the city council? I was saying none. We'll go ahead. And you? Well, it's on the wrong screen. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize the City of Long Beach to sign an Amicus Brief in support of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 31 in the matter of Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 (United States Supreme Court). | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12192017_17-1145 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Take care. Okay. So that was our one presentation for the night. We have two hearings and then we're going to go into the VIP records item. So the first hearing, Madam Clerk, please please read the first hearing.
Speaker 1: Hearing. Item number one is a report from financial management. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing and approve the hearing. Officer's recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application submitted by the CCI Medical Group Inc for Medical Marijuana Business located at 1529 West Pacific Coast Highway District one, and this item required
Speaker 0: . So why don't we do an oath and then we'll go right into Mr. Moto? Because. Report.
Speaker 1: You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony may give in that cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Speaker 2: So help you God.
Speaker 0: Do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report for this item will be given.
Speaker 5: By Sandie Singh Palmer, our purchasing and business services manager.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. Tonight you have before you a recommendation to uphold the hearing officer's recommendation to deny the business license application. MJ 21701203 Submitted by Seaside Medical Group, Inc. for a medical marijuana business located at 1529 West Pacific Coast Highway in Council District one. In addition to the counsel letter, you have been provided the hearing officer's recommendation and findings and the appeal hearing packet. To provide some background on this item. On February 21st, Seaside Medical Group Inc. submitted an application to operate a medical marijuana dispensary at 1529 West Pacific Coast Highway on August 16th, 2017. The Department of Financial Management denied the business license application.
Speaker 3: Due to the proposed business location being within 1000 feet of a public or private.
Speaker 2: School, which is in violation of Long Beach Municipal Code Section 5.90.030. On August 21st, 2017, Seaside Medical Group, Inc. filed an appeal of the business license application denial. And on October 10th, 2017, the City Council referred the appeal hearing to a hearing officer. On November 7th, 2017, the appeal hearing was held and the presiding hearing officer assigned by the city clerk's office was Jennifer L. King on November 9th, 2017. The hearing officer recommended that the denial of the business license application submitted by Seaside Medical Group, Inc. be upheld due to the proposed business location being within 1000 feet of a public or private school, which is in violation of Long Beach Municipal Code Section 5.90.030. It is requested that the City Council accept the hearing officer's recommendation to deny the business license application. That concludes my report, and staff are available to answer any questions Council may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. There is a motion in the second before I do that. Is there any public comment on this item? This is just the hearing.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Surely, Rosada, I don't understand the full reason for this denial. But. But whatever needs to be done to deny this and others, I believe it would be in the city's best interests. There is no medical marijuana. It's all marijuana. When a child smells it walking past someone's house in the alley or lately sitting on the street. Guy was rolling his joint in Belmont Shore, just sitting out there on Second Street, just in full view of everyone unafraid. Children are not going to know.
Speaker 0: Oh, that was.
Speaker 3: Medical marijuana, Johnny. No, no, no. They're just gonna say that was we. And there used to be. There used to be a time when we would say, you know, something is going to pot. Now our sister cities literally going to pot. With our approval, we are proving our city to go to pot. It's a gateway drug. I was just in conference with another young lady. Who works here in the shore. She affirmed. Yes, it was it was a gateway for me. It doesn't matter. The stamp of approval we put on it. It does not me. God's test for approval for things that should be. Around his humans. Maybe it doesn't. It doesn't meet his approval. Still yet and still. There is no medical. It didn't grow up out of the ground. You don't buy seeds. It's a medical. It just says marijuana or cannabis. As many of you that can find a reason to deny this and others, it would be in the best interest of yourselves and your family for years and generations to come. As you put your stamp of approval on anything representing the city in heaven, it registers as, Oh, this is so-and-so. They approve that. So we can let that walk in their family. If you're a child, 16, 18 years old, 21 year old, whatever the legal requirement is, if they walk in your door with a joy, Hey, Mom , I kid, you gave me this. You want one? What will be your reaction? Oh. He gave you a medical marijuana, Susie? No, that won't be your reaction. You're going to frown and you know it. Come on. We're sending our city to pot. Somebody needs to get a C, D of New Jack City and make sure all the council people get it for Christmas.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Speaker, please. Is there any other public comment on this hearing before I close it? Mr. Goodhew, please come down. Is there? I'm going to close the speakers list.
Speaker 6: They promote.
Speaker 0: They will. They will. It'll be fine. We're going to. So I. The next three speakers and then the speakers list is closed officially. Thank you, Mr. B.
Speaker 6: Giving honor to Jesus who made marijuana not medical is good. Marijuana is good. I don't know what she's talking about. I got got I have glaucoma. And the first thing the doctor told me is that the team along the tunnel process have six or seven side effects. Doctor told me when I went to specialist smoke marijuana. It has no side effects. It takes the pressure off your eyes. Right now, I have to drive way down to L.A. to get my marijuana, and I'm smoking as much as possible because I didn't used to wear glasses, but I'm wearing them now. I lost a lot of my sight and I don't know what that mumbo jumbo she's talking about, because if it wasn't for marijuana, I'd be in trouble. So and Nixon was given medical marijuana since 73. You know, the rich were getting it back then and other people were getting slammed, sent, sent to prison for it. I had a cousin that did what? Got 40 years for it in Texas, had about a little more now. So, you know, I don't know about that. So I wish you would have some marijuana so I can get it down the street, you know, so I would have to go way out there. It ain't like, come on, I was marijuana. Marijuana. I no problem. Remember back in the eighties when cocaine was outlawed? That was a problem. Heroin and meth is a problem. Matter of fact, you guys are. Be glad marijuana is out here. That's comin. Everybody down. It'd be a problem if it wasn't a weed out there. The marijuana is good. And I don't know. It's still my God's letting people in heaven who.
Speaker 0: Smoke marijuana acolyte who believe in his.
Speaker 6: Name. You got to believe in Jesus name. You go to heaven so you know you're not smoke marijuana. You left out. So you know, hey, let me get me. I got 123. So, you know, marijuana is good. You know, land marijuana is good. Let's get that marijuana in Long Beach to help the people that need it and have them body aches and stuff. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And just and just to clear also just the record out before the last week or so, the voters have approved on the medicinal side locally is obviously at the state on the state side. Recreational in Long Beach I believe has Mr. West already probably two dispensaries, I believe, that have already opened with business licenses. And I know there's a few more that are being processed silver and that are on the way. And so there are those there are dispensaries that are have opened and will continue to open as part of the the the voter approved laws. Yes.
Speaker 3: Next Speaker Okay. I wasn't even intending to speak, but I'm I'm sorry. My name is Cammy Johnson from Cameco. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm actually going to speak on the business side of this is the question of having businesses that are not allowed within thousand feet of a school. And I don't understand why that's an argument, because there's so many other businesses, whether it's a 7-Eleven that wants to sell alcohol near school or if there's another company that wants to sell marijuana near a school. This is really about just regulating where the businesses are. The city of Long Beach has already voted this in. I'm not I'm not an advocate on one way or another. I've seen the medical benefits of medical marijuana and recreational marijuana for those who need to become or whatever it is. I'm not a user or protect myself. But what I will say is that I don't want it near a school and that's what the law is. So I don't know whether there's a question here or what needs to be said or some to interject on God or anything else. The people of the city have voted and there are laws in the city. This is a common question that anyone can ask. You can ask anybody if they use marijuana, that's what they do. There's a doctor involved or whoever is involved that is has nothing to do with this going on right now with this agenda item. This agenda item is only because is within the thousands thousand feet of a school. That's it. So what you may. But if you do vote to allow this to happen, what makes a difference if alcohol or other drugs or whatever is.
Speaker 0: Sold.
Speaker 3: Within a thousand feet of a school, what will stop it? And why are we making exceptions for Seaside Medical Group? That's all I'm asking. And I.
Speaker 0: Think you. Finally, Mr. Good, he stated a number of times before, If I view marijuana of any type, those people entering into it is just one step, slight step above. Sex trafficking. Period. No ifs, ands or buts.
Speaker 4: Currently.
Speaker 0: As I've stated before, also the boundaries that you set up are certainly appropriate. But they don't go far enough. What you've got to figure out, as I pointed out with the one that's operating in that building next to the third down there in Belmont Shore is you've got to figure out in each district what are the pathways those kids take back and forth to school and to their hangouts at the end of the day, which are generally where parents are not in the Belmont. Sure, it's Rite Aid for ice cream. One block away or jack in the box the other way. And you see kids of from Lowell, from Rogers tramping by there every single day. So whenever you set that up, you've got to factor that in. And if you're forced to sell this. The one you. What you should do, as I mentioned before, is read out a space. It's in the police department. If you want to get money. And one for each statistic. So you'd have nine vendors up there. All right. And they could be open from 10 to 10, 15 a.m. or whatever. The other alternative would be very serious about this. Also, put it out on one of the if you look at the aerial photos in the Long Beach, this is your house today. There's an excellent picture in shot of the oil well. Islands set it out there and they can come out every other Thursday for a few hours and pick up the stuff. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our public comment on hearing item number one. So I will move this back to the deliberation that we have a motion in a second to receive the supporting documentation and conclude the hearing and approve hearing officer's recommendation on the denial. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 2: No, I just I support the hearing officer's decision. I know there was some back and forth. But, you know, we as many mentioned, we have to stand by our 1000 foot buffer and I support this item. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay, there's a motion. And second, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion case. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and approve the hearing officer’s recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application MJ21701203 submitted by Seaside Medical Group, Inc., for a medical marijuana business located at 1529 West Pacific Coast Highway. (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12192017_17-1165 | Speaker 3: This motion carries.
Speaker 0: 21, please.
Speaker 1: Item 21 is communication from the City Attorney. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Concluding the ordinance relating to the temporary limitations on the issuance of any permit, entitlement license, approval operations, or any activity related to a don't use non medical, recreational.
Speaker 3: And commercial commercial.
Speaker 1: Cannabis activity in the city. Red adapted as red and laid over to next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. As you mentioned in a second, so any public comment signal, please cast your vote. Mayor, we need two votes on this because it's been adopted as an urgency ordinance as well. First vote.
Speaker 1: Because Andrew's. Bush and Kerry.
Speaker 0: And then the second vote, please. Any public comment saying now please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: We need a mover in second?
Speaker 6: Yep. It's there.
Speaker 1: Councilman Austin Councilmember Mungo motion case. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare an interim ordinance adopted as an urgency measure establishing a temporary one hundred and eighty (180) day limitation on the issuance of any permit, entitlement, license, approval, operation, or activity relating to adult use non-medical commercial cannabis activity in the City; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read.
(Ordinance No. ORD-17-0030) (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1117 | Speaker 1: Thank you are hearing I remember to.
Speaker 2: Report from economic development recommendation received supporting documentation into the record conclude the public hearing regarding an economic subsidy in connection with revised transient occupancy tax sharing agreement with American life, and authorize the city manager to execute the First Amendment to the purchase and Sale Agreement. Attaching a revised transient occupancy tax sharing agreement for the property located at 100 East Ocean Boulevard District to.
Speaker 1: Thank you. We will just begin by doing this staff report, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Our staff report will be given by John Keisler, our director of economic development. Honorable man.
Speaker 9: Members of the city council. I'm happy to bring to you tonight an update on an agreement for vacant property located at 100 East Ocean Boulevard, popularly known as the Jurgens Trust Building. This building was built in 1919, but demolished by private property owners in 1988 and purchased by a redevelopment agency in 2011. It was designated for future development in the Long Range Property Management Plan, and in 2015 the city issued a request for proposals for the purchase and development of this site. The proposal that was chosen was from American Life Hotel Developer and located in Seattle, Washington, for the purchase price of $7 million. Also executed at the time of the purchase and sale agreement with a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement authorized by the City Council on May 17th, 2016 as part of the original purchase and sale agreement. There were a few conditions prior to the transfer of ownership, which included an executed contract with a nationally recognized hotel operator for star or equivalent designation. Fully executed project labor agreement between the buyer and the L.A. Orange County Building, Construction Trades Council, and evidence that the hotel operator had agreed to participate in a card check neutrality agreement for the hotel, not including the restaurant. And the original Transient Occupancy Sharing Agreement was based on an analysis for a 350 Room four star $165 million project, which established a $47 million feasibility gap and verified by a third party review. The projected $54 million in total transient occupancy tax that would be generated over 20 years was determined to be shared 5050. Over that 20 year period between the city and the buyer, the developer, which would be approximately 27 million for for both the buyer and the city. What we have since that time that occurred are a number of changes, including a 2016 lawsuit that was filed by the Citizens Against Downtown Long Beach giveaways, ultimately that the court ruled in favor of the city and a petition for writ of mandate was denied in 2017. And also changes in the market costs for labor construction materials and financing had grown over this period of time and to to make the project work. The design was increased from 350 rooms to 417 rooms, with the construction costs increasing from 165 to $262 million to complete the project. Since that time, we've conducted a new economic feasibility gap analysis and established that the gap was now $61 million. And we verified that with our third party financial consultant, Kaiser Marston and Associates. So what we have for you tonight is a revised transient occupancy tax sharing agreement. The purpose of this agreement is to address the feasibility gap by restructuring the timing of the total sharing in this new amendment. The buyer would share up to 80% or approximately 27 million, the same amount from the original agreement. But they would be reimbursed in the first nine years rather than over a 20 year period. The city in the new agreement would receive 20% or approximately $7 million of the TOT over the first nine years, and then at year ten would start begin to receive 100% of the TOT generated from the project starting at about $4 million a year and reaching over $6 million a year by year 20. As part of this new agreement, the developer has committed to a minimum investment of $230 million to receive the full benefit of the TOT sharing agreement. And the agreement would continue to remain in effect for 20 years. There's a number of other benefits of the revised TOT sharing agreement. The project will be much bigger, as we mentioned, creating more jobs for both the construction project as well as for ongoing operations. Construction jobs are estimated to be 1700 for this project in ongoing operations. The estimated job creation will be 360 ongoing jobs in the downtown. The new project will include more amenities, which will create more sales tax and jobs than the original project. The cost of the project going from 165 to 262 million are almost $626,000 per roomkey will result in a greater economic impact for the city. It will require this minimum of $230 million in investment, which was not a part of the original agreement. It will command higher average daily room rates estimated to be over $220 per night, which will generate both. Higher wages and more transient occupancy tax to the city. And the developer has also agreed to include worker safety improvements such as panic buttons, to make sure that we have a safe working environment in our hotels, as well as a good faith effort to identify a local restaurant operator if a third party operator is chosen for the restaurant itself. I wanted to give you a quick estimate on the on the timeline. If we do have an approved agreement amendment, I'm sorry, and the buyer would begin the process of securing entitlements, as well as a card check neutrality agreement in a hotel operator agreement in 2018. There would also be a play or a project labor agreement for construction in 2018, and if all the permits, entitlements, environmental review and agreements are presented to the city, we would approve the transfer of the asset and begin construction in 2019 with a grand opening estimated for 2021. And just to conclude, the existing agreement that is in place that the City Council approved last year.
Speaker 1: Already requires.
Speaker 9: The project labor agreement and a card check neutrality agreement before the property could ever be conveyed or escrow could be closed. The amendment maintains these requirements and the transfer of property will not occur until these requirements are satisfied with that. I would like to conclude my report and answer any questions.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Thank you for the update. And just to want to clarify, and I'm going to go ahead and go to the Council on the public. So, Mr. City Attorney, I know that this was mentioned briefly by Mr. Keisler, but get both the former proposal as well as this proposal of Mr. City. And if you can just clarify this piece, they both contain both a project labor agreement, a full project labor agreement on the site, as well as a contract agreement on the site as well. Is that correct? That's correct. And is it correct also that the the support from the city in our commitment financially to this project would not happen and this project is not eligible for those funds? When we close this deal months out, unless both the contract agreement and the project labor agreement were in place, is that correct? If I understand your statement correctly, we we do not have to close unless those items that you indicated occur. That's correct. And that's part of the agreement is for those items to be included. The transfer would not occur. Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much. Want to just reiterate that. So I appreciate that. And with that, let me go to you. There's a there's a motion on the floor, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Great. Thank you. I want to thank you for clarifying. I want to thank staff for their incredible work. And I want to highlight a couple of things with this project. This is the first hotel project in my district that's been on city land that I will be participating in approving, possibly just want to keep my options open here. I want to make sure that we highlight some things that have changed in the process. Never before has everybody really had a seat at the table in creating a what we're not calling, but what is essentially a community benefits agreement where we're hearing from all the Labor Party's as a city and it's not the city's job to negotiate those Labor contracts, but the city ushering through best practices to try to make sure everybody is at the table. And so I want to applaud staff for forming a relationship with Unite Here Local 11, where they have not had that before. I also know that we've had a lot of outreach from other stakeholders and different issues pertaining to local hire piece and a couple other components. I have a couple of questions, then I want to go to public comments and then hear from my colleagues. I know vice mayor has to leave, so if we could hear from vice mayor and the public comment and then behind the rail, I think it would be helpful. The city attorney I have a my first question is you you stated that we do not have to.
Speaker 3: Approve.
Speaker 4: The ask the land sale if those things are not met. But is it a requirement that we have to? Have those.
Speaker 0: In place.
Speaker 1: Mayor and members of City Council. Assuming I understand your question correctly. No, it's not a requirement. There's the possibility that the failure of a condition could be waived by the city and the closing could proceed without a card check agreement or without a labor peace agreement. But I think, as you just heard staff publicly say.
Speaker 9: That's not their intention. And I don't.
Speaker 1: Think they would ever do that without seeking further clarification or guidance from council. But it's theoretically possible.
Speaker 4: Theoretically possible. But we could say tonight that if something were to happen, it would need to come back to council. We could ask for that tonight.
Speaker 1: That's correct.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: You could make it so that those two conditions there, they are described in section.
Speaker 9: 3.2 H and I of the current.
Speaker 1: Agreement that those conditions are not waive able by the city.
Speaker 4: Thank you for that. I also wanted to clarify in the communication we've received this morning, it has the Los Angeles Orange County Buildings Trading and Construction Trades Council is outlined under 3.2 H under 3.2. I'm assuming I it just says that there's a card check neutrality agreement. So tonight we could put in there that that needs to be done with unite not here local 11 I'm assuming.
Speaker 1: Well no I think the card check neutrality agreement, the idea is that it needs to be executed by the hotel management company. Right. And then I'm not a labor law expert, but my understanding is that the that the employees could opt to unionize or not and become part of whatever union they might choose to. It may well be that unite here 11 is the one they would, but I don't think legally they're required to.
Speaker 4: All right. Thank you for those questions. I'd like to hear from my colleague and then hear from the public, please.
Speaker 1: Councilman Richardson. Thanks. So I do have a hard stop at 630. It's my daughter's first Christmas show tonight. But I wanted to. I'm already late, so I wanted to just chime in and just say this is a very important project. And I was here when the first agreement went through, and I remember hearing from the parties, you know, everyone hasn't seen that corner and wonder what the city of Long Beach is going to do with that corner. It's really important. It's going to be a tremendous success. My comments last time that came around are the same when we want to make sure that there's, you know, that that, you know, I congratulate there's a project labor agreement and it's great to hear that the 1700 quality jobs are going to be created through this process. And I hear the commitment to the commitment to labor peace for the ongoing operations. I just think that's the way that we go moving forward. So I wanted to express my support here and also acknowledge the president of the school board. Well, both the president, the school board and Dr. Feldman Williams, school board member. I won't be here for your recognition tonight, but I just wanted to acknowledge before I have to take off. But thank you and express my support here. But unfortunately I won't. Given how long the last item went, likely this will go for another hour. I won't be here for that. Thank you. And thank you for that moment, Jenny. Thank you. Okay. So, Councilmember Pearce, you want to go to the public comment, is that correct? Yes. Okay. So we're going to go now on to public comment on this item. So please come forward if you have a comment on this item. I'll go first. Ron Miller, executive secretary of the L.A. Orange County Building Trades. Really appreciate the partnership here. We do know this developer. We've done agreements in the past with him in Los Angeles. They've been very successful agreements with both the building trades and the hotel workers. You can go over to Olympic Boulevard and see a see the hotel there. And it's been very successful, put a lot of folks to work, create a lot of new careers and should be good. We'll have local hire just like we have on all the other projects in Long Beach and moving forward with more success. I did get a thing from a researcher today in my office that through Long Beach City College we put numerous people through our apprenticeship readiness program. The latest numbers I got, we've put 50 people into careers, into apprenticeships in the building trades. 16% of those 50 are women, 16% are African-American. And so it's a good success. We're building on this project. It's going to be something to help us go further. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Shirley. So with respect to this hotel and I'm sure that each council councilperson representing the homeless in your district, you know who they are. You you talk to them, that you meet with them regularly and they have access to you as your more affluent constituents. The Seaport Marina closed, and a lot of those people who were using vouchers to live there are now without a place. Some of them lined PCH and Second Street. When you're allowing businesses, particularly coming into the state or other cities to operate here.
Speaker 1: Other cities are building.
Speaker 3: Now, building in to the base. Knowing that they need to do more for their homeless clients, building it in so that somewhere in there the working homeless I'm not talking about the dirty, sloppy one that you don't want to shake their hand. Their teeth is green and creamy. Their clothes look like they haven't bathed in 12 years. I'm not saying that homeless. I'm saying the working homeless person who. You wouldn't even recognize that they were that. But they're sleeping in their car, some of them. What if we built in? And I know it might be a little too late for this hotel? What if we bought into the coming forward so that vouchers can be accepted for those who may or may not be able to afford the $700 a night a night fee for that hotel? But, hmm. If you say to the business coming in, you know, we're trying to work with our homeless community. Oh, we want to rename them to not homeless, but people without housing. Possibly you can build that in so that, who knows, they may be able to reside there. The statement going Long Beach kept ringing in my ears last week and I laughed every time it was coming up. Go, go. Long Beach. Well, we go in with the homeless. What creative ideas are you thinking moving forward? Or are.
Speaker 1: You only.
Speaker 3: Sticking to the letter of the law that other cities are doing? Where the home is going with you. They think.
Speaker 1: They're going to go if there's nothing more.
Speaker 3: Than.
Speaker 1: Around the.
Speaker 3: Corner and back. They're going with you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, please. But even they are seeing a fellow concern in the city staff in the public as here today. I just wanted to recognize the brothers and sisters that's here to support this idea item moving forward. IBEW folks there living here in Long Beach that wants to support good projects like this moving forward. I can tell you that the track record that American Life has is a really good track record in L.A. City, L.A. They've done a project under a project agreement in Seattle. I spoke with our our sister local union there, Local 46, which represent IBEW members out there. And they've implemented project labor agreements under American lives projects out there. So they have they do have a good track record on utilizing place and in the benefits that come with it. I urge the city council to move forward with this item. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for coming out next speaker, please. Very good. What I am going to impart here, I was going to impart also. On two other items on another agenda. But the same principle applies regardless of what regardless of what project we're entering into. I think the city should adopt as a policy. If before they enter into an agreement and sign the agreement, they must secure from the company. No matter who it is. A letter that states and discloses. Any. Financial. Embezzlement. Crimes. That they had their companies had been involved in. Like we discovered after after after we signed the contract for was a near near $10 million for the parking structure used in parking lots. And we found those people, you know, they came here like flies on garbage. They know where the you know, they know where the corrupt is or are. So I think it you adopt it for this cup and I, I the building certainly we need to rebuild that. But let's make sure. And I know nothing about this company that you do your due diligence, see how many, if any, have been convicted of crimes. And had them just you sign the agreement in saying that if if. It's later discovered. That you didn't do due diligence and they in fact, were convicted of the crimes such as the person is such as a company who signed the contract with the market like did then. The contract is null and void, period. Not only that, the city would get any money back. That they spent. Having to deal with this company. Thank you. And my apologies to the company. I know nothing about you, but I do know some of the people here in this city and on the city council. We have a great many that are honest. Unfortunately, that's not 100%. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. next speaker, please. Good evening. Warmed Lisowski Long Beach Citizens for Fair Development with a group that brought the original litigation and have a pending appeal. I applaud my union brothers and sisters for trying to get this developer to sign some type of labor agreement. But as you could see, the answer to council person's second district's question was that, no, they can still buy the property without your union agreement. So I urge the union to if you see how fast these buildings go up these days, you really are only going to have about two months of work there. You should be looking for longer term sustainable jobs in the in a renewable energy sector. The city is still arguing that this is not a project council person papers, not a project. And as you can see, they have selected a developer. They have selected hotel brands. And this most certainly is a project. In fact, if you look on tonight's agenda, the address is not even on the agenda item number. So who was trying to pull a fast one and not even alert the community that there was a hearing on 100 East Ocean today? The transient occupancy, occupancy, tax sharing agreement, it's kind of become a frank agreement. I don't think even people behind the days understand what's going into this agreement. If the gap all of a sudden has expanded to 61 million, how is the same $27 million going to cover that gap? It just doesn't quite make sense. And so we also take objection with the fact that in the staff report, the staff gave our organization an incredible amount of power, saying that delays caused by our lawsuit , where we were merely asking the city to follow, secure the law, just merely holding the city to account, to follow the laws that that other cities make their developers follow. And then use this to speed up the rate at which the developer gets their $27 million tax rebate. So we support development in the city, but we support development with local developers that have a benefit to the community. This is an out-of-town developer that is just giving some lip service to the labor movement. And this project does not help the residents of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Rita moreno. I been a hotel worker in the city for four years now. I live in the ninth district. I'm here on behalf of the hospitality workers of Long Beach. I have.
Speaker 4: To oppose American lives proposal.
Speaker 3: To restructure the existing tax sharing agreement with the city. We believe this would set a bad precedent for the city's upcoming conversations.
Speaker 4: Of studies of the city wide tax initiative policy for hotels.
Speaker 3: We also we are also here to tell the city council that we oppose broader tax initiative policy that carries the intent of subsidizing future hotel development near the city, near the city center, without any assurance that the working families of Long Beach like mine have tangible benefits, either as our city hotel industry continues to grow. We, the hotel workers of Long Beach are a reminder, are reminding our mayor and the Council that it is your duty to protect us, all of your working people, not just the businesses we hope to. We hope that the mayor and the council respect other workers and and the community. You call to put people over profit. Profit. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Rachel Smith. I currently work in and formerly resided in the first district. I'm here to oppose American Life's proposal to restructure the existing tax sharing agreement with the city, because we do not know how this may impact a potential.
Speaker 6: Citywide incentive policy.
Speaker 3: I'm also here to tell the city to tell the city council that I oppose a broader tax incentive policy that carries the intent of subsidizing.
Speaker 6: Future hotel.
Speaker 3: Development near the city center without any reassurance that workers in Long Beach will have tangible benefits and protections in hotel. Workers are the backbone of Long Beach tourism industry. Working women of color make up more than half of all hotel workers in Long Beach. In my experience, as time goes on, workers see an increase in workload and consequently an increase in injury rates. I call on the mayor and the city council to prioritize working families, not only business. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is one. I'm a lawyer. I am a hotel housekeeper here in Long Beach. Last week, Time magazine feature me as proud a group of women called The Silence Breaker, and we were named Time's Person of the Year 2017. It was an honor to me to be included with a brave woman, a man who came forward publicly against sexual harassment at all economy levels. For years, I have been fighting for the rights of women working in the hotel industry. After. After I decided that I was tired of being harassed, ignored, abused, and that I will fight back. I am so proud of this moment where women everywhere are standing against abuse. But I'm.
Speaker 6: Here tonight to condemn.
Speaker 3: The actions of the city council. They have failed the woman or this city. Mayor Garcia and Council members Pryce, Huston, Mango, Soprano and Andrew in known our pleas to heal and instead fight with the rich hotel company who profit off our exploitation. Tonight, Austin in Price will propose an investment policy for city employees just a month after they deny one for hotel workers. I said to my male Garcia will promise them a new hotel, a bellman requiring the company to do nothing about the abuse its workers will no doubt face. I know this because I have to spend my life, my life cleaning hotel rooms, save them by breaking what that fell foul me honorable to predators who too often are protected by the fact that they are also paying customers like so many other women in the Long Beach hotel industry. How come? For what we know with my story, to demand that the theory is stand with women I think are being ignored by councils that spend more time talking about giving away millions of dollars to hotel developers than that it does about protecting hotel workers from an abuse. The honor of being named Time's Person of the Year is an honor that should be shared with the entire city. Long Beach. But as it is, then, that person that the year awards show the hypocrisy of a city council who will rather have us stay quiet and suffer in silence. I am here tonight to tell you. We won't stay quiet. We will persist. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Go ahead, sir. Good evening. My name is Andrew Mayorga. I'm a representative of Laguna Local 39, representing our membership. I just want to. I just came here in support of this project, and I'm glad I was at the end of the line. I heard a lot of negative stuff. Let's just start with first. You know, American life doesn't just give lip service, say they came. And wherever they build, they build with the community. They outreach to the community. They come to individuals like myself and my brothers back here. So to sit here and say that they give nothing but lip service to us or to you as homeless, an insult. I know wherever they go, they reach out. I probably share that. There's developers here in Long Beach that are building right now that have never once approached anybody from our community to come help them put a shovel in the ground. But that's on a separate note. And again, to address something else that I heard tonight, and just for the young lady, I think started all this conversation about how the council doesn't do anything to help the homeless when projects like this come. I just want you guys know that's not true. Through projects like this and agreements through plays, I've come across many of our membership that started out in their cars and now live in apartments are on their pathways to owning homes, on cars, new cars and on their end are starting families. And that's because of people like you, people like American life and my brothers and sisters back here that we tend to build things. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. I just have a point of clarification because I'm confused is like the agreement, essentially the company is going to pay the city a lump sum and then over nine years they're going to get money back from the tax cut of the taxes because I know resort tax from Palm Springs where I'm from like goes entirely to the city to fund like all of our special projects and social projects. So I just I'm curious about that, like to understand how like are they getting all the money that they paid the city back in that nine years? So they're breaking even and then we're going to start getting our money. And then with subsidizing like developments like a hotel, wouldn't American Life Inc be, like, big enough to be able to support itself and not need a subsidy when developers like like local real estate developers that are trying to build, like, low income homes for people that already need it because we have a population problem already. So to bring in like a hotel. Yeah, we have we have conventions all the time, but we have plenty of hotel space for those conventions already. As it is, we need more housing subsidy. So I'm just wondering. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Council. My name is Max Norris. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak today. Following Councilwoman Pierce's line of questioning, I can assume that she's likely to make an amendment to require the play conditions as well as the card check and hopefully as well the safety call buttons as a matter of condition for the the passing of the transfer of the land between the city and American life or whatever this company is called. I would just want to point out that without that amendment, this is simply just a lip service to the trends of the week. The hashtag of the week, the TIME Magazine article. You know what? You guys all turned your back on a couple of weeks ago. So without an amendment like that, this is nothing, obviously. My. My brother's in labor, and the trades will get their play. It's coming quick, and the trades will make sure it happens. But on the back end, without assurances by amendment, as I assume Mr. Pearce will introduce shortly, this is nothing, this is nothing at all for the hotel workers or for the rest of Long Beach because those 7000 jobs will be gone. And as important as they are and and I do think that they are important, those jobs aren't going to go anywhere by adding that amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Speaker, please. The last speaker speaker's list is now closed. Good evening, honorable mayor, honorable council members. My name is Greg Steinhauer, president of American Life. I thought I would come up here and you could hear directly from my mouth. So, as you know, we're under a purchase and sale agreement to buy the property. And in the earlier agreement, we have agreed to sign a card check agreement with the unions. We will commit to that. We have committed to signing the project labor agreement with the unions. We've always had excellent relationship with the labor unions. We have excellent relationships with Unite here up in Seattle. But for some reason there seems to be an issue down here. I don't know why that is. The but we're not going to sign the card check agreement until we have a flag in place. It's just that simple. It makes no sense to do that from our standpoint until we have an operator for the hotel, which we hope we'll be able to announce in the first quarter of 2018. John ran through all the economics of the proposal. One other point that was not made, and that is by changing the structure of the proposal and reducing the length the city actually benefits to a tune of over $6 million that receives $6 million more during that time period than had we stuck with the original agreement. It's just as the hotel's gotten bigger. These projects, hotel developments, a cyclical type of development. There is no assurances that when you come online, there's going to be a market. And this is a way to help mitigate the risks so that we can and make this investment and create jobs for everybody. These projects take between 24 and 30 months to build. That's a lot of construction work. And I appreciate your reconsidering this from from my view. Where I sit, I see no issue and we will honor our word. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Kim he was the last public speaker. Mr. Pete. I called last public speaker. So I will, sir. Yes, I called last of the speaker already. You want anyone in the audience? I will let you speak because for public comment, please be quick. We all recall that public speaker. Go ahead, sir. Quick. So I don't get the whole 3 minutes, so I actually don't even have to let you speak because I recall. Come Speaker said be quick, but go ahead, sir. Up there. Go ahead. So you told me I'm getting I'm just saying out of respect, but you can go ahead. Speak. Quick, 3 minutes. Quick. Yeah. So as far as you know, hey, I wouldn't even come up here, but let me switch this out. And so I want you to go come on up here. But the lady the young lady spoke and it sounds like she was making threats, like, oh, well, well, they always giving funds to the hotel. You're supposed to put funds to the hotel. The Americans. She only she can speak English. She's up here reading off of a paper, you know? Sir, could you please address the issue? Can you please address the issue? If you believe? Because check this out. You know what? Check that 8834 B of the penal code is about citizen's arrest. Hey, watch your threats. I organize a brother service officer, you know, stay on topic. We're. I'm telling you. 834 B.S. And I'm not shy about it. I'm not having that. This ain't going down in America having non-Americans threatening Americans. You American men and I don't give a damn about. Hey, sir, you know that. You know, you have to stay on topic. Topic? No, you're out. I'm talking about the lady with you. Go ahead, sir. I'm going. You didn't tell her she was off topic about threatening Americans, did you? Go ahead, sir. You did. You did you hold on second to the public as as as reprehensible as what's being said. But this is he has a he has a right to say it. So continue. Yeah, yeah. Oh, shut up, sir. Anyway, address me. Thank you. Well, okay, you could take that too, but check this out. Hey, the thing is, is America for Americans? Okay, and when we up here, I like to see it as such. I don't know. I'm 53 years old. I ain't never seen it like this to where a non American could come with a threat towards an American. Hey, I don't know. We ain't having that. I know some yoga don't turn into snowflakes and got sore but we ain't no snowflakes in this side Are we going to melt the snowflakes? Snowflakes melt and they're going to get dealt with just like just like all the people again dealt with now for what they did earlier. So back to this issue no more non Americans then we're gonna deal with your own non Americans think you got something going that ain't being forgotten and all of them sorry people this with you so that's a warning. That's it. Trump is running the stuff in the United States. Amen. John, thank you. So public comment is now over and now we're going to back to the council. So public comment is over. Thank you very much. So we'll start off with Councilman Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you to all the speakers that spoke tonight. I do want to give a little bit of context and a little bit of my background. When I first came to Long Beach and I first started volunteering, it was before the release of The Tale of Two Cities, which Gary Heidrich, who was wrote the foreword for that, is actually here. And what came out of that study was that we had given $1,000,000,000 of subsidies to our downtown tourism industry, and we've done that with zero strings attached. We did that without asking for a play, without asking for a card check, without asking for environmental protections, without any strings attached at all. One hotel rent free for ten years on city land. And so for me being here tonight, talking about this tonight, it's been a challenge for me in looking at what the ideal situation would be. Would I like to have things signed in front of me and a guarantee? Yes, I would. Do I have faith in the process and the commitment from developers, from labor, from the community members that we're going to have a fair process in the end? I do. And I do want to hear from my council colleagues, but I would like to make some amendments to guarantee us some of that process. So I just really want to make sure that those folks in the audience and at home recognize that having a community benefit agreement that's going to be comprehensive. It's the first time we've done this with the hotel development in our downtown. I'm going to go ahead and list the amendments that I'd like to make. And so city attorney, if you don't mind. And then do you want to do the play stuff for the requirement? Okay. So first, I just want to clarify on you. Make sure I read it right. I want to make sure that we do amend Section 3.2 to require council review before finalizing the sale. As I had asked previously of our city attorney's office, it's a requirement. And so I want to make sure that we do ensure that it comes back to this body before a sale is final made.
Speaker 1: You can require that. That's not what I understood you to ask earlier. When we had our discussion, I thought that you were seeking the city would not be able to waive requirements three to H and three to I. It would only come back before you if the city proposed to waive either one of those. But if they do not waive them and there is a labor peace agreement and there is a carbon neutrality agreement, then we would close without coming back to council.
Speaker 4: So only if there is a request for a waiver would I like it to come back. Perfect. To be clear, I would also wouldn't mind having a report after that sale is done, a staff report just given to the council so we know where we're at on the process. I would like for the restaurant peace. It's one thing that I've always talked about. I think that our downtown is an amazing downtown and we have that balance in between some corporate businesses and some local businesses. And we tend to be a fantastic place where we've got things like the chocolate place and the juice place. And so wanting to take an opportunity on the corner of Pine and Ocean to celebrate a local restaurant. Should there be a third party restaurant operator? Just clarifying that the developer would work with the Economic Development Department to identify a Long Beach restaurant for that operator if it is a third party operator. So I wanted to make sure that was clear on the record because in the report it just kind of lays it out. Lucy For the workers safety, as you know, as some people brought up today, it is not a it weighs heavy on me that we had a very lengthy meeting about Claudia's law and a two weeks later we had an agenda item around giving a subsidy to a hotel. And so it does weigh on me, and it is an opportunity for us to highlight a developer that's saying, hey, we're going to do it voluntarily without even it being part of a labor contract, but we're willing to do that. And so I do want to lift up the specifics for me that are important. As I raised at the last council meeting, we talked about this, that the developer has agreed to have panic buttons. I would like to clarify that these panic buttons be given to each hotel employee assigned to working in a guest room without another hotel employee at no cost to the hotel employee. And that panic button should be able to communicate with security, not simply be a noisemaker like a whistle that could only be heard on one floor. I'd also like to include establishing a process for the employees to notify their employer about unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual conduct or other verbal or physical contact, which is typically included in a personnel file or not file but protocols. But just wanted to make sure that we highlight that there's a process where an employee has an opportunity to step out and do that. Those are the changes that I would like to have included as a requirement for this. And these are changes that I've had conversations with our developer on. And so I now ask my council colleagues to support this motion to approve this total restructuring. The benefits to the study are great. Adding the additional rooms is fantastic for our bottom line and having a developer that's willing to do more than just sign a card check agreement or labor peace is the right choice for us in this city. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Mayor. May we clarify a couple of the amendments? Sure. Councilmember. Councilmember Pearce, as the deputy city attorney that will be tasked with drafting the amendment, I want to.
Speaker 9: Just bring to your attention to things that might be difficult and ask for clarification. The first two conditions.
Speaker 1: I think are clear. The first of which is that the three two age and 3 to 1 cannot be waived without coming back here. I think it's also pretty simple to include a requirement that the panic buttons or providing immediate contact with security be included for all workers. The other two are you requiring that the any restaurant be locally owned, or is it best effort to.
Speaker 4: Best effort with working with our economic development team? If it is a third party. Okay. So it's only if it's a third party and working with them to identify and it's a best effort.
Speaker 1: Okay, great. Thank you. And then lastly, the it had to do with the employment policies with respect to reporting. That gets into quite a bit of detail. Can you provide me with more?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's not actually reporting. It's just making sure that there's an employee process in place for which the hotel employee notifies the employer, the operator, about unwanted sexual advances, and that they have time on the clock to do that, which is pretty standard in every H.R. policy. But I wanted to make sure we lifted that up because we have had so many issues around sexual assault in the industry.
Speaker 1: Okay, great. Thank you. I can certainly draft it that way. If if it's okay with staff and the council, I can do that.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes. I want to thank city staff as well. And I know the developer. Gregory spoke with him earlier today, as well as our building trades and unite here. Who is here as well. I think this was a very good collaborative effort and Councilmember Pearce brought forward a lot of great items that I know she worked behind the scenes on to make sure we got it right, not just for any city, but for a long beach. And as we know, we try to do things very customized here in the city. And I think this was a really good example of what we could do when we all worked together. And for me, I think, you know, seeing that the average hotel investment, hotel unit investment will be $630,000, give or take. We're right now at about an average of 350 to $400000 of investment per unit of hotel speaks volumes to where the city is headed. And with that, I really am appreciative that we have these benefits for our community that will come back with all that investment. So absolutely ensuring that there is a project labor agreement, that's something that my office authored a few years back with a few of my council colleagues here that embeds in that 40% of our of the workers on site will be local hire. And we'll we'll certainly do everything that it takes to get to that target. And then 10% of the workforce on that specific project will be disadvantaged workers. What's exciting about that is that we know that, like I said, it's an all encompassing project that will include the workforce as well as great development. And I have done some research on American life and I've seen the projects and the stature of the projects in other cities like Seattle and other cities in downtown L.A. and it's just fantastic that they're willing to invest their time and money here. And as far as that's concerned, I think the only question I had was just clarification. I know I spoke with John earlier today on the six or $7 million that we are going to that we're projected to see within the total that, you know, from the former restructuring plan to now, will that be realized within the nine years or within the 20 year term? The nine years, correct?
Speaker 9: Yeah. Councilmember So that the 7 million projection that is cited in the the staff report is just the city's portion of the first nine years.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 9: The actual number of four for Tom projected on this much larger project will be 77 million over the 20 years. City will realize an estimated $50 million in total over that term.
Speaker 2: Great. I appreciate that. So I'll just end with saying that we're going from a $165 million investment to a $230 million investment. That's not just dollars. That's workers. It's employment for the city of Long Beach. And I think all of you, again, for being great players in all of this. Thank. You.
Speaker 5: Thank you. So I would like some clarification on the amendments and what requirement that puts on the developer, because I have to admit, I'm a little bit confused at this point in terms of what the amendment does to the developer. I may have missed that along the way, but I know we can't force them to do certain things, but then we're including them as amendments as part of this contract.
Speaker 9: So I'm sorry, Councilman Price, what what amendments are you referring to? The amendments that are included in the staff report.
Speaker 1: Or the amendments that were made on the.
Speaker 5: Floor? The amendments that were made on the floor.
Speaker 1: So I'll walk through the four amendments again to the extent I remember them off the top of my head. The first one is that right now 3.2 H requires the buyer to execute a labor peace agreement prior to the city's obligation to transfer the property. 3.2 I requires the buyer to I'm sorry, the hotel operator. So it's the buyer's contracted operator to execute a card check neutrality agreement with its employees or agree to do that when it has employees prior to the city's transfer of the property. Both of those conditions right now, as the agreement reads, are craveable by city staff, which is normal in purchase and sale agreements. All conditions that run to the benefit of either the buyer or the seller are waiver bbl by the buyer or seller respectively. I want the first amendment was not to make those craveable. So those two are hard and fast requirements to the extent that the staff wants to close without either one of those two agreements, that council would have to approve that. Is that clear?
Speaker 3: I think so, yes.
Speaker 1: That's the First Amendment. The Second Amendment was the inclusion of a panic button, as it were. And I'm sure that I will be able to work up more detail for the agreement in a commercially reasonable, commercially standard panic buttons for all the employees of the hotel. The third one was requiring the developer to use a best effort to work with the city economic development. To the extent that there is a third party operator or there will be a restaurant at the property. Keep in mind that this property may not be developed with a restaurant. It may not even be developed as a hotel. There's still the entitlement and squat process to go through, which is completely separate from what we're doing here. And the last request was. That's right. That's right. That last request was the system in place for the hotel operator to work with its employees to take sexual harassment claims and make sure that that's not done on the employees time? As I understand it, that would be on the clock. So that's all the detail that I expect to excuse me, including the amendment. Above and beyond what was already disclosed in the council letter, which Mr. Keisler spoke to.
Speaker 5: Okay. So a couple of questions on the panic buttons. How many rooms does this hotel have?
Speaker 9: Councilmember. It's proposed for 416 rooms.
Speaker 5: Okay, that's good. Because as I indicated very strongly the last time this item came before council.
Speaker 3: I believe all.
Speaker 5: Employees should be protected from sexual assault and harassment regardless of the size of a hotel. So it's good to know that this hotel is over the threshold of 100 rooms, which was arbitrarily set in a prior proposal. But but surely that policy should apply to hotels of even ten rooms. So that's that's good to know. In terms of the first and second provisions, how is that? I mean, we heard the operator, the owner of the project, talk about their commitment to those the play and working with their employees on the union aspects. How are these two amendments changing? What the understanding of the city or the hotel owner? What as to these two elements, how how did these two amendments change that understanding?
Speaker 9: My understanding is that these amendments.
Speaker 1: Don't change the substance of either agreement.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 5: So the substance stays the same? Yep. Okay. And our contract, our contractual obligation, would not change as a result of these two amendments.
Speaker 1: That's correct. I mean, the contractual obligation would change in that the city staff can no longer waive them. They no longer have a contractual right to waive. They have to come back to the council.
Speaker 5: Perfect. I understand that. I'd like to hear from my colleagues on this, but I think some of the amendments are definitely make a lot of sense, like the panic button. And I support that entirely. Thanks.
Speaker 1: Thank you, counsel. I'm in Austin.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. So this is a been a very, very interesting discussion thus far. I was really struck by listening to public comment, particularly those from labor. I'm thrilled that this hotel is in the works. I think it's going to be a great luxury hotel potentially for our our downtown skyline, but also for to improve economic development. And it's been mentioned it's going to create jobs, construction jobs and hotel jobs as well. I was struck by the comments. Labor clearly is not on the same page and not monolithic on this particular item. And so from time to time, there are disagreements within even the House of Labor. And I think that speaks to some of the leadership today. I think these are this these kind of public disagreements should be avoided in the future. But I'm curious regarding the amendments, and I appreciate the effort put forth. We want to make sure that we we have a sound public project. Labor agreement is something that the city has worked towards for some time. We've actually, I think, work toward getting card check neutrality agreements as well. I don't think this would have been accomplished or even be entertained five years ago or with council's previous to this council. And so I think we've come a long way as a city. But regarding the the amendments I gave, number one and number two, I'm fine with. But in terms of what we are doing this evening, it's it's creating a in agreement with the developer correct over TLT and some of these issues will be borne out after the hotel is actually developed in. We're talking about operations of a hotel. And so my question is what and I was going to ask this question is what enforcement mechanisms will the city have, you know, after this hotel is built, should any one of these provisions not be adhered to? For example, number four or number two, what what what provisions what kind of enforcement can can can happen at that point? At this point, we're talking about a well, an operator that we don't know who is going to be. Right. Right. We would hope that they have a contract neutrality and a collective bargaining agreement in place which could be negotiated at that point. But but what kind of this is this is what kind of enforcement is.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Isom? That's a good question. The enforcement before the sale would be that they don't get the developer doesn't get the property, which which is a pretty big hammer to wield. However, at their after after escrow closes, the city would have very limited enforcement powers over that. But the idea would be that the developer won't get the property until such time as an agreement is signed with the union providing for the panic button. So it would be incumbent upon the organized labor to then enforce its rights under the written agreement, which I would expect it would be able to do on an ongoing basis
Speaker 7: . And so, with what I understand, organized labor coming back or enforcing their rights with their collective bargaining rights, but would they come back to the city or would we be the arbiter at that point, or would that be?
Speaker 1: No, I think the courts would be the arbiter at that time. Okay.
Speaker 7: Thank you for that. I will. I'm looking forward to hearing more and more comment and conversation about this. Again, I'm in the spirit. I am certainly supportive of of building and developing a hotel in our downtown. I think it's necessary, particularly on that that corner something this is something that we should be be working towards. I want to congratulate and thank our staff for negotiating what I believe is a creative agreement that gets to yes with American life. And I want to thank American life, the president, for being here personally and for for his commitment. I've done some research on the developer. They've had some very great projects throughout the country, throughout the downtown L.A. area. And I hope we're able to to reach an agreement. Here this evening to help to move forward with something that I think is will be an economic development boon for the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman. Councilman. Mongo.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I am so excited about this project. I think that I hear from my colleagues that their support to build another hotel in downtown Long Beach. I think that it's great jobs, great local hire program. Locally owned and operated restaurant opportunity. I think that a lot of credit goes to the staff for all your work on this. The developer for coming to the table, labor for coming to the table. I think that it's a tipping point for Long Beach and I think the projects like this will continue to come forward at a benefit to the city and a benefit to the residents. It is no wonder that we are seeing record levels of lower the lowest levels of unemployment in our city's recorded history. Local hire programs create that, and that is really important. We're also seeing impressive household income growth, unlike is being seen in the rest of the country. We are top we are number seven in the country for income growth. And projects like this continue to contribute to that. And so thank you to everyone who cares about our neighborhoods. And thank you for working through this together. I look forward to a ribbon cutting.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. What a difference a couple of weeks makes. While I'm very, very amazed at this city council, I'm very proud of the city council today because of the support that they are giving. Not only a new development, not new perhaps, but new to the city of Long Beach and their willingness to adapt and change and include some of those key points that we want to have to protect not only workers, but to give jobs to people. And I think that that's amazing. I want to thank, of course, Councilmember Pearce for taking that bold step and included some of these items in there and in her amendment to the project, because I was already looking at the possibility of us not strong enough, we need to include support announced by. The bottom line is that as long as we have a labor agreement, then a project that's going to be working for Long Beach, it's going to be unprecedented, from what I understand, for us and for the region. I think it speaks volumes about the city council, how progressive it is, how mindful it is of all of its responsibilities to not only its residents, but to the working class and to the working people of Long Beach. So thank you very much. I will be supporting the item. Thank you. I know that all the other council members have spoken. I want to just say just one thing and then we'll go it will go to the vote. I want to just you know, this is have been a parcel of land that's been empty for decades. And I want to thank, obviously, the team that's come forward to develop. What is going to be Long Beach is first a four star hotel. It's going to be incredible activator and job creator. I want to thank, of course, our partners in labor the fact this will be the largest private labor agreement, I believe, in the entire city. You guys are going to build a pretty substantial project and I just want to congratulate all the good jobs are going to be created. I think it's great and complete as we did the first time support. There'll be a contract agreement. And of course, this is also going to provide millions of dollars of economic development into into the city as well as into the jobs from boat for both the hotel workers on site, the food service workers. And of course, the workers are going to be building this incredible structure on the corner of ocean and pine. So these we're the largest hotels in the city. This will be also, I believe I was talking to our economic development folks, Mr. Chrysler, but it will be it's one of the largest hotel construction projects, I believe, happening in the state of California. If that's not if that's not correct. Is that right?
Speaker 9: Honorable Maria. It's one of the most certainly per room. It's the one of the most expensive.
Speaker 1: Okay, good. Well, good. Okay. Excellent. Well, thank you. Look forward to seeing this thing come out of the ground next year. I want to thank the councilmember. I want to thank the the the staff who worked incredibly hard and also want to thank the folks that don't get a lot of thanks often. But you guys worked so hard on this to our city attorney team. Thank you for the years of this work. So, member, please cast your vote. Motion case. Thank you very much. Great. Okay. We are now. That's believe it or not, we're about to start the regular agenda, which is crazy. So the hearings are over. We're going to we're only going to one request to move an item up. So we are going to hear the first. Two things we'll do is hear the item and then consent calendar. I'm sorry, then public comment, then we will do a consent calendar. So we are going to do Councilman Austin's item.
Speaker 0: No, no, no.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. That was the item. I meant the item for Dr. Williams where I'm looking at the wrong one that got moved up. Item 26, 26. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing regarding an economic subsidy in connection with a Revised Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement with American Life, Inc., pursuant to California Government Code Section 53083; and
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary, including the First Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement, attaching a Revised Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement for the property located at 100 East Ocean Boulevard, with American Life, Inc., a Washington corporation, or assignee, subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1111 | Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. That was the item. I meant the item for Dr. Williams where I'm looking at the wrong one that got moved up. Item 26, 26.
Speaker 0: 171717.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzales. Councilman Andrew's recommendation to receiving file a report from Long Beach Unified School District Board member Dr. Felton Williams on the 2017 Urban Educator of the Year Green Gardener Award. You anyway. Fine. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, this is going to be very exciting for me to be able to present this award to a very outstanding individual, because the fact that the work that he's done, not only in the city of.
Speaker 0: Long Beach International, this individual, he is someone that.
Speaker 1: You will not only hear about tonight, but you hear about this guy all over the world, because I can just see that's the type of movement he has in his heart. And so, you know, my colleagues, I'm bringing, you know, basically great joy to celebrate the work of this long time friend and colleague, Dr. William Felton. And, you know, his enthusiasm for education, youth has spanned decades, decades, and he's an advocate and a change agent in programing for marginalized communities. His leadership has been recognized on a national level, earning him the national highest honor as an urban educator of the year. Great job, Dr. Felten, and I want you to keep the work. And so after this, I would like to I'd like to bring this ad, my colleagues, you know, help me pass this. And I have I know I have some other people want to speak on this item. So, you know, we'll wait until after this and I'll have a certificate I'd like to give. Absolutely. Councilmember. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes. So I have a few things to say. So thank you so much for being patient, everyone with us. This is definitely something that deserves a lot of time. So a bit about our distinguished, honorable Dr. Felton Williams. He worked in education spanning about 45 years. From 1972 to 79, Dr. Williams held several administrative positions at Cal State Long Beach, which include administrative analyst, instructional services, administrative assistant to the Director of Public Policy, Administration, and Supervisor of the Learning Assistance Center. During this time, he helped develop computer assisted registration and the Public Policy Administration Graduate Program. Dr. Williams also served as the Director of Affirmative Action and Assistant to the President from 1979 to 1994 at Cal State Dominguez Hills, when Dr. Williams was dean of the School of Business and Social Science at Long Beach City College. He was elected onto the school board. Since then, he has been a proponent of the academic and career Success for All Students initiative that recently established Ethnic Studies program with Cal State, Long Beach and Long Beach City College Promise. Dr. Williams was recently awarded the 2017 Urban Educator of the Year from the Council of the Great City Schools. This award was named after Richard Green, first African-American chancellor in New York City, and Edward Gardner, former Denver school board member. And it comes with a $10,000 scholarship to a student in the winner's district. We're looking forward to who you select. And it is no secret that his passion in ensuring that every student in Long Beach succeeds definitely matters to him. And Dr. Williams, we thank you for your service to students in our city and we congratulate you. Thank you so much for being a friend. He and I share a family hometown. I grew up in a few different places, but San Pedro is where we call home to many of our family members. And so we have that bond and connection. And I really appreciate you being here and thank you for your work. I think now, Councilmember Andrews, there's a video that will play on behalf of Dr. Williams.
Speaker 1: Congratulations, Dr. Williams, on the 2017 Green Garner Award. We can't thank you enough from the Lumbee Unified School District for everything that you've done for our young people from the day that you stepped on as a board member. You've been a huge advocate for equity and access for all of our kids. And because of your efforts to lead our initiatives, our district is recognized as one of the best in the nation. You truly have transformed the lives of thousands of young people and our entire community. So on behalf of all the children, their parents, our teachers, our community stakeholders, and the Board of Education and myself, thank you for a job well done. Williams has the wherewithal to. Reach back on life experiences that none of us on the board. He brings those and the most meaningful way to policy, to discussions. To better the future of our kids in business schools. He advocates for programs that benefit students. He's an articulate voice on the in their defense and on their behalf, as well as for the teachers. He understands that the teachers and the classified staff, the community as a whole is all part of this effort. We also saw some great injustices in this community and actually. And so he dedicated his life to be the change process and to. Part of the process. You know, one says you can't bring the change process unless you have a seat at the table. I think Dr. Will and Sara, he knew that education was the key. So we went into the military. Came back through the GI Bill, got his education, gets his Ph.D. from Claremont. So he not only is a great role model for other African-Americans and for all students, he is one who models on a daily basis what one should do if they want to bring about change.
Speaker 3: I think for his own upbringing and maybe some of the challenges or the injustices that he's seen in his own life has helped him to perhaps see that in.
Speaker 4: Others and.
Speaker 3: Want to create a way in which people can excel, be able to move forward. His work in the NAACP, I think, has a lot in terms of building his character and his passion for education and just. We were wanting to create a around that because we know the drive system.
Speaker 1: Is seeing students succeed. He wants to close that achievement gap. He wants to see students graduate from high school. He wants to see those students go on to college, enjoy successful careers, and have successful lives. He knows the risks. We're done. So for him, it really is about getting as close to the end zone as possible so that we can share the rest of the nation. How this can be done in the general with the Legion of Ideas has been growing nationwide, but I think Dr. Ruth. It gives it further emphasis. It's nice to read about a district in its successes. When you have an individual as articulate and well-informed as Dr. Williams. In that message forward. Personally, it makes a tremendous impact. I think what gives them the greatest satisfaction is knowing he's made some contribution to the welfare of others. And that's what motivates.
Speaker 4: Now. Karen.
Speaker 1: I'd say equity. Charismatic integrity and I would say commitment. A great board member should be.
Speaker 10: You're going to speak for the city, which is.
Speaker 1: Great. And we do have a couple. Let me get to a couple of the council members and then I'll have Dr. Williams come up. Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Well, Dr. Williams, congratulations. I'm so proud to know you and to hear about your accomplishments. That video was beautifully done. As a council member, I'm very proud to have you here with us today so that we could recognize you for this. But more importantly, I'm really proud as a Long Beach Unified School District parent. I started my political career by being active on my PTA, and so I am very much in tune with the needs of our students and the expectations of the parents in terms of what the.
Speaker 3: School board does.
Speaker 5: And the satisfaction that parents in my circle have with the way that Long Beach Unified is run. And that has a lot to do with you and your leadership and that of your colleagues. So I congratulate you not as a council member tonight, but as a as a parent of two children in the very district that you have worked hard to build and strengthen. The only thing I will say is I was very disappointed that there was not a Wilson cheerleading squad in the final shot. But Councilman Andrews and I have an ongoing rivalry as I'm about to become a Bruin family member. But one of the things that I love about our school board is that you understand, celebrate, appreciate that diversity and that that level of levity that we have when we have the banter back and forth about our schools. Because really, at the end of the day, it's every single one of these schools that's fantastic and offering our kids opportunities every day. Thank you for being a role model to them and inspiring all of us in terms of your leadership. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I'd like to just.
Speaker 7: Also take this opportunity to congrats, congratulations. And I say congratulations to Dr. Williams for the honor. I'm glad that you're here. And I'm glad my colleagues brought this item forward to give you your due respect as an education leader, as a champion for mentoring in our city, young men and boys of color an example and as a class example of an elected official who carries himself with great integrity. I've watched you've been involved for many, many years. He is always been a voice for equity and of course, quality education and a steady force for poor in our city. He's everywhere. And all the events, he's he's popping up and making sure that he's representing the school district to the fullest. I want to also thank you as a parent in our schools. I want to thank you for the work that you do to impact the lives of students and parents along with unified and throughout our state . You are certainly known and have helped put Long Beach on the map as a as a league leading and distinguished district. And on a personal level, you have been a friend and a confidant and a mentor on so many levels. Again, it's my honor here. And thank you for all you do.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. I've had the privilege of working with Dr. Williams for many, many, many years. We worked together one at one time, Islamic State, when he was there at the Learning Assistance Center, and I was across the hall at a tutoring center, and we were both worked together for a while. And then we saw when our different ways and we came back together again when I was a member of the Board of Trustees at Army City College, and he became a board member at the at the Board of Education. And we worked together to help put to to craft what is now known as the College Promise, which is a nationally recognized program that puts brings together community colleges and school districts to create student success, not only locally, but nationally. And so I want to congratulate you on that as well and congratulate you on your award. Well-deserved. Thank you very much, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 3: I was an echo the comments of my colleagues. You're such a role model to so many. And you do so much for the community, not just what you do on the board, but what you also do for the community and the nonprofits and the churches and every other group that you touch. And so thank you and thank you for being there to take coffee on a Saturday to be a mentor, because that's really important to the future of of Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Supernormal. Congratulations, Dr. Williams. I just have a very quick anecdote. If you want to know where Dr. Williams priorities lie. Last week, we were all set to celebrate this night here in council chambers, and there was a conflict. So rather than come here and get all this praise, he went to a ribbon cutting at Browning High School. So that tells you what he's all about. Thank you. Thank you. And Dr. Williams Felton, obviously a huge congrats. We're so proud of our school system. We're so proud of your leadership locally and across the country. And I want to invite you to come up and say a few words. And as Dr. William is coming down, I just want to let you guys know, if you decide to change this profession, Dr. Williams can say, yeah, yeah . Thank you all so very much. Good evening. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia, members of the city council. Thank you all so very much for your wonderful comments. Let me just take a quick second to introduce two of my colleagues that are here tonight, our board president, Megan Kerr. She's here and my fellow board member, John McGinnis, which you both stand, please. Thank you so much. And to Councilman Andrews and to Councilwoman Gonzalez, thank you so much for this opportunity for my hometown girl from San Pedro. And if you don't see it right, we know you're not from San Pedro. Some people try to pretend that they're from San Pedro, but they just don't get it right. But a home grilling for Councilman D Andrews who spent so much time over there, you may as well have been from San Pedro. So the I really want to basically just say that, you know, even though I was a recipient of the award, the award is about much more than me. And if I can just quickly just highlight some of the notes at the event in reference to that award. And so I want to just take a moment to read that information. It's about my appreciation to Aramark and Scholastic for their continued sponsorship of this award. More importantly, I deeply appreciate the continued efforts to add value to the lives and aspirations of urban schoolchildren throughout America. And in today's climate, this support is more crucial than ever. I want to extend my appreciation to the men and women and students of the Long Beach Unified School District for adding meaning to my life. They take their responsibility seriously in the worst of times, in the best of times. They are committed and resilient and work diligently to provide challenge and opportunity to each and every student. Added to that, as a city government under the leadership of our current mayor, Robert Garcia. That, along with the other district partners, do not hesitate to serve as a crucial link to the success of our students. Recently, the Long Beach Police Department sponsored a shopping outing with students from Washington Middle School shot with the Cup. Other partners have stepped forward to provide free eye examinations and glasses to every student in the district who needed them. Similarly, the city prosecutor, Doug Halbert, has worked with the district on a consistent basis to fashion programs for our students and their families that are fair and compassionate. Other activities, such as free school uniforms, are provided to students who are unable to afford them. Just to cite a few examples of the individuals and organizations that make Long Beach what it is. We had approximately 500 business partners when I first joined the board in 2004. Thanks to the great work of our staff, we now have over 1500 business partners who provide every conceivable form of support imaginable. This was the climate in Long Beach and it is an enduring one. It is a testament to the broad level of community and business support in the city. I want to thank our superintendent, Chris Steinhauser, who does not waver in the face of challenge, particularly when it comes to ensuring equity and opportunity for each and every student in the district, as evidenced by providing district supported PSAT and SAT exams. Khan Academy Pairing University have some ethnic studies classes just to name a few. His support has been unwavering in responding to the challenges and academic success of students across the board. And it has been my sincere pleasure to work with him. He is not only the superintendent of one of the nation's most effective and nationally recognized urban school districts that is recognized for its efforts in closing the achievement and opportunity gap. But he is also my friend. During my 13 year tenure as a member of the Council Great City Schools to include serving as its chair, I've come to truly appreciate the important work of the Council on behalf of the nation's urban school districts. That work is and remains first class. My thanks to the men and women of the Council who continue to endure and claim the moral high ground on behalf of our students. They are indeed blessed with excellent leadership and the person of the Executive Director, Michael Casserly. And finally, to be the recipient of the Green Gardiner Award is a testament to the many people who work day in and day out. None of us make such opportunities on our own. And again, I want to thank Councilman De Andrews and Councilwoman Linda Gonzalez for this opportunity to be with you this evening and to take people who are here tonight who came to support me. And I would like to ask them to stand, please. And again, thank you all so very much. BOLTON We're going to come up there real quick. Why don't we all go up and take a photo with better. Be.
Speaker 0: You might want to put that back to Susie.
Speaker 1: What is this place? I told you. You like to speak? When the doctor speaks for me, I have to tell him time is up. This guy is a great archer. I can say.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. Here we are. You go down there. Okay. We're going to look over here real quick. All right. Okay. Yeah. Doug. You guys very good. John McGinnis. Everybody. Everybody.
Speaker 3: It's all right.
Speaker 0: No, no. Come on. Let me go. Come on, you guys.
Speaker 1: We're trying to get everybody to squeeze in.
Speaker 0: Please. She's coming. Come up. She's coming. Yeah. You stand right here. Don't worry. Yeah. Yeah. There we go. Okay. All see it? All right, everybody, that's easier to do. One more. Awesome. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for waiting.
Speaker 1: Okay is a public comment. Dr. FELTEN Before we see none. Dr. Williams, congratulations again, and let's give him another round of applause. Okay. I apologize. So it's just the the the second the second agenda item that was asked to move up and that was some. We'll do that one. That's the last one. I'm sorry. Please vote. Cast your vote out, please. 25 married into public comment. And that would it be a public comment?
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. So it'll be, it'll be item 20 then public comment and consent. I don't know, item 20. That's not the item. You wanted to name Mr. Aston, because it's not quite 19. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from Long Beach Unified School District Board Member, Dr. Felton Williams, on the 2017 Urban Educator of the Year, Green Garner Award. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1139 | Speaker 1: Okay. So it'll be, it'll be item 20 then public comment and consent. I don't know, item 20. That's not the item. You wanted to name Mr. Aston, because it's not quite 19.
Speaker 0: It's just 20.
Speaker 1: It's item 20. Go ahead.
Speaker 0: What do you think?
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And obviously, I want to thank all my my colleagues also for signing on to this very timely and important issue facing workplaces throughout our country today. In the past two months, the nation has seen a transformational moment and how we address the magnitude and pervasiveness of the problem of inappropriate sexual contact in the workplace. Numerous high profile reports of harassment and abuse in fields such as entertainment, media, hospitality and government as well as through the MeToo social media campaign, have prompted many organizations to reexamine their policies and procedures to make sure that we promote a safe work environment. The victims of unlawful harassment feel comfortable coming forward and reporting. This is about ensuring that we are fostering here in the city of Long Beach a work environment and that we do not. A respectful work environment. And that we do not tolerate an abuse of power or a lack of respect or professionalism. I would like to thank our Director of Human Resources, Alice BASKAS, for for being here this evening and would ask that she provide us a brief overview of our existing policy and procedures regarding unlawful harassment or sexual harassment. Thank you.
Speaker 0: All.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor. And City Council members and the City of Long Beach has several policies regarding a EEO related to unlawful discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Those policies are posted online and they're also provided to city employees when they're onboarded as new employees. We also provide mandated sexual harassment training to our supervisors and managers. And also employees can file a complaint at five different places if they can file a complaint informally with their supervisors or managers, with the EEO counselor at their department, or directly with the H.R. department, EEO citywide counselor. They can also file complaints with outside agencies such as the State DFA or the federal EEOC. They can file those directly with those agencies. Employees can also file complaints or lodge a complaint with the city auditor. And if that happens, those complaints are then referred over to H.R. for investigation. I think I covered basically what is a just a high level overview. And if there are any specific questions, I'm happy to cover that.
Speaker 1: Okay. Follow up with a couple of quick questions. Does the city's.
Speaker 7: Policy currently address bullying and intimidation in the workplace, whether or not it's due to a progressed protected class?
Speaker 3: So in broad terms, our policies do cover harassment in the workplace. So if an employee came to us alleging harassment in the workplace, we would investigate it. And that also is covered in the state policies.
Speaker 7: And is our. Is your department currently looking at doing any ways to provide any sort of additional avenues for victims to report harassment, such as a.
Speaker 0: Hotline?
Speaker 3: So we are currently exploring the feasibility of of user utilizing a hotline type of avenue for individuals to file complaints. I recently came back from a H.R. conference last week and talked to my colleagues from the City of Los Angeles who are also looking at that. And we're going to be collaborating together and looking at the feasibility of having such a such a process for individuals to file complaints using a hotline or a one 800 number.
Speaker 7: And how can you explain how such complaints are investigated? Are they done internally or are they done by outside investigators?
Speaker 3: Yes. So there are various different types of investigations. We are policies called for and we prefer that complaints to the extent possible can be resolved informally with the supervisor and manager. However, if that's not possible, we will conduct a formal investigation. If someone wants to file a formal complaint. We will use either inside or outside neutral investigators to conduct an investigation, including conducting an intake with the complainant and also interviewing any witnesses, reviewing any documentation. And we also consult with the city attorney's office in conducting our investigations as we are progressing through the investigation or need assistance.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. And I just.
Speaker 7: Wanted to just address some some of the comments that that were made earlier. And, you know, in case anybody wants to twist this issue into something else. As chair of the city's Personnel and Civil Service Committee, I really felt a need to have this discussion this evening and the responsibility to bring it forward along with my colleagues . So I'm and I'm really glad we have a very diverse council to have this discussion this evening. Recognizing that the employees understand the intent of this item is to discuss and reaffirm our city's policy on unlawful harassment and sexual harassment to make sure that we're sending a clear message as a council that such misbehavior will not be tolerated in any workspace in this city. We as a council also have a direct responsibility to our city's workforce, and we have a responsibility to the taxpayers of our city. And so this is why we I brought this item forward. I look forward to hearing from my colleagues. I would ask that you go ahead and and and but but also I wanted to also point out that the motion tonight requests that the city manager report back to the city council, in addition to review the city's current policies and procedures. What we're doing this evening and look at how the city and how city employees are informed of how they can file a complaint. A breakdown of the complaints the city has received over the last five years, and recommendations on possible changes to the policy to ensure that it is also victim friendly. And so with that, I ask for my my councilmembers colleagues to support this item, and I look forward to hearing further their comments as well.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to thank Councilman Austin for bringing this forward. I know that there are many organizations and entities who are reevaluating their policies around the nation based on the national conversation and what what I think I hear the intent of Councilman Austin and from what I know of my colleagues to be, is that it's not just about creating a policy or revising our policy. It's about the culture. It's about the type of culture that we're setting as leaders and the type of environment that we want to create. And so to the extent that city management, the city manager and his team are listening and identifying some best practices that can be utilized to not only identify areas where our current policies can be strengthened, but also areas where we can provide additional training for our department heads and possibly even our employees of how to create spaces that are safe for the employees. One of the things that I have often said in regards to trainings that I've been involved in for with managers for H.R. related issues, is that when people come to work, most people go to work because they have to in order to support their families. And so to have to go to work and be in an environment where you are subjected to things that are offensive, the where you're being bullied, where you might be feeling uncomfortable in terms of your space every day is definitely not an environment that should be tolerated. So to the extent that city staff can develop best practices to not only make that culture known, but also provide ways to investigate corroborated claims where such policies are not followed. I think it's important for us to be able to do that. So again, I commend Councilman Austin for bringing this forward and making sure that we are keeping at pace and in some instances ahead of the national conversation regarding workplace policies designed to prevent this type of incident or.
Speaker 3: Behavior at.
Speaker 5: Workplaces. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes, I just want to say that, of course, I will absolutely support an item that looks at sexual harassment and sexual assaults. It's absolutely something I believe in. It's something I'm passionate about. And as this item starts, it actually starts with over the past two months, numerous high profile reports of inappropriate sexual conduct in the workplace that prompted a national discussion about sexual harassment. What I find a little troubling about that is that why it took high profile reports for us. Actually have a discussion about this item to actually bring this forward to this this council. And so instead of being and I don't feel and absolutely I'm going to support this and I have a question relative to what we can make do to perhaps make it stronger. But what I would like us to do when we're looking at policymaking is to be more proactive versus reactive, because now this just looks as though we're reacting to everything going on because a celebrity decided that they wanted to come out with a high profile issue. And so I don't believe in that type of policymaking. I want us to be able to get in front of something before this happens or when people start coming out in various industries, not just the municipal industry . So I will say that and I hope that we can stand committed to making sure that whatever this policy is, that we look forward, as I mentioned, to other industries and and especially as we brought forward the hotel housekeepers to ensure that that stays the topic of discussion. I will ask, though, that I believe, Alex, that the state requires sexual harassment training each year. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: That's correct. Every two years, supervisors and managers must go through a two hour training course that is meets state requirements. And we actually just completed that in 2017 for our supervisors and managers.
Speaker 2: Perfect. And so that's just supervisors and managers, though. So is there any way for us to expand that above and beyond what the state requires, to require everyone to do some sort of sexual harassment training? I do that on my private side of life. Everyone does the training, whether you're a manager or not.
Speaker 3: So that's something certainly we are looking into also expanding, providing some type of a course to all city employees, non supervisory non-management employees. We're we're right now exploring the feasibility of doing that, whether that be it on an online type of system or in classroom type coursework. So we are looking at the added ways of delivering that type of training.
Speaker 2: Great. And I was just going to ask about that because I know that video. I mean, if we can make it easier on people to take a at least a video so they can see scenarios in which they can understand what sexual harassment and assault actually mean in the workplace, I think that would be great. So other than that, I extend my support. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I do want to, you know, recognize that the conversation we had several weeks back, one of the discussions was making sure that we take care of our our house first. So I want to, you know, applaud us for doing that. I have lots of thoughts and I did a PowerPoint, but I'm going to save it and I'll share it with you guys at our next meeting. What I do want to include are some talking points and some facts. So we ground ourselves. We're having a conversation about policies and procedures which sometimes can be very dry and pull us away from the reality. The reality is that over 50% of people that have said that they've experienced sexual harassment on the job do not report it for fear of losing their jobs. That 80% of those that experience sexual assault on the job are women. That we spend over $120 billion a year as a national government on workplace violence cost. And so I just want to ground us also in the fact that it's not just sexual assaults that we're talking about with the hashtag MeToo, which was cited in the item, but that there's other types of violence and bullying and yelling and threats that can happen. And we need to have an H.R. policy that understands that violence and understands the trauma that people experience, men or women, when they go through violence at home, as children, as adults, and how that trauma can be triggered in the workplace . And so while I would love for us to have a policy that is inclusive of gender and inclusive of making sure we have a one 800 hotline, which I support, making sure that we have a video training that is not just for supervisors that all of us have to take. I want my staff in my office to understand how to deal with those that have experienced sexual violence or bullying in the community and in my office. So a trauma informed policy is what I hope that you can come back with, because I know in my experience it. There are spaces that do not feel safe that are supposed to be safe. There are processes that are supposed to support victims that do not support victims. And while we say as a whole that we want that culture to be there, unless we're talking about it and doing it every single day, it falls through the cracks. And if I felt that way, then our lowest paid staff person at City Hall, I can't imagine how they feel if something happens, whether it's a offhanded comment and making sure that we're being trained. I'm not assuming because they had poor work habits, that they're just complaining and blowing something out of proportion. So I believe after a lot of conversations that this council has had, that our city attorney's office has had and directors that a trauma informed our practice is what we have to do in in the city. And so I wanted to make sure that we feel that gravity, especially with the fact that in our management we are 60% male in management and that we are 39% women. Then in Non-Management, it's 39% male and 60.8% women. And with the numbers of statistics that we have around that abuse that we have to recognize, we have to go above and beyond trauma.
Speaker 3: I just want to make.
Speaker 4: Sure I don't. And I want to also call out and recognize that as a city, I want to ensure that our legislative department is treated the same as all of our departments whenever it comes to training, cultural sensitivity and expectations for processes. If a complaint is made that that goes into someone's file, that their process is fully being run through, and that the 14th floor is not treated any differently than any other department. I'm not saying that's happened. I just want to ensure that that is a process that is there. And then again, I want to echo what my my colleagues said. Councilmember Gonzalez. It's about prevention, creating a safe culture, trauma informed practices, and exploring options around safety and health managers. In the policy that we have, I don't see, I didn't know. And so I asked my staff to give me this policy that we even have a equal opportunity office that will notify and that there is an actual counselor or designee. How do how does each department know who that designated person is?
Speaker 3: So each department has an administrative officer so that the they and that person is usually the EEO counselor for that particular department. And then there's also a city wide one. We just recently revamped our brochure that is provided to city employees, and we also translated it into Spanish and we have that available online. We're looking at disseminating that to each employee and with a piece for a pay stub staffer. And so it also, as I indicated before, employees are informed when they're onboarded initially about our policies and and provided the brochures.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I don't think I got any brochures when I came on, but, you know. Thank you. I would also like to say one thing that was in the sexual harassment piece that we were looking at for the hotels included having a third party, whether it be a nonprofit, their own attorney or the police present whenever filing complaints that when you come back with recommendations of, you could see if there's some best practices out there that allow an employee to have a third party present when they're going through the investigative process. And that's it. So thank you, colleagues, for bringing this forward. It obviously is a timely issue.
Speaker 1: Because we're going to take you there as a former manager and administrative officer in the city of Long Beach. I had instances where I had employees come to me with complaints about harassment or potential workplace violence. And I dealt with it. And it's it was at the time that I was employed here that we were the administrative officers were the individuals that employees could go to. But there's not always that level of trust, I have to say. And unfortunately, with every department, within every department that that had an employee can go to an administrative officer and lodge a complaint and feel comfortable that it's going to be taken care of, because that's not always the case. So I would I would agree with my councilmember colleagues out here that we probably do need some kind of additional way of having employees report harassment. Or intimidation or bullying or whatever it is that that bothers them in the workplace when they're working with either a colleague or us or a subordinate or a superior. Because it's not always possible to know if your item got taken care of. I mean, that one of the things that I think it's unfortunate and it's I know it's probably the law because you're not supposed to reveal that. But sometimes a police don't know if where their complaint when they might have lodged it but then it's gone and there's no feedback for them in terms of whether there was a resolution to their complaint. And they continue to work. And and the person that they may have be having an issue with is still working or still supervising them or still a colleague or still in the workplace. So we need to know, have a resolution on that and hopefully that when this comes back, there's going to be some kind of recommendation or suggestion or a policy that addresses that, because I think that's that's the most important thing is that is harassment is reported. And the reason it's not reported and we get that high percentage of individuals that don't report it is because there's a lack of trust. And we need to build it. We need to build that trust for our employees and anybody to come to us or to go to, to, to our office of h.r or a or whoever we designate to report those come to our senators. So I will support this. Adam, I want to thank Austin customer roster for bringing this forward. But at the same time, I want to address the fact that if we don't address it now, we're going to have a hard time addressing it later. So it is unfortunate that this conversation is not taking place because of what's taking place nationally and locally. But it's it's an important one. And I'm glad that we're having it now. Thank you. Thank you. In that clip this hour, Councilman Councilman Austin, I thank you and.
Speaker 7: I appreciate the comments. I want to just follow up on a couple of of items unlike any future policy and like staff to look at, including bullying and intimidation. And in this the harassment policy specifically calling out those actions because there are situations and as a employee advocate, I deal with all the time situations where people are not necessarily being sexually harassed or harassed, but they're being bullied and intimidated to the point where their their work environment is completely hostile. And that does open the door for other problems to the point that, you know, we're having this conversation today instead of being proactive about it, this and I think we're being proactive because the city has a policy. We are reviewing our policy. The city of Los Angeles is reviewing their policies right now. The county of Los Angeles are reviewing their policies right now. The state of California is reviewing their policies right now. This is what good government is all about right now. And if we don't have this conversation today, as Councilmember Jauregui said, we'll be regretting it later. This item, this issue is specific to employees in the city of Long Beach, the employees who are within our purview as a city council to to to to govern. And they they we we we vote on their they're collective bargaining contracts. This is within our house. And again, the responsibility is not only to making sure the workplace for the employees here is safe and healthy, respectful and professional, but also that the we also have a responsibility to our our taxpaying public, because there are liabilities that come with us not taking care of business in that regard. And so I'll in my comments there, I appreciate the the discussion, the fact that council my council colleagues were reading this policy and discovering new things and things that they didn't know about in terms of city operations was well worth the time spent this evening. And so thank you very much for the colleagues and look forward to voting. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any comment on this? Please come forward. Please come forward quickly so we can. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: When I heard Councilman Gonzalez's comment about why suddenly because of celebrities are down being paid, they are called on the carpet about their internal behavior. I immediately thought, what difference would that make at the moment when we first heard the first celebrity, whether it be Bill Cosby or and now our president making statements that were harassing toward women. The people who follow suit.
Speaker 1: All the other.
Speaker 3: Celebrities who were found to be in conflict. They knew bringing in these men was called that they had a behavior that was adverse. They started calculating when. There are. Oh, at some point my may be uncovered. When Mr. Austin brought this up and now hearing that it was his call, I thought, okay, if the city has existing behavior now, that's going to be revealed. This is the call out now. You may hear about it next year. It may start being rolled out. Things that you didn't know. This is the call coming from Mr. Austin that, oh, we need to relook at this. Based on all the other behavior of people, we never would have thought statements such as this would have come. So I. I wasn't called to answer that. But I say. Yeah. It needed to be done now because other cities are examples, because other people are examples, because celebrities are role models to our children. Because Mr. Cosby was a role model to many black family families. So I took it. I took an aversion to that. Why now? Yes. Now, because now the city of Long Beach may give its employees the go ahead in just that statement to say, okay, now I can start talking about what has been happening to me for the last five years. Where before I wouldn't have felt free. This is why. And it doesn't matter that it took a celebrity to bring it forward. The issue is. It hadn't been done. Until all of the other individuals that affect our city, in our view, came forward. Tonya, seven, district resident. I want to applaud you for bringing forth this policy review, a policy review that you labeled as a victim friendly policy. I'm not sure what motivated you to bring this policy review forward now, other than the many victims who have recently come forward in the media to report inappropriate conduct and and who, quote , did not feel there was a safe environment in their workplace for them to come forward to report harassment. What pains me is that a couple of months ago, some of you did nothing for the many victims or more appropriately called survivors, who indicated that they, too, did not feel there was a safe environment for their in their workplace for them to come forward to report harassment. As council members, you're not elected just to put forth public policy, but you're elected to make a difference in people's lives, to make their lives better. As past director of the Sexual Assault Crisis Agency, I too agree that there is a need to ensure that all employees have a safe work environment and feel safe to report incidents. Emphasis on all employees. Yet reviewing and updating policy alone is not what will ensure that employees feel safe. Workers need to know that you understand what they are going through and how their working conditions either increases or lessens incidents of abuse. You must understand that what workers are going through. If there are no women in management positions, it can be difficult for some to understand what's going on. While working in the city 29 years ago, my water broke at work and I drove to the hospital. My boss asked me if I was going to return to work later that day. And now, an hour later, I gave birth to my youngest child. And no, I did not return to work that day. Don't get me started on pumping milk while at the city of Garden Grove. While I was working there, the public works department had all men employees. When one man who is transgender and showed up as a woman after her surgery, they worked hard to understand her circumstances and in what way work, environment and behavior need to change. First of all, you need to show you understand why some survivors do not report abuse. Three months ago, many were saying and were troubled because there was no record of reported incidents. That's not understanding. Saying that policy will result in litigation or that you see no nexus between harassment and workload. That's not understanding. Secondly, you need to engender trust. I can't see my time, Dick and I just have to talk faster. Thank you. If you engender trust, if employees don't trust you to believe their claims, or that those claims will not be investigated, no amount of policy tweaking will help. If they don't trust that, you will protect them. After reporting, no policy review will help. And finally, you need to acknowledge that working conditions play a major role in setting the stage to allow harassment to fester and continue. For example, here in the city of Long Beach, many years ago, no fire stations had separate facilities for women firefighters to shower or use the restroom. A separate restroom. I hope that has changed. When a few months ago, a couple of you were concerned about nuanced details that about treating differently. One class of employees. Please recheck next time you're dealing with public safety because they do have unique needs. Also, the employees are represented by a bargaining unit and they should have a say in this policy because it is about working conditions. I applaud your attempt at this policy review, but understand that work environment also means work conditions. And I hope that when you receive the requested breakdown of complaints the city has received over the past five years, and if there is only.
Speaker 1: A victim ensuring.
Speaker 3: That you continue to seek improvement in the policy. Thank you very much. A few more seconds for someone given eight years.
Speaker 1: That I got to treat everyone the same. Thank you so much. Mic speaker, please.
Speaker 3: My name's Nader Tushnet and I live in the third district and I am very pleased about this policy coming forward to City Council. I'm particularly pleased that we are looking at changing the culture. I worked for 50 years and in men in a largely male industry and it's not easy to change the culture. It's also important to note that the more managers there are who are women, the better it is for women to work there. I know that it's not only women who feel harassment. I am concerned, however, that you are looking only at your house. Your house is important. It sets the tone for the city. That is true. But your house and leaving other houses alone. And I'm speaking particularly about the hotel workers, leaves out the most important people in our city.
Speaker 5: And I want to say it's Hanukkah.
Speaker 3: So I can quote a rabbi. And I also was with my my extended family this weekend, and we were raised in a particular way. Rabbi Hillel said, If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself.
Speaker 5: What am I? And if not now, when?
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Q Next speaker, please. I'm also closing the speakers list, so I think. That. Mr. Murchison, for the last speaker there was no other speakers. Is that correct? No other speakers besides Mr. Murchison. Okay. Great. Next speaker.
Speaker 3: Please. Thank you very much. Zoe Nicholson. I live in Rose Park, second district. I can understand that. You might think that I am writing tonight to congratulate you on agenda item number 20. In fact, I would be if this was 1999. I've been an elected leader and am the president of your local now chapter and W is the largest organization advocating for the rights of women and girls. It is celebrating its 52nd year. I find this moment absolutely astounding because you are differentiating between the workers who work for you and the workers who support the industry in this city. I want to ask those five council members.
Speaker 0: Who voted no on.
Speaker 3: September 19th to do me a favor. Should anyone in your future want to shake your hand?
Speaker 1: Over one of our.
Speaker 3: Citizens being honored as Time's Person.
Speaker 1: Of the Year. I hope you will stand tall.
Speaker 3: I hope you will square your shoulders. I hope you will look them right in the eye and tell them.
Speaker 0: You voted no.
Speaker 3: Because that is the fact. One failed panic button out of thousands. Three years isn't long enough for a study or the comment. Well, it is Grand Prix weekend. Our people deserve protections and workloads and sexual assault. All human beings deserve this. You should be leaders in this culture.
Speaker 0: This is not progressive. Progressive means that you lead.
Speaker 3: You don't wait for the hashtags to pile in and how many people you love.
Speaker 0: Can now say me to. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: I'm with her. My name is Linda Calderon, and I am president of National Council of Jewish Women of Long Beach. And I represent over 400 members who live in Long Beach and in the surrounding areas. One of my priorities is to advance the well-being and status of women, which includes developing laws, policies, programs and services that protect every woman from all forms of abuse, exploitation, harassment and violence. I would say that your mandate as a city council is the same to protect all employees from all forms of abuse, exploitation, harassment and violence. And I would commend you on looking at your employee policies again. That also should include the hotel workers and others, the majority of whom are women. Although they may not be under your direct supervision, their rights to work in a safe and secure environment are in the hands of the policy makers. That means you and I would like to give you some feedback about the meeting that we had in terms of Claudia's law. We had been told that you studied this hotel issue for almost three years. Was this not enough time to pool your research and unearth every possible question and solution to the issue? Each of you had that responsibility. There should have been no excuses about coming to a conclusion. You are a leaders. You're looked to as leaders. And when you receive testimony that there were incidents and actions that created a hostile work environment such as sexual assault, you are obligated to review the facts, not your opinions. And you did, as you did at that city hall meeting that met about hotel issues. It is your responsibility to inform yourselves about the circumstances surrounding sexual harassment and sexual abuse and make informed decisions. Did you know how difficult it must have been to publicly testify to these acts of aggression? Do you recognize the testimony of a supervisor standing up and saying he was present here as one of intimidation? Do you think anyone would publicly describe their experiences that they were not true? And yet one of you said that you did not believe them. You said it again tonight as well. In addition, many of the words that the five people who voted against this were dismissive and self-serving and lacked human compassion. Your leading means to listen, study, evaluate and make a decision that is the best possible decision for all parties. You are the leaders. I might also add that I'd like you to be part of the solution. I noticed that some of you, at least one of you is on the telephone right now, gave us your back for a few minutes. This is dismissive again and it is rude. We are here to try and come together to do something for people who feel that they don't have a say. Thank you very.
Speaker 1: Much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, everyone. My name's Christine Pettit. I'm the executive director of Building Healthy Communities Long Beach, and I'm also a sixth District resident. And I'm here tonight to speak in support of the item and also to echo some of the sentiments that were said that policies are one thing. I definitely agree with Councilmember Price Price's comment that we must look at culture. And one of the things that is telling about the culture and City Hall are some of the comments that were made on September 19th and the discussion around Claudia's law. I heard hotel workers come up and share their experiences of sexual harassment and assault, and I heard council members say that there wasn't enough evidence. Why do we need to act right now? Let's make sure to get it right. Even though we've been talking about this for years, those comments from the dais actually made me sick to my stomach and it lingered throughout the week as someone who has experienced sexual harassment. And I think that. You know, if I was a city employee or council staff, I would think that maybe if I came forward with my experience of harassment, that maybe it would be dismissed. And so while you might think that this testimony is twisting this item, what you say up here on all items sets the tone for the culture in Long Beach. And I want to say to that. If anyone else had been recognized as a time person of the year in Long Beach, we would be celebrating. And I haven't heard a peep about that. Our brave silence breaker from Long Beach. So I just want to say that, you know, it's good that you're looking at your policy. I ask you to look beyond what is written. Look at the culture you are promoting here. Sure. Get your house in order. But I also encourage you to take action to protect workers in the taxpayer subsidized hospitality industry and frankly, wherever else you can. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next week if we. Your name's David Garcetti. It's a g r c t. I just came up here impromptu. But there's an issue with this sexual harassment that really kind of hit a nerve. The one person that made a big issue about policies and reviewing stuff is somebody who apparently is not. Has had issues at the workplace with working with or with coworkers. In the question, though, I was having is that with this new reviews that you're doing here, are you going to be looking also at workplace relationships? And both sides of the spectrum, if somebody comes to complain, whether it's a subordinate or a supervisor, and also if it's male or female, different genders, now that we have to deal with all the different genders, it can also. I'm talking about being going across the board with everything and not just looking at which is what. What's going on now where it's a female saying that, oh, I've been sexually harassed, but men aren't coming forward or even gay or lesbian or anything else. I think that when you're looking at this now, when you're looking at this now in this day and age, it's not just, oh, let's look back at something from the nineties and this update. This is new stuff that we have to go across all genders. And just like they said, if somebody doesn't feel comfortable, you might have somebody who's doesn't feel comfortable talking to this particular person because of their sexual orientation versus that one. There's age differences. But the biggest thing that was strange to me is that I've I've worked in the military, I've worked in the government. We've always had these sexual harassment classes. And for it to be something like new is kind of strange. I don't know how it's been going on Long Beach where you don't even know if you've been doing it once a month. You don't even know who to go to. That's just seems kind of weird to me that you wouldn't be able to know your chain of command and everything you're supposed to be doing. But just but just in point, the thing that the main question I'm asking is that if there's issues of workplace relationships, let's say, and it feels something is something goes wrong, and then somebody out of retaliation goes and says, well, I was harassed. Are you going to look at it just because of that person is a male or a female or subordinate or supervisor? Are you going to take it seriously and be like, okay, wait a minute, we need to look at this and we need to use this as an example for, like Dan said earlier, as an example for the rest of the city where you're not taking sides just because it's somebody in a position of power or somebody who is more favored. And that's the thing that I'm saying. If that if you're going to be looking at this, look at it, there's a big giant spectrum now. So you have to start looking at. Thank you, sir. Next week, please. Good evening, councilmembers. My name is Brian McGinnis and I'm a Long Beach resident and constituent of council member supervised district. I am here to say that I commend city leaders for taking steps today to address how city staff can be protected from abuse on the job. However, I also want to point out a contradiction. Recently, the Long Beach City Council had an opportunity to help hospitality workers get much needed protection in the workplace. This council and the mayor failed them. Council Members Price, Mango, Austin and Supervisor. Well, I appreciate you bringing up this important item. The four of you, along with Councilmember Andrews, were responsible for voting down protections for hotel workers this past September. This hypocrisy lays bare one of the defining questions of our time. Will you, as empowered individuals, side with the most vulnerable members of our communities? Or will you serve moneyed interest and callously try to justify unnecessary human suffering? Long Beach bills itself as a progressive city. But it strikes me as cynical that some of you favor political expediency over workers health and safety. The time has come to protect all workers, regardless of who they work for. Thank you. Thank you. And the final speaker. Good evening, Mayor. Council members. I want to applaud Councilman Austin and the rest of you for bringing forward this item tonight. I know that we had a very robust discussion several months ago. I do want to point out a couple of things where I don't disagree with Councilman Pearce and Councilman, you're wrong in indicating that people don't come forward necessarily that have been assaulted. One of the things I did hear from our chief, our deputy chief at a public safety committee meeting, was that reported there was one incident in five years. Now, I grant you that there's a lot more that happens. I grant you that we don't want that culture in Long Beach. I get that. But statistically, there's one in five years. It's hard to focus on an industry like that more specifically, and I need remind everybody, including the audience, that proposed ordinance was focused on hotels of over 100 rooms. So it wasn't like it was going after the hospitality industry, quote unquote, in general. It was focused on a very specific group, a group that hasn't had a problem in the past. And yet, if we're all that concerned about sexual assault, why not go after the motels? Those seem to be the ones that would have bigger problems in Long Beach than the big hotels. The big hotels have H.R. policies. The big hotels have security. The motels don't. So why wouldn't you go after them? I don't see a policy in Long Beach when you're looking at your in-house stuff that says, gee, let's target this at development services, but we'll leave the IT department alone. It doesn't work that way. It's across the board. So if you're going to do a policy, take it across the board all the way and make sure that when you focus in on it, you can back it up. Now, I understand that things happen like that and people have incidences where they don't want to discuss it. Totally respect that. Totally respect the fact of the woman that mentioned don't want that culture in Long Beach. I get that. But on the other side of the coin, when you're going to propose an ordinance, let's make sure that's across the board for every industry in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. Public comment is closed. We have a there's a motion in a second on the floor. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I wasn't going to speak again, but I feel very compelled to do so because it's a shame that the item that is being brought forth by Councilman Austin tonight, an item that's being discussed all over the nation by municipalities and public entities alike to evaluate not just sexual harassment policies, but all types of harassment policies is now being somehow connected to a. A political item that came forth in September that really is being spun in a very, very unfortunate and inaccurate way. So the first thing I will say is one of the blessings of being a city council member in Long Beach is that every single one of our meetings is recorded. And one of the benefits of that is that people who want to repeat what you have said have the option to do it accurately by going back and listening and watching the video to find out what you actually said. I have been reading a lot of the social media posts, not all of them, because frankly, some of them are just garbage because they're complete alternative facts. But I've been reading a few of them, and it's absolutely unbelievable to me how blatantly they have misrepresented what happened at that meeting. Some of you were in the meetings that I had with Unite here before the item came to council. You know, you know, in your heart of hearts what my issues were with that item. If you didn't know them from being in a private meeting with me, you certainly had the opportunity to learn them by listening to me talk about the items on the council floor. The issue for me was never about panic. Buttons are providing public safety for hotel employees. Was I concerned that the proposed ordinance only protected employees? Housekeepers. Not all employees. Housekeepers in hotels of 100 or more. Yes, that was a concern to me because I think if housekeepers are vulnerable.
Speaker 3: Which they are, they should be.
Speaker 5: Protected at all size hotels. I don't believe that people who stay in hotels of 100 rooms or more are more violent or aggressive towards housekeepers than those who stay at a local motel. So I asked whether or not it was possible for us to consider an ordinance that required panic buttons for hotels of all sizes. And those of you who were in the meeting with me heard me ask, because there was a connection made between public safety and workloads. And what I said at the council floor was how is it that.
Speaker 3: Workloads will.
Speaker 5: Reduce the number of number of public safety issues in the room? Is there some correlation between the number of square feet that an individual cleans and their likelihood to be sexually assaulted? That was a simple question, and there was no correlation between the two. When I met with the organizers and I believe. But while they indicated that they had authored most of the ordinance, what I was told is that sometimes the hotel rooms in today's day and age are harder to clean. The mattresses are heavier. There is more glass on the surfaces. And so the question that I asked was, well, then why is it that we're including other types of rooms in the work load limitations, like a conference room or a dining area? And they said, no, no, no, that shouldn't be in the ordinance. And I said, No, no, that is in the ordinance. And they said, Well, we'd be okay with that if you want to make that change. And my response was, You'll be okay with it. What about the councilperson who brought the item? Shouldn't that be the person who's making the decision about what's okay and what's not? It was very, very clear to me, as it was to everyone, that the the item that was brought to council was a package deal that included many different elements, not related specifically to public safety. And my public safety, I mean, an attack on an individual when they're vulnerable with another human being. There were several items that were included, including the opportunity.
Speaker 3: For the housekeepers, if they are.
Speaker 5: In a union, to be able to.
Speaker 3: Completely waive.
Speaker 5: Those protections by vote of the union.
Speaker 3: So if there's only let's say there's.
Speaker 5: 100 people in the union and 30 of them are housekeepers and 70 of them are not.
Speaker 3: They could vote to.
Speaker 5: Completely do away with those protections.
Speaker 3: By vote of the.
Speaker 5: Union. That to me didn't make sense, and that is what I said. I started off my comments that night, as I did, as I know many of my colleagues did, saying that we should absolutely protect public safety, safety, and that I would do anything possible to figure out a way to change that ordinance, to make it public safety. It was very, very clear to me that the ordinance was a package deal. There was no room for compromise, and that's why it failed. So let me just be clear. It is okay. If you want to summarize people's arguments, it's okay if you want to give their arguments a certain meaning, but it is not okay to falsify people's statements. It is not okay to say that someone said something they did not say. It is not okay. It's absolutely improper, unethical and in some circumstances.
Speaker 3: Illegal to attribute words.
Speaker 5: To an individual who did not state those, especially when those words are on video and can be evaluated. And so I hear what everyone is saying. But please, the problem that we have in many situations with women and there there are opportunities for advancement is women not supporting other women. And I think it's very, very important that if we're going to criticize one another, that we do it fairly. But we do it fairly and honestly. We all know we're all educated enough to understand the nuances of policy that's presented to council. If one aspect of policy is something that's objectionable, that doesn't mean it's okay to walk away and accuse someone of disagreeing with every aspect of the policy. That's just wrong. It's just wrong. So let's call it what it is. If you feel compelled to summarize what happened at that September meeting, what you should be saying is that the five people who voted against the proposed ordinance completely agreed with the public safety aspects. They had trouble with the other aspects because that is what was repeatedly stated. And in fact, what you should be saying is, for the first time ever in the region, the Long Beach City Council passed a resolution supporting collective bargaining for an industry, a private industry. That is not something you see every day. For that, my colleague, Councilman Austin, should be commended. And there is no other way to spin that. And I know let's talk about adding bullying to our policy here. Bullying comes in many, many forms. I know bullies. If you're going to criticize someone, criticize them for what they actually did, not what you want to sell to the people. Thank you.
Speaker 1: But the councilwoman. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: I wasn't going to queue up again either. I respected the voices that came to speak. They had a right to speak. They had a right to voice the pain that a lot of us felt after that day. I felt. Like a certain day in November for good month after that vote, and we can debate what happened that night to clarify. Mr. Marginson For the 100 rooms. I made an offer on the floor that night to make it cover everybody. I made an offer for us to have several months to do the work and those offers were denied the opportunity to work on this long term, whether or not that's what the union wanted, that's what I, as a council member behind the dais offered, and it was denied. And so that's that's what hurt the residents and the workers. They didn't care about the politics of what happens up here. Five, four, nine person vote. It takes courage to speak up. You guys know, for me, it takes courage to speak up. And the reason why I spoke so passionately about this is because I know what the process is like in the city. And I know that to have a council that says, we heard you for 3 hours and we weren't willing to do something out of the box, whether or not our union partner wanted it or not is it is painful for the other people that work in the city. It does send that message whether or not that was the intent, that was what happened and that's the action. However, we set our words or spun those words or how passionately we got. The fact is, there was a vote that said, we're not going to work on this anymore. And that's why it's so hard because hashtag me, too, takes courage. And it is you know, I disagree with the idea that this is the wrong time to do it. I agree with my council colleagues. This is the right time to do it. I saw the item and said, Dang, I wish I would have done that first. You know, so I applaud them on that. But we can we have to recognize that the culture in this city is is by all of us. And so I don't like when we school, the people that come up here to have courage to speak up, correcting the record, I agree with, but there's a lot of assumptions and it just demonstrates how difficult it is to talk about assault. It demonstrates how hard this item is and how much we could commit to it and not just make it a policy review like we did in 2015. So I urge us to really dig in and do this the right way and change our culture. I worked for a nonprofit who is.
Speaker 3: All about.
Speaker 4: Culture first, and our leadership development is there. It's not a question of whether we offer a department head some opportunity for a grant for leadership development. It's a given lane. I had every two weeks, an hour with a personal coach to talk about any issues that that's the type of organization that has leadership, that says we care about you and your partner. So I just want us to ground ourselves. And this is passionate for a reason. It's very personal and politics is personal and sexual assault is political. And we have to make sure that we do the right thing by everybody in our city. This is the right first step and I look forward to more steps in the future.
Speaker 1: But you to continue.
Speaker 2: Gonzalez I would just like to say to that, you know, it's it's unfortunate this took a turn. Absolutely. Support this item. Absolutely. I do a 150%. But relative to what Councilmember Price was saying, which I feel is really unfortunate, but we have to reprimand the public for coming forward, I don't feel that that is respectful in any sense of the word for us to be talking to the public in that sense for coming forward and speaking how they feel. We should never dictate how they should feel and we should just accept it. And sometimes as council members and elected officials, we have to take it. Trust me, we have to take it day in and day out. And that's what we do and that's part of our daily routine, is being able to hear things that maybe are not comfortable regardless of the situation. And clearly we're on different ends of the spectrum and on what we feel about the item that came forward in September. I don't think it's an item that will go away, and I'm glad that this will not go away within the city inner workings. But when we say a resolution, it's almost like saying nothing is going to happen. And so while highlighting that there's an issue, unfortunately, I don't believe a resolution did anything. And then to talk about, you know, that this last item was a package deal, I feel was also disrespectful. It's not a package deal. There was a lot of work that went into that policy. I write my own policies myself, personally. I do the work and the research myself. Yeah, somebody may give me an idea for a policy, but I put every ounce of energy and I research quite a bit to make sure that it's the right policy for Long Beach . So while we said that, I again appreciate the the public being here and speaking about this issue and supporting this issue as much as possible for men, for women, for all of us. And I hope. We can get it right. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 3: I appreciate, Councilman Gonzales, that you do your own research. I would also like to say that when this does come back, that in the meetings that I had before that policy was brought, I, too, proposed several changes that would have made it a policy that could have been a huge success for Long Beach and hotel workers. And my meeting ended with and I wish it could have been recorded like council meetings are because you could go back and check the tape. But it ended with that's not something we're open to taking out of the policy at this time. At a time when I was told that the policy had not been written yet, a version of that policy was circulated in the community. And I went to community meetings and I went to meet and talk to and hear from the hotel workers. I appreciate that, my colleagues. Councilman, at the time, both Mayor Richardson and Councilmember Durango were very welcoming to me at these meetings. And many of you know that in downtown Long Beach, my mother was assaulted at work, but nobody's stepping up to protect her or her rights. And she had a panic button and nobody came for 47 minutes. And so when I write a policy, I'm going to write one that's actually going to make a difference. I've gone and spoken to hotel workers and worked with hotel management to provide self-defense classes and trainers, the same providers, the same trainers. That provided me defensive tactics training after I was assaulted on Vermont Avenue in my workplace as a county employee. The reason I am a deputy sheriff today is because I didn't want to be defenseless. And there's no better empowerment for any woman. Continue. How to protect herself because it takes a long time to call 911 and it takes a long time when you press that panic button. And so I want to thank. Those that are in the community that are doing the hard work and making the compromises. It's not about Facebook posts. It's about the actual work on the ground and talking to the people who are actually cleaning their rooms and walking to their cars because the likelihood that these people are attacked is actually most when they are leaving or going to a place of business, not not significant which type of business it is . And so I want to thank all the hotel jams who paid for free courses for defensive tactics training provided by the same trainers that L.A. County Sheriff's Department uses at their own cost and on their employees paid time. Because I believe that makes a difference.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: I just want to say one thing, and that's really we have yes, we're public servants. We put ourselves out there, but we also have the right and, in my opinion, the obligation to defend ourselves. And when we hear comment after comment, that is a complete misinterpretation of something that we said. It's important. And it's I have a duty to my constituents to make sure I set the record straight. I would do that in a court of law, and I will do that in here. I will not allow someone to misstate something I said. I will always defend myself and stand up for myself. And we talk about a culture of support. We really should be starting with our city council, because for whatever motivation any of us have for bringing an item forward, if someone accuses us of doing something that our colleague knows we didn't do because we had a private conversation with them, we shared with them what our concerns were. And if they stand there idly while someone accuses us of having an intent they know we didn't have, we should be supporting each other. We should be saying, you know what, I hear what you're saying. But she actually didn't have an objection to this part or this part. What she did have an objection to was this part. But they're not doing that because you know what? It's really, really fun to watch a train wreck when it's not happening to you. It's fun to watch someone, one of your colleagues get attacked or something. You know, they didn't mean you know, it's not in their heart and sit quietly and allow them to get attacked. It's much, much more difficult to stand up and say, you know what, I understand your passion and your frustration, but I got to tell you , I work with this person. I may not agree with everything that they do, but that wasn't their intent. They don't want women to get attacked. They do care about public safety. We need to support each other. Just because we don't agree on every aspect of a policy doesn't mean that when someone else defames us or slanders us or says something that's inaccurate, that we shouldn't be standing up and doing the right thing and saying, You know what? I understand you're frustrated, but that's not exactly what they said. We're all educated enough to be able to do that, and it takes courage to do that. And I want to say something because I know I was hoping that this item wouldn't turn into this. But when the comments were made and and frankly, they were instigated by some of my colleagues before they went to public comment by referencing Claudia's law. This item today is not about Claudia's law, but it was made to be about Claudia's law. And at the end of the day, it is not okay for any of our colleagues, one in particular, to be taking the heat that my colleagues who voted, who were in favor of Claudia's law. No. His intent was not about. It's just not okay. People are getting bullied. And if we're going to stand by and pretend it's not happening and be part of the we're part of the problem, I think support creating a culture of support means we also support each other. Just because we don't agree on every single aspect of a policy doesn't mean we're not the enemy, doesn't mean we are. We hate whatever the topic was that was brought forward. Please, please, please. If we're going to start talking about creating a culture of support in this city, we should start with the city council. We should keep the facts straight and accurate and operate from a place of.
Speaker 0: Facts.
Speaker 5: And fashion our arguments based on facts and not emotion. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 4: Hold on. Councilmember Price. So I wanted to make a comment in reference to Councilmember Price's comment. I'll give her a second. What I'm trying to make a comment with, you know, Councilmember Price, I want to recognize that your comments and feeling like you've been bullied, whether it's by the folks in the audience or I'm.
Speaker 5: One of our colleagues, has been bullying.
Speaker 4: Okay. Well, the comment that you just made made me feel like you were saying that about yourself based on the comments we made. So I wanted to apologize. I don't like the idea of bullying, and I don't like the idea that our colleagues feel bullied. And I. I just want to highlight that again. It's something that's very passionate for a lot of people and for you. And any comments that were made by the colleague, by the audience about your comments that you were defending your right, you supported all hotels, you supported the sexual assault pieces, you supported that. My frustration is that we were all told by a third party that we weren't okay with dividing it up and the vote didn't happen. And so from my record, my recollection is that people felt like there was a decision made before we came to this body to be worked out behind the dice. And that I believe in us as a group behind the dais to trust each other, to have a conversation. And so I don't want my colleagues to feel like I'm in the bullying business or that people that are passionate in the bullying business, but we owe it to ourselves to have a full process. And, you know, I hope that we can put this to rest right now and just recognize that it's something that's very emotional for a lot of folks. So.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. I know you've done public comment already on this item. So there is a motion on the second floor by Councilmember Austin and Councilwoman Price members. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Jimmy. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Okay. We're going to we're doing public comment now. I'm one of the first three speakers, Kenneth Roth. Jonathan Crouch and Larry Boland. Please come forward. Kenneth Roth. Jonathan Crouch. And Larry Boland. I've got to put on my prop here first. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to provide to the City Council a review of the City's Unlawful Harassment Complaints policy and procedures, how city employees are informed of how they can file a complaint, a breakdown of the complaints the City has received over the past 5 years, and to reexamine the existing policies and make recommendations on any possible changes to the policy to ensure it is victim friendly. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1123 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Item eight on the consent calendar, please.
Speaker 2: Report from economic development. Recommendation to authorize the city manager designee to execute any and all documents necessary for the Eighth Amendment to lease. Number 25156. Between Properties Number 22, LLC and or ILWU Credit Union, A Successor and Ownership and the City of Long Beach for continued operation of the Career Transition Center by the Workforce Development Bureau and the Department of Economic Development District seven.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah. I want to thank staff for arranging this nice little swap in the lease to get the ILWU, the International Longshore Workers Unit, into Long Beach. It builds that bridge between San Pedro and Long Beach with the ILWU and that. And it's a great repurposing of that of that building. SIMON Thank you. I do. Thank you. COUNCILMEMBER There's a motion and a second. Any public comment, please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: She went.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Mungo. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary for the Eighth Amendment to Lease No. 25165 between PI Properties No. 22, LLC, and/or ILWU Credit Union, as successor-in-ownership, and the City of Long Beach, for the continued operation of the Career Transition Center by the Workforce Development Bureau in the Department of Economic Development, at 3447 Atlantic Avenue. (District 7) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1136 | Speaker 1: Next up is item 20. We heard 2021.
Speaker 2: Report from Long Beach Airport in financial management recommendation to execute a contract with Clear Channel airports for the development and operation of an airport advertising program at the Long Beach Airport District five.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion. Any second. Is there any public comment?
Speaker 0: What?
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Yeah, I'll switch it up. Okay. Yeah. You know what I want? Okay. There's a motion in a second. Is there any public comment? There's no public comment. Let me actually get a short staff report, cause I know this is something that a few of us up here are probably looking forward to. It's exciting stuff. Our airport director, Jess Romo, less honorable. They were members of council. The item before you is a concession agreement for advertising opportunities. Long Beach Airport. This is a successor agreement to an advertising contract we have in place. This one, if approved, will generate in excess, in excess of $1,000,000 over the term. And it will broaden our ability to advertise more fully at the airport while still abiding by the city's regulations and ordinances relative to billboard advertising. And any questions you have, I'm happy to answer. Okay. That was a separate point, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 3: I'm just glad that we're moving in this direction. I think that there's a lot of opportunities in this, and so I look forward to seeing what gets created. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Account Summary Gringo Councilmember Superdome. Thank you. I just wanted to recognize Director Romo and staff for sitting through a long meeting. Thank you. And please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ AP17-053 and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract, and any necessary amendments, with In-Ter-Space Services, Inc., dba Clear Channel Airports, of Allentown, PA, for the development and operation of an airport advertising program at the Long Beach Airport, for a period of five years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1137 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Adam. 22.
Speaker 2: Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to accept a total of $981,509 in grant funding from the California Department of Housing and Community Development through the Housing Related Parks program to be utilized for the rehabilitation of park facilities and park playgrounds, District one and six.
Speaker 1: There there's a motion in a second that comes from Gonzales in the comments, or.
Speaker 2: It can have a quick.
Speaker 1: Look where we get a quick staff report. Sure. This is very exciting as well. Our Parks Recreation and Marine Director re night.
Speaker 4: Good evening. Honorable married members of the council. Yes, we're very excited to receive this grant from the state. And just under $1,000,000.
Speaker 3: We want to make sure everyone.
Speaker 4: Understands that the grant guidelines were very restricted as to what types of projects and areas that we could spend the funding. So this will fund three projects.
Speaker 3: One is some.
Speaker 4: Upgrades desperately needed upgrades and repairs to the Drake Park Community Center.
Speaker 3: We are also going to be replacing a very well worn and loved.
Speaker 4: Playground at Peace Park and giving them a brand new playground which has been long overdue, as well.
Speaker 3: As another.
Speaker 4: Brand new playground at Martin Luther King Park. So we're very excited about these projects.
Speaker 1: Those are all three so needed. That's great. Really great to hear. Councilmember Andrews. Yes, thank you. Again, I'd like to thank Maria for this, because the fact that this will really, you know, be greatly benefited from the investment in our parks and also I'm looking forward to the ribbon cutting. So thank you again. Really wonderful investment. Thank you again. Thank you. And no public comment on this. Please, members cast their votes. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to accept a total of $981,509 in grant funding from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, through the Housing-Related Parks Program, to be utilized for the rehabilitation of park facilities and park grounds at Drake, Peace, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Parks; execute any documents necessary for the administration of the projects; and
Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department (PR) by $981,509, offset by reimbursement grant revenue. (Districts 1,6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12122017_17-1108 | Speaker 1: Public comment saying non please cast your votes. Motion carries 24.
Speaker 2: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare an ordinance approving resolution number WD 138 to establishing the rates and charges to be charged for water and sewer service, declaring the urgency thereof and providing that this ordinance shall take effect on January 1st, 2018. Read an adopted as read citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion or a secondary or any public comment. CNN. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Is there any second public comment period for anybody? Nope. Yes. Okay. Please. Is there someone speaking or. No, just general public comment. This is general public comment on anything, not on the agenda. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving Resolution
No. WD-1382, a resolution of the City of Long Beach Board of Water Commissioners establishing the rates and charges to be charged for water and sewer service; declaring the urgency thereof; and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 A.M. on January 1, 2018 read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1066 | Speaker 1: Well, congratulations again to all of you. Thank you. All right. So next we have a hearing. So let's go ahead and cue up our first hearing for the night and think it's item number one. So no oath is required here.
Speaker 6: There is an oath required.
Speaker 1: There is no. Okay, this says no oath. But let's go ahead and exercise the oath.
Speaker 6: So. Any of the witnesses. Please stand. Do you solemnly state that you will? The testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Mr. Modi could take us away.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor. We will.
Speaker 4: Have a staff report from Eric.
Speaker 0: Romero, honorable mayor and members of the City Council. This item is the annual approval of the East Anaheim Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Ongoing Assessment.
Speaker 4: The resolution of.
Speaker 0: Intent and public hearing notice for reissued in order to comply with noticing requirements on November seven, 2017. The City Council approved a resolution granting approval of the annual report and set today's date for the public hearing. The recommended action on this item continues the assessment for another year. There are no proposed changes to the basis of assessment, nor changes in proposed activity. The staff request that the City Council receive the supporting documentation to the record, approve the resolution, continue the levy of the assessment, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for one additional year. That concludes my report.
Speaker 7: Thank you for the staff presentation. We will go into public comment for the hearing. Is there any public comment on the hearing? Seeing no public comment on the complaints come forward.
Speaker 8: They rubber feet represent Jesus in Long Beach. This is the one I believe for that island in the middle of the street right now.
Speaker 7: This is an assessment. This is not that this isn't a this isn't that.
Speaker 8: But that's coming up.
Speaker 7: I'm not sure what item you're speaking of, but this is for the East Anaheim Street parking assessment for for the year.
Speaker 8: Okay. Well, this has nothing to do with the island that's going to be built in the middle of that street.
Speaker 7: I don't believe so. No, sir.
Speaker 8: Okay. I just want to make sure. Make sure I didn't miss it. I'll be back.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 8: No island.
Speaker 7: So we're going to go with no public speaking on this item. We will close the hearing. Go back to the council. Councilmember Supermom.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I stand in support of this item. And just one caveat is the board changed the name of the association a month ago to Zaf Ria.
Speaker 7: Count to one price goes FERPA. Yeah, and let me add just to that as well. This is a great association. They do a fantastic job. And I think the name change is actually is great as well. So they're doing it's a great way to brand the area that they've already done a great job of branding with a lot of the improvements. So it looks good. And members Prisco and Castro votes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Great. Thank you very much for only caring for the day. We are going to go to some of our agenda items. The first one we're going to do is the Commission Appointments 31. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the East Anaheim Street Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018; and, authorize City Manager, or designee, to extend the agreement with the East Anaheim Street Business Alliance for a one-year term.
(Districts 3,4) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1111 | Speaker 7: So let me get a motion to continue that real quick, if you don't mind.
Speaker 0: For good cause that's pretty great.
Speaker 7: There's emotion or second is our public comment to postpone not to just to continue okay cost Castro votes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Next item is item 29.
Speaker 6: Report from Technology and Innovation and Financial Management Recommendation to authorize the city manager to submit to the City Council. Purchase transactions for critical technology infrastructure needs citywide.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. You know what? We're going to. What? I'm going to move, actually an item around because we have some folks here for another item. And I want to get them on their on their way since I know they're all here. So let's go ahead and do item 35, which is the Grand Prix item. Want to be respectful of all these folks that are here. So if we can do item 35. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from Long Beach Unified School District Board Member, Dr. Felton Williams, on the 2017 Urban Educator of the Year, Green Garner Award. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1098 | Speaker 7: So let's go ahead and do item 35, which is the Grand Prix item. Want to be respectful of all these folks that are here. So if we can do item 35.
Speaker 6: Report from Economic Development Recommendation to execute all documents necessary for an amended and restated agreement with the Grand Prix Association of Long Beach District two.
Speaker 7: Okay. I'm going to let's turn over to Steph.
Speaker 4: John Keisler, director of Economic Development.
Speaker 5: Honorable Mayor and members of the city council. I'm very excited to bring back to you tonight a process that we began last year to evaluate the next generation of Grand Prix operators. This was a process that on August 8th of this year, the City Council authorized staff to enter into an exclusive negotiating period with the Grand Prix Long Beach to establish a five year agreement with one option for renewal to operate the Grand Prix race between the period of 2019 and 2023. And tonight, we're coming back with the terms and conditions of that agreement and a recommendation to approve that agreement with the Grand Prix language. The key terms that the City Council had recommended or directed staff to negotiate with Grand Prix, Long Beach included the term that I just described as well as the time period for construction of the race course. I'm happy to report that Jim McCallion and Grand Prix Long Beach have been excellent partners in addressing these concerns and have proposed to reduce from 60 days to 53 days the time it takes to construct the race course, as well as to reduce the time period in front of some of our businesses and our aquarium to two weeks before the race. We've also as part of this agreement, we had asked for the Grand Prix Long Beach to conduct an economic impact study, which not only did they agree to do as part of the new agreement, but they began that process in advance and have already begun the process of engaging a consultant Beacon Economics, to develop the impact study and believe that it will be completed before our race in 2018. The Association has also agreed to be responsible for reasonable cost of repair, for damage to any city property owned, operated or leased as part of the race course. Additionally, they've agreed to pay permit fee and administration administrative cost reimbursement fee in the amounts of $91,000 757 and $47,524 adjusted annually by our CPI. Additionally, the Association has agreed to reimburse the city for extraordinary expenses, including incremental city services. These are costs for public safety as well as public works and other related costs to to operate the event. And these expenses will be adjusted annually, which is a new term and adjusted by the CPI. And the Association has also agreed to prepare a community access program for outreach to disadvantaged youth, as well as a marketing and promotion package for the city. And finally, one of the key terms as part of the agreement is that if the city is has an opportunity to explore development in the area, that the Grand Prix Association will be willing to terminate the agreement as needed or to restructure the race courses needed to accommodate for those developments. So with that, we're very excited that we've addressed what we think are the deal points that the council authorized staff to negotiate. Our partners at Grand Prix Long Beach have been extremely good partners in considering the request from the Council. And with with that, I'll conclude my report. We do have Jim Mickelson here tonight from Grand Prix Long Beach to also say a few words in preparation for next year's race. And with that, I'll conclude my report and answer any questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Did you want to? But I'm not sure Mr. Castle was part of your report hearing from Mr. McMillian or we're just going to go to the council?
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think Mr. McCallion would be happy to give his report now as part of the staff.
Speaker 7: That's part of the staff report. That's my question. Okay. Mr. McMillan.
Speaker 0: Thank you much. Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council, city staff. John, thank you very much and for the opportunity to come here tonight. You know, for 43 years, there's been a unique partnership between the city of Long Beach and the Grand Prix Association. During that time, Long Beach has grown into a city with a tremendous amount of potential and growth and opportunity, and the Grand Prix has become the largest street race in the world. But not only have we met our commitment with regard to bringing thousands of people here every year, we brought 183,000 plus this last year and also to. Provide the opportunity for the city to be broadcast on national television with 10 hours of first time programing, with the city in the backdrop and the port and the marina and the skyline. But also, this event has continue to be a community event. We are committed to making sure that we are integrated into this community. We are part of the fabric of this community. Let me just give you a few examples that a lot of you are probably familiar with. We've consistently made sure that our pricing for our product is very affordable. Children 12 and under are admitted for free. We've committed with the King Taco to provide a thousand tickets Sunday Reserved seat tickets, which are distributed to the Long Beach Boys and Girls clubs, to underprivileged youth in this area. And it's been in operation for 12 years. 12,000 different individuals had a chance to take advantage of it. And in addition to that, we have had the opportunity to work with many of you in terms of some of the activities in your particular area. We've involved in the and a lot of the parades we were involved up in in Michelle Obama's library opening, and we were involved in the Touch Your Truck activities and the festival, the festival of flight. We want to be an integral part of the community and I think we've carried through on that in a very substantial way . And so that that's an important part of what we tried to do in it. In addition to that, what we have made, it made a significant attempt to do is to be a part and parcel of the activities that go on in this in this area. But with your agreement tonight, as we go forward, what we're looking forward to is even doing better in terms of what we are going to be presenting to the public and to the city in the future years of this agreement. First of all, next year, we're going to be introducing a new race to our weekend activities. It's called the historic Trans-Am. Race should be very exciting. It'll feature the cars that such legends as Dan Gurney and Parnell Lee drove in the past. And we're looking forward to having that on display here. But we're also taking a look down the road at providing some more environmentally sensitive racing activities. As you probably know, with the expansion that's taking place with regard to electric cars, we're looking to see if in the future there might be an electric car race that we could put on here. We'll also we're also looking at autonomous vehicles and how that might factor into some of the activities we're going to be looking to put on here. In addition to that, we are working with the Long Beach Unified School District with Pete Davis over there to bring high school classes here on the Friday of race week to bring them here and to inaugurate them into the activities that take place going into the paddock area and into the when having teams and drivers and and mechanics come and make presentations, then we think we can start a real tradition of bringing high school students in the Long Beach School District here every year to take advantage of the opportunity to have an educational experience, which I think will be very advantageous. And then as as John mentioned, we're committed to the the provisions that we talked about in the agreement, reducing the amount of time that we will be setting up the course and some of the impact it has in the downtown stakeholder areas , and also making sure that we will be removing the tire marks from the track in certain terms so that the city is sort of returned back to the condition it was in when we started. These are all things that we want to do in order to create an environment in which this race and this city excels. So in closing, let me say, first of all, thank you, thank you to all of you and your predecessors for your support over these last 43 years. You know, it has really been a great partnership, and we look forward to continuing that into the future. And we're making a commitment that what we're going to do is make sure that we provide a first class, family friendly event that all of you can be proud of and that we will be able to make that commitment and stay with it. And we very much appreciate your support in helping to make that happen. I would also like to take just a moment, if I could, to thank a couple of people that work on John Stafford, Johnny Vallejo, who was an important part of this negotiation, as well as a gentleman that works for Mr. Park and Rich Anthony, who both of those represented the city very well. And I think we had a very positive dialog and we look forward to being a part of your community in this community for the next six years and hopefully well beyond that. So thank you very much for your support and we look forward to having a great year next year and in the succeeding years. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Pierce.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I definitely want to take some time to think staff and thank Mr. McCallion for their efforts on this. When I first came into office, it was probably the biggest topic of discussion outside of parking. And I recall going through the RFP process and the conversations that were had with our restaurants in the aquarium. And I know that this agreement today, this five year agreement, is very different from the five year agreement that you previously had. And so I just want to applaud everybody for their efforts and really trying to make sure that this remains something that the entire city of Long Beach can be proud of. I want to highlight the fact that your commitment to the community is not only going out to those schools, but we've had some conversations around engineering programs and tying it to the race cars, and I think that's really exciting. Also, your commitment to good quality jobs and the fact that you're working with Liuna. If you look through this agreement, everything from including, you know, the increase in CPI after two years, I think is really demonstrates your willingness to to make some changes to be a great fit for our community. And I would be amiss if I didn't mention that I met my dad for the first time this last year. And one of the very first things we talked about was the Grand Prix and he is watching tonight. So I have to say hi Dad. And he's already bought his plane tickets to come this April to the next Grand Prix. So we're really excited. Again, thank you for being good partners and I look forward to seeing how this impacts our downtown in a positive way. And thank you for being flexible as we as a city try to re-envision what our downtown is yet again, but doing that with some flexibility and with you guys at the heart of that. I really appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Yes. Jim, I want to say thank you as well. You know, we work together and I absolutely love what you're doing, as Councilmember Pearce said, for the community. You're really constantly evolving, taking our feedback, taking everyone's feedback. And that's very appreciative on my end. And thank you to your Grand Prix Association volunteers who have been volunteers for so many years and so want to thank you all for being a great part of that. The gym that we we love to attend every single year. So thank you all and great work to economic development on this.
Speaker 1: And I'll chime in here. Jim. Fantastic work via the Grand Prix is a staple in our city, right? I remember the first time I've gone and I was just blown away. That had never been before. And I've gone every year since. And it's it's great to see that you guys stepped up John and economic development team. It's great to see that that you stepped up as well. There were a lot there. There was a tall order where you guys were able to do. And I know the amount of concessions that were made and I know that the economics associated with that. But this is an important economic driver. And we all have to make sure that we we make the decisions best for our residents. And I think that this agreement does that. It takes us in that direction. So, you know, in short, let the good times roll.
Speaker 7: Councilman Ringo.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor.
Speaker 0: I want to add my my.
Speaker 4: Kudos to the Grand Prix Association, to his marketing for his leadership in that. But I want to bring up one point is that it but so understanding that it's a new agreement two or three almost two years ago I think it came before the California Coast Commission and we for the first time.
Speaker 0: Approved a multiyear permit.
Speaker 4: For you.
Speaker 0: To conduct the Grand.
Speaker 4: Prix in Long Beach, whereas prior to that it was an every year application. So I just want to make sure maybe staff can and researcher look into it, in fact that hopefully this new agreement which will start what, in 2019. Correct.
Speaker 0: 2020 that that the.
Speaker 4: Conditions for having to race under the present.
Speaker 0: Coast coastal.
Speaker 4: Development permit.
Speaker 0: Don't change.
Speaker 4: And that you might not have to reapply to reinforce the.
Speaker 0: The current permit but in fact will make you eligible for.
Speaker 4: Keeping that permit so that when you come back for a new course, we do have a permit. We could also do the same in terms of a multiyear permit for.
Speaker 0: Two that will take you through this.
Speaker 4: This new application. So just.
Speaker 0: A.
Speaker 4: Recommendation that the staff and perhaps yourself follow up with California Coastal Commission to.
Speaker 0: Ensure that everything is in order and.
Speaker 4: That you could still run the race going through the next cycle.
Speaker 0: Thank you and thank you for everything you do for Long Beach.
Speaker 8: Carrie Fisher I'd like to just take the opportunity to congratulate Jim. You and the Grand Prix Association, the number one street race in America, will continue to be on the streets of Long Beach, and we're very proud of that. I know the RFP process was an easy process for you, but it was one that I think was necessary and one that I think helps the race evolve and and cater to the city of Long Beach even even more than it does. I think it's a it's a real benefit for our city. But but and it's very difficult to quote, to quantify the benefits of those the that that the Grand Prix Association brings and the race brings to the city of Long Beach. But again, I just wanted to weigh in, say thank you very much for for your great years of partnership and look forward to many more ahead. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 3: Thank you to the entire team. Thank you for your continued outreach in the community. The kids love the race cars. They talk about it all the time. I was with some Boy Scouts this weekend at the Belmont Shore Parade and they even commented, remember, when that race car was at our school? And so I know that it means a lot to everyone. And I hope that 20, ten years from now, probably, gosh, ten years from now, they'll be the ones buying the tickets and sitting in the stands. So.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Counselor Supernova. It's a woman, Price.
Speaker 2: You know, again, I echo the comments of my colleagues. I think it's a great partnership and I want to thank city staff for the work that they put into this. I'm most excited about a few things with the current agreement. One, the shortening of the preparation and setup time, I think that's going to be huge for the businesses in the area to the fact that we have a five year option that allows us to meaningfully consider other options for the city in terms of future possible development and best and highest uses of the property. And I, I appreciate the partnership that you have had and understanding that that's a concern and that that you've heard us on that point and of course, the reimbursement of the extraordinary expenses and the incremental city services that are required for the operation. It is a hugely successful event, a great partnership. It does, you know, tax our resources quite a bit. And so we are grateful that as our partner, you understand those concerns and that you are genuinely doing what it is you always say you do, which is looking out for the best interests of the city, not just this race. And I think that's something we really appreciate. Looking forward, I hope to follow the economic impact studies that we receive to see how racing trends are changing and how our opportunities as a city might change to accommodate that. So thank you very much for being flexible and understanding as we exercise our prudence with our resources. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilman Hooper, now.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Jim, you mentioned your community involvement. I think you mentioned touch a truck in the third district and the festival of flight in the fifth. We missed you last Friday at Jojo's annual Lighting of the Antlers. So maybe next year. But seriously, Mike did arrange for a race car to go around town, and that was one of our stops. So that was a great event. So thank you.
Speaker 7: Well, thank you. Obviously, I think this is just a great opportunity once again for the city to have this amazing event that we all love and enjoy so much. It's great for economic development. It's great to bring visitors into the city. So I would say just, Jim, to you and the team, to all of the incredible supporters of the Grand Prix, we appreciate all the hard work. Couple of clarification points. I think it's good for just for the public, just. Mr. Keiser if you can just confirm for for us, the first is that this is a little bit to Councilman Price's point. But if because there is a lot of conversation right now around development in the downtown, obviously we have the Olympics that are coming up and a bunch of other things that we are developing over the next few years. This this does give the city the ability and flexibility to move forward if we so choose on any sort of development projects that may occur, that could impact the race. Is that correct.
Speaker 5: Mr. Mayor? That is correct.
Speaker 7: I want to make sure, obviously, we would never move forward and or on anything that wasn't a partnership so that we can ensure that that the race could be successful. But I think it's important to think for the city to have all of its options available to us. If there is some sort of a master development project that comes down the pipeline or some sort of other opportunity that could impact the race. So. So you're you're you're you're stating to me that the that if that happens in this contract, we have that flexibility.
Speaker 5: That is correct. Grand Prix Long Beach is is is willing to work with us as a partner so that if the city needs to adjust or terminate the agreement, that is an option for us. Yes.
Speaker 7: Okay. And it gives it gives the city the ability to to to make those decisions.
Speaker 5: That is correct.
Speaker 7: Mr. City Attorney, can you confirm that for me?
Speaker 4: That is correct, yes.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I won't actually have Councilman Price, you follow up and I'm going to go back to me.
Speaker 2: Okay. So I just have a follow up on that because John used a term that has some legal significance to me. The people are the the city can exit the contract if we need to or if we want to at our discretion.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I can actually I can ask the city attorney if you'd like to clarify the that that term or if you don't. Yeah. So, so correct. There there is language in the new agreement that that refers to the ability to terminate the agreement if the city so chooses.
Speaker 2: Okay. So it's not need with an N, it's it's it's our discretion.
Speaker 0: If I could.
Speaker 4: I don't have the contract in front of me right now. We could certainly provide a memo to the mayor and council on the termination clause, and we will give you an explanation on our partnership and how that could be exercised.
Speaker 2: That would be fantastic. Thank you. I apologize.
Speaker 7: But I'm taking what you're saying is the city does have that flexibility to do so. So. Okay, great. Also, I do want to just commend city staff for working and and really for the Grand Prix to. For stepping up to ensure that we had as minimum of an impact to the business businesses prior to the race. I know that the amount of time that the set up and take down is happening is shrinking, which I think is really important. I know that in some cases it's shrinking pretty dramatically in some areas that are that are impacted from a business point of view. Is that correct, Mr. Kessler?
Speaker 5: Yeah, that is correct. In the new in this new negotiated agreement, Grand Prix Long Beach has has given special attention to those areas in front of the businesses, the aquarium. So to limit the impact. The K rail, the grandstands won't be installed in those specific areas earlier than two weeks. So that is a significant improvement. And we're very grateful for for that partnership.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And then also, if you can, please, on review and mentioned one of the issues I know that was important to public work staff and other folks was ensuring that the condition of the streets were left in every year in good order. And I know that in the past we have had some issues with tire tracks and markings and some other issues they know have concern some of the public works folks. And so can you please explain how this is changing, moving forward?
Speaker 5: Mr. Mayor. Yes. The the annual removal of tire marks resulting from the race in key turns and along the race circuit are actually called out in this agreement. And so there's there's much more specificity which allows for us to work with Grand Prix Long Beach to make sure that all those issues are codified and denoted up front . And then ultimately we'll work together to make sure that those are removed and the cost for the removal that cost these what we call extraordinary costs that come up will be covered by Grand Prix Long Beach.
Speaker 7: And this was different. This was not in the former contract, correct?
Speaker 5: Correct. Correct. There's much more specificity in this agreement and in terms of making sure that the council's direction of total cost recovery so that this doesn't come as a cost to the city is specifically called out.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Appreciate that. And, you know, this is, again, just a gem and the team just thank you for working with us and really come up with a new contract that I think is good for everyone. So really appreciate your hard work as a public comment on this item.
Speaker 0: Very good. I moved in here in May of 1978, Grand Prix Day in 1977. I fully support it. Some reflections and comments on the issue, the program itself. One of the things we will not have to deal with, if all things go well, you'll not will not have to worry about the Coastal Commission. If Governor Brown initiates and follows up on the effort, the good Governor Deukmejian realized needed to be done, i.e. dismantling that roving band of of corruption. We will not have to have that so forth. And hopefully the governor is going to move forward with on that starting in about 90 days. One of the things I've always suggested thought about and as a. Others are going to have to evaluate it also as long as we have the course. Is there any way that we can set up a nice little course for those people who are in wheelchairs and or the motorized ones? And I realize that's pretty you know, motorized wheelchairs are a necessity for people that are having them and so forth. So we don't want to obviously any crashes, but set up some type of thing where there are people that are in those might be able to use that course is longer to set up and I think that's about it. It's a great event and as they say, we won't. Fortunately, I don't think we're going to have to deal with the Coastal Commission very much longer. So you won't have to worry about that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Banana to Jesus. My name is Robert Pete. Okay, I wasn't going to say anything on this issue, but then it really struck me how my man said he wanted to be more involved with the city and everything. I'm addressing you, but I got to address him because he said it. So I want you to and you need to see what's going on in this town. You mentioned Michelle Obama, which we've had a drag queen in that library recently teaching itty bitty kids. And this is part of this because he said he wants to be involved and to.
Speaker 7: Make sure you address the body. Okay. I'm going to thank you.
Speaker 8: The body represents the people. He's here. I wish I could see him because. Okay, I look over here, but I'm talking to you, okay? So and as I go out there and talk to people, you know, it's kind of funny. That's not a Republican or Democrat issue no more when when we surprised and we weren't told a drag queen was in. I know you say this has got.
Speaker 7: To be with the Grand Prix.
Speaker 8: This is the Grand Prix because continue. Hey, I'm a no I'm rebelling what he said. Okay, so that is part of this. So don't burn my time. He wants to be more involved and I want to be more involved and he has money and power. I want him to be able to stop people like you, Mayor, because you allowed that right under our noses. So so the thing is, is appreciate if you get involved and deal with people like in almost a Fidel Castro over here. So, you know, so we don't want drag queens in Michelle Obama like we don't even know if that's a woman. Maybe that's why they sent a drag queen to that library, you know, so.
Speaker 7: Got to talk about the Grand Prix.
Speaker 8: So we need more Grand Prix.
Speaker 0: And less drag.
Speaker 8: Queens, more good, good events. It's a real good event. You move the skid marks in the streets of the boys, can see what they want to do, do donuts and stuff like the Dodge Brothers, not put a dress on and be like La Cosa fo, you know.
Speaker 0: So we want.
Speaker 8: More drag racing, less drag queen.
Speaker 0: More drag.
Speaker 8: Race, less drag queen. Now, what the hell is up with them horns, man? So anyway, so all the answers, you want to be more involved, you're capitalist because that's money involved. Let's help. Help me get rid of this Karl Marx over there.
Speaker 7: Can you please can you please address address the building, your address through.
Speaker 0: You get it and you need.
Speaker 8: To be around. He can see me talking to him, but he can't. So I want him to see me talking to him.
Speaker 0: So help me get rid of this Karl Marx.
Speaker 8: Over the help. We got to get rid of her so we can make you more money. Everybody more money. Take care of the kids. Get him into the racing. Get him into drag races. Get away from drag queens. We like you, drag race. We're not drag racing, but we can't stand drag. And that's Democrats and Republicans about to come in here. I mean, the churches are pissed off. I know he's pissed off. He probably likes it. But anyway. So anyway, that's all I got to say.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much, Mr.. You appreciate it. There is no other public comment, so members is going to cast your vote.
Speaker 6: Councilman Andrews?
Speaker 0: Yes, ma'am.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Congratulations. Thank you, guys. Thank you all for coming out to appreciate it. I'm looking forward to a great race this next year. So. Good luck. Okay. We're going back to the regular agenda. We're going we're going to be doing public comment first. And then we have the item on tech infrastructure. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee to execute any and all documents necessary for an Amended and Restated Agreement with the Grand Prix Association of Long Beach, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1073 | Speaker 6: When Councilman Mongo. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Will have number 12.
Speaker 6: Recommendation to execute a memorandum of understanding with Long Beach cares to receive and expend grant funding in the amount of 100,000 from My Brother's Keeper Alliance for the Continuation of My Brother's Keeper. My Brother's Keeper Initiative Citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Staff report, please.
Speaker 4: Kelly Colby.
Speaker 9: Canadian Honorable Vice Mayor and council members. So the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Equity wrote a grant to the MBK Alliance for $100,000. It is required to go through a501c3, so it is funded through Long Beach Cares, which is the 523 for the department. The funding will be utilized to build a Health Equity and Violence Prevention Youth Leadership Program. So we'll be reaching out to 25 youth, ages 16 to 22, who will participate in leadership opportunities within the health department and build leadership skills. Each of those who completes completes the program will get a $500 stipend. In addition, those resources will be utilized to fund an MBK lead. As you know, we had a Fuzed fellow last year and the Fuze fellow her term ended, so we'll be looking to hire someone to help support operating the MBK program as well as additional staffing opportunities to support all the youth meetings and other outreach efforts. And then finally, we'll be utilizing the funding for community capacity building. Capacity building grants will be small grants to local community based organizations who want to help support moving forward toward the six goals under the MBK plan.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I just wanted to call this out on from the consent calendar because it's kind of a big deal. $100,000 may not seem like a lot of money, but this is one of the first disbursements of the My Brother's Keeper Alliance, which is now aligned with the new Obama Foundation. So it's a real it's a good feather in our cap to be one of the first communities to receive one of these grants. And it really and I think investing in a youth leadership program is certainly the right way to go. So thank you and congratulations, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Great work, Kelly. We always appreciate this this work within the equity lens. And we appreciate all of the work of your staff as well, because I know it's a lot under these grants.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any public comment saying please cast your vote?
Speaker 6: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding, and any subsequent documents or amendments, with Long Beach Cares, to receive and expend grant funding in the amount of $100,000 from the My Brother’s Keeper Alliance, for the continuation of the My Brother’s Keeper (MBK) Initiative and implementation of the MBK Health Equity and Violence Prevention Youth Leadership Program; and
Increase appropriations in the Health Fund (SR 130) in the Health and Human Services Department (HE) by $100,000, offset by revenue. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1104 | Speaker 7: Okay. We've done consent already. We're now moving on to item 41, please.
Speaker 6: A report from Health and Human Services. Recommendation to adopt a resolution declaring a shelter crisis and authorizing the operation of a winter shelter at five, five, seven one Orange Avenue for the period of December six, 2017, and March 31st, 2018. District eight.
Speaker 7: Mr. West.
Speaker 4: Mayor, council members. We're here tonight to talk about our winter shelter, to declare an emergency, to put that in motion. The last several years, our winter shelter has been at Atlantic Farms in District nine. Thank you, Vice Mayor at Artesia and Atlantic. This year that spot is no longer available to us. So we've been looking wide and far to find a spot inside the the city to handle that. And we have landed on a facility. It's our old North Library on Orange Avenue on the west side, just between South Street and market. And we appreciate Councilmember Al Austin's support in this. So without I'm going to turn this over to Kelly Collopy, our director of Health and Human Services, and also Theresa Chandler of the Homeless Services Bureau, to walk us through the process.
Speaker 9: Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and Council Members. Thanks for this opportunity to share a little bit more about the winter shelter. So as you know, it's been getting pretty chilly in the mornings. This morning I was out and there were a lot of people wrapped up in coats, hats, gloves and a lot of blankets. And so we're really, you know, we're really excited that we have found the winter shelter opportunity so that the folks who are on the streets will have an opportunity to keep warm. While it may seem that this is sort of a last minute find, I want you to know that we've been searching everywhere that we could possibly look for the last three months, looking throughout the city of Long Beach as well as in neighboring jurisdictions. We had worked with the realtor, the Economic and property management team. LAS We've reached out to our faith based organizations. Everyone we could to identify this site as our previous Atlantic Farm site was not available this year, and the only one that met criteria and that was available was the city in the Old North Library. We're so thankful the building is available. The site being discussed today will be used for the winter shelter this year only it will not be used in the future. As a winter shelter site, the city of Long Beach is releasing an RFP for another use of that building. So it is a short term, less than four month opportunity to be able to house folks who are currently on the street. So I want to thank all of you in the community who have expressed your support for this opportunity. And I'm also hoping that this presentation helps address the concerns of others who expressed their concerns. So the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, otherwise known as Lahsa funds and administers the Winter Shelter Program. The Winter Shelter Program is expected to operate from December 12th of this year to March 31st, 2018. The shelter is funded to provide about between 100 and 140 beds for single men and women experiencing homelessness. It is for adults. Only families who need support will need to call two, one, one and or will be going through the Homeless Family Solutions Services in San Pedro to help find a crisis bed placement license, relax and contract with the providers through a competitive application process. And this year, they selected U.S. Veterans, an initiative otherwise known as U.S. vets, to operate the shelter. US Vets is the nation's largest nonprofit provider of comprehensive services to homeless and Ariz veterans. Well, this mission is to successfully trans transitioned military veterans and their families by providing housing, counseling, career development and comprehensive support. U.S. vets is running the winter shelter, however, not be only for veterans, though we will be doing outreach through with them for veterans services. They'll be collaborating closely with our homeless services team, The Continuum of Care and the SPI coordinated entry system to do outreach, case management and provide housing options to individuals who are staying at the winter shelter. US Vets has an extensive experience operating winter shelters in Long Beach and around the Long Beach community. Their executive director has worked for Alaska and oversaw the winter shelter program countywide. So has a lot of experience in how to operate a shelter. In terms of the city to support the winter shelter. The city expands the hours of the multi-service center. So now will operate from 730 in the morning to 5:00 at night, Monday through Friday, to accommodate the increase in clients who will be accessing services due to the shelter. It also serves as the transportation pick up spot for Long Beach. And so through that people will be meeting there, they will be getting on the bus and going to the shelter. Through that, we're able to provide them more support services, more employment services, behavioral treatment, medical services and housing linkages. So there's a lot of additional supports provided to homeless individuals as they're waiting while they're waiting to be get on the bus. But also, once they get to the shelter itself, the shelters open between the hours of 5 p.m. and 7 a.m.. It is not open during the day in the event of rainy weather. Sometimes it can be extended. When those when participants are there, they get dinner, breakfast and case management services and linkage to care. Participants are not allowed to walk up. They must arrive by bus or they must arrive. They can be dropped off by the police or fire department, but they cannot just walk up to the site. U.S. vets will provide the transportation to and from the shelter, from the pick up locations. One of those will be the multi-service. One or the other is in San Pedro. They'll provide security and oversight at the pickup locations, as well as at the shelter. The Street Outreach Network, which is our Continuum of care team. And the many groups that go out together will be proactively reaching out to individuals on the streets and coordinating transportation to the Multi-Service Center to facilitate and facilitate the access. And they'll be working with individuals throughout the city to make sure that they know of the service and of the service that can be provided. Their winter shelter is really an important part to Long Beach for our ability to help house folks. It helps us to build a much stronger relationship and to connect with homeless individuals because they're there almost every night. Many people stay throughout the process and so rebuild trust and relationship. And that's what it takes to start to bring people into service and to help people. HOUSE So this is very important to our to our operation to ensure community safety. The shelter operates as what we call a closed facility. Once participants are checked in, they're not allowed to enter or exit at will. They are now they are not allowed to leave until the bus arrives to pick them up in the morning. Individuals who do not comply with these rules are not allowed back in the shelter in the future. In addition, US vets and MSI will work closely to communicate any issues with individuals accessing the program to make sure that we don't have walk offs from the site. Police and fire are also at the shelter, sometimes to assist individuals who may have mental health or medical crises and that may, you know, higher level of care. And they also, as they're doing their street outreach, will be able to bring people to the homeless shelter. So I want to thank you for the opportunity to share about the shelter that closes our remarks. And Theresa and I are available to answer any questions.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank staff for the very comprehensive report. Before I go into my comments and deliberations on this, I'd like to hear from the public. That's okay, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 7: Sure thing. Is there any public comment? Please come forward.
Speaker 3: Okay. Let's try this again. You got to stop multitasking. I'm Erlinda, Chico. Phill, deputy for supervisor Janice Hahn and I have a letter of support to read into record. Dear Mayor Garcia, I urge your support in using the Old North Library located at five, five, seven one Orange Avenue for this year's Winter Shelter. The winter shelter will be funded by the county and operated by US vets from December six, 2017 to February 28th, 2018. This shelter would be able to house homeless individuals during the coldest time of the year. This will fill a much needed void of shelter beds for homeless individuals in the region. Homeless individuals who come to the winter shelter will not only be able to find a safe place to sleep, but will also be provided with two meals and referred to resources and programs. I am committed to working in partnership with you and all members of the City Council and the residents of Long Beach to ensure that the operator is able to provide care in a way that is acceptable to the community in which it operates. Thank you for your consideration in advance. Sincerely, Janice Hahn, Supervisor, Fourth District County of Los Angeles. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Karen Rayford.
Speaker 3: Resident of First District. I am speaking tonight on behalf of seniors that I eat lunch with every day at the Long Beach Senior Center and the lunch program. Many of them are homeless and the lack of transportation to the shelter is a big concern. I know usually there's pick ups at First Congregational Church. Many of them are in walkers and wheelchairs. Some of them are sleeping on the sidewalks outside of the senior center. And that's the regular residents place that's creating a lot of hazards as well as not a good condition for them either. The the walkers and the wheelchairs, it's very, very difficult for people to get to the multi-service center because the bus stop is not close and many of them can't get to San Pedro. They don't have the finances to pay for the bus. They need to be considered when making arrangements for the winter shelters and please get notices to the seniors centers because they don't know. And there they've been actively looking as to when the shelter is going to open. And it's not just the one on Fourth Street, although there's regularly about 25, 30 seniors that are homeless there. And some of them are too proud to go to the shelter and really need the services. So all of the senior centers. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And Speaker.
Speaker 0: Jim Howard Well, first of all, there is a desperate need for the homeless shelter tonight, the cold weather shelter. And I've operated a number of shelters over the years. And I went out and visited the site, looked at the site and read what they had planned to do with it. And I think the plans are very good. I think the concepts are all they are. They allow you to successfully operate one. While the more difficult ones that I had to operate was actually located 100 yards from the Culver City Council person, and we managed to operate it over many years without any complaints at all because we did use the same concepts that you're doing now with transportation to it, not allowing people to walk in and also treating people while they were in there. And I'm quite familiar with us vets worked with them on partnerships over the years, competed with them at times too, but got operation and got operators. So I think you really have a good plan for successful cold weather shelter.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Gary Barr, eighth district. I just want to put.
Speaker 4: My comments here. And I represent a lot of the neighbors and neighborhood.
Speaker 0: Of that library. Okay. Al Austin, the councilman. I believe that he misrepresented.
Speaker 4: Because he said we have a homeless crisis in our city. And I'm finding that we're going to be bussing in from San Pedro, which is not. I agree, homeless need a place to go.
Speaker 0: But why are we not.
Speaker 4: Dealing with our city homeless? Not San Pedro. Okay? Not L.A.. Okay. All these things need to be done. Okay.
Speaker 0: We have Theresa.
Speaker 4: Chandler, manager of Human.
Speaker 0: Services Bureau, stated in the Press Telegram. It is has been a case in previous. There's only people allowed to use these shelters. Are those bused in from other parts of the area? Okay. That is not City of Long Beach issue. Okay. I'm sorry. I pay a lot of taxes here. I've been here for over 40 years. And this is not what we intend to do. Treat our homeless. Not the counties. If you want to do the counties, then put it to a vote. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi. I'm Reverend Heather Minor, and I serve as minister to North Long Beach Christian Church. We are on orange and market and so many of our constituents go to our live in the neighborhood of the North Library. And one of the things I understand about North Long Beach, it is a place that has great heart. I remember one of our members came and she saw somebody walking down the street and she gave her shoes to them and came in to church barefoot because that person needed the shoes more. And that's just the sign and symbol of what North Long Beach really is. And this shelter's just have a piece of who we are as North Long Beach, and I speak in favor of it. Having worked with homeless for over 20 years, starting when I was young in my twenties, in an emergency shelter situation. And I understand that homeless shelters get people off the streets and into services, into conversations that allow them to.
Speaker 2: Access services so out of the alleyways and into a.
Speaker 3: Place where they can find a movement towards wholeness. And, you know, I'm thinking that the cold right now is a great blessing to many because it allows them to make that choice to try to do the thing that.
Speaker 2: Will get them better. So God bless the cold and there.
Speaker 3: Is room in our inn. So let's open those doors.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi. My name is Myra Salinas, and I'm a property owner near the proposed location for the temporary homeless shelter. I am a District eight resident and I have a few concerns regarding the shelter. First and foremost, the residents of the area that we're going to be directly impacted didn't receive notice of the shelter or the proposed location for the shelter. We found out about the proposal from the Gazette newspaper, which a lot of people in the area may or may not have access to. That was my first issue when I did find out I contacted Austin's office, left a message, and I did get a call back the same day. This was last Friday, and I received information that was explained, as was just previously explained. But my concern still is that in our specific neighborhood, we have high crime rates. We already have existing homeless, an existing homeless population that are not going to be directly helped with this shelter because they're going to have to figure out how to get to the other side of town, onto transportation that's going to bring them back and provide that shelter for them. I'm not against helping homeless individuals. My concern is as a resident that is directly going to be impacted by this shelter, anybody who refuses to cooperate and is going to resist or walk off, if I understand that that's being mediated or taken in consideration, but I can't imagine that it's going to go as smoothly as it's proposed. And my my concern as a property owner is regarding the increase in crime, potential substance abuse increase to a neighborhood that's already been impacted. So I, I like I said, I'm not against helping the homeless. You know, we I understand that there's a need for it. I didn't know that there was L.A. County money that was funding this particular shelter. And if that's the case, adding to what was previously mentioned, I can imagine that there's no other location that's not in a residential community, as was in the past. I really five out of the last six years, the shelter was in a commercial area. And I don't know whether there was problems or not because obviously we were not made aware of even this this decision. I just think that as a property owner and concerned for increasing crime to our neighborhood, that's already impacted. I, I think that another location should be considered. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Honorable Mayor.
Speaker 4: Members of the City Council. My name is Andy Curt and I'm a resident of the eighth District. And I think, Councilman Austin, for your leadership of our district and in particularly on this issue of homelessness in our community. I'm also currently Supervisor Hahn's appointment as fourth District Representative on the Measure H Citizen Oversight Board. So this issue has been really important for me for a long time. I'm also a former member of the city's Homeless Services Advisory Committee. And so I really understand the hard work.
Speaker 3: Of.
Speaker 4: Kelly Colby and Theresa Chandler and the whole team that works for the city. And I do realize how hard they work to try to identify a location for this critically needed winter shelter. And so I'm here today just to say to highly recommend that the city council move forward with their recommendation to to to utilize the former North Lynn Library as this year's winter shelter. It is as, as Kelly mentioned, getting very cold. And we really need to take care of this population and our city. And just to address a couple of the concerns that I heard today, first of all, with with regard to this just being a city issue versus a county issue , I just like to remind folks that this really is a regional problem and we need to work in collaboration with the county. We are through Measure H actually doing extremely well as a city with the resources that we're going to be getting from Measure H, as far as how much we're contributing as a city because of some of the tax calculations. So wanted to remind the council and the community about that that we really are getting a great bang for the buck with the measure h tax revenue that I'll be helping oversee over the next few years. And so I think that's mainly what I say. I also wanted to speak in support of U.S. vets. I think they're just an amazing organization. I'm really excited that they're on board this year. Brenda Thread I've worked with for a long time and I know she's an extremely capable administrator and I know that that they'll do a terrific job this year. Any concerns that the community has? I grew up in the neighborhood of the North Branch Library. I know that community very well. I'm proud to have this service in my district, the eighth district, as is an uptown resident. I think we need to get out of the mentality of we're going to support these efforts as long as there's somewhere else. We need to take ownership in order to really solve.
Speaker 0: These these difficult.
Speaker 4: Challenges in the community, we have to be supportive of them in our in our own backyard and not try to block everything that happens close to us. I was here in May and.
Speaker 0: Supportive in support of.
Speaker 4: The urgent psychiatric care facility on Long Beach Boulevard that's less than a mile and a half from my home. I would be here in support of it if it was, you know, less than that just a couple blocks away. So thank you for your support.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, I'm going to close the speakers. This is how many more folks are in line. Please, can you guys please get in line? Please let me know who's in line here. Okay. And then there's two other folks as I write for the line. Okay. And then now call closer speakers less. Please come forward.
Speaker 0: Mayor Councilmembers My name is John Silver. I'm a program manager for US Vets. U.S. Vets has been a veterans homeless service provider in the Long Beach area since 1998. As a member of the Long Beach Continuum of Care, US Vets is dedicated to the work of the continuum of care in the community, serving the most vulnerable of our of our people within our community. The homeless, Long Beach in the US, other words, has participated, has partnered with the Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority and the City of Long Beach and the Long Beach Rescue mission to open this homeless, this winter shelter. We're going to do everything we can to make sure that the community is served, is served, and that the safety of the community, of the individuals that are being served and those in the community are being met. It is you know, it is a difficult decision to make as far as finding a place to put to to put these shelters. They've done everything I can what I can see to make this happen. And like I say, we've got a tentative date of 12 December. Hopefully everything works out and that we move ahead with that point. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: My name is Linda Barr, and I live in the eighth District. I just want to verify.
Speaker 4: One thing and I want to know if it's going on the record that this is going to be for this.
Speaker 3: Period from December to March.
Speaker 0: 31st.
Speaker 7: That is correct. I mean, I believe that this site is actually going out to also the RFP for a different use pretty soon. And so this would be a sort of end with the final date.
Speaker 0: Yeah, March 31st. March 31st.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name's James Scarborough. I live in the eighth District on Washington Street, two blocks from the proposed facility. Staunch supporter of councilman asked and it's true. This is I found out.
Speaker 0: About this two days ago.
Speaker 4: So it is a rather short notice. And our our concern would be impact to the neighborhood. And I'd like to hear how that's going to be addressed and perhaps words to the wise from Councilman Richardson on how to best operate the facility. That is our main concern, day to day operations. So at this point, we we speak I speak opposed to the measure or opposed to the to the item. I'd like to hear the plans for zero negative impact to.
Speaker 3: The.
Speaker 4: Local residents and.
Speaker 0: A protocol.
Speaker 4: Or you know, who is accountable for this such that we do have a means to address our concerns with ongoing operations and anything that does come up that there is a chain of command to deal with it. Thank you.
Speaker 7: I can't. Speaker.
Speaker 0: Frederick Gharib. I live on Washington Street represented by Mr. Alston, and I am like many other people that I have talked to within the last two or three days. I'm really surprised to hear about this in such a short period of time without any hearing conducted about on this, i. I have serious concerns about the safety. We have already a good portion of homeless population in our area, and the last thing that we need is another bigger population of homeless here. I believe this was a very.
Speaker 7: There's some talking going on in the audience. We can have. Talking in the audience, please. We want to hear the speaker continue. Sir.
Speaker 0: I still would like to have I wish we had a more hearing on this so more and more people. Mr.. Austin a lot of people are unhappy about this. And one additional question that I had from the lady provided the explanation is that what is your legal ground basis for holding people between 5 p.m. and 7:00 in the morning? If they would like to leave, on what grounds can you arrest them and bring them back? Can you call Long Beach PD to pick them up and return them back to the shelter where this library is located? I don't know if you folks know exactly the location of this library on both sides of the library, up and down on Orange Avenue, we have a whole bunch of apartment complex buildings. It's a very highly condensed population area. They have children playing in their front yards. And I'm sure, Mr. Austin and none of you ladies gentlemen live within a few blocks from that library. Otherwise you wouldn't have decided to go ahead with this. However, I would like personally I would like to Citi double its efforts towards taking care of our homeless population. I honestly believe in that. And on my way coming in, I went through the gantlet of a homeless that you all have noticed here. Thank you so much and I hope you don't pass this motion. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 0: They're to doing some out-of-the-box thinking in dealing with the veterans that are homeless. Is there some type of paradigm that we can set up with the major downtown hotels, not the ones that are sometimes problematic and by prearranged arrangements have protocols where. At a given hour the night or when the people have to check in. If they've got one room, one room in the Hyatt, in the Hilton, the upscale hotels, or even one level above that. Where they'd be comfortable putting it in its shape, particularly in seasons that are not typically when they're not typically filled. And see if there's protocols that can be set up. They'd be on a list, and the city would make the requisite transportation paradigms with the taxi company. To pick the individuals up and take them to that room. And again, I think my sense is that every hotel might have one room that they could spare for that night for 12 hour or whatever the period, if we work out those protocols after dinner or what. And give that a shot doesn't cost anything to ask. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Last speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. I'm Dan Rogers, and let's take that given concept a whole step further. I don't.
Speaker 8: Know what you guys are working on right now, but I do.
Speaker 0: Know for a fact that what for? Did you work on last? Tell me, please. What did you work on last pick up for? My wife balanced. What? The 13th floor you left on the 13th floor. You were completely vacated during the eighth month of last year. During the eighth month of last year. In the 10th month.
Speaker 8: You could have.
Speaker 0: Taken the 10th, 10th floor and occupied the 10th floor with cream of the cream of the crop from the country. Could you not have. Yes. Yes, you could have. Oh, come on, please. Janine, answer that question. Could you not have you're just grinning at me, only you're not being asked. You can say yes, it's okay.
Speaker 7: So make sure it was addressed. That can be dressed.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. Never mind, Mr. Bashir. He's right. Right now. My wife's company, Peachtree Engineering, is doing the eighth floor. They could do your homeless on their eighth floor. Take any of the big builders. They could do any of the floors you're talking about throughout the county. That's just the big builders throughout the country. Take his concept, take his concept and do it throughout the hotels in town. Yes, you can do it all the way. I want to go back to what I was sharing with you earlier. We can take what you want to do every single year and do it underneath the given overpass area in the ninth district that they've taken away. With respect to the freeways on Artesia, where Artesia Cross is, where I used to walk to school today. The star now David Star Jordan West David Star Jordan. Before I to go to Hamilton as before I want to get to down better avenue to go to the elementary school before Artesia got so busy before they widen the freeway, I used to live six stories from the freeway. Now my boyhood childhood is two days from the freeway. That's how much the freeway has eaten up fat jacked fun and I better I'm angry over but this young man told me I get to have 6 minutes because of a different reason. Why did you say this sequence?
Speaker 7: So you have to be sure you have to address to.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry, Mr. Garcia. I apologize. Why do you like it? I don't know why this 6 minutes mean. He said I get 6 minutes because I guess I'm changing subjects now because of something he's going to help me with.
Speaker 7: So you have 8 seconds left.
Speaker 0: I got no seconds left. I have no seconds. Lady, what are you going to show this guy back here at the Los Angeles County?
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you very much. Your time is up. Appreciate it. Thank you, sir. I'm in sugar.
Speaker 0: Now. Training is over. Thank you. And you're speaking over.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. My special.
Speaker 0: Counsel. It is. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 7: So your time is up. You have to take a seat, please.
Speaker 0: At the end of this Mr. Good, you can't speak out.
Speaker 7: Okay, Mr. Goodwin, you cannot speak out. Sir, please grab a seat. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank all of the people who came out this evening on this item to provide public comment. I want to follow up with a couple of questions that were raised during public comment. There was a talk about some some neighbors express concern that there are currently homeless people within the neighborhood. What can be done to try to get those individuals into the shelter? And can you discuss what sort of outreach efforts will be taking place for the homeless population in the general area so that there is some sort of community benefit for the poor?
Speaker 9: So the Multi-Service Center and our and our street outreach team will be out there reaching out and doing outreach to the folks who are near the shelter and in that community. And at that time, they'll actually have an opportunity to ride in a van to where the bus pick up is so that they'll be able to have access to that. They won't have to do their own transportation to get there. So if they participate in the outreach and they want to be in the shelter, then we'll make sure they can get on the bus to get into the shelter location. And through all of this, they'll also have greater access to case management services, other kind of behavioral health services and other issues that are things that we they have not engaged in in before. So we see this actually as an opportunity to help support the homeless individuals that you're finding in your neighborhoods, to help increase their opportunity to be able to be in the homeless shelter and to increase their access to services.
Speaker 8: Such as car parks. We see this as an opportunity as well, and to help educate our public about the services that our Health Services Department, Homeless Services Department actually provides. And so if somebody encounters a homeless person and we have them in every neighborhood, people know where where they are, where they're sleeping. If one of our residents were to encounter one of them in their neighborhood, if they were to provide that information, would we be able to outreach and do better outreach in that particular area? Because we have actual staff in that area where.
Speaker 9: We have a homeless outreach hotline. And so when people call the homeless outreach hotline, they can report that there are homeless individuals or families. And then we send outreach workers out to meet with to meet with those folks. The phone number for that is 5625704550.
Speaker 0: With that number, people can call.
Speaker 9: You know, leave a message and then if you would like or call back, then just leave your name and phone number and we'll make sure you get a telephone call back. And then we provide outreach services to those to those neighborhoods. And if they identify that they are in work, Long Beach near there, near the winter shelter, we'll make sure that the outreach conducts them, that we can assist them in getting into the shelter.
Speaker 8: Okay. Currently, the North Library has been vacant for about a year and a half. Can you elaborate on what the security plan will be for the for the winter shelter to ensure that that the shelter is secure? But but it's having minimal impact on on the residents outside.
Speaker 9: So when a person chooses to participate in the winter shelter program at that time, they we share all of the rules of what it is to be in the winter shelter, which means that, you know, they will take the bus and that they will go in and they will stay in the shelter and that they will only exit the shelter when they are coming back on the bus. And so if people choose, if they don't if they don't want to engage in those roles and they choose not to ride the bus, they don't participate. In the past, we've had very little opportunity where people have to have taken, you know, an opportunity to leave. I think, you know, in the at the Atlantic Farms, we had no no reported incidents through the police department or others that occurred from folks who were there. And so that's that's what it looks like. The vet, the US vets provides the system of security and support. And so they are in ongoing conversations and they're making sure that people are not leaving and we do not have a legal ground to be able to hold people. So it's not that police picks people up and takes them back. It's that that the rules at the shelter are that. And people who participate and have participated in the past in the Atlantic farms have participated and paid attention to those rules. However, if we do have phone calls and there are concerns in the neighborhood, the police can and will and can can be called and will arrive to support when there is any concern of behavior going on within the community.
Speaker 8: All right. Thank you. And I'd just like to thank the city staff and for the thorough presentation. I'd like to thank you as vets, Lisa, for your efforts on this winter shelter. And I'd also like to thank the residents who've contacted my office and took the time to come here to speak this evening. I'm listening and I hear you. Please understand that one of the questions that I get as a city council member very often year round, and it's something I'm constantly grappling with. I think every one of the city council members here grapple with this is what are we doing about the homeless population in Long Beach? And and in our neighborhoods, throughout our districts of I live around the corner from Cheer Park and I have the opportunity to see people sleeping in a park in cold conditions year round. I recently, just a couple of weeks ago engaged a homeless person who was sleeping in the bushes of my neighbor two doors down. This is no longer a heating problem. This is this is a problem that exists. And it's not out of sight for most of us. The homeless population has reached a crisis proportion and we see it in all of our neighborhoods and council districts throughout the city. That is why I cannot in good conscience reject an opportunity to to to house homeless folks in a shelter in an empty city building. This is not the plan. It was not ever the plan to try to transition the old North Library into a winter homeless shelter. But the opportunity presented itself after extensive and extensive search. The city manager approached me with this a couple of weeks ago. I know there's been some conversation about learning about it last minute. There wasn't a whole lot of planning into this. This is a crisis. This is an emergency shelter. This is a situation that we as a city had to act upon. I can't in good conscience reject this opportunity that is practically a last resort to provide shelter this winter to get people off off of the streets. And it truly saved lives during the 15 years that the winter shelter program has existed in our city. It has been hosted in five different council districts, and this is the first time it will be hosted in a district. Many of those previous locations were in residential neighborhoods or had homes across the street or very, very nearby. I understand the concerns and anxiety, and I can tell you that as your elected representative, I will be working with all of the city departments to make sure that there is minimal impact on the residents. We will. And if there are concerns, I heard about protocol, who would call? There's call. You can contact you as vets who will be running the operations. You can contact my office. We will be responsive to you. The old North North Lights Library site has been vacant for nearly a year and a half and it was looking like it. I know some neighbors have complained about loitering and other activity around the building since it was closed. There will now be staff and security around the building on a daily basis, providing a deterrent against such loitering. I've also pressed the city manager to invest in landscaping upkeep of the building while it's in use so it does not detract from the neighborhood. This is also it was important to note that this will be a short term use for the site only from December 12th through March 31st. Concurrently, two shelter will be there. The city will be requesting proposals, RFP for future development of the site, which should contribute, we think, to the neighborhood when the reuse of that library is determined. This is an opportunity to get people off the streets at night to receive services and hopefully get them on a path to transitional housing and other assistance that they need. If we don't provide them with a shelter for them, they'll continue to be sleeping on the streets, in our parks, in our neighborhoods. And they don't they won't be receiving any additional services. And I think that's a that's a that's a choice that I don't think we don't we want to make. I don't want to wish that upon anybody. And especially as it's getting cold, very cold, like we experienced just last night and with rain and more cold to come. Our Health Department are Homeless Services Bureau, the county La mesa. US vets are all committed to this winter shelter program, working smoothly without disruption to the neighborhood I've already met just a couple of days ago. What the North Long Beach commander and Long Beach PD is aware of. This, this, this, this, this, this plan and will be committed to to servicing the area if necessary. I'm personally committed to making that happen. And I'm I'm willing to come out and talk to to the residents to to also explain this and address their concerns. Again, this is not something that we had 30 days or two months to plan. If we hadn't had that kind of timeframe and known this was coming, I would have certainly done some more robust community outreach. I don't I do think I know for a fact that the homes were flier in the neighborhood and the Gazette newspaper and other local media picked the issue up. We thank them for doing that because that did help get the word out. I also put it out in my my my newsletter for that I put out every two weeks. There was a void there. We got the information out as soon as we could get it out. But again, I want to just say that this is, I think, an opportunity, an opportunity to save lives, an opportunity to get people on the pathway to getting transitional housing and the service says they need and hopefully getting them off the streets. The only way we do that is engaging them. Right. And having them in overnight in a in a in a winter shelter provides a lot of opportunity for our professionals. Our staff are homeless services vision to to actually do that. And so with that, I would just let the residents know I've heard you. I will be working with you, continue to work with you and monitor this, this, this shelter throughout the process. I would ask my colleagues for their their support for this as well. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 0: Yes, thank you, Mayor. I'd like to thank you, Councilman Austin, for you are very concerned, you know, you know, feelings about this situation, because I am concerned about this opposition towards placing that when a shelter in the eighth District, you know, we're talking about, I think an animal shelter would reaction be the same. This is the service we need. And at this point it has been placed in my district and the vice mayor's district at the time. We share the responsibility. We obviously are to become to the people, you know, because you guys realize it does house, you know, and help people who are dying in the cold during this winter months. And I would like and congratulate Councilman Austin in his opening his district for their service. And I'm hopeful that no person will freeze this year. I don't really think it's about districts. I just think it's about being the person that you should be and that's being humble and opening your heart to these individuals out here who are down in the street. Thank you again, Austin, for bringing this of lesson to the diocese.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Council member Pierce.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And I want to thank staff for your hard work on this and also U.S. vets. I recall whenever we did our homeless count and we kind of looked at where our homeless population was in the city, we found it was a very different trend from ten years ago. And the fact that it was really spread out citywide and I know that it is a challenge for each community whenever this conversation comes up. But again, echoing, you know, we have to make sure we care for all of our residents and all of our citizens. And to me, that boundary isn't a district boundary. It's not even a county boundary. You know, and it's really important that we are.
Speaker 7: As you said. So thank you very much.
Speaker 3: That we as a city are taking on that responsibility. I did want to thank you for clarifying for the residents and the community the security measures taken around the area. And I did want to ask you mentioned to could the drop off in the pick up locations? Is the Hart team one of those that is able to drop off at the winter shelter? It is great. And I also want to thank speaker. I'm sorry. It's been a long night for me. I want to thank her, Linda Chico, for coming and speaking on behalf of Supervisor Janice Hahn as a mental health commissioner. I know how important this is to the region and just want to congratulate the eighth District for taking this responsibility on. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: I just want to say I was compelled to talk because I have lived by the winter shelter and the first district actually has been the home of the winter shelter consecutively over the last few years. And it's always very difficult, I understand, for a community to and to have this winter shelter next door to their property, into their home. And what they feel is, you know, their their property, everything that they they value. And I'll tell you, the Willmar City Historic District off of I'm sorry, off of Daisy and Anaheim in that area was also in the same situation, didn't really understand what was coming to their neighborhood. And I'll tell you, after the winter shelter came and how well-run it was, how managed, how well managed it was and how absolutely safe it was felt incredibly great. So we actually welcomed it the next few years. It was so wonderful. And so I will say I would be happy, more than happy to connect council member Austin with that Whitmore City historic district. If any of your residents want to, to connect with them, to share the experiences, because I know it's always difficult, as I mentioned, and I want to thank Supervisor Hahn as well for always being a great advocate for Long Beach in terms of and her dedication to the issue of homelessness as well as our health department. You all do an incredible job. And it's not easy any any year every day. But it's you do fantastic job. I do want to clarify, though, as far as the downtown lineup, location's the first district. We've had them at First Congregational. I know it's been the second district on Ocean and Magnolia. Have we selected a downtown location at this time? No. Okay. Just checking on that. I know we usually hear about that, but yes, my my offer stands for all of you if you want to learn more to come to you as well. Like I said, Mr. Councilmember Austin, if you'd like to connect with my office and our residents on that, we'd be happy to do that for you.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I know a lot of times we start off by thanking staff, but haven't been in the position to you know, the ninth District has been home to the shelter, you know, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016. Given that dynamic, I know I know the burden that that the city council member is taking on. So before I acknowledge staff and talk, I want to acknowledge Councilman Austin for for stepping up, because the the difficult thing the easy thing to do would have been to just say say no. And the difficult thing to do is to. Actually try to grapple and understand the issue. And so what I'm going to hope to try to do is just give some assurance and some some some guidance as to the things that we've done. Like, I go to sleep, I rest my head in North Long Beach every night. I live there. You know, you don't have to tell me about the issues in North Long Beach. I'm driving home tonight when I go home and we work on these issues. And the way that you work through these things is with congruence and with transparency, with openness. For example, you know, we've partner. We partner. Here's an example of something that helps the minister demystify some of the of the anguish, the anxiety around the situation. We would work with the neighborhood associations to literally go to the shelter and provide food. That simple activity gave a local connection between the residents and the shelter. Number two, we would have periodic check ins where Theresa, our health department staff, would literally visit on a regular basis the neighborhood association, and give updates in terms of like how many people every night and feedback on a regular periodic basis about us as to what's happening next. The operator really makes a difference. U.S. Vets is one of the best artists to have it one year with U.S. vets. They're very responsive. They have a real heart for Long Beach, real heart for the community. I think it goes a long way. And and and then the fourth thing I would say is it's it's temporary. Don't don't forget about it. Just acknowledge it for if you have a neighborhood association, be really engaged with with PD and and the health department. And we're in a unique and Long Beach in that we're one of, I think, three cities in the state with our own health department. So you don't have to go through the county. You have staff right here that you can you can talk with. And so I hear real sincerity on the on the part of Councilman Austin. I can tell you firsthand how quality our health department is. And this is something that frankly, this is something that I think that will be a good learning experience. And it's only it's only three months. So at the end of those three months, hopefully you've had you have an activated site at the North Library, better landscaping, and you've done something to make sure that the people that are that are in our community already, I mean, you know, homeless folks, they don't they don't just disappear. They're going to be somewhere, hopefully, that we've we've taken them out of the parks, out of the right. Always know about the the area between the 1791 and talking about maybe out of those sort of themes and place them in a in a healthier environment. And the last thing I'll say is it's a larger conversation about I'm sorry. It's an important issue. I just figured I was asked to comment on it. So it's the last thing I'll say is, you know, we've been engaged in a conversation about a permanent long term shelter. Won't be won't be that site. But we're in that conversation. I think when we get to that next year, hopefully we can have the more robust conversation as entire city about where it is, what that looks like, the services that are that are connected to it. And so and so it's everyone's issue. I like I like the fact that everyone you know, a lot of people have said, hey, we've had the winter shelter. I'm glad that they've actually stepping up. It's something that it's a responsibility we just have to do as a city is providing emergency shelter in the in the Cold Seasons . So, again, thank you, Councilman Austin. I hope those comments help.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 6: Motion case.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. Okay. Appreciate that. We have a couple folks I need to head out early as well. So I'm going to move a couple things around. We have to do the two ordinances tonight and then the two properties. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a shelter crisis; suspending applicable provisions of local law, including those contained in the City's zoning ordinances and regulations; and authorizing the operation of a winter shelter at 5571 Orange Avenue, for the period of December 6, 2017 and March 31, 2018. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1107 | Speaker 7: The property changes as well. So we do 40, 43 and 44, please. 43 the two ordinances.
Speaker 6: Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to specific election procedures. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide.
Speaker 7: Pick any public comment? See none. Mr. Gephardt, please, quickly.
Speaker 0: Again, I would suggest that we postpone this for at least another three weeks again, to give the city prosecutor and the mayor a further time to reflect on whether or not they'll do the right thing and avoid a special election by stepping down now. Thank you.
Speaker 7: KC No, the public comment, please cast your vote.
Speaker 6: Vice mayor. But that motion carries. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal code by amending and restating Sections 1.21.010, 1.21.040(B) and 1.21.050, all relating to specific election procedures, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1108 | Speaker 6: Vice mayor. But that motion carries.
Speaker 7: To the next one, the next to the next ordinance, which is I'm 44. I know it requires two votes.
Speaker 6: I believe communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance approving resolution number WD dash 1382 establishing the rates and charges to be charged for water and sewer services, declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect on January 1st, 2018. Read the first time and lead over the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading.
Speaker 7: Thank you, sir. The first vote is to determine the urgency. So please, is there any public comment on the urgency? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: The second part of the ordinance is setting the rates. Is there any public comment on setting the rates? See? None. Get the motions and please cast your votes.
Speaker 6: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate you guys. For the audiences, those are the two audiences on the agenda. We will go back up now to the agenda and do items 37 and 3837. Thank you. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving Resolution
No. WD-1382, a resolution of the City of Long Beach Board of Water Commissioners establishing the rates and charges to be charged for water and sewer service; declaring the urgency thereof; and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 A.M. on January 1, 2018 read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1100 | Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate you guys. For the audiences, those are the two audiences on the agenda. We will go back up now to the agenda and do items 37 and 3837. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Report from Economic Development Recommendation to execute all necessary documents with Rain Tree Evergreen for the reduction in sale price of Broadway and Long Beach Boulevard for a total purchase amount of 7,093,316 District two.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. West, for the short report.
Speaker 0: Quick report by John.
Speaker 4: Keiser and Sergio Romero of Economic Development. Thank you, Pat. This item is a price reduction for an item previously.
Speaker 0: Considered by the City.
Speaker 4: Council on June 21st, 2016 for property at 125 3133 North Long Beach Boulevard and 230 4248.
Speaker 0: East Broadway. The subject property is about 44,000 square feet. It's currently utilize as a parking lot. The approved purchase price was $7.3 million. During the developer's due diligence, it was discovered that a major dedication would be required since you reducing the size of the developable site. The proposed reduction in price is approximately $206,000, and this item and evaluation of the price reduction has been evaluated.
Speaker 4: By the city's economists. Kizer Martin Associate.
Speaker 0: And we're ready to proceed with a sales price of a little over 7 million.
Speaker 4: 7,093,000 $316,000.
Speaker 0: That concludes our report. Happy to answer any questions.
Speaker 7: Great. Thank you. There's a motion in a second, Councilman Pierce. Anything?
Speaker 3: I just want to thank staff for meeting with me last week and going over this. And I also want to thank Raintree. I expect these projects to be good projects and this is really simple and straight shooter for me. So thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Any public comment on this scene? And please cast your vote in 37. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all necessary documents with Raintree-Evergreen LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, for the reduction in sale price of Broadway and Long Beach Boulevard (125-133 North Long Beach Boulevard and 234-248 East Broadway), Assessor Parcel Numbers 7280-025-903, -917, -922, -923; for a total purchase amount of $7,093,316. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1043 | Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. Thanks again. And we're going to go ahead, go back to the regular agenda item 29.
Speaker 6: Report from Technology and Innovation Financial Management Recommendation to authorize the city manager to submit to the City Council purchase transactions for critical technology infrastructure needs citywide.
Speaker 7: Mr..
Speaker 4: Mr.. Mayor. Council members, this, as the city Clerk pointed out, deals with critical infrastructure in the technology arena. We've already had a study session regarding this subject with the city council. It's been on the council's agenda a few weeks ago, but it was like 1130. Postponed till today. So here you go. Basically, we were looking at the history of financing in Long Beach and dealing with technology. In 2001, we were facing a $103 million deficit. It took 3 to 4 years to deal with that, but we stabilized the budget and dealt with that. In 2008, we faced the greatest recession since the Great Depression. That took a long time to recover from, but we did that as well. During the past decade or so. We focused a lot on streets, sidewalks, buildings and roads, but not so much on technology. During the past couple of years, we've conducted a major review of technology and infrastructure, technology, infrastructure throughout the city. This review is turning out that we have big needs to be the 21st century technology city that the community council commissioners all want us to be. We've discovered that we've had some critical technology needs that are imperative for us to deal with things like a new fiber network. Things like replacing outdated technology, replacing outdated equipment, security cameras, and dealing with the issues we're facing with those a brand new CRM system dealing with cybersecurity and electronic document management systems. So I also want to make it clear that we want to do this in a fiscally responsible way. For example, in our fiber buildout or replacing our outdated technology or even in transitioning into electronic documents, we want to know that. We want to make it clear that if the private sector can work with us for cost efficiencies, such as public private partnerships, will be open for innovation and working with our partners throughout the community to do that. So at this time, I'm going to turn it over to Brian Stokes, our director of technology and innovation. He's going to walk through the operations that I've just noticed here, and then I'm going to turn over to our finance director. John GROSS is going to talk about the funding. And the funding here is significant. It's a potentially $60 million of purchases throughout the next several years. This is something that won't be dealt with here in 2018, but certainly will be dealing with in 2019. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Brian.
Speaker 10: Thank you. Good evening. Honorable Mayor and City Council. At a special City Council study session on October 24th, staff presented a report outlining four critical technology infrastructure needs the city is facing and at this time to ensure we can reliability reliably and efficiently service our residents. Tonight, we'll discuss the details of these critical needs, as well as the estimated cost and potential financing and funding. Currently, staff is seeking approval to bring forward for Future City Council consideration. Three of the four key categories of unfunded critical technology infrastructure needs. First is installing a fiber optic network so city buildings can save on current and future communication costs and to form the basis of a potential future digital inclusion, replacing outdated technology that's becoming unreliable and will not support new systems or the new civic center and furnishing needed systems to make key critical city needs and prevent malicious system attacks. Data loss and service outages. The total of these three items come to $67 million. The remaining 21 million is in a fourth needed category, replacing our public safety communication technology, which is not being recommended for action at this time, as additional information pretending pertaining to extended support is anticipated to become available in the next few months . If the recommended action is approved, staff will finalize the specific purchases secure vendors through existing and new contracts for bids, secure funding and financing, and in conformance with the mechanism outlined in this letter. A Return to the City Council for authorization of individual purchase transactions. To create a plan for action for expanding the city's fiber network. We completed a citywide fiber study that addresses the needs for faster data speeds between city facilities in order to accommodate the new technology systems that we are currently in the process of implementing.
Speaker 7: It's like a giant. You cannot you can't be talking inside. I'm sorry. You need to go outside, sir. Thank you. Please continue.
Speaker 10: Thank you. As I was saying, this is addressing a need for faster data speeds between city facilities in order to accommodate the new technology systems that we are currently in the process of implementing as well as those planned for future installations. We've also addressed and documented the current city fiber assets and infrastructure. We've evaluated fiber network approaches in other cities and we developed preliminary engineering and financial analysis. These also integrate dig wants approaches that the City Council has outlined. We also identified opportunities for incremental strategic investments in expanding the fiber infrastructure. The recommendation is to create interconnections between city owned buildings and departments with high bandwidth infrastructure to ensure seamless and inter-departmental communications. This fiber network will be a cost effective way to provide redundancy, increase capacity for both current and future connectivity needs, while also providing the economic and physical framework for future expansion and potential private investment. This initiative is expected to provide a net cost saving, including debt service, by avoiding future communication costs that the city would have to incur in order to leverage the new systems currently being implemented. The city will also begin the design and engineering of a fiber backbone throughout its process. We will solicit proposals and alternatives from communication providers that may offer opportunities to lower the investment cost. In addition, we will be concurrently exploring private partnerships for future expansion of this fiber network. For additional broadband services to build the businesses and residents. When we talk about our existing fiber network, this map shows the red outline of where the city currently has existing fiber facilities. In this slide, we're adding the blue line, which shows current fiber construction representing the installation of fiber along the Metro Blue Line, Second Street, as well as a partnership we currently have with Crown Castle. Slide eight represents the proposed fiber network by adding approximately 61 miles of additional fiber, with the potential to interconnect over 135 city facilities. As next steps. The Technology Innovation Department will develop and issue a request for proposal to engineer, design and construct the completion of the city building fiber backbone network. TII will also begin the process of upgrading existing telecom circuit speeds in order to support the immediate departmental needs of the current application, such as OLB Coast. Also at the October 24 study session, staff identified $431 million worth of outdated equipment in this category over the course of the past year. Thai public works and an extensive team of construction, engineering, design and technology consultants work collaboratively on developing a modern technology plan for the new civic center and citywide systems. This assessment, comprised of a wide array of technology, infrastructure and systems that support city operations and concluded that the technology infrastructure currently in place is that of life and not capable of being transitioned to support the new civic center as well as cities business needs that are expected. After more than a year of that joint planning, dozens of city and non city personnel and a sizable amount of planning and evaluation of citywide infrastructure. A breakdown of that outdated equipment cost is listed in the table below. You and I can go into more detail around these later if needed. As previously stated, the city's technology infrastructure is at the end of life and is not able to reliably support the new systems that are being installed to meet city business needs. In addition, with the new Civic Center soon to be completed, this technology will be required for occupancy and will be needed to enable senior seamless transition and provide the essential foundation needed to build a better Long Beach. For our next steps here. The Technology and Innovation Department will finalize equipment lists and incorporate the necessary details to bring purchase requests for specific items forward to City Council. As purchase recommendations are finalized and recommended, vendors are identified. In addition to the critically needed infrastructure detailed in the previous section, the city also needs investment in three key technology systems. The first consisting of a customer relationship management system or CRM. This will improve our community and residents needs to make inquiries, requests and tracks statuses that is intended to be a major upgrade for Go Long Beach to also received and from informal proposals from 16 vendors for both cloud based and on prem models that help initiate the development and issuance of an RFP for this CRM. As evidenced by recent events locally, nationally and internationally. Cybersecurity is also a major issue worldwide. The Technology and Innovation Department has conducted a preliminary cybersecurity assessment that has identified numerous security areas across the city's functional areas. These areas need to be addressed to ensure compliance with state, federal and contractual requirements and better protect the city from cyber attacks that threaten both our data and our ability to operate. As a next step will initiate the development and issuance of RFPs for our cybersecurity initiatives and bring back those options. The Council. In addition, the city has conducted a physical inventory of paper documents and identified that the city has over 67 million paper documents citywide, and we've created a roadmap for digitization. Recently, T.I. has issued an RFP this past August and is currently in the process of reviewing the submitted proposals. We will also come back to council to award a contract. This process will be a phased in implementation with a timeline that also coincides with the move to the new civic center. To those further into the financial and funding aspects of this presentation, John GROSS has prepared a detailed breakdown, which you will now review with you. Thank you. Thanks, Brian, and good evening. Mayor and council members, I'm going to kind of walk you through the financing and funding and all the numbers, of course, are estimates at this time. The funding, we don't have quite enough cash or enough cash to do these all these projects and this equipment and the fiber. So we're going to be funding this kind of like a person in individual dues, does a new car loan. We'll be using equipment leases, we'll be using cash for installation and implementation costs, kind of like a down payment where we need to if we don't have enough cash, we may do a small enter fund loan if enough cash isn't available. Most of these costs, as the city manager talked about, are f 1.19 costs, not F 518 costs. There will be some costs. And in FY 18, as we move forward, these needs are pretty newly identified. And so we weren't able to include them in the f y 18 budget. But again, most of the costs will be an f y 19. We'll use cash where we can in terms of the funding to minimize ongoing debt service. The debt service will be built into the annual budget. It will likely be a permanent structural cost and all that will be painful. It serves a one major benefit. Council has always been interested in resolving unfunded infrastructure costs and unfunded maintenance by putting this into the budget. We will have permanent funding for this equipment, so when it gets old, we won't have this problem again. We'll have debt service built into the budget to replace the equipment. The operating costs will also be built into the budget and the annual costs will add to any shortfall. Because we do have a shortfall, they'll be absorbed or at least were expecting one. They'll be absorbed in future budget by revenue offsets available or by reducing other expenditures. I'm going to talk a little bit now about the detailed of the three areas that Brian talked about. The first one is the fiber network. The cost of their fiber network is low compared to the savings, the operating savings that are going to occur by having our own fiber network between city buildings. As a result, it's desirable to bring this network up as fast as possible in order to get the savings. We're talking about 11 million, $11.9 million to finish the network with a half a million dollar net annual general fund cost. There is a portion of the network and the outdated equipment. And even when you look at those costs combined, the annual general fund cost is about $1,000,000 for the first few years. But once we get communications speeds up, which will be probably within two years, we'll actually have a net savings in the general fund of around $250,000 a year, and that includes net debt service. So even with debt service, our overall costs should go down. Equipment is the single biggest area. It's 43.1 million, I think. Brian didn't mean to say 431 million, but it's 43.1 million. Just the decimal point that is to replace the outdated equipment to ensure the technical needs are met and to avoid potential delays and costs in opening the new civic center. That will translate to about a $4.8 million annual general fund cost and also about 6.6 million in general fund one time cash. That's an area where we may need to do an inner fund loan because it's not clear yet that the general fund has that kind of cash. For the technology systems. As Brian talked about, it's $12 million or $1 million for the customer relationship management system, 4 million for cyber security and 7 million for idms. In other words, the paperless processing that has an impact of about 1.3 million and annual general fund costs and ¥4.3 million in cash total. We're talking about $67 million that the manager talked about, but 49.6 million in loans for all funds and about $10 million in cash from the general fund. The total annual cost is about $10.4 million from all funds. We have been able to move a very significant portion of the cost, a little less than 40% over to non general fund funds, which really lowers the impact on the general fund. And that leaves us with a $6.6 million impact on the general fund. Again, most of that probably beginning in 19. In terms of future steps, the Budget Office is planning a December 19th update on budget status. And from from December on, if this is approved, the technology department will be submitting and purchase recommendation specific purchase recommendations to the council. These recommendations will consist of lists of equipment to a large degree. So they're going to be very technical. So it's probably a lot better to ask questions today than when those details come during F five, 18 and 19. Again, if this motion is approved, there will be limited staff action, temporarily increasing leasing a data line speeds as needed to make sure our equipment survived. We'll be updating council on mobile radios and other critical infrastructure needs during 18 and in the Fy19 budget process. As promised, we will have a listing and discussion of the overall all of our unfunded needs. So our recommendation is, is to proceed with a motion authorizing staff to come forward with actual purchases over the next few months . And there are a lot of individual points where addressing critical technology infrastructure with this we are moving into the 21st century. So all the things that the Council wants us to do, we actually have the framework to do it. It's a permanent solution to unfunded technology infrastructure. Something that is rather exciting eliminates about $2 million in costs we would otherwise have, eliminates equipment failure, and allows us to move into the new civic center and have the data center updated and provides a very strong foundation for future digital inclusion and improved access to public internet and wi fi. And with that, we're open for questions.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. We're going to go ahead and go into some questions first. So let me start with Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank everybody who put together this presentation. It's a lot of information. We have seen a lot of this come in. So we were ready for this conversation. I think updating our technology infrastructure is smart, is the right thing to do. And and but the angels and the details. So I want to start just with the map of the fiber network. Thank you for outlining it in those three categories of what exists today, what's currently under construction and what we're proposing under this plan. And so it's a dramatic difference. I see that. And I'm going to focus on on my area of town. You know, we did invest in fiber when we did the Michelle Obama library, when we did the Atlantic Avenue Street Project, when we invested in Artesia, we invested in fiber. But there are and I see there is a plan to connect all the way, connect fiber all the way east to Ramona Park. But one area that that sort of has a physical barrier is cut off in the city is the area around the Coolidge Triangle. So it's divide it from the city by the by the seventh in the L.A. River and also the 91. So that's the area, the College Square, Neighborhood Start, King Longwood and Coolidge Triangle. So what are the things that we can do to make sure that that area that that has a big physical barrier? Is there some technology or some something that we can do to make sure that that that area is not left behind as we make this investment?
Speaker 10: Yes. With this approach would be is as we defined this backbone would be able to provide to other partners a lateral off of that in order to meet those needs.
Speaker 1: So that's possible and that is a plan I didn't see it accounted for here. But is that something you're saying is very fairly simple to do? Or does it require changes to this plan?
Speaker 10: It would not require changes to this plan. The plan is meant to be built upon. So once this is implemented, we have the capability to go beyond that, whether it's engaging those specific specific areas, other economic development areas, as well as providing more opportunities for digital inclusion. Yes.
Speaker 1: And that's within the parameters of the finance set here. Like we wouldn't need additional finance. We can do that within what's being proposed.
Speaker 10: We would build the underpinning technology here, and then we would look for partners to come in to provide that additional lateral infrastructure. Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. So this this takes a step to make sure that we get there. Okay. That is correct. That makes sense. Next, I know that we work together on one of the early fiber projects making Atlantic Avenue between the Michelle Obama Library and Highland Park, the first Wi-Fi corridor. But and it was a test. It was a pilot, but we always intended to go back to it to make sure that we are filling in the dead spots. So the closer you are to the intersections, you have a great signal. But the farther away you get from the intersection, you have dead spots. It's important to us. It's a part of our strategy for the Atlantic corridor to activate the corridor and create places that folks can, you know, tap to tap in the Wi-Fi and create these these active spaces within the funding here. And we I know we've talked about some of these, but within the funding here, is there enough allocated to fill in those dead spots and make it a really active corridor? So so in between the intersections and perhaps across the street and some and wrap it around Jordan High School to Artesia Boulevard. Can we do that within this funding parameters?
Speaker 10: With this parameters would be extending that line. What else we are doing is currently, as we talked before, we are currently mapping out those empty heat. We're doing a heat map of that area and we're providing those services in order to accommodate that request. Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. And what and what is what is the timeline? I know we talked in loose numbers and like, what will be the anticipated timeline? Should the city council move forward with this plan.
Speaker 10: For which piece for this plan or for your request of.
Speaker 1: Just this this specific part lighting up Atlantic Avenue.
Speaker 10: For for us with Atlantic Avenue. If you're going down further, we would issue this design specs over the next few months to have them come back to see what that would entail. After that point, we would issue the ability to try to begin the construction, which will happen probably by the fourth month of next year.
Speaker 1: Yes. Okay. So within the first six months of next year, that's that's good. That's a good timeline. The other thing I would say is in terms of financing and funding, so we it sounds to me and Mr. GROSS, you feel free to recap it, but we are somehow the ongoing costs, we're going to ultimately save money by taking in sort of a contracting in some of our services. Is that correct?
Speaker 10: Yes. Yes. The fiber network, it's not so much contracting in the fiber network allows us to avoid additional or lease line costs as we put new systems out there. We estimate at TIDE estimates that will save about $2 million a year.
Speaker 1: Okay. And so ongoing that so are ongoing. So will will save money there and that that. So are we making a commitment? So is our general fund making a commitment beyond what we've already allocated to commit?
Speaker 10: The total commitment that we're talking about is the $6.6 million a year. That's our estimate. And that would avoid costs of of $2 million a year.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, just to be clear, are you saying beyond the $2 million is a $6 million general fund commitment?
Speaker 10: Yeah, on that, yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. So so I would say so if there's six $6.6 million in general fund, this action we take tonight does not necessarily encumber us. We still would need to go through our regular, normal budget process to evaluate how we how we would pay for this. Is that correct?
Speaker 10: Yes, we would we would build this into our budget projections for FAA in 19, and we would have to work on balancing the budget at that time. These costs would would be presumably be being incurred by that time.
Speaker 1: And so if let's say that casting a vote to include this $6 million into the budget and we come back and it's a budget that has cuts, we can go back and say nothing about this vote tonight stops us from saying, hey, you know, we don't want to cut any services in other areas. We may want to roll back some of this technology stuff that we that we encumbered that that were you're telling me or are you saying that we're going to we're going to, in fact, trigger cuts by casting his vote?
Speaker 10: The the estimated cost is $6 million annually. Probably the significant portion of it would hit in 19. Probably not all of it. Probably the rest of it in FY 20. And I imagine that the commitments based on what we heard the TID director say, those commitments would probably the bulk of them be made in fy18 meaning in the next 12 months. So probably by the time the flight 19 budget was being considered by City Council, these commitments will have been made for the most part.
Speaker 1: So we're locking ourselves in before we figure out how to pay for it. So you're saying.
Speaker 10: To some degree that happens? Yes, we we would be doing that. That's that's part of the reason for this discussion today and why we're saying there is an urgency and a critical need here.
Speaker 1: So I obviously want to hear from the rest of the city council members. I think we should we should definitely move forward with updating our technology, but we should do it in a way that honestly doesn't encumber ourselves in a way that, you know, we don't have the means to pay for it. So I would ask that so well, have we evaluated all public private options to diminish our ongoing costs? Have we done that?
Speaker 10: Part of this process would engage them during that timing of the RFP. We have not foregone that conclusion. If there's submittals for that process to help offset costs within the fiber infrastructure, then yes, we would entertain that. But there's other costs that are the majority of that, which is critical for us to maintain city services beyond what a public private partnership can provide.
Speaker 1: Okay. And just outline for me one, one, one last time. What are the critical infrastructure needs that cannot they cannot wait. And again, that cannot wait until we have a plan to pay for it.
Speaker 10: Pretty much these areas, when we look at the outdated equipment, these are critical needs areas that we would be incurring either way, even if we stayed in this existing civic center. It's critical for us to maintain our operations, our communications. This would be our priority category to have this completed.
Speaker 1: Okay. Well well, thanks a lot. And I'll thank you as I see it on screen. Thank you. So that's it. I'll hold the rest of my questions. My thoughts here are yes. And in theory, I want to be supportive. I want to upgrade our technology. I think a lot there are a lot of benefits to us in making this investment financially. There are benefits to us sort of a I'll use my term contracting in some of these services, but I think we definitely, certainly need to need to, you know, do a little bit more work on the front end with the city council to make sure that we have a good plan, a plan that we can all stand up and and stand behind in the face of our residents. And it may be just an honest conversation about within the context, the budget of of what this actually means. If we don't have that, then I would hope that there's some way that we can put ourselves in a position to where when we have that conversation in the budget where we we aren't too far along in the process to hit the pause button or stop if we're not comfortable with what this means. You know, we we went through a process in this last budget. We got a lot of things done, but there were some things that we had to do out in the open, like some of our underperforming, you know, afterschool centers, for example. I would hate to have to continue to do things like that for technology. So so my hope is that we can get some of this done in a way that allows us some options around budget time. I'll put it that way. Thanks.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 2: Yes. Thank you both for the presentation. I just have a few questions. And of course, I'm a big believer in making the investment for technology on all of these fronts, because I know how much it's needed, both on hardware side and just, you know, software and all the back end work that we need to do that is very antiquated. What type of grants at this time are we leveraging, if any, for to offset some of these critical needs?
Speaker 0: Through our review.
Speaker 10: The grants are most likely for the mobile radios and the mobile radios. We are not putting on the agenda for approval at this time for a number of reasons. One, we want to look at the possibility of grants. And, two, we're asking the vendor to extend the warranty period that may bias a little time. So grants are most likely for the mobile radios, the U.S. grant for the other items, the equipment. That's extremely unlikely. Probably the same for the systems, the the fiber network, as Brian talked about that we're open to options. And in councilwoman also there are some areas of technology that we are able to use a protocol to E-Rate. It's mainly around library services and that stuff where we're able to buy some equipment at a much reduced rate and we have incorporated those costs into this proposal.
Speaker 2: Yes, great. And I'm glad we brought the fiber network up, because I do believe there's opportunities, whether through grants with various vendors or or just a public private partnership, as vice mayor was mentioning. And I think that's going to be very critical. And I would also like to see the fiber network as we begin that process and discuss, you know, ongoing how it evolves and places we can add, you know, my the the area that I constantly talk about is the Washington neighborhood that has, you know, very little access. And I know that as we evolve, hopefully that neighborhood will be included, some sort of a you know, some way. Which brings me to another discussion with security cameras. And I know as we are upgrading that that hardware and figuring out kind of a backup, you know, data, and that's very critical. Perhaps there's a way once we get that up and running to obtain wi fi similar to vice mayors area where we can provide alternative options, whether if it's not fiber and some sort of option for these places that are serious dead zones for the city, economic development residents, etc.. And I really I'm going to be pushing for that quite a bit. I really am, because I think that it's it's super critical. And then on the issue of cybersecurity, I know I was glad to know that we honored cybersecurity one month, but I would like us to talk more about that because it is absolutely a major issue and we can take a lot of preventative measures. I also want to know well, hopefully as this evolves as well, measures to educate our city staff on some of the issues that they can find themselves upon. As we know, there's Sony executives that had data completely obliterated, you know, within that large corporation. I think it's it's not impossible for it to happen here in the city. And so I think we absolutely need to educate our city staff on on on those issues as far as. Okay. Talked about that and then our CRM system, how are we? I know everything is sort of, you know, in preliminary stages right now, but how close are we or what is that looking like? Can you give me a little bit more in depth? Because I think this is also I know everything is critical, but I use a CRM every single day and I know how important it is for contact management, constituent management and for so much of what we do here in the city. So can you go a bit further with that?
Speaker 10: Sure. For for us, with regards to CRM, we're scheduling a June time to issue the RFP in order to solicit a system and go back to start the implementation of that. It would be a phased approach as well, targeting critical areas such as the council offices and so forth in order to meet that demand as we phase it in to provide services back towards organizations like Public Works and allow incoming tickets and so forth to be the next replacement to go Long Beach.
Speaker 2: Great. Wonderful. And then the last thing I'll say is, I know this is kind of small comparative to the whole big picture, but again, with city staff, I think to set us apart, you know, conferencing tools that are I don't want to suggest anything but conferencing tools, workplace communication other than email I think will set us apart as a city. And I'm sure you know what some of those are, but I think that will be very critical as we start to communicate in a different way internally. So great work on this. Thank you. I look forward to seeing more.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 3: Could you say again when the RFP scheduled to go out in.
Speaker 10: June of 2008?
Speaker 3: Okay. I'd like to make a substitute motion that the RFP that was already procured and paid for by the city go out in January. I don't understand why the RFP that's sitting that we've already paid a consultant to pay for. Can you.
Speaker 7: Name it? No. No clapping, sir.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Assistant city manager.
Speaker 0: All right.
Speaker 7: Hold on a second.
Speaker 3: Could you tell me the.
Speaker 7: Way you got to where you need to start talking to me to be asked to go outside? No talking from the audience. All right, sir.
Speaker 0: Pay for it.
Speaker 7: Okay. Can we please. I'm going to ask you if if you do one more outburst, I'm gonna ask to be removed. So one more out person and you can ask me to remove. You've been talking the entire meeting. Thank you. One more person, you'll be removed.
Speaker 3: Mr. West. Mr. Modica, I have it on good information that we have a RFP that was already procured and utilized an outside vendor to create. Could you please give me that information and tell me why there is a delay till June? Because I believe that the RFP we have that we paid someone to create will no longer be valid by then.
Speaker 0: And so, yes, we did bring on somebody to help us create that RFP. We can certainly look at going faster than June. I think June.
Speaker 4: Is what we are looking at as we have a number of different high priority projects, including ERP and all the others. So it was trying to balance that workload. We can certainly if that's something the Council is very interested in, look at accelerating it. So we will work on that.
Speaker 3: When was that completed and given to our office? When was this procured?
Speaker 0: I don't have it at the top of my fingers that it's probably several months ago. Where we completed it, where we did the initial.
Speaker 3: So, Mr. Stokes, what has been the delay and why did we procure a CRM, RFP and not put it on the street?
Speaker 10: One, we did not have funding for the CRM yet at the time. We've done a study what was done by Stern Consulting in order to find out what was the best solution or possible solutions for us to do in order to implement a CRM solution. They have drafted up a draft RFP that we would go ahead and finalize that's there and then we can issue that RFP in order to try to select a vendor and then initiate issue a contract in order to implement that system.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. So we do have one part of this motion which is on the floor will be to do the CRM RFP in January. The crux Mongo is are a second on that and there is a second as well.
Speaker 4: Mayor, if I may, I understand the current motion. There was no as far as I understand the motion and the item this evening was in the future to submit purchase transactions and critical. So is the substitute motion only to issue an RFP in sometime in January?
Speaker 7: No, I think the substitute motion is going to be is to as part of this motion, I some other council on mongo clarify, but I believe it's as part of the motion.
Speaker 3: I would like to make it as part of the motion. I can make it as a friendly. I'm happy to do it as a substitute.
Speaker 7: So it's essentially the motion before us with the addition of Councilwoman Mango's motion.
Speaker 3: I feel that the taxpayers have paid for this consultant to do the RFP. It is our duty to at least put it on the street and give vendors an opportunity to bid it. I think that the continued delays are just not acceptable. We need some results. I know that there are several organizations who are open to bidding on it. I know there are creative partnerships that have been done by subsidiaries of many different organizations that have work both in L.A. County and our neighboring cities. They have products that have been created at little cost on a licensing model that can be expanded. I actually had planned to come here tonight and thank Mr. GROSS and thank you and all the time you've spent with me in my office. And I'm just so shocked by the answer to the question that it would be acceptable to tell this council that an RFP that we paid four months ago. Would take 12 months to get on the street. I just I don't understand it. And we need to reprioritize. And I think this goes back to I appreciate that cybersecurity is an important thing, but maybe we need to overhaul and look at what the priorities are because perhaps we shouldn't have hosted a conference. Perhaps we shouldn't have done some of these other things. This has been a priority of this council for three years. Three years. And so I want it to be taken seriously. My substitute motion is that that RFP is on the street before January 31st. Otherwise, I'd like it to be an item on this agenda for us to do a review of the IT department at that time.
Speaker 7: Q The substitute motion is the motion as presented by staff with the addition of the RFP coming out for the CRM system by the 31st. Is there a second?
Speaker 1: So, Mr. Mayor, can I engage absolutism? Yeah. Just want to. Want to engage here quickly.
Speaker 7: Well, I just want to make sure I have a speaker's list, so I do want to get through the speaker's list.
Speaker 1: Okay. She asked, would this be friendly or a substitute? Sure. That implies some level of exchange and it doesn't afford it to wait to the end of the speaker's list.
Speaker 3: And you were the original maker.
Speaker 0: I understood it was a substitute. And so.
Speaker 4: It wasn't a friendly.
Speaker 0: Gotcha with me.
Speaker 7: Yeah. So there's a substitution.
Speaker 3: Frustrated. I went straight for the substitute.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I heard you say substitute or I'll make a friendly, which is why I chimed in. But it's okay.
Speaker 7: Okay. So there's a substitute motion, which is essentially the main motion by summary that you had with the addition of the January 31st CRM date. Councilman Preston won't speak to that or. Councilman. Okay. Okay. So let me just go and go through the speaker's list and councilman, actually. Councilman pressure next.
Speaker 3: Oh, can I finish asking my questions? Sure. I should have put that one at the end because I didn't. Have we looked at opportunities for leasing our equipment so that we wouldn't have to be in this position again? What kind of leasing options do we have for. Technology is changing so quickly, it's almost unreasonable for us to be buying this quantity and quality of of technology knowing that it'll be out of date so quickly.
Speaker 10: I can I can comment on that one to to a degree. And maybe if I don't handle it at all, Brian will go answer the rest. One of the things we're doing here, even though it's it's adds to the operating budget is putting in a structural. If council approves this a structural funding of the debt service that buys the equipment, the equipment will, in fact, be bought on a lease. So you are absolutely correct. Okay. And then when that lease is up, we will have money in the budget to buy new equipment, the newest and latest, or actually change the type of equipment if the technology has changed. So we think this approach really addresses what you're talking about, and it goes a long way to solve our funding needs.
Speaker 3: I think I get confused because you say leasing and buying. In the same sentence. Sorry. Buying it or releasing it.
Speaker 10: It is a lease to buy. Okay. So and at the end, we'll probably throw the equipment out, but that's it's technically a lease with an ownership at the end.
Speaker 3: And what exploration have we done on bring your own device policies that have been adopted across the region? There's so many security measures available now by offering employees a small stipend of I know in L.A. County, I think it's $40 a month, then people who are already purchasing the equipment for their own personal use. Then through the Microsoft 365 program, which I know we deploy here, they have access to that both at home and here, but it would be on their own device. It reduces a lot of our costs and then they receive the stipend to update and maintain their own devices. I feel like we're kind of moving in that direction overall as a employer in that we expect people to have a driver's license and be able to move around the city. Why would we not start to move in the direction of offering a stipend to expect individuals to bring their own device that meet certain criteria?
Speaker 10: We currently do a bhiwadi for mobile devices. We offer a stipend there. But with regards to computing, we don't have a policy right now to allow other devices in with regards to laptops or PCs.
Speaker 3: And on the mobile devices. What percentage of the city staff use that?
Speaker 10: I can get you that information. I wouldn't know that right now, but I could get that to you.
Speaker 3: That would be great. I think that the incentive has to be great enough for employees to be willing to do that now that the laws are very clear on what is and is not discoverable. And it's a great time to move into that. I had two questions on fiber, and I think that you answered these for me when we met last week, but I just wanted to make sure to. Verbalize them because I want the community to know that these decisions are open and transparent. So has staff. What is the long term plan for us to own our own fiber backbone or a way to work through private, public, private partnerships? Or are we bringing that back to council for a decision at a future time through either an RFI or what does that look like?
Speaker 10: Our recommendation right now is to provide a city owned fiber backbone that interconnects city facilities. Through the process of that RFP. We will solicit other private partnerships that are there in order to try to see if there's an alternative or another solution that we could address. And that's what would be brought back to you. If for some reason that does not pan out, the direction would be at a minimum to interconnect the city facility. So it offers both those opportunities.
Speaker 3: Understood. So your preference, though, is the city building the backbone at this time with the option to expand through public private partnerships? But should the RFP or RFI bring forward a option of a private partner that is more financially beneficial and or timeline beneficial or whatever the criteria we decide, then you'd bring back an alternative to your current plan.
Speaker 10: That is correct.
Speaker 3: Understood. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 2: Okay. So I have a few questions and just observations. They're probably not as technical as what we've been talking about, and I'm happy to support Councilman Mango's request to expedite the RFP process. But of course, I'm also open to hearing what staff's reservations may be on that. I did want a second so that we can further discuss it as an option, but I don't think I'm as as plugged into the details as I should be to feel strongly one way or the other. And I'd like to hear from staff in terms of what the feasibility of expediting that process would be. So maybe you can just think about that for a minute while I throw out a few softballs. So our Sunday library hours, I feel like, have been a really great way to provide access to people all over the city, to the computer, to the software programs and of course, to the Internet. Do you know whether all of our libraries are equipped with computers and wi fi access? All of our libraries?
Speaker 10: Yes, our libraries have that access. In fact, we recently have upgraded the broadband speed to all libraries, to one gig circuits.
Speaker 2: Okay. Have we given as part of this process, have we given any thought to increasing the budget for the libraries to allow for more stations? Because every time I go to the library in my neighborhood, there's a long waiting list. Well, Sundays are the only day I can go, but there's always a long waiting list of people waiting to use the computers so that they can get Internet access. That seems to me to be kind of a more financially viable way of getting immediate access to residents who may want to use those city services. Is that something we've considered at all.
Speaker 10: When we looked at equipment? The library, if they want to expand that service, that's something we could entertain. But what was designed here was solely for infrastructure, for city facilities and the new civic center.
Speaker 4: Those requests come to us from the library, and the library puts in their budget a request that we certainly would supply. Those are work on those.
Speaker 2: So how involved is the library on this discussion of digital divide?
Speaker 4: They're incredibly involved in what's going to happen at the library with putting computers and things again. Note that the library has been incredibly involved in two world class libraries just this past two years, whether it's Michelle Obama or the new library. So they've been you know, Glenda and her team have been at the table all along. This was moving forward with the two new libraries that said the rest is for the rest of the libraries, the branch libraries, it'd be budget time.
Speaker 2: Okay. And the reason I asked that is I understand that we're trying to limit the scope of the discussion we're having tonight. And I appreciate that, because this certainly is something that has legs and could expand very quickly. But I think the conversation we're having and the priority that we would place on this topic has a lot to do with resident access. And resident access is is a much bigger issue, involves a lot of different departments. So that's why I'm wondering how engaged were we in these discussions? Because for me that that does set priority quite a bit. We do have an innovation and technology commission. Have they been engaged in this infrastructure needs and do they have any recommendations?
Speaker 10: Yes, we talked about this at our last meeting. They're supportive of this initiative around fiber, around the technical needs assessment that are being done. And they also provided a lot of the background with regards to CRM. They're looking at right now, they're also highly engaged with digital inclusion in the digital divide components of this.
Speaker 2: And in reviewing your staff report and I haven't obviously committed it to memory, but we were you were recommending option one in terms of the path that we would take as kind of the first phase. And you would reference different cities and different options that they had encountered. And you you indicated that San Francisco and I think you said on Ontario, to a lesser degree, is following that option. One model, is that right?
Speaker 10: Santa monica.
Speaker 2: Oh, Santa monica. Okay. And in that option, one model is that investment for that initial infrastructure, a city investment, or how much private infusion into that initial phase do we have the option to participate.
Speaker 10: In the initial design? And the initial option is city investment, even even with the other city. The intent would be, as it expands to cover other services that are beyond what the city is requesting to do of the interconnection of our infrastructure, those would be looked at for public private partnerships in those areas.
Speaker 2: And why would the initial structure infrastructure have to be city only?
Speaker 10: It's at a minimum, as we mentioned earlier with Mongo, we would look at other alternatives as we go out and prevent the OR present the RFP if a solution comes forward that could provide some additional private investment. As we do this infrastructure, we're not saying we're not inclusive to not entertaining that.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 0: So I would.
Speaker 3: Great that that sounds good.
Speaker 2: So now going back to Councilwoman Mungo's substitute motion, what is the feasibility of expediting the RFP process? I think it would be probably about six, six months or so. What's the feasibility of that?
Speaker 10: If I can maybe make a comment from a financial viewpoint and then maybe turn it over to to Brian. My concerns, I think I think we have the message very strongly and we agree about the importance of fiber and getting getting something out on the street. But there are a number of factors. One is the in fiber and it goes right into getting the fiber out as fast as possible. We need to keep our data line costs down. We we want to minimize the cost of leasing with our budget situation. And the fiber network gives us an opportunity to do that. Another issue that we have out there that I'm very much attuned to is the need to replace that $43 million worth of equipment, which is which has a very tight time frame in order to be put into the civic center and stay operational and not and avoid additional costs because we don't have equipment in time in the civic center idms which we the debt document management system is also on a tight time frame because we want to be as paperless efficient as and efficient as possible and also not put too much paper in the new civic center, which was designed to work in a more paper free environment. What I'm getting at is that from a financial viewpoint, it might be something to to ask as an alternative. Yes. To push the fiber, but to maybe ask the technology department to say what can be done, maybe a little more flexibility on the timeline, because I have some concerns is as the project sponsor for the ERP project, that technology is really stretched with ERP and other projects and it might probably is difficult to do all of this at once and maybe consider asking for a TFF that says how fast can you do that without interrupting other things and minimizing the overall cost to the city? That that would just be a thought.
Speaker 4: Councilmember, if I can interrupt now, too. So John was giving us more of a macro global picture. So if we just want to focus on the CRM, which I believe is the question that that's before us tonight, that if we already have an RFP on that, couple the reasons and we'll get into that later and explain, explain later and I'll get more educated on it so that we have it pushed ahead is because we haven't had the funding and also because of some of the things that John has been saying. But one of the reasons we're here tonight is to get authorization to go forward with all of these things. So given the fact we're here tonight, I see no reason whatsoever. As Councilmember Mungo pointed out, that if we can dust off a request for proposals at City Hall Shelf right now, put that out immediately, come back. And if it if it comes back and meets our needs and we can deal with that, we'll bring a right to the council. If we have issues, once it goes out, then we certainly will be chatting with the Council about that. But I, as a city manager, have no issues whatsoever responding to exactly what Councilmember Mungo put forth.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I'm sorry. That counts one person in additional.
Speaker 2: No, I appreciate that input. Thank you. I've nothing for.
Speaker 7: Coulson for Supernova.
Speaker 0: Thank you. My questions will be even lower tech than Councilwoman Prices. But first I have to comment on what Mr. GROSS just said. He said, I quote, I have some concerns when Mr. GROSS says I have some concerns. Councilmember Supernova has some concerns. So I'm taking that as not a ringing endorsement of the financial proposal here.
Speaker 4: If I can interrupt and I'm going to say this before John says that when so Mr. GROSS has said that numerous times. What Mr. GROSS is saying is they're very, very busy and don't have you know, they're they're all the staff is just we're just doing so much right now with the civic center, with the ERP system , with other things that are happening in the finance, the budget alone. So I mean, Tom and I meet with Mr. GROSS, Miss Erickson, every single Friday for 2 hours a week for the past several years. And one of the key things that we try to do is keep our finance department healthy. And one of the things that and I'm interpreting, Mr. GROSS, that they're busy. And that's, I think, what he meant by that. And John, say whatever you say.
Speaker 0: It's too bad he's not here to speak for himself. So I'll move on to the next question.
Speaker 10: I will just comment that I think that while I don't think I misunderstood Councilwoman Mango's motion as to deal with the fiber as opposed to the crime, and so that was my mistake and that was really what I was directing my my comments to. So I have absolutely no concern about the Sierra.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And you understand there's a lot of money on the table here, so I want to be absolutely sure we're very clear on this. Another question and this is from my constituents has to do with the civic center now. Now, the Civic Center train had already left the station by the time I was elected. And Mr. GROSS, I know that you were late to the party here also on this, but. Well, first of all, let me ask, what is that dollar figure we're putting into the civic center here?
Speaker 10: The this this equipment. They it's it's kind of a the data center happens to be in the civic center. So when we build a new data center, we have to put equipment in it. So I think that's maybe a better way to answer the question than.
Speaker 0: Right. So so can we hang a number on that?
Speaker 10: I think of that amount, about $40 million is going physically going into the civic center because the civic center is the center data point for the city.
Speaker 0: Understood. And this might take speculation, but do you know if if that investment was considered at the time the civic center itself was considered, or why are we encountering this at this late date?
Speaker 10: We joined in the assessment of when I came on board after the Civic Center was defined and we looked at existing technology that is currently here and it's come back through those assessments that it does not have the lifecycle capacity or the capability of supporting the new systems that are going forward. With regards to whether or not the Civic Center was going to be built.
Speaker 0: Okay. So let's say three or four years ago, the plan would have been to take our equipment from here to the new building. And an assessment assessment was done where that would not be cost effective or feasible. Okay. Thank you. I'll just I'll just very briefly, I don't want to go over our meeting that we had eight days ago, but one of my big issues is we have constant nagging problems around technology. And some of these fixes could be simpler and far less costly than what we have on the table. The part that disturbs me the most is we could make these this huge investment and still not fix the nagging little problems. So I was a business consultant for 30 years, and once in a while I would get I'd have to tell a client, you know, your problem is very simple. You have way too much what you don't need, but not enough of what you do need. And that's my fear here, that at the end of the day, we all have the exact same problems, be it cameras, eyes on Anaheim or other businesses. Maybe they don't fit the right profile to get wi fi. So as of this point.
Speaker 4: I.
Speaker 0: I remain unconvinced that this is a good move for council. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Think you got somebody, Ringo?
Speaker 4: Thank you, Barrett. Quite an interesting discussion that we're having here. But one thing that stood out with me and by the way, I want to thank staff for meeting with me yesterday. You guys had. It would be nice if we could. Go ahead, man. Yesterday, regarding this whole project is the one that really stood out to me was and we're having a discussion tonight the fiber network component of it and the the need for that and slides six through eight are really indicative of what we need to do in order to connect the whole city. Talk about what's there was a proposed and when I look at at.
Speaker 0: The recent.
Speaker 4: Slate of articles that came out recently in terms of the digital divide and especially when you look at my my area in the West Long Beach.
Speaker 0: Area, there's a big gap.
Speaker 4: There and big need for fiber and for communications network and for Internet access in the West Army. CHEERING We're talking about community that is a working class community that has basic needs in terms of fiber, internet access, even cable for that matter. And so my concern with with what's going on with with this.
Speaker 0: Component of it is that we.
Speaker 4: Might already have connections out there. All we do is access.
Speaker 0: Is an example. We have what spectrum? Verizon, AT&T, people who already have fiber connections in those areas.
Speaker 4: And the discussion that we're that we had that I heard a little while ago about.
Speaker 0: Our building, our own, where we would need to do that, where we're going to.
Speaker 4: Reinvent the wheel with all we had to do is access what might be already there.
Speaker 0: So the only the only concern I really had was we what councilmember among those substitute motion is that I think it rushes it and pushes it into an area. You know, this is going to be one of the biggest investments we're going to be making for the future.
Speaker 4: For the future of the city, for future.
Speaker 0: Communications. And we have to do it right. And we need to sort of step.
Speaker 4: Back and reevaluate it and look at it more closely. I think that's what we should do.
Speaker 0: I'm not sure that we need to have a January.
Speaker 4: 31st deadline to send out an RFP that may not even be ready to be sent out. I mean, we yes, we we might have paid for it already, but is it ready?
Speaker 0: And and on top of that are our vendor potential.
Speaker 4: Vendors who RFP some.
Speaker 0: People are going to submit proposals.
Speaker 4: Are they ready? Have they been oriented as to what is in the RFP, what's what does exist and what are going to be some of the requirements that we're going to have for them to fill that RFP? So I'm not I'm not convinced that that that so that's what pushed it further is that is that could have an idea if I could step in just for this conversation right here. First off, what Councilmember Mungo's suggesting is the CRM. The CRM is not going to be related to fiber. So the CRM is a standalone component that again, we have no issues with that and it is not going to be related to the fiber discussion at all or net neutrality, all that kind of stuff as we go forward with fiber in the city. You are absolutely right. There is a lot of fiber in the city, whether it's Verizon, whether it's Southern California, Edison, there's a lot of fiber in there. So one of the things that we will be doing is we can put our own fiber in and own it and then have a payback system in five, six, ten years and we own it and amortize it. Then we can utilize it or we could lease fiber from people. We've had those discussions with folks to do that with spectrum. And if it when we put the RFP out, we are going to talk to these people. We already have had conversations with spectrum that if someone can put together a public private partnership where we could actually use your fiber and in somehow make it cost neutral for us for owning and put in, it would be much quicker of course, because we could just go access it. But again, we would have to have some kind of revenue neutral system where we're just not renting for the next 50 years as opposed to paying it and owning it in five, six, seven or eight years. So those conversations are out there. We're putting it out there to the private sector. Our hope is that the private sector can respond, if not with a public private partnership, something that's that's innovative, that's been done somewhere across the country where we can jump in and save a lot of money, save a lot of time, and just utilize the fiber that's already. So I want to make it very, very clear that we're paying a lot of attention to that. We're going to like listen to that. And in my opening remarks, if that's available to us, whether it's for document imaging or any of the technology replacements that we're doing, and even as Councilmember Mongo pointed out, the lease to buy, I mean, we'll look at leases and things and, you know, maybe, you know, we'll be in a situation we're going to have to lease in five or eight years as opposed to structurally put it together. But we'll be looking at that stuff to. To do as much savings as we can in this. Thank you very much.
Speaker 10: That kind.
Speaker 0: Of answer I wanted to hear because I mean, there is.
Speaker 4: Anything that I wanted to do is obviously, as.
Speaker 0: We know, we're going to be making.
Speaker 4: A big investment here in the next few years. But if there are some ways that we can.
Speaker 0: Limit that big.
Speaker 4: Expense on us and build and towards that trip Piper partnership, that would be absolutely wonderful.
Speaker 0: And you just mentioned something else that I was going to ask about, and that is in terms of the electronic document management system, I know that we have a local vendor here in Long Beach that is excellent, or at least that has been a leadership, a leader in that area. And I'd like to see a lot of our of our contract guys.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 0: Be local. I mean, they have a lot of local impacts on it because I think it's it speaks.
Speaker 4: Volumes for us that for Long Beach, that we have companies in Long Beach that can do these kinds of things.
Speaker 0: Not only locally, but globally.
Speaker 4: And if we can do that, that that'd be wonderful as well. So my my view on this, obviously, this is our first hit. We're going to be having more discussions on this as we move forward, especially as we get closer to completing the new civic center and and completing this whole network of of communication systems.
Speaker 0: But like I say, if we can't, we don't need to reinvent the wheel to do so.
Speaker 4: And if we have people locally to help us out doing it, let's use that. And that would be my emphasis at this point.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Catherine Ashton.
Speaker 8: Thank you and certainly enjoying this conversation. I'm learning a lot and even from my colleagues, I've got to say and thank you staff for the very, very detailed presentation. This is what we were looking for, I think, a few weeks ago back. I think the critical needs outlined here are pretty overwhelming. And from from a number standpoint, when you look at where our budget is today and what has been already projected, this certainly will have an impact on our on our on our budget moving forward. And so, you know, I'm taking into account Vice Mayor Richardson's questions and concerns as well. And going back to Councilmember Sabrina's points regarding the Civic Center and, you know, the the deal that went into the public private partnership to create the Civic Center project that we have right now. It was a design build, finance, operate, maintain. If we were to finance and build this critical infrastructure need, who's going to maintain it? Is this going to be maintained by Johnson Controls in our new building?
Speaker 10: No, no. That is not the one of the that that that is a possibility. But one of the concerns we had and I had is is is finance is just what Councilwoman Mungo talked about is that the equipment is going to change a lot. And it's not clear it has a very short life. It's most important that we have the cycle, the equipment cycle that Councilwoman Mango's talking about on the financing. However, we did ask our P3 partners to see if they could do a better proposal and we are waiting for information. I will be surprised, pleasantly surprised if they can do better, but we did ask them.
Speaker 0: So I would just like to elaborate on that a bit. Just just so there's a little more understanding about technology in the new Civic Center project. What we engaged the project company with in the building was for them to own the infrastructure. And what I mean by that is all the lines and wires and everything that's going to move the technology through the building is part of the P3 structure. What is not included is the equipment. So when you plug a PC into a data port, project, company will own everything up to that data port, but the city will own the PC. Think of a telephone switch in a in a telephone closet. All of the lines connecting those data switches are owned by project company and will be maintained by Johnson Controls. But the technical piece of equipment that telephone switch itself will be a city equipment and a city asset. Same with the telephone handsets. And think of a conference room where you're going to put a monitor on the wall of a conference room. The monitor would be a city asset. The wires connecting that monitor to the system would be maintained by Johnson Controls. So that is essentially how we carved out the project. So infrastructure is part of the project company. The equipment itself is is a city asset.
Speaker 8: So thank you for that clarification. So would the fiber network be part of the infrastructure?
Speaker 0: So that's a yes and no answer. The fiber that's within the building would be part of the project company's responsibility, but the fiber leading to and from other assets, for example, connecting the library, connecting the public safety, building other assets into the data center itself would be a city responsibility.
Speaker 8: All right. Well, I appreciate that. And I'm encouraged that there is at least a conversation with the the the the maintained maintenance portion of our 3 p.m. with the Civic Center. I'll just just say that I think, you know, for us to be the city we want to be, we we're going to have to invest in technology . And I think technology citywide needs to be factored into our our overall livability score. And I know our city manager, I know the city council mayor. We pride ourselves and working to be a one of the best livable cities in the country. And so we have to, I think, address our technology needs. We talk about equity. We talk about access to information. I think this is this is one of those areas that we can we. We can't overlook and we can't we can't we can't take baby steps on this. You know, we have to be bold as well. And so I would encourage and support, you know, staff to be as innovative as possible. I'm not sure we're completely there yet, but I know that there are private interests out there that can help us meet these needs. And I would encourage that those conversations, I would encourage us to move in that direction. I understand the need to to move quickly on the CRM. That's that's already in process and I'm comfortable supporting that. But and I just needed to get some clarification on some of those points. So thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: RICHARDSON Thank you. I'm not that familiar with the CRM, RFP. I had no idea there was one drafted on the shelf. No clue. But it sounds like City Manager West is on board. City council is on board. The timing doesn't make it matter as much to me, but I was hoping some other things came up through the council conversation because I didn't want to be the one I really sort of focus in on it, but I'm going to. So owning the fiber makes sense. That's just a smart play. Owning it makes sense. A question for me is, so how does how is this going to work? Because it's going to be ongoing like line of credit or something. And as we buy technology, as we go and purchase technology, we we sort of sort of cash in. How is the actual financing going to work? Mr. Rose Very good on these different pieces.
Speaker 10: Very good question. This for the most part, will be the standard type of lease financing that periodically comes before the city council, such as with the fire trucks, with PCs. We routinely use exactly the same mechanisms. So let let us say that there's going to be an equipment to purchase, to fund the data center, provide equipment in the data center. That would probably be one of the first things because the building will be ready to receive that in the next few months. You will get a list of equipment in front of you and a vendor, and that is part of that transaction that comes before you to consider. There will also be a leasing arrangement through a master lease agreement that council has approved in a previous previous year. We bid out the master leases. So we have a company, Bank of America, who currently does the master leases. You would see that at the same time in the same council letter spaces.
Speaker 1: So so help me understand. So from a cash flow standpoint, we, we have the cash to carry this and we just budget for it every year through an existing mechanism.
Speaker 10: I think think of a car loan in that we don't have the cash to pay for most of the equipment. We borrow the money from Bank of America and then we would start paying them in fy19 we would have a down payment, what I would call a down payment, which is about that $10 million in the general fund, that cash we would have to come up with. And we think we can come up with most of it.
Speaker 1: So so given I mean, it's a big it's a big price tag. 40, 40, 43.1 million. And what I don't want to do is if we're going to you know, the city council sounds like we're on board with 43 million. What I don't want to do is say we're on board with this and then and actually aim too low. And frankly, some of the things that we're talking about that we need, we don't we aren't able to address in this number because I don't know that we will come back while this council's on the city council to come back and do additional technology. So how do we arrive at 43 million in terms of priorities? Because I know Civic Center is a big priority for the city, but I know there are and I know the fiber network is a big priority for the city. When I look at, for example, where it talks about security cameras, it's talking about the main library, the civic center at 2.1 million will now be the appropriate time to talk about enhancing our security cameras in our parks and our, you know, human trafficking corridors, our high crime neighborhoods would now be the time to talk about that . So we're going to address it in one swoop, because in my opinion, the average person in general likes technology. But, you know, to the residents who deal with stuff, a lot of times it's what have you done for me lately? How this impact me. The Civic Center still not a tangible thing for them. So I'd like to see, you know, something tossed out to the neighborhoods here, called out in this 41, 43 million, or it could become 44 million because, frankly, it's not going to it's not going to make me an. You know, it's not going to make that much of a difference on the ongoing financially, but on the front end it will make a difference. So what are the things we could can we include, say, additional funding in this for security cameras outside of the civic center, space.
Speaker 4: Vice mayor and council members? I would think at this stage that if indeed we go forward with our fiber network or do more work with, you know, companies like Crown Castle or Spectrum and things like that, I think it's definitely it's definitely an imperative from the city council that we install more cameras throughout the city, especially in parks and neighborhoods and things like that. What this is going to do is hopefully allow us to put the cameras that we have out there online to make sure that they're working perfectly and also be able to put more cameras online. Right now, this situation doesn't fund the actual cameras, but it's going to fund the the actual conduit so that the cameras we put in are going to work. And we can come back later and talk about like how cameras are going to get funded throughout the city, but it's definitely going to fund an infrastructure. So when a camera does go on, it's going to work.
Speaker 0: I get that.
Speaker 1: But I thought there was $1 million for equipment that's already placed in.
Speaker 4: You know, excuse me. Time is telling me it funds. How many? About $1,000,000.
Speaker 1: There's 1 million. Mind if you don't.
Speaker 10: Mind the council number when you look at the $2.1 million that are listed in outdated equipment, right? Yes. We have around $1.4 million that's being set aside to drive cameras around the Civic Center campus. Yes, that's what you're talking about. There's also an additional around $700,000 that's there that will be citywide. Looking at those initiatives that we're trying to modernize some of the broken equipment that Mr. West was just kind of talking about. In addition to that, we also, as part of our normal budget, are looking at certain measure aid dollars in order to improve and enhance the system throughout there. So when you ask for certain requests, we have an additional 200,000 that's not represented here, but that's represented in our day to day operations. So when you ask for a camera installed, we have the capability of doing that.
Speaker 1: So what I what I would say is, I mean, frankly, we're having a conversation, we're having a budget conversation outside of the budget. That's what we're having. This is a list of things that were a list of things that are needed. Now, I'm going to argue that what I'm going to say is 43 million investment invested here. What I just heard was 770. So $700,000 to the actual equipment that people interact with, not the actual in the ground fiber. I think we need to bump that up. I think we need to bump that up and increase the actual things people care about. If as a part of this, we know they're going to deploy, you know, a hundred new cameras throughout the city tapped into this fiber network. That's the kind of thing that will get the average person excited. Then we can have a conversation about over the course of the next year, where are those security cameras going to go? You know, wi fi is a lot of conversation about lighting up corridors and wi fi. I get it. Those are exciting things that have a very little cost. Once the once fiber's there. So so what I'm saying is from your bone here, Mr. City Manager, what can we do necessarily? Manager What can we do in terms of throwing something, you know, out to the residents that that they will well understand and appreciate in terms of infrastructure investment, aside from walkie talkies, aside from, you know, fiber, which is great and I support it. And I've spent on one time zone, what can we do? Can we is there room and capacity here? Mr. Rose and Mr. Pack to increase the $700,000 that goes to actual equipment in the neighborhoods to increase that number.
Speaker 4: So vice mayor, councilmembers, rather than add to the significant number that we're talking about tonight, let us commit to go back and look at some type of a value engineering where we could accommodate more cameras into this into that while still, you know, while still paying for what we need to pay that to actually have a technological city. So what we're putting on on beforehand are things that are absolutely essential. But again, we will look at this value engineer, see what we can come back with beyond the fiber that makes the cameras work. What kind of numbers can we come back the next time we talk to you? How many cameras or how much can we set aside for cameras throughout the community? We can certainly do that. Yes. Okay.
Speaker 1: Because what I don't want to happen is what happened with bike share, which was a commitment to the entire city, that when the time came to expand it up north, north to four or five, seventh district, eighth district, ninth district, something happened, right? Something happened. They didn't get there. And here we are a few years later, we made a commitment in the spirit of let's do the right thing for the city. And frankly, it's just not there. And what I, what I, what I prefer and you know, I like what you're saying. You if you think you can get it in here, more of these sort of and these are the cheaper pieces like adding a camera is one of the most inexpensive things you can do once you have the backbone in place. I want to make sure we we are. Not, Hey, this is what we're going to get. And at the end of the day, you know, you're out of luck when the time comes for this additional equipment. And, you know, you know, I may get, you know, folks rolling their eyes and I'm talking about uptown, but yes, I'm talking about North Long Beach. I want to make sure North Long Beach and in these other areas are included. And that, you know, we get the technology we need as a part of this expanse because we're all going to pay for this in the general fund, and I'll make sure that everyone can benefit from it. So it sounds like you're going to come back to city council, am I right? You can come back with some thoughts on how to expand those pieces. They're relatively inexpensive. And for 43 million, that's that's not not a big bone at bone to ask for.
Speaker 4: We'll come back with ideas for that. Absolutely. Okay. That said, I can't help myself regarding the comparison to the Bikeshare program. We because well, I just want to we were doing all this let's remember that we had a bike share program that that disappointed that we had to fire because they did their job. So I, I can't promise that we're going to hire somebody, whoever the best company in the world, and they just go back or disappear from us.
Speaker 1: So I don't want to be unfair, Mrs. Amanda. I completely understand.
Speaker 4: All right, but Mr. Beck is listening, and he is working on those bikes.
Speaker 1: Right? At the end of the day, we need to deliver for our residents, all residents and all night line districts. People need to see that. And when 360.
Speaker 0: Are going to be ordered.
Speaker 1: Thank you. That's what I want to hear. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Mangan. And I got to go to a public comment and then come back to the council.
Speaker 3: Well, I just want to thank Mr. Richardson for pointing out this is a budget conversation in an off budget area where the Budget Oversight Committee has strong rules about budgeting and no decisions on any funding are being made today, but rather. Just some estimates being thrown out and each individual item would need to come back to the Council for consideration and any expenditure that would be made after. In a different fiscal year should go before the Budget Committee. And furthermore, to Rex's credit. The ninth District is not in any way not getting its fair share because you've represented them so hard, so ferociously, that I don't even know how to stop spending in the ninth District, quite honestly.
Speaker 1: Then don't stop.
Speaker 8: Well done.
Speaker 3: Well, I have one more question about the scanning project since it was brought up by my colleagues during this. What is the timeline and status of that project?
Speaker 10: Right now, we're in the final stages. I think they're down to the finalists that will be in the process of award and then come back to you within the next. February, February.
Speaker 3: So we already have all the decisions. You have a committee that is evaluating the responses. Have they been evaluated yet?
Speaker 10: Yes. We're down to the final two finalists and they're currently going through that process of reviews. And then we'll go through the normal process to award and bring it back to you.
Speaker 3: And we have budgeted for that in this year.
Speaker 10: The budget for that project is in the critical needs.
Speaker 3: So it was not budgeted in this year. I thought a portion of it was must have been the RFP portion. Okay. Any concerns about. The theorem going out by January 31st and nothing has to be completed, but it needs to be on the streets advertised and in process by January 31st.
Speaker 10: No, I mean, again, we don't have an issue moving forward that it's just a matter of implementation and so forth. But we can look at finding ways to try to accommodate that in a phased approach.
Speaker 3: Any particular desire to respond to why we've had this document sitting on a shelf and it has not gone out, nor have we been briefed on it or it's.
Speaker 10: The wave again as before. It wasn't an item that we had current funding for. We did an assessment and part of that assessment to find out what type of CRMs would be viable to the city. Part of that project was to draft the RFP. We have that respective draft and now that we move closer to looking at funding for this, we can issue that RFP.
Speaker 4: And just to add to that a little bit.
Speaker 0: Yeah, this was a little bit backwards because.
Speaker 4: Normally we wouldn't have even brought on a consultant to do that level of work, of detailed work until we had the funding. But realizing that this was a huge priority, trying to find ways to move it forward, this is a very irregular one for us.
Speaker 0: So we didn't make that investment. It has been completed for a while, but it has all been waiting on funding.
Speaker 4: So this is the discussion that we're having now. So we are ready. But it is, as you note, Councilmember, very irregular for us.
Speaker 3: Are there any other projects that are waiting on funding and technology that we should know about?
Speaker 4: I think everything we're talking about tonight. Okay.
Speaker 3: Well, as long as they were included in this, because in our meeting, multiple meetings, no one had said June before we could have had this conversation outside of this meeting because. We've met multiple times on this presentation and no one's mentioned June before. That was a huge surprise and a huge disappointment. And so I am excited to have the support of my colleagues in ensuring this is on the street in January. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Counsel on pricing. Then we'll go to the public.
Speaker 2: It's real quick. This raises an issue that I actually wanted to ask about, but I forgot, and that is our scanning project. Have we stopped work with our current provider, our vendor for scanning projects? Because I know that we've talked a lot at Public Safety Committee and in other forums regarding some efforts that our city prosecutor's office and other offices are taking to have some data collection. So we haven't stopped work. Who is our who? Our current vendor.
Speaker 10: But we have multiple vendors that provide that service. But we haven't stopped any type of process or so forth within the department for any type of imaging or scanning.
Speaker 2: So no projects with vendors like laser fish have been stopped as a result of this proposal process that you're aware of. Okay. Because I want to make sure that that whatever we're working on in terms of progress isn't halted because there are you know, it's a little bit of a domino effect in terms of something that halts in one area. It impacts our ability to collect data and others. So. Okay. Just wanted to confirm that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. We're going to go before we go to the public. I just haven't had a chance to make any comment, so I will make a couple. The first is I we need to use this opportunity where we make these investments in technology. And this is a major investment. But we all know we want to have a 21st century city. We want to be ahead of the game. These are the kind of investments that oftentimes you don't get to see, but they're very important. We have this level of investment to make today because we haven't been making it for the last 30 years. And so we have let all of our systems fall apart. We're doing our time cards on PE on paper. This is in many ways we have moved forward in so many areas. But for whatever reason, the investments in technology, especially when the recession hit, all got pushed to the bottom of the list. And so here we are today. And so I appreciate the work that technology and innovation has done. The city manager, I know this is a critical needs, but I would ask that as we look to these technology enhancements and the investments that we also think are about our local tech community, I mean, there are clearly, clearly software programs and other types of services that were that will have that will be nationally national vendors that are specialized in this work. But I just hope also that oftentimes when you invest this amount of money into a project of this size and scope, you are also able to support the local tech community and the local vendors and larger companies like the larger pieces of the world, like others that do some of this work. And so I hope that we're reinvesting these technology dollars into our community so that we strengthen the technology sector within Long Beach. This is an opportunity for us to also support the local tech community. And I would implore us to please, if there's an opportunity to please do that. And I hope that's something the Council would support as well. And let me say finally that I think if. Mr. West. You've heard from the Council the importance of CRM. You've heard it from me for many years, and I think I hope that we can get to a point where we stop arguing about how important CRM is and we actually implement CRM. And I know that oftentimes management also has a list of priorities that are important. But I hope that you and you're the team is heard loud and clear that this system is a priority of mine and it's a priority of the council's and we need to get it done. So with that public comment.
Speaker 3: Karen reside as someone that uses the city system on a daily basis and nobody's talking about productivity. And this is one of the main advantages of having technology. I can tell you, I spend about 6% of my time waiting for downloads on the city's horrible, slow system. I work at a partner, so Parks were based at the Fourth Street Senior Center. The the technology is embarrassing in our community. We cannot move fast enough to increase speed and access to technology. Our communities are being left behind, particularly our lower income communities, and our seniors are being isolated because they don't have access to technology. There hasn't been any discussion about that. I understand about building a backbone and plugging into that, the fiber optics and having to do a conversion to spectrum over at the park office. I can tell you there are big differences when you move to fiber optics. Whatever we can do to speed up this process, because you're going to save so much more money in the productivity that's going to be produced in the people that have access to the system. And partnership parks is also switching to a CRM system by the end of January. And I'm concerned that these slow speeds are going to, in part, impact our ability to be productive in using this new system that we hope. Switching to a cloud based system will give a lot more people access to critical information within the park system. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening, honorable members of council. For the record, I'm Chris Swecker, CEO of Laser Fish. I've been in this in the IDMS and ECM industry for 31 years. I know all of the players and excuse me, with the exception of us, all of them have either no record or a bad record. We came to Long Beach and we've been it's been a privilege to serve the city for the past ten or 12 years. During that time, we've scanned we've automated converted to digital documents. I don't know, for the police department, about ten terabytes. For the other departments, probably an equal number. Brian, perhaps you can verify this. We have a we've made Long Beach our home. We are a private company. We have no outside investors or venture capitalists or hedge fund managers to whom we have to answer on a regular basis. We only answer to our customers, and their satisfaction is a primary concern to us. We came to Long Beach and as we don't have any outside investors, we pour all of our profits into the company and into Long Beach. We are right now we purchased south of us about an acre and a half, rather, I'm sorry, 1.7 acres of land on which we will be building a 90,000 square foot building to employ high level, high wage employees who will who attend schools necessary and bring all kinds of value. I've noticed tonight there's been about 2 hours discussion on homeless issues. The antidote to homelessness is prosperity. And that's what we bring to this city. We have about 100 people working here of about 300. We have about 400 worldwide. And we're growing. We're expanding in. Thanks to our relationship with with the city of Long Beach and all of the cities in Southern California, with the majority of them of the Digital Cities Winners Award are using laser fish. We've been given awards for our work with the Long Beach Police Department and Prosecutor's Office, the Impact Awards. We're now working on an integration of G.I.s with our system for them. I just don't see why we are. There are is there is an RFP out to replace us. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Once again, my name is.
Speaker 0: Demi.
Speaker 8: Rogers. I own.
Speaker 0: A couple of.
Speaker 8: Homes in Long Beach. I grew up in Long Beach with the exception of four years when I lived in Saudi Arabia and two years when I lived in Argentina.
Speaker 0: I just attended an event in Los Angeles at the Los Angeles County Museum Arboretum, the Arboretum and Botanical Gardens, or I purchased a.
Speaker 8: Vase created by the author of Thor and the director of Thor, and he sold all of his rights to Disney. And I bought this vase that he created.
Speaker 7: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 0: It's called the Dan Rogers E-ticket. So this is going to fill it with oranges.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Something related to this.
Speaker 8: Point to you.
Speaker 0: It's going to be on display until this given Sunday. And I want you to attend the exhibit. It's called Memories of Nature.
Speaker 7: Sir, you might expect. It's not we. We're we're. We're talking about technology. You're. Mike is off, sir. So no one can hear you.
Speaker 0: Are you working with. Thank you.
Speaker 7: You're Microsoft. Maybe later. Probably a couple of hours. Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 0: All right. And. Thank you. Finances? Yes. Your 41 million. Should be the down payment on his expansion of the r t as transit of the Pacific Railway.
Speaker 7: So this is. This is ah, this is a different topic. That is not this topic. So can you can please grab a seat and we'll have you come up at the end of the meeting. Thank you very much. Ah, we have a motion in a second, Councilman Mongo, that we're going to vote over here.
Speaker 3: I just want to say that I appreciate. Mr..
Speaker 7: Mr.. You can take a seat. I'll get you at the after.
Speaker 3: I appreciate chris, the CEO of Leaves a Fish Coming Out. It's my understanding that we're expanding services, not replacing the services we have.
Speaker 4: That's absolutely true.
Speaker 3: Okay. And that per the agenda item brought by myself and Councilwoman Gonzalez that we have a process in place where local vendors are looked at with additional consideration because of the additional prosperity and influence in the economy that they bring.
Speaker 4: We certainly are doing that.
Speaker 3: Yes. Wonderful. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Mr. Good. Then we're going to vote.
Speaker 0: Very quickly that the answer to your conundrum, I think it's best solved by Councilman Price's kids getting together with Rex Richardson's kids. They'll sit down and figure out how to do it and come back and show you how to do it. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. Members is going to cast your vote.
Speaker 3: From the property.
Speaker 6: From motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. We are now going to item 30. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to submit to the City Council purchase transactions for critical technology infrastructure needs. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1095 | Speaker 6: Councilman Austin motion carries.
Speaker 7: Item 32.
Speaker 6: Communication from Councilwoman Price recommendation to increase appropriations in general fund and the City Prosecutor Department by 18,000 to support the funding of a neighborhood impact prosecutor for a one year period.
Speaker 7: Councilman Price.
Speaker 2: I asked my colleagues to support me on this item.
Speaker 7: Any public comment on this? It's going to hit.
Speaker 0: Let me begin by saying. The a large part of what I've got to express. I've already communicated to the good council person ahead of time. I've got a great deal of respect for her. I think she rises to the level. Of the two individuals that were on Meet the Press. This past Sunday. I don't know if you watch that, but if you haven't. Senator Collins. Senator Feinstein, that's that's my standard of what I expect out of public officials. As I expressed earlier. The concept in chief that she wants to put in place is excellent. The problem is the problem is and it will become a problem for her in her other job. As I see this. Is here is the city prosecutor and I in the emails I sent her, I said a couple of weeks ago , I think it was about three weeks ago, that she should give him a very wide, wide berth. And that was before I knew the full details of another issue that the California Bar Association is now looking into, as will probably the U.S. attorney. It just unfolded, I think, in the last couple of weeks. And I can see. What? Now you face her in discharging your responsibilities down in Orange County when she's trying to prosecute someone. And that the defense attorney in that case. Or bring up. And refer to collusion or. A fellow traveler that she has. Whose conduct will probably result in his. If not suspension. If not suspension. Quite possibly removal from the bar. For what has unfolded. I'll send you an email on the details of that in the next couple of days. But. Hold off on that this. And in the meantime, distancing yourself as far as you can from our prosecutor. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Those in the public comment, please cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Moving on to item 34. I'm sorry I I'm 33. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to increase appropriations in General Fund (GF) in the City Prosecutor Department (CP) by $18,000, offset by the projected Third Council District FY 17 office budget surplus to support the funding of a Neighborhood Impact Prosecutor for a one-year period of time. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1097 | Speaker 6: Vice Mayor Richardson. Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Item 34.
Speaker 6: Report from Economic Development Financial Management Recommendation to execute all documents necessary for the lease of city owned property located at 309 Pine Avenue to the Long Beach Community College District and blank spaces for the maintenance operation and programing of a coworking space, Small Business Development Center Consulting Services and an international business accelerator pilot.
Speaker 2: Program. John Gonzalez Yes, I want to thank economic development staff, both Sergio and John, if you want to give us like a quick because this is the Sean LaMarche Innovation Center and I think it deserves at least one minute of discussion. So I appreciate it.
Speaker 5: Honorable mayor and members of the city council. Yes, this is very exciting. This is a process we began about a year ago when we released a request for proposals to do something creative and exciting at three or nine pine for entrepreneurs. And we had a number of different proposals that came forward. One exciting public private partnership with Long Beach City College and Blank Spaces, which is a private co-working space operator who has multiple sites in the region. What we're proposing tonight is a ten year agreement for the lease and operations of 309 Pine. Ultimately, Long Beach City College, as part of the agreement, will provide entrepreneurial support programs, which include SBA, the Small Business Administration Business Consultants. Their International Business accelerator programs for entrepreneurs in blank spaces will manage and operate, maintain the facility for us at no cost to the city. In fact, the city will do some initial tenant improvements in the amount of $250,000. However, we'll get that capital investment back over the next ten years as they pay approximately 40 $600 per month for these ten years with some CPI increase as well. So this is a very exciting partnership, as you mentioned. Last month, the council approved moving forward with a recommendation to name this Sean McKee Center for Innovation. And it will be a great asset in our downtown to activate a really neat governmental facility in partnership with the private sector and hopefully allow for lots of business start up as well as the creation of jobs. Thank you. That's the end of my report and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Speaker 7: Thank you. No public comment will go. Sorry. This is this is not the final public comment.
Speaker 0: I'll let all that.
Speaker 7: I'll let you know when it's coming. Okay. You want to comment on the show on the Marquee Innovation Center? Yes. Come down.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 8: I didn't hear what we're.
Speaker 0: Going to be doing there. What are we going to be doing there? What are we going to be doing.
Speaker 7: So that it's over? It's time for a public comment on the show on the Marquee Innovation Center.
Speaker 0: Where what are we going to start? I think the goal in the center, please.
Speaker 7: The reports over. So continue. I didn't.
Speaker 0: Hear what the center's going to.
Speaker 7: Do. You need to take a seat, sir.
Speaker 0: I can't ask what we're going to be doing at the center.
Speaker 7: You can't see. It's not that. We just had the report. Thank you. Okay. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 8: Sounds great.
Speaker 0: That's my vote.
Speaker 3: Motion Carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP CM16-098 for Launch, Do, Grow: Business Solutions for Long Beach, Scope C;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary for the Lease of City-owned property located at 309 Pine Avenue (Subject Property) to the Long Beach Community College District and BlankSpaces, LLC, for the maintenance, operation, and programming of a coworking space, Small Business Development Center consulting services, and an international business accelerator pilot program; and
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Economic Development Department by $250,000, offset by a release of funds received from the sale of former Redevelopment Agency-owned parcels for improvements at the Subject Property. (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
Subsets and Splits